Posted by:
rtdunham
at Tue Sep 15 21:13:23 2009 [ Email Message ] [ Show All Posts by rtdunham ]
>>To me this is a classic example of how the purity thing doesn't fit real well with the subspecies concept. Even if you had the exact capture location to place on the map you'd have a fraction of the information needed to determine if the snake was a "pure" eastern or not....
Tony, you're smarter than me about these things: I think we need a different term than "pure,". What would be a better way to refer to animals from a subspecies range--whether smack in the middle of a range, or close to the margins but NOT in an intergrade zone? As you say, "purity" doesn't fit well with our understanding of what's going on. So what's the more accurate term?
I think if we began using a different, less specific, term we'd all more often find some agreement. And that's a good thing, right?
[ Show Entire Thread ]
|
