Reptile & Amphibian Forums

I just read the thread about subspecies inter breeeding. I was wondering, are the mutts then able to reproduce, or are they sterile?

Interbreeding subspecies would produce viable offspring that could further interbreed. That's why they're subspecies. The red-eared slider and yellow-bellied slider comes to mind.

Katrina

The red-eared slider and the yellow bellied slider are not subspecies of one-another. They are two distinct different species of turtle. Also, the vast majority of crossbreeds from two different species of turtle or bird or whatever are in fact sterile and cannot reproduce.

Hi,

I'm confused and was wondering if you could clear up a few things. I have always read that red-eared sliders were Trachemys scripta elegans while yellow-bellied sliders were Trachemys scripta scripta. If that doesn't mean they're both subspecies of Trachemys scripta, then what am I getting wrong? You said "they are two different species of turtle" so that is what I was confused about. Is there a new taxonomist classification that I was unaware of? Thanks.

Johnny

John,
I don't think you are the one confused. While I don't know my water turtles very well, if you have the specific name matched right to the common name they are both the same species but are recognized by some as different subspecies. I say it this way because not all taxonomists recognize the subspecies level.
-----
Ed
Tortoise_Keepers-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
Trying to keep the fun in Chelonian care

First off, taxonomy is very controversial and far from being an exact science. Many zoologists think there is too much division of species, preferring to simply call anything that looks similar to the nominate species a "subspecies" of that species. Others think that is incorrect and think any animals that have significant differences in appearance be classified as their own species. It seems to go back and forth. Years ago, most animals within a family were thought to be different species if they had any well-defined and uniform differences in appearance. Later, the subspecies became popular because some zoologists wanted to simplify things and put many types of animals within a family under the same umbrella if they were similar enough. Now, it seems to be divided pretty much, making it even more confusing. The question is, "where does a subspecies end and a distinct new species begin?" My belief, and many hold the same view, is that a true subspecies should look very, very much like the nominate race with only a few minor differences, such as slight difference is size, or one color missing that the nominate race has, or vice-versa.

As far as the scientific names of animals, many different species have the same family name, such as "canus" or "felis." Domestic dogs, wolves, and coyotes are all "canus" but they are not subspecies of one-another, they are distinct and different species. Same with "felis," many types of cats have this name, but are distinctly different species.

I probably didn't clarify very well, but that is the nature of taxonomy.

Hi,

You said:
"As far as the scientific names of animals, many different species have the same family name, such as "canus" or "felis." Domestic dogs, wolves, and coyotes are all "canus" but they are not subspecies of one-another, they are distinct and different species. Same with "felis," many types of cats have this name, but are distinctly different species."

Hmm..how does that answer my question? I said both red-eared sliders and yellow-bellied sliders are under Trachemys SCRIPTA. I didn't say that they were both JUST under the same genus Trachemys. YOu meant "GENUS" right when u said "FAMILY name?" I understand what you said in the previous paragraphs but the last one's examples kinda threw me off. If you had said "many types of cats have the same species name (Felis sp.), but are distinct from one another that they should merit their own species name," then it would have made more sense to me. But all you did was confirm that many species of cats have the same genus...which I assume we all agree on.

Anyway, no big deal.

~Johnny

See my other post. Everyone is confusing the word "subspecies" with "crossbreed" and erroneously thinking it means the same as different species that are related or similar. Again, a subspecies is almost exactly like the main species, but differs slightly due only to different habitat or location. Turtle and tortoise species tend to have very few true subspecies.

Different species that cross breed will almost always have sterile, or nearly sterile offspring.

It's refreshing that someone's got the species/subspecies concept down when even the taxonomists can't agree on a solid difinition of the terms.
-----
Ed
Tortoise_Keepers-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
Trying to keep the fun in Chelonian care

That's me....."Mr. Refreshing."

Sorry guys but this should be cleared up.
"A subspecies is an aggregrate of phenotypically similar populations of a species, inhabiting a geographic subdivision of the range of a species, and differing taxonomically from other populations of the species"

Though not often in comformity with the definition, as it stands now the formal descriptions of the "yellow bellied slider" and the "red eared slider" are as follows:
The yellow bellied slider is the turtle Trachemys scripta scripta the nominate form of a group consisting of several subspecies, one of which is Trachemys scripta elegans.
Now you may argue that since these species do intergrade occassionally they are not strictly separate that therefore they are actually part of a *cline* but that makes them MORE closely related in a sense rather than more disparate.

There are those who feel strongly that Terrepene carolina forms a cline and has no proper subspecies (with the possible exception of T carolina mexicana and T carolina yucatana whose ranges are isolated from those of the nominate and northern forms) but as it stands at the moment, and likely for a long time, as it seems things change slowly in taxonomy, it is considered that T carolina has 5 subspecies beyond the nominate form. Yes they do interbreed and yes the offspring are usually fertile.

Sorry to be blunt and butt-in here, but it seemed to me this argument was not decided definitively. I only just learned the disticntion between cline and subspecies (and even its most techinal definition recently myself. But sometimes you have to go back to the start to figure out what really going on.

Do you really want to go there?
I think this depends on if you follow the Biologicical Species concept or the Phylogenetic species concept. Wouldn't it be nice if 'they' got together and came to a happy medium.
-----
Ed
Tortoise_Keepers-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
Trying to keep the fun in Chelonian care

You weren't butting in at all. You gave your take on it and helped to clear some things up. Well, taxonomy is one thing that will probably never really be totally cleared up, but you know what I mean. You could put ten zoologists in a room together and you may get ten different theories on how to classify animal species.

tortoisehead and Ej
i agree that taxonomy is nothing if not a good look into the way man has attempted to promote order in his chaotic world. His weaknesses are that he applies the same ppaterns and alogorithms to everything he does and gets frustruated when they don't fit the natural world (i'm a mathematican-physicist who abandoned ship, but i feel the same way about linguistics, ecology, socilogy, psychology, art theory, cultural theory, semiotics,......etc... : ) ) and probably it never will be different.

BUT
since there is an accepted standard it actually does make sense, i think, to learn it and then refute it if one has the ability/time/inclination.

As a famous biologist once said "the definitions that man lays down are doomed to haunt all who follow except the one who changes them"

There is no question in my mind that the power of naming is literally and metphorically man's most primal and most sophisticated way of trying to lay claim and control to his chaotic and inconsistent world. Most of our most interesting scientific and cultural acheivements have arisen from this.

ahh but i am straying from turtles....and i have 70 to feed.

This is not to incite an argument or be a smart a$$ but if you know of one accepted standard in taxonomy please share it.
To put this in perspective we are talking about species and subspecies of turtles which are part of a pretty big family here. I've been watching another argument on another list that is for Taxonomists... professional taxonomists. This argument has been running as long as I've been a member(about 4 years now) (and I didn't start the argument nor participate). The argument is where does Man fit in the grand scheme of things or on the phylogenetic tree.
No, I don't claim to understand taxonomy but I do take great relief in the fact that the more I learn, the more I'm aware that not many, if any, people do.
I do find it fun to discuss. Especially when someone jumps in and says... 'I know...'.
-----
Ed
Tortoise_Keepers-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
Trying to keep the fun in Chelonian care

All i meant was that the standard in taxonomy is that when somebody publishes staing that "X is now to be claled Y for the follwong reasons...."
then you have to accept it until such time as you can dispute with equally good reason in a professional paper. That is not to say that everybody agrees. They just have to accept.
So that's why i favor calling box turtles subspecies and sliders suspecies even if we think they don't fit the description. It allows for order and ease of of information transfer.
If one day somebody fixes the situation and calls Terrapene a cline, well good, then i'll use that word then.

You hit the nail on the head with a major flaw in todays day and age. Although it was never stated, I'll bet it was implied that the criteria of the name being published was meant to be in a peer reviewed bulletin or the like. Then, if the peers agreed with the argument, the name is accepted. I don't think they ever considered anyone publishing a name in a magizine like Reptiles, or self publishing, as valid.
Todays major battle seems to be about the Biological Species and the Phylogenetic species concept with the (over)use of DNA.
I can't wait until it runs it course and it comes to medium between the two which I think is the only natural progression in this case.
-----
Ed
Tortoise_Keepers-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
Trying to keep the fun in Chelonian care