Keskustelua tekoälyn kanssa lajeista

 

What is a species?

A species is a group of living organisms that are able to interbreed and produce fertile offspring. The concept of a species is used in biology to classify and organize living things, and it is one of the basic units of classification in the field of taxonomy. The most widely used definition of a species is the biological species concept, which defines a species as a group of organisms that can interbreed and produce viable offspring.

That is the definition I am used to, but nowadays there seems to be another definitions, based on genetic differences for instance.

Yes, that is correct. The biological species concept is the most widely used definition of a species, but it has some limitations. In particular, it does not always apply well to organisms that reproduce asexually or to fossils. As a result, other definitions have been proposed, such as the phylogenetic species concept, which defines a species as a group of organisms that share a common ancestor and are reproductively isolated from other such groups. The genetic species concept defines a species by genetic differences and a cohesive genetic identity. The recognition species concept which defines species based on morphological and/or behavioral differences. These definitions may be used in addition to or in place of the biological species concept, depending on the organism and the context.

For instance birds reproduce sexually but some time ago there was ca. 9000+ species of birds in the world, now they claim those to be well over 10000, and only a few have been found as new to science.

That is correct. The classification of birds has undergone a lot of changes in recent years, as new research methods and techniques have become available. One of the major changes has been the use of DNA analysis to study the relationships between different bird species. This research has revealed that many birds that were previously considered to be the same species are actually distinct evolutionary lineages, and should be classified as separate species. This has led to an increase in the number of recognized bird species, as well as changes in the classification and grouping of birds. While this research has led to a better understanding of the diversity and evolutionary history of birds, it also means that the classification of birds is an ongoing process that is subject to change as new information becomes available.

How is the differences in the DNA measured, as for instance humans and chimpanzees have mainly the same genes, but the same genes work differently in humans and chimpanzees?

The differences in DNA between different species can be measured in a number of ways. One common method is to compare the DNA sequences of different organisms and look for differences in the order of the nucleotides (A, C, G, and T) that make up the DNA. For example, humans and chimpanzees are about 98% similar in their DNA sequences, but this 2% difference can include many important genetic changes. Another way to compare the genetic differences between different species is to look at the function of their genes. For example, humans and chimpanzees have largely similar sets of genes, but those genes can be expressed differently in the two species. Also, some genes that are present in one species may be absent in another, or have undergone mutations that affect their function. These functional differences can have a big impact on the characteristics and behavior of an organism. Therefore, it is not only the number of differences between the DNA sequences that is important, but also the nature of those differences and how they affect the organism.

And human ancestors then, only the genomes of modern humans, neanderthals and denisovans are known completely and these species interbred producing fertile offspring, modern humans have genes from those other two species. Earlier these three at least would have judged as same species.

Yes, that is correct. The genomes of modern humans, Neanderthals, and Denisovans have been fully sequenced, and it has been found that these three groups interbred and produced fertile offspring. Studies have shown that modern humans outside Africa carry around 1-4% of Neanderthal DNA and that some populations in Oceania and South Asia have around 5% of Denisovan DNA. This interbreeding means that the classification of these groups as separate species may not be entirely clear-cut. The concept of a species is a way for scientists to understand and describe the diversity of life on earth, but it is not always a precise or fixed concept. The discovery of genetic interbreeding between what were once considered distinct species raises the question of where the boundaries of a species lie and whether the concept of a species should be reevaluated. It is also important to note that interbreeding between different groups of humans is not unique to our species, it is a common feature of evolution as it leads to genetic exchange and variation which is the raw material for natural selection.

Earlier everything was clear. For instance there was one species of Herring gulls having a circumpolar distribution, the other end meeting another here in Finland as Lesser black-backed gull. Now it is divided to about 10 species which interbreed freely as a cline and twitchers tick them to their lists. Is there any other use of this dividing but the longer lists of twitchers?

The classification of organisms, including birds, is an ongoing process that is subject to change as new information becomes available. As you mentioned, the classification of gulls has undergone changes in recent years, with some species being split into multiple different species based on new research.

One use of this reclassification is to provide a more accurate picture of the diversity and evolutionary history of these birds. By recognizing multiple species within a group, scientists can better understand the relationships between different populations and how they have evolved over time. This can have important implications for conservation efforts, as it allows for the identification of distinct and potentially endangered populations.

Additionally, the reclassification can help in the understanding of the ecology and behavior of these birds. Different gull species may have different migratory patterns, feeding habits, and breeding behaviors, which can be important for understanding how they interact with their environment and with other species.

Regarding the twitchers, it is true that the reclassification of birds can lead to longer lists for them to tick, but it is also important to note that the reclassification is based on scientific research and is not done for the sole purpose of providing longer lists for birdwatchers.

It is also important to note that the classification of species is not a fixed concept, it is based on the best available information at the time, but as new information and research methods become available, it can change.

Well, for instance this Herring gull, we have several observations of Slaty-backed gulls in Europe although it breeds in the north-western Pacific ocean. Nobody has ever explained how they come here, and how would this help its conservation as it roams freely across the northern hemisphere?

The appearance of Slaty-backed gulls in Europe is an interesting phenomenon that is not well understood. The species is a non-breeding visitor to the western Palearctic, and the exact mechanisms behind their movements are not known. Some researchers have suggested that the birds may be following food sources, such as fish and marine invertebrates, while others have proposed that they may be driven by changes in sea ice and other environmental factors.

As far as conservation, the appearance of Slaty-backed gulls in Europe does not have a direct impact on the conservation status of the species, as it breeds in the northwest Pacific ocean and it is not considered to be threatened or endangered. However, the study of the movements and behavior of these birds can provide valuable insights into the ecology and adaptations of the species, which can have important implications for understanding the impacts of environmental changes on seabirds.

Also, the study of these birds in non-breeding areas can help to identify potential threats to the species, such as pollution, habitat loss, or human disturbance.

It is important to note that the classification of a species, and the recognition of different subspecies or forms, is not a fixed concept but it is based on the best available information at the time. As new information and research methods become available, it can change. Therefore, the study of these birds in different parts of their range can provide important information that can be used to refine our understanding of the species and their conservation needs.

I think this roaming can be more a threat to this species as the Arctic ocean is polluting due to oil industry and increasing marine traffic.

You are correct that the increasing human activity in the Arctic Ocean, including oil exploration and production, shipping, and fishing, can pose a threat to seabirds and other marine wildlife. Pollution from oil spills, as well as the release of chemicals and other pollutants into the ocean, can have serious impacts on the health and survival of seabirds. Additionally, the increasing marine traffic can disturb nesting and feeding areas, leading to the displacement or mortality of individuals.

The Arctic is also experiencing rapid changes due to climate change, such as loss of sea ice, ocean acidification, and changes in the distribution and abundance of marine species. These changes can have a significant impact on the distribution, behavior and survival of seabirds.

It is important to note that the Arctic Ocean is a vast and remote area, and the research and monitoring of seabirds and other wildlife in the region is challenging. However, the study of these birds in non-breeding areas can help to identify potential threats to the species, such as pollution, habitat loss, or human disturbance.

Therefore, the conservation of seabirds, including the Slaty-backed gull, requires an integrated approach that considers the impacts of human activities, such as pollution, shipping and oil industry, in addition to the impacts of climate change, and other environmental changes in the Arctic region.

The concept of species is not the same to every living group of organisms. For instance if we used the same accuracy of separating to insects which we use to birds, there could be a vast increase of insect species.

You are correct that the concept of a species is not the same for every group of organisms and the criteria used to define a species can vary depending on the group of organisms and the context. For example, the classification of insects can be particularly challenging, due to their high diversity and the difficulty of identifying morphological characteristics that distinguish one species from another.

Insects have a high degree of intraspecific variation and this makes it difficult to apply the biological species concept, which is based on the ability of organisms to interbreed and produce viable offspring. Many insects reproduce asexually, which means that they do not have the same reproductive barriers that exist between sexually reproducing organisms. Additionally, many insects have high levels of genetic variation within populations and this can make it difficult to identify clear boundaries between different species.

Therefore, the classification of insects is often based on a combination of morphological, genetic, and ecological criteria. For instance, DNA barcoding and phylogenetic analysis, which compares the genetic sequences of different insects, have become increasingly important tools for identifying and classifying insect species. Additionally, the use of behavioral and ecological characteristics, such as mating calls, pheromones and host-plant association, are also used to identify and classify insect species.

Therefore, it is possible that the classification of insects may reveal a higher number of species than previously thought, but it is also important to note that the classification of species is an ongoing process and is subject to change as new information becomes available.

The study of genomes in populations is more useful in conservation when it is used to insects and plants, and it has more use of understanding evolution when used to those groups of living organisms which form the majority of diversity of life.

You are correct that the study of genomes in populations can be particularly useful for conservation efforts when applied to insects and plants, as well as other groups of organisms that form the majority of life's diversity.

Genomic data can be used to identify and track genetic variation within and between populations, which can help to identify genetically distinct populations that may be at risk of extinction. This information can be used to prioritize conservation efforts and to design effective conservation strategies, such as captive breeding and reintroduction programs. Additionally, the study of genomes can also help to understand the impacts of environmental changes on populations, such as habitat loss, pollution, and climate change.

Furthermore, understanding the genetic makeup of a population is also important for understanding the evolutionary history and relationships of different species. Genomic data can be used to reconstruct evolutionary relationships between different populations and species, and to infer the historical events that have shaped the diversity of life on earth. This can help to understand the processes that have led to the current distribution and diversity of species, and to predict the impacts of environmental changes on biodiversity.

In summary, the study of genomes in populations can have a wide range of applications in conservation and evolutionary biology, and can provide valuable insights into the diversity, distribution, and conservation needs of different groups of organisms.

The concept of species has evolved over time. The oldest is morphological classification which has to be used to most fossils.

Yes, that is correct. The concept of a species has evolved over time, and the classification of fossils has traditionally been based on morphological characteristics. The morphological species concept defines a species based on physical characteristics such as shape, size, and structure of the organism. This method of classification was used for a long time for fossils, as well as for living organisms.

However, the morphological species concept has some limitations when applied to fossils. Fossils often only preserve a small portion of the organism, and it can be difficult to identify all of the characteristics that are needed to classify the species. Additionally, fossils can be difficult to compare with living organisms due to the changes that occur over time and the lack of information on the soft tissues.

Therefore, more recent classification methods have been developed, such as the phylogenetic species concept, which defines a species as a group of organisms that share a common ancestor and are reproductively isolated from other such groups. The genetic species concept and the recognition species concept. These methods can be used to classify fossils by comparing the genetic or morphological characteristics of the fossils with those of living organisms, in order to infer evolutionary relationships and reconstruct the diversity of past life.

It is important to note that the classification of fossils is an ongoing process, and new methods and techniques are constantly being developed to improve our understanding of the past.

When it was used to living organisms, those actual specimens were first collected to museums.

Yes, that is correct. When the morphological species concept was first used to classify living organisms, the specimens were collected and preserved in natural history museums. These specimens were used as a reference for the classification of new organisms, and they were also used to study the morphological characteristics of different species.

Museums play an important role in the classification of living organisms, as they provide a repository of specimens that can be used to study the diversity of life. These specimens are used as a reference for the classification of new organisms, and they are also used to study the morphological characteristics of different species. In addition, museums also house historical collections, which can provide valuable information on the historical distribution and diversity of organisms, as well as on the changes that have occurred over time.

Today, museums continue to play an important role in the classification of living organisms, not only by preserving physical specimens but also by preserving and providing access to data, such as DNA samples and images, which can be used for research. This can support the development of new methods for classification and increase the accuracy of the classification.

In conclusion, natural history museums have been, and continue to be, an important resource for the study of the diversity of life, providing valuable information for the classification of living organisms and for understanding the evolution of life on earth.

... and sometimes no observations of the found species have been made since collecting the first specimen...

Yes, that is correct. In some cases, the classification of a species may be based on a single specimen that was collected and preserved in a museum, and no subsequent observations of the species have been made. This can occur for a variety of reasons, such as the species being rare or difficult to find, or the species living in a remote or inaccessible location. In these cases, the classification of the species may be based on morphological characteristics of the specimen, and without additional observations, it can be difficult to confirm the validity of the classification.

Additionally, the classification may be based on a specimen that was collected a long time ago and the species may have changed since then. In this case, the classification may not reflect the current characteristics of the species, and it may not be accurate.

In these cases, museums and natural history collections are still important resources, as they provide a historical record of the diversity of life, and the specimens can be re-evaluated with new techniques, such as DNA sequencing, and compared with similar species, which can lead to a better understanding of the species and its classification.

It is important to note that the classification of a species is not a fixed concept, and it is subject to change as new information becomes available, and re-evaluation of specimens can contribute to a better understanding of the species and its classification.

The modern species concepts treat more tenderly their objects. For instance behaviour can be used to separate different species. Courtship works when it is recognized...

Yes, that is correct. Modern species concepts take a more holistic approach to the classification of organisms, and they consider a wide range of characteristics, including behavior, ecology, and genetics, in addition to morphological characteristics.

One example of this is the recognition species concept, which defines a species based on morphological and/or behavioral characteristics. The recognition species concept takes into account that many organisms have evolved specific behaviors, such as courtship rituals, that are used to identify and attract mates of the same species. These behaviors can be used as a criterion for the classification of species, as they can help to distinguish between different species that may be morphologically similar.

In addition, the recognition species concept also takes into account that the ecological and behavioral characteristics of an organism can be influenced by the environment and that these can change over time. Therefore, the recognition species concept allows for the possibility that different populations of the same species may have different characteristics, depending on their environment.

Therefore, the use of behavioral characteristics in the classification of species can provide a more accurate picture of the diversity and evolutionary history of organisms. This can be particularly useful for groups of organisms, such as insects, that have high levels of intraspecific variation and for which the morphological characteristics alone may not be sufficient to classify the species.