Discriminating arboviral species

2021 ◽  
Vol 102 (4) ◽  
Author(s):  
Yiyuan Li ◽  
Angela C. O’Donnell ◽  
Howard Ochman
Keyword(s):  
Evolutionary History ◽  
Viral Vectors ◽  
Species Concept ◽  
International Committee ◽  
Biological Species ◽  
Biological Species Concept ◽  
Substantial Variation ◽  
Artificial Boundaries ◽  
Human Infections

Mosquito-borne arboviruses, including a diverse array of alphaviruses and flaviviruses, lead to hundreds of millions of human infections each year. Current methods for species-level classification of arboviruses adhere to guidelines prescribed by the International Committee on Taxonomy of Viruses (ICTV), and generally apply a polyphasic approach that might include information about viral vectors, hosts, geographical distribution, antigenicity, levels of DNA similarity, disease association and/or ecological characteristics. However, there is substantial variation in the criteria used to define viral species, which can lead to the establishment of artificial boundaries between species and inconsistencies when inferring their relatedness, variation and evolutionary history. In this study, we apply a single, uniform principle – that underlying the Biological Species Concept (BSC) – to define biological species of arboviruses based on recombination between genomes. Given that few recombination events have been documented in arboviruses, we investigate the incidence of recombination within and among major arboviral groups using an approach based on the ratio of homoplastic sites (recombinant alleles) to non-homoplastic sites (vertically transmitted alleles). This approach supports many ICTV-designations but also recognizes several cases in which a named species comprises multiple biological species. These findings demonstrate that this metric may be applied to all lifeforms, including viruses, and lead to more consistent and accurate delineation of viral species.

Species

2021 ◽  
pp. 219-238
Author(s):  
Andrew V. Z. Brower ◽  
Randall T. Schuh
Keyword(s):  
Species Concept ◽  
Biological Species ◽  
Species Concepts ◽  
Biological Species Concept ◽  
Character State ◽  
Phylogenetic Species Concept ◽  
Units Of Analysis ◽  
Perceived Reality

This chapter studies the systematists' perspective on species concepts and the role of species in systematics. No matter how sophisticated the tools and methods enhancing the conceptualization of reality may become in the future, systematists will still be constrained by their perceptions. In their more modest, empirical view, systematists embrace their perceived reality and prefer species concepts that incorporate tools for identifying and delimiting species as empirical hypotheses, thereby providing them with efficacious working terminal elements for phylogenetic analysis and classification of more inclusive taxa. It is fortunate that cladists employed the notion of a “phylogenetic” species concept based on diagnosability before more metaphysically inclined authors appropriated the term for concepts founded on monophyly or common ancestors. As noted, Willi Hennig's species concept was a version of the “biological” species concept, and it fell to his followers to develop a species concept that is well suited to cladistic principles. Among the earliest of the post-Hennigian empiricists was American Museum ichthyologist Donn Rosen. Rosen's concept, sometimes called the apomorphic concept because of its requirement that every recognized species must have its own derived character state, accomplished two key advances for systematics: it proposed a cladistic criterion for recognizing species, and it defined species as the minimal units of analysis, as far as taxonomy is concerned, thus setting a lower bound for systematic inquiry.

5. Species and classification

2019 ◽  
pp. 63-82
Author(s):  
Samir Okasha
Keyword(s):  
Evolutionary Biology ◽  
Species Concept ◽  
Biological Species ◽  
Theory And Practice ◽  
Biological Species Concept ◽  
Phylogenetic Systematics ◽  
Species Problem ◽  
Higher Taxa ◽  
Linnaean System

‘Species and classification’ first considers the species problem and the biological species concept. It then discusses phylogenetic systematics, which involves the organization of species into higher taxa. Classification in science raises a deep philosophical issue as all objects can in principle be classified in more than one way. Is there a ‘correct’ way to assign organisms to species, and species to higher taxa? Classification of organisms was traditionally done using the Linnaean system, which served biologists well for years, and elements of it are still used today. However, the rise of evolutionary biology has led to fundamental changes in both the theory and practice of biological classification.

Biogeography and taxonomy of racket-tail hummingbirds (Aves: Trochilidae: Ocreatus): evidence for species delimitation from morphology and display behavior

Zootaxa ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 4200 (1) ◽  
pp. 83 ◽  
Author(s):  
KARL-L. SCHUCHMANN ◽  
ANDRÉ-A. WELLER ◽  
DIETMAR JÜRGENS
Keyword(s):  
Geographic Variation ◽  
Endemic Species ◽  
Species Delimitation ◽  
Evolutionary History ◽  
Species Concept ◽  
Molecular Data ◽  
Biological Species ◽  
Biological Species Concept ◽  
Taxonomic History ◽  
History Of

We analyzed geographic variation, biogeography, and intrageneric relationships of racket-tail hummingbirds Ocreatus (Aves, Trochilidae). Presently, the genus is usually considered monospecific, with O. underwoodii including eight subspecies (polystictus, discifer, underwoodii, incommodus, melanantherus, peruanus, annae, addae), although up to three species have been recognized by some authors. In order to evaluate the current taxonomy we studied geographic variation in coloration, mensural characters, and behavioral data of all Ocreatus taxa. We briefly review the taxonomic history of the genus. Applying the Biological Species Concept, species delimitation was based on a qualitative-quantitative criteria analysis including an evaluation of character states. Our results indicate that the genus should be considered a superspecies with four species, the monotypic Ocreatus addae, O. annae, and O. peruanus, and the polytypic O. underwoodii (including the subspecies underwoodii, discifer, incommodus, melanantherus, polystictus). In this taxonomic treatment, O. annae becomes an endemic species to Peru and O. addae is endemic to Bolivia. We recommend additional sampling of distributional, ethological, and molecular data for an improved resolution of the evolutionary history of Ocreatus. 

scholarly journals Putting the Biological Species Concept to the Test: Using Mating Networks to Delimit Species

PLoS ONE ◽  
2013 ◽  
Vol 8 (6) ◽  
pp. e68267 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lélia Lagache ◽  
Jean-Benoist Leger ◽  
Jean-Jacques Daudin ◽  
Rémy J. Petit ◽  
Corinne Vacher
Keyword(s):  
Species Concept ◽  
Biological Species ◽  
Biological Species Concept

Fern nothogenera and ×Lepinema, a new hybrid genus between Ellipinema and Lepisorus (Polypodiaceae)

Phytotaxa ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 455 (4) ◽  
pp. 262-266
Author(s):  
LIANG ZHANG ◽  
LI-BING ZHANG
Keyword(s):  
Species Concept ◽  
Intergeneric Hybrid ◽  
Molecular Data ◽  
Biological Species ◽  
Biological Species Concept

The biological species concept is not exclusively applicable in many groups of organisms including ferns. Interspecific fern hybrids are not rare: there are 16 intergeneric hybrid genera in ferns confirmed with molecular data. Here we add one more hybrid genus in the tribe Lepisoreae of Polypodiaceae, ×Lepinema, formed via hybridization between parents in two genera: Ellipinema and Lepisorus.

The increasing multiplicity of the species concepts

2005 ◽  
Vol 176 (2) ◽  
pp. 221-225
Author(s):  
Jean Génermont
Keyword(s):  
Species Concept ◽  
Cladistic Analysis ◽  
Biological Species ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
Biological Species Concept ◽  
Phylogenetic Species ◽  
Phylogenetic Species Concept ◽  
Ecological Criteria ◽  
Stem Species ◽  
Definition Of

Abstract In 1980, Henri Tintant advocated the usefulness of the biological species concept in paleontology. At this time, this concept was still accepted by many neontologists, but it was already rather severely criticized by some others. In fact, a lot of new concepts appeared in the course of the following two decades. While a few ones are mere adjustments of the biological concept, for instance taking in account ecological criteria, in such a way that it could be applied to clonal organisms, some others, which were developed in connexion with the cladistic theory of taxonomy, are truly new from a conceptual point of view. The diagnosable version of the phylogenetic species concept is somewhat reminiscent of Simpson’s evolutionary species concept, since it accepts phyletic speciation as well as survival of the stem species after a cladogenetic event. One of its more criticizable features, from a cladistic point of view, is that the species are not necessarilly monophyletic. On another hand, according to the monophyly version of the phylogenetic species concept, species are recognized rather subjectively as monophyletic taxa revealed by some previous cladistic analysis dealing with operational taxonomic units. A consensus on the definition of species cannot be expected, since all concepts related to the biological one are founded on population grouping on the basis of potentially identical evolutionary fates, while those which are related to cladistic taxonomy are exclusively concerned with historical features.

scholarly journals Group selection and the development of the biological species concept

2010 ◽  
Vol 365 (1547) ◽  
pp. 1853-1863 ◽  
Author(s):  
James Mallet
Keyword(s):  
Species Concept ◽  
Biological Species ◽  
Second World War ◽  
Species Level ◽  
Biological Species Concept ◽  
Ernst Mayr ◽  
World War ◽  
Mutualistic Interaction ◽  
Theodosius Dobzhansky ◽  
Second World

The development of what became known as the biological species concept began with a paper by Theodosius Dobzhansky in 1935, and was amplified by a mutualistic interaction between Dobzhansky, Alfred Emerson and Ernst Mayr after the second world war. By the 1950s and early 1960s, these authors had developed an influential concept of species as coadapted genetic complexes at equilibrium. At this time many features of species were seen as group advantages maintained by selection to avoid breakdown of beneficial coadaptation and the ‘gene pool’. Speciation thus seemed difficult. It seemed to require, more so than today, an external deus ex machina , such as allopatry or the founder effect, rather than ordinary within-species processes of natural selection, sexual selection, drift and gene flow. In the mid-1960s, the distinctions between group and individual selection were clarified. Dobzhansky and Mayr both understood the implications, but their views on species changed little. These group selectionist ideas now seem peculiar, and are becoming distinctly less popular today. Few vestiges of group selectionism and species-level adaptationism remain in recent reviews of speciation. One wonders how many of our own cherished views on evolution will seem as odd to future biologists.

scholarly journals Collembola, the biological species concept and the underestimation of global species richness

2013 ◽  
Vol 22 (21) ◽  
pp. 5382-5396 ◽  
Author(s):  
Francesco Cicconardi ◽  
Pietro P. Fanciulli ◽  
Brent C. Emerson
Keyword(s):  
Species Richness ◽  
Species Concept ◽  
Biological Species ◽  
Biological Species Concept

scholarly journals Predictors of Taxonomic Inflation and its Role in Primate Conservation

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maria J.A. Creighton ◽  
Alice Q. Luo ◽  
Simon M. Reader ◽  
Arne Ø. Mooers
Keyword(s):  
Perceived Risk ◽  
Species Concept ◽  
Research Effort ◽  
Biological Species ◽  
Primate Species ◽  
Biological Species Concept ◽  
Primate Conservation ◽  
Phylogenetic Species Concept ◽  
Initial Application ◽  
Positive Message

ABSTRACTSpecies are the main unit used to measure biodiversity, but different preferred diagnostic criteria can lead to very different delineations. For instance, named primate species have more than doubled since 1982. Such increases have been termed “taxonomic inflation” and have been attributed to the widespread adoption of the ‘phylogenetic species concept’ (PSC) in preference to the previously popular ‘biological species concept’ (BSC). Criticisms of the PSC have suggested taxonomic inflation may be biased toward particular taxa and have unfavourable consequences for conservation. Here, we explore predictors of taxonomic inflation across primate taxa since the initial application of the PSC nearly 40 years ago. We do not find evidence that diversification rate, the rate of lineage formation over evolutionary time, is linked to inflation, contrary to expectations if the PSC identifies incipient species. We also do not find evidence of research effort in fields where work has been suggested to motivate splitting being associated with increases in species numbers among genera. To test the suggestion that splitting groups is likely to increase their perceived risk of extinction, we test whether genera that have undergone more splitting have also observed a greater increase in their proportion of threatened species since the introduction of the PSC. We find no cohesive signal of inflation leading to higher threat probabilities across primate genera. Overall, this analysis sends a positive message that threat statuses of primate species are not being overwhelmingly affected by splitting in line with what has recently been reported for birds. Regardless, we echo warnings that it is unwise for conservation to be reliant on taxonomic stability. Species (however defined) are not independent from one another, thus, monitoring and managing them as such may not meet the overarching goal of conserving biodiversity.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document