| |
 |
|
Twenty Second
Annual Darwin College Lecture Series
2007
Lecture 8 : 9 March
SPECIES IDENTITY: WHEN IT MATTERS
Peter Crane
University of Chicago
Abstract
In 2007 we celebrate the 300th anniversary of the birth of
Linnaeus, the eighteenth century Swedish physician best known for
developing a pragmatic approach to naming the basic units of
biological diversity. Linnaeus leaned heavily on the work of earlier
scientists, but he was relentless in applying his new binomial
approach across the whole of biology, and to material brought back
from all over the world. This great work of synthesis, and its near
comprehensive systematisation of the diversity of life as it was
known at the time, established Linnaeus as one of the great
scientists of his day. It also set new standards and was of great
practical value. It became an essential tool in organising the
explosion of knowledge that resulted from rapid exploration of the
natural world through the late eighteenth and nineteenth centuries.
In this sense, Linnaeus made possible the insights of Darwin and
Wallace. Linnaeus' approach to recognizing and circumscribing the
basic units of diversity, which he then named, was comparative. It
was also based on examination of reference specimens. But it was
nevertheless largely intuitive and resulted in a concept of species
identity that was fixed. It is remarkable that despite current
knowledge of how species develop through the processes of evolution,
despite ever deeper insights gleaned from genetics, and despite
advances in the theory of systematics, the approach employed by
Linnaeus and other naturalists of the eighteenth and nineteenth
centuries persists and remains central to much of our modern
understanding of biological diversity. In part this is because their
work has stood the test of time: we now know that many of the species
that they recognized do have a meaningful biological identity. But
the seemingly sparse application of more sophisticated techniques to
circumscribing species in Nature also undoubtedly reflects the
daunting practicalities: outside the most conspicuous groups of
animals the variety of life is vast, poorly sampled and very
imperfectly understood. For the specialist the unevenness in our
current concepts of species identity represents a challenge, and
fertile ground for developing deeper understanding. But in other
areas such unevenness is inconvenient. For example, we depend on
reliable notions of species identity to help set policy for the
conservation and sustainable use of natural resources. Instability
can be uncomfortable and can have political and economic
ramifications. Legislation designed to regulate the conservation and
use of species, for example the Convention on International Trade in
Endangered Species, or similar efforts at the national level, all
rest on the presumption that the relevant species can be reliably and
unambiguously identified. Beyond these practical issues the
fundamental nature of species remains controversial. Many of these
lively arguments revolve around matters relating to different notions
of species identity, including how species recognize each other, and
how they are recognized by us. Another controversy is over the rules
by which species are named: an area of debate confounded by an
unfortunate weakness inherent in Linnaean binomial
nomenclature. Uniform application of the binomial approach requires
uniform concepts of both genus and species identity. The binomial
system, rather unfortunately, intertwines the delivery of
straightforward species labels, with the much trickier issue of how
similarities and differences translate into hypotheses of
evolutionary relatedness at the generic level. The focus of this
lecture will be on concepts of species identity in plants. The
examples will illustrate the heterogeneous state of current
knowledge. Many economically important or biologically interesting
plants have been well studied and provide insights into the identity
of some plant species in genetic and evolutionary terms. But at the
other end of the spectrum many plant species (perhaps the majority)
are not well understood. Their identity rests on a preliminary
interpretation of similarities and differences in plant form, that
remain to be understood in terms of the biological processes that
created them.
The lectures are given at 5.30 p.m. in The Lady Mitchell Hall,
Sidgwick Avenue, with an adjacent overflow theatre with live TV
coverage. Each lecture is typically attended by 600 people so you
must arrive early to ensure a place.
|
|
|
| 19 January | | | 26 January | | | 2 February | | | 9 February | | | 16 February | | | 23 February | | | 2 March | | | 9 March | |
|
|
|