Skip to main content
Log in

The units of experimental taxonomy

  • Published:
Acta Biotheoretica Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Summary

Recent definitions of the botanical terms ecotype, ecospecies and coenospecies are briefly reviewed. Examples of ecospecies are discussed and the following new definitions are proposed:

  1. g-ecospecies

    Groups with the same chromosome number between which there are well-defined morphological, ecological and geographical differences and which, under artifical or natural conditions are capable of only limited gene-exchange.

  2. a-ecospecies

    Groups with different chromosome numbers between which there are well-defined ecological and geographical differences and which are capable of only limited gene-exchange.

  3. ecotypes

    Groups forming genetically distinct components of ecospecies, adapted to special types of environment and capable of unlimited gene-exchange.

  4. cytotypes

    Groups forming polyploid components of an ecospecies.

The probable modes of origin ofg-ecospecies (gradual) anda-ecospecies (abrupt) are explained; and the importance of the recognition by taxonomists ofa-ecospecies, which may differ morphologically hardly at all, is. emphasized.

Examples of the uses of the terms are given, and it is suggested that their application to animals as well as plants would be of interest.

Zusammenfassung

Neuere Definitionen der botanischen Begriffe „ecotype”, „ecospecies” und “coenospecies” werden kurz besprochen. Beispiele von ecospecies werden erörtet, und folgende neue Begriffsbestimmungen vorgeschlagen:

  1. „g-ecospecies”

    Gruppen mit gleicher Chromosomenzahl, zwischen denen morphologische, ökologische und geographische Unterschiede deutlich festzustellen sind, und bei denen in künstlichen oder natürlichen Zuständen nur beschränkter Genaustausch stattfinden kann.

  2. „a-ecospecies”

    Gruppen mit ungleicher Chromosomenzahl, zwischen denen ökologische und geographische Unterschiede deutlich festzustellen sind, und bei denen nur beschränkter Genaustausch stattfinden kann.

  3. „ecotypes“

    Gruppen, die genetisch unterschiedene Bestandteile von ecospecies bilden, die für besondere Typen von Milieu geeignet sind, und bei denen unbeschränkter Genaustausch stattfinden kann.

  4. „cytotypes“

    Gruppen, die polyploiden Bestandteile einer ecospecies bilden.

Die wahrscheinlichen Enstehungsarten derg-ecospecies (allmählich) und dera-ecospecies (plötzlich) werden beschrieben, und es wird für besonders wichtig erklärt, dass die Systematiker den Begriffa-ecospecies anerkennen, denn diese mögen sich morphologisch äusserst wenig unterscheiden.

Beispiele für den Gebrauch der Begriffe werden angeführt, und es wird vorgeschlagen, dass es interessant wäre, sie nicht nur bei Pflanzen sondern auch bei Tieren zu verwenden.

Sommaire

Nous avons brièvement étudié dans l'article ci-dessus les récentes définitions des ternies botaniques „ecotype” „ecospecies”, et „coenospecies”. Nous avons discuté quelques exemples d'ecospecies et nous avons proposé les nouvelles définitions suivantes:

  1. „g-ecospecies”

    Groupes avec le même nombre de chromosomes, entre lesquels il y a des différences morphologiques, écologiques et géographiques nettement déterminées; ils ne sont capables que d'un échange limité de gènes dans des conditions artificielles ou naturelles.

  2. „a-ecospecies”

    Groupes avec différents nombres de chromosomes, entre lesquels il y a des différences écologiques et géographiques nettement déterminées, et qui ne sont capables que d'un échange limité de gènes.

  3. „ecotypes”

    Groupes formant des composants d'ecospecies génétiquement distincts, adaptés à des types spéciaux de milieux et qui sont capables d'un échange illimité de gènes.

  4. „cytotypes”

    Groupes formant des composants polyploïdes d'une ecospecies.

Les origines probables desg-ecospecies (graduelles) et desa-ecospecies (abruptes) y sont expliquées; nous avons mis en relief l'importance de l'identification par les taxonomistes d'a-ecospecies, qui peuvent à peine présenter des différences morphologiques.

Nous donnons des exemples d'emplois de ces termes, et nous suggérons que leurs applications aux animaux aussi bien qu'aux plantes pourraient présenter un intérêt certain.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Anonymous. (1943). Memorandum on nomenclature and taxonomy in the Biological Flora. - J. Ecol. XXXI, p. 93–96.

  • Babcock, E. B. (1947). The genusCrepis. - Univ. Calif. Publ. Bot. Vol. XXI, xxii. + p. 1–198; Vol. XXII, x + p. 199–1030.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baker, H. G. (1948a). Stages in invasion and replacement demonstrated by species ofMelandrium. - J. Ecol. XXXVI, p. 96–119.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • — (1948b). The ecotypes ofMelandrium dioicum (L.emend.) Cosset Germ. - New Phytol. XLVII, p. 131–145.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clausen, J., D. D.Keck & W. M.Hiesey (1940). Experimental studies on the naturer of species. I. Effect of varied environments on western North American plants.

  • - Carn. Inst. Wash., Publ. No. 520, vii + 452 p.

  • — (1945). Experimental studies on the nature of species. II. Plant Evolution through. amphiploidy and autoploidy, with examples from the Madiinae. - Carn. Inst. Wash., Publ. No. 564, vii + 174 p.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gregor, J. W. (1939). Experimental Taxonomy. IV. Population differentiation in North American and European sea plantains allied toPlantago maritima L. - New Phytol. XXXVIII, p. 293–322.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • — (1944). The ecotype. - Biol. Rev. XIX, p. 20–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hagerup, O. (1933). Studies on polyploid ecotypes inVaccinium uliginosum L. - Hereditas, Lund XVIII, p. 122–128.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hancock, B. L. (1942). Cytological and ecological notes on some species ofGalium L.em. Scop. - New Phytol. XLI, p. 70–78.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Howard, H. W. &I. Manton (1946). Autopolyploid and allopolyploid watercress,. with the description of a new species. - Ann. bot., N. S., X, p. 1–13.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hutchinson, J. B., R. A. Silow &S. G. Stephens (1947). The evolution ofGossypium. - Oxford, University Press, xii + 160 p.

    Google Scholar 

  • Huxley, J. S. (1942). Evolution: the modern synthesis. - London, Allen & Unwin,. 64S p.

    Google Scholar 

  • Löve, A. (1943). Cytogenetic studies onRumex subgenusAcetosella. - Hereditas, Lund XXX, p. 1–136.

    Google Scholar 

  • Löve, D. (1944). Cytogenetic studies on dioeciousMelandrium. - Bot. Notiser, 1944, p. 125–213.

    Google Scholar 

  • Manton, I. (1937). The problem ofBiscutella laevigata L. II. The evidence from-.meiosis. - Ann. bot., N.S., I, p. 439–462.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mather, K. (1947). Species crosses inAntirrhinum. I. Genetic isolation of the species.majus, glutinosum andorontium. - Heredity I, p. 175–186.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mayr, E. (1942). Systematics and the origin of species. - New York, Columbia. Univ. Press, xv + 334 p.

    Google Scholar 

  • — (1948). The bearing of the New Systematics on genetical problems. The nature-of species. - Advances Genet. II, p. 205–237.

    Google Scholar 

  • Skalinska, M. (1947). Polyploidy inValeriana officinalis Linn. in relation to its. ecology and distribution. - Journ. linn. Soc. (Bot.) LIII, p. 159–186.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, E. C. (1943). A study of cytology and speciation in the genusPopulus L. - J. Arnold Arbor. XXIV, p. 275–305.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stebbins, G. L. (1945). The cytological analysis of species hybrids II. - Bot. Rev. XI, p. 463–486.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • — (1947). Types of polyploids: their classification and significance. - Advances Genet. I, p. 403–429.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tobgy, H. A. (1943). A cytological study ofCrepis fuliginosa, C. neglecta and theirF 1 hybrid, and its bearing on the mechanism of phylogenetic reduction in chromosome number. - J. Genet. XLV, p. 67–111.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Turesson, G. (1922). The species and variety as ecological units. - Hereditas, Lund III, p. 100–113.

    Google Scholar 

  • — (1929). Zur Natur und Begrenzung der Arteinheiten. - Hereditas, Lund XII, p.323–334.

    Google Scholar 

  • Turrill, W. B. (1946). The ecotype concept. A consideration with appreciation and criticism, especially of recent trends. - New Phytol. LXV, p. 34–43.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Valentine, D. H. (1947). Studies in British Primulas. I. Hybridization between Primrose and Oxlip (Primula vulgaris Huds. andP. elatior Schreb.). - New Phytol. XLVI, p. 229–253.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • — (1948). Studies in British Primulas. II. Ecology and taxonomy of Primrose and Oxlip (Primula vulgaris Huds. andP. elatior Schreb.). - New Phytol. LXVII, p. 111–130.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • White, M. J. D. (1945). Animal cytology and evolution. - Cambridge, Univ. Press, viii + 375 p.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilkinson, J. (1944). The cytology ofSalix in relation to its taxonomy. - Ann. bot., N.S., VIII, p. 269–284.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Valentine, D.H. The units of experimental taxonomy. Acta Biotheor 9, 75–88 (1949). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01556761

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01556761

Keywords

Navigation