Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Microbiology and the species problem

  • Published:
Biology & Philosophy Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper examines the species problem in microbiology and its implications for the species problem more generally. Given the different meanings of ‘species’ in microbiology, the use of ‘species’ in biology is more multifarious and problematic than commonly recognized. So much so, that recent work in microbial systematics casts doubt on the existence of a prokaryote species category in nature. It also casts doubt on the existence of a general species category for all of life (one that includes both prokaryotes and eukaryotes). Prokaryote biology also undermines recent attempts to save the species category, such as the suggestion that species are metapopulation lineages and the idea that ‘species’ is a family resemblance concept.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. A third difference between BSC species and microbial species is that for most eukaryotes recombination is obligatory while it is not for any prokaryotes. (Thanks to an anonymous referee for pointing this out.)

  2. Though in some cases the introduction of foreign core genes may be harmless or even beneficial (Ford Doolittle, pers. comm.).

  3. By ‘lineage’ I merely mean either a monophyletic or paraphyletic group of organisms.

  4. We have seen examples where the recombination and ecological species concepts divide the same group of organisms into different species. For examples where the recombination and phylogenetic approaches sort organisms into different species, see Touchon et al. (2009). For examples demonstrating the conflict between the phylogenetic and ecological approaches, see Konstantinidis and Tiedje (2005).

  5. Some readers of this paper have objected to the claim that phylo-phenetic species taxa are real. Though I stand by this claim, it is worth mentioning that none of the arguments in this paper concerning the reality of a prokaryote species category or a general species category depend on this claim. The diversity found among recombination species, ecological species, and phylogenetic species is sufficient for the arguments that follow.

  6. See Fraser et al. (2007) and Morgan and Pitts (2008) for further reasons to be pessimistic about an all-encompassing ecological approach to prokaryote species.

  7. This is not to say that most organisms do not belong to taxa. The claim here is that most organisms do not belong to species taxa. Most (or all) organisms may belong to taxa, but there is no natural species category that those taxa belong to. See below and Ereshefsky (1998, 2009) for further discussion.

References

  • Achtman M, Wagner M (2008) Microbial diversity and the genetic nature of microbial species. Nature Rev 6:431–440

    Google Scholar 

  • Bapteste E, Boucher Y (2008) Lateral gene transfer challenges principles of microbial systematics. Trends Microbiol 16:200–2007

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bapteste E, Boucher Y (2009) Some epistemological impacts of horizontal gene transfer on classification and microbiology. Methods Mol Biol 532:55–72

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baum D, Donoghue M (1995) Choosing among alternative “phylogenetic” species concepts. Syst Biol 20:560–573

    Google Scholar 

  • Beatty J (1992) Speaking of species: Darwin’s strategy. In: Ereshefsky M (ed) The units of evolution. MIT Press, Cambridge, pp 227–246

    Google Scholar 

  • Boyd R (1999) Homeostasis, species, and higher taxa. In: Wilson R (ed) Species: new interdisciplinary essays. MIT Press, Cambridge, pp 141–186

    Google Scholar 

  • Brigandt I (2003) Species pluralism does not imply species eliminativism. Philos Sci 70:1305–1316

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cohan F (2002) What are bacterial species? Annu Rev Microbiol 56:457–487

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coyne J, Orr A (2004) Speciation. Sinauer Associates, Sutherland

    Google Scholar 

  • Darwin C (1859[1964]) On the origin of species: a facsimile of the first edition. Harvard University Press, Cambridge

  • De Queiroz K (1999) The general lineage concept of species and the defining properties of the species category. In: Wilson R (ed) Species: new interdisciplinary essays. MIT Press, Cambridge, pp 49–90

    Google Scholar 

  • De Queiroz K (2005) Different species problems and their resolution. BioEssays 27:1263–1269

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Queiroz K (2007) Species concepts and species delimitation. Syst Biol 56:866–879

    Google Scholar 

  • Doolittle F, Bapteste E (2007) Pattern pluralism and the tree of life hypothesis. Proc Natl Acad Sci 104:2043–2049

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Doolittle F, Papke T (2006) Genomics and the bacterial species problem. Genome Biol 7:116.1–116.7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Doolittle F, Zhaxybayeva O (2009) On the origin of prokaryotic species. Genome Res 19:744–756

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dykuizen D, Green L (1991) Recombination in Escherichia coli and the definition of biological species. J Bacteriol 173:7257–7268

    Google Scholar 

  • Ereshefsky M (ed) (1992a) The units of evolution: essays on the nature of species. MIT Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Ereshefsky M (1992b) Eliminative pluralism. Philos Sci 59:671–690

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ereshefsky M (1998) Species pluralism and anti-realism. Philos Sci 65:103–120

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ereshefsky M (2001) The poverty of the linnaean hierarchy: a philosophical study of biological taxonomy. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Ereshefsky M (2009) Darwin’s solution to the species problem. Synthese. doi:10.1007/s11229-009-9538-4

  • Franklin L (2007) Bacteria, sex, and systematics. Philos Sci 74:69–95

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fraser C, Hange B, Spratt B (2007) Recombination and the nature of bacterial speciation. Science 315:476–480

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gevers D et al (2005) Re-evaluating prokaryote species. Nat Rev Microbiol 3:1043–1047

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gogarten J, Townsend J (2005) Horizontal gene transfer, genome innovation and evolution. Nat Rev Microbiol 3:679–687

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Griffiths PE (2006) Function, homology and character individuation. Philos Sci 73:1–25

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Griffiths PE (2007) The phenomena of homology. Biol Philos 22:643–658

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hanage W, Fraser C, Spratt B (2005) Fuzzy species among recombinogenic bacteria. BMC Biol 3:6

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hull D (1965) The effect of essentialism on taxonomy: two thousand years of stasis. Br J Philos Sci 15:314–326, 16:1–18

    Google Scholar 

  • Konstantinidis K, Tiedje J (2005) Genomic insights that advance the species definition for prokaryotes. PNAS 102:2567–2572

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lan R, Reeves P (2001) When does a clone deserve a name? A perspective on bacterial species based on population genetics. Trends Microbiol 9:419–424

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lawrence J (2002) Gene transfer in bacteria: speciation without species? Theor Popul Biol 61:449–460

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lawrence JG, Retchless A (2010) The myth of bacterial species and speciation. Biol Phil. doi:10.1007/s10539-010-9215-5

  • Maddison W (1997) Gene trees in species trees. Syst Biol 46:523–536

    Google Scholar 

  • Mayden R (2002) On biological species, species concepts and individuation in the natural world. Fish Fish 3:171–196

    Google Scholar 

  • Mayr E (1970) Populations, species and evolution. Harvard University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Mishler B, Brandon R (1987) Individuality, pluralism, and the phylogenetic species concept. Biol Philos 2:397–414

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morgan G, Pitts W (2008) Evolution without species: the case of mosaic bacteriophages. Br J Philos sci 59:745–765

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nesbø C, Dultek M, Doolittle F (2006) Recombination in thermotoga: implications for species concepts and biogeography. Genetics 172:759–769

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nixon W, Wheeler Q (1990) An amplification of the phylogenetic species concept. Cladistics 6:211–223

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • O’Malley M, Duprè J (2007) Size doesn’t matter: towards a more inclusive philosophy of biology. Biol Philos 22:155–191

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Paul J (1999) Microbial transfer: an ecological perspective. J Mol Microbiol Biotechnol 1:45–50

    Google Scholar 

  • Pigliucci M (2003) Species as family resemblance concepts: the (dis-)solution of the species problem? BioEssays 25:96–602

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pigliucci M, Kaplan J (2006) Making sense of evolution: conceptual foundations of evolutionary biology. Chicago University Press, Chicago

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosselló-Mora R, Amann R (2001) The species concept for prokaryotes. FEMS Microbiol Rev 25:39–67

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stackebrandt E (2006) Defining taxonomic ranks. In: Dworkin M (ed) Prokaryotes: a handbook on the biology of bacteria, vol 1. Springer, New York, pp 29–57

    Google Scholar 

  • Stackebrandt E, Frederiksen W, Garrity G et al (2002) Report of the ad hoc committee for the re-evaluation of the species definition in bacteriology. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 52:1043–1047

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Touhon M, Hoede C, Tenaillon O et al (2009) Organised genome dynamics in the Escherihcia coli species results in highly diverse adaptive paths. PLos Genetics 5:e1000344. doi:10.1371/journal.pgen.1000344

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Valen L (1976) Ecological species, multispecies, and oaks. Taxon 25:233–239

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wertz J, Goldstone C, Gordon D, Riley M (2003) A molecular phylogeny of enteric bacteria and implications for a bacterial species concept. J Evol Biol 16:1236–1248

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wilson R (ed) (1999) Species: new interdisciplinary essays. MIT Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilson R, Barker M, Brigandt I (2009) When traditional essentialism fails: biological natural kinds. Philosophical Topics (in press)

  • Xu J (2004) The prevalence and evolution of sex in microorganisms. Genome 47:775–780

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

I would like to thank Eric Bapteste, Richard Boyd, Ingo Brigandt, Ford Doolittle, David Hull, Maureen O’Malley, Elliott Sober, Joel Velasco, and two anonymous referees for their helpful suggestions. The Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada provided financial support for this project.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Philosophy, University of Calgary, 2500 University Drive, NW, Calgary, AB, T2N 1N4, Canada

    Marc Ereshefsky

Authors
  1. Marc Ereshefsky
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Marc Ereshefsky.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Ereshefsky, M. Microbiology and the species problem. Biol Philos 25, 553–568 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10539-010-9211-9

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10539-010-9211-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation