PHYLOGENETIC SYSTEMATICS AND THE SPECIES PROBLEM

Abstract— A tension has arisen over the primacy of interbreeding versus monophyly in defining the species category. Manifestations of this tension include unnecessary restriction of the concept of monophyly as well as inappropriate attribution of "species" properties, to "higher taxa", and vice versa. Distinctions between systems (wholes) deriving their existence from different underlying. processes have been obscured by failure to acknowledge different interpretations of the concept of individuality. We identify interbreeding (resulting in populations) and evolutionary descent (resulting in monophyletic groups) as two processes of interest to phylogenetic systematists, and explore the relations between the systems resulting from these processes. In the case of sexual reproduction, populations of interbreeding organisms (regardless of whether they are monophyletic) exist as cohesive wholes and play a special role in phylogenetic systematics, being the least inclusive entities appropriate for use as terminal units in phylogenetic analysis of organismal relationships. Both sexual and asexual organisms form monophyletic groups. Accepting the reality and significance of both interbreeding and monophyly emphasizes that a conscious decision must be made regarding which phenomenon should be used to define the species category. Examination of species concepts that focus either on interbreeding or on common descent leads us to conclude that several alternatives are acceptable from the standpoint of phylogenetic systematics but that no one species concept can meet the needs of all comparative biologists.     

Speciation in the fossil record

It is easy to claim that the fossil record says nothing about speciation because the biological species concept (which relies on interbreeding) cannot be applied to it and genetic studies cannot be carried out on it. However, fossilized organisms are often preserved in sufficient abundance for populations of intergrading morphs to be recognized, which, by analogy with modern populations, are probably biological species. Moreover, the fossil record is our only reliable documentation of the sequence of past events over long time intervals: the processes of speciation are generally too slow to be observed directly, and permanent reproductive isolation can only be verified with hindsight. Recent work has shown that some parts of the fossil record are astonishingly complete and well documented, and patterns of lineage splitting can be examined in detail. Marine plankton appear to show gradual speciation, with subsequent morphological differentiation of lineages taking up to 500000 years to occur. Marine invertebrates and vertebrates more commonly show punctuated patterns, with periods of rapid speciation followed by long-term stasis of species lineages.     

Interbreeding, monophyly and the genetic yardstick: species concepts in parasites

The biological species concept defines species on the criterion of interbreeding. This may not be applicable to many parasites that are capable of self-fertilization and asexual reproduction. In this review, Alan Lymbery explores alternative concepts that may be applied to recognize species in such groups, using the cestode genus Echinococcus as an example. Two conclusions can be drawn. First, that the applicability of the biological species concept should not be dismissed without some knowledge o f the frequency of interbreeding in natural populations. Second, that where interbreeding is absent or rare, species should be delimited on the basis o f both monophyletic origin and genetic distinctness.     

Species concepts and species reality: salvaging a Linnaean rank

The validity of the species category (rank) as a distinct level of biological organization has been questioned. Phenetic, cohesion and monophyletic species concepts do not delimit species-level taxa that are qualitatively distinct from lower or higher taxa: all organisms throughout the tree of life exhibit varying degrees of similarity, cohesion, and monophyly. In contrast, interbreeding concepts delimit species-level taxa characterized by a phenomenon (regular gene flow) not found in higher taxa, making the species category a distinct level of biological organization. Only interbreeding concepts delimit species-level taxa that are all comparable according to a biologically meaningful criterion and qualitatively distinct from entities assigned to other taxonomic categories. Consistent application of interbreeding concepts can result in counterintuitive taxonomies--e.g. many wide polytypic species in plants and narrow cryptic species in animals. However, far from being problematic, such differences are biologically illuminating--reflecting differing barriers to gene flow in different clades. Empirical problems with interbreeding concepts exist, but many of these also apply to other species concepts, whereas others are not as severe as some have argued. A monistic view of species using interbreeding concepts will encounter strong historical inertia, but can save the species category from redundancy with other categories, and thus justify continued recognition of the species category.     

How to be a chaste species pluralist-realist: the origins of species modes and the synapomorphic species concept

The biological species (biospecies) concept applies only to sexually reproducing species, which means that until sexual reproduction evolved, there were no biospecies. On the universal tree of life, biospecies concepts therefore apply only to a relatively small number of clades, notably plants andanimals. I argue that it is useful to treat the various ways of being a species (species modes) as traits of clades. By extension from biospecies to the other concepts intended to capture the natural realities of what keeps taxa distinct, we can treat other modes as traits also, and so come to understand that theplurality of species concepts reflects the biological realities of monophyletic groups.We should expect that specialists in different organisms will tend to favour those concepts that best represent the intrinsic mechanisms that keep taxa distinct in their clades. I will address the question whether modes ofreproduction such as asexual and sexual reproduction are natural classes, given that they are paraphyletic in most clades.     

The cladistic solution to the species problem

The correct explanation of why species, in evolutionary theory, are individuals and not classes is the cladistic species concept. The cladistic species concept defines species as the group of organisms between two speciation events, or between one speciation event and one extinction event, or (for living species) that are descended from a speciation event. It is a theoretical concept, and therefore has the virtue of distinguishing clearly the theoretical nature of species from the practical criteria by which species may be recognized at any one time. Ecological or biological (reproductive) criteria may help in the practical recognition of species. Ecological and biological species concepts are also needed to explain why cladistic species exist as distinct lineages, and to explain what exactly takes place during a speciation event. The ecological and biological species concepts work only as sub-theories of the cladistic species concept and if taken by themselves independently of cladism they are liable to blunder. The biological species concept neither provides a better explanation of species indivudualism than the ecological species concept, nor, taken by itself, can the biological species concept even be reconciled with species individualism. Taking the individuality of species seriously requires subordinating the biological, to the cladistic, species concept.     

为什么在物种概念上难以达成共识?

生物学家通常认为物种是生命多样性的基本单位。然而, 尽管近一个世纪以来生物学家们不断地讨论物种概念问题, 但到目前为止仍然难以形成共识。大多数生物学家关注如何定义物种主要是因为它有非常重要的实践意义, 所以, 不同学者提出的物种概念在很大程度上是基于实践应用上的可操作性, 并且其视角难免受其专业见地以及对形成新物种的进化过程的认识所影响。物种代表了进化过程的一个阶段, 而且不同的“物种”可能处于物种形成这个进化过程的不同阶段。鉴于“定义”实际上是一种类似协议的约定或界定, 任何定义都是一种带有局限性的概括, 因此我们可能很难建立一个与分类实践中千变万化的情况都能完全匹配协调的物种定义。已经提出来的那些物种概念或定义都有其合理性, 但是也没有一个是完美无缺的。认识到这一点很重要, 否则就可能会因为固执地坚持某一特定的物种概念而在物种界定和进化研究中自觉或不自觉地引入错误甚至制造混乱。     

Species: the concept, category and taxon

The term species by itself is vague because it refers to the species concept, the species category and the species taxon, all of which are distinct although related to one another. The species concept is not primarily a part of systematics, but has always been an integral part of basic biological theory, It is based on evolutionary theory and applies only to sexually reproducing organisms. The species concept and the phyletic lineage concept are quite distinct although they are related to one another. The important aspect of the species concept is lack of gene flow between different species, and hence the defining criterion of the species is genetic isolation. The species concept is often considered as non‐dimensional, both in time and space. Species possess three different major properties, namely genetic isolation, reproductive isolation and ecological isolation; these properties evolve at different times and under the effect of different causes during the speciation process. Speciation requires an external isolating barrier during the initial allopatric phase in which genetic isolation evolves and must reach 100% efficiency. The subsequent sympatric phase of speciation occurs after the disappearance of the external isolating barrier when members of the two newly evolved species can interact with one another and exert mutual selective demands on one another. Much of the reproductive and ecological isolation evolves during this secondary sympatric phase. The species category is a rank in the taxonomic hierarchy and serves as the basis on which the diversity of organisms is described; it is not the same as the species concept. The species category applied to all organisms, sexually and asexually reproducing. The species taxon is the practical application of the species category in systematics with the recognition of species taxa requiring many arbitrary decisions. No single set of rules exist by which the species category can be applied to all organisms. Recognition of species taxa in asexually reproducing organisms is based on amount of variation and gaps in the variation of phenotypic features associated with ecological attributes of these organisms as compared with similar attributes in sympatric species taxa of sexually reproducing organisms. Species taxa are multidimensional in that they exist over space–time and often have fuzzy borders. Because recognition of species taxa, including those in sexually reproducing organisms, depends on many arbitrary decisions especially when dealing with broad geographical and temporal ranges, species taxa cannot be used as the foundation for developing and testing theoretical concepts in evolutionary theory which can only be done with the non‐dimensional species concept.     

A two-locus model of speciation.

Speciation is considered as the evolution of partial or complete cross-incompatibility between the carriers of genes (at a locus called "object locus") that distinguish the prospective species populations. The mating relations at the object locus are modified by the alleles at a second mating modifier locus. Based on a widely applicable concept of fitness and mating preference, it is shown that heterozygote disadvantage in fitness at the object locus is necessary for speciation, which corroborates Wallace's hypothesis. It is pointed out that the difference between sympatric and parapatric speciation essentially lies in the mechanisms stabilizing the polymorphism required at the object locus as a prerequisite for speciation. In the presence of recombination between the object and mating modifier locus speciation may be prevented by forces maintaining gametic phase imbalance between these loci such as can result from unidirectional gene flow between parapatric populations.     

Introduction. Speciation in plants and animals: pattern and process

Although approximately 150 years have passed since the publication of On the origin of species by means of natural selection, the definition of what species are and the ways in which species originate remain contentious issues in evolutionary biology. The biological species concept, which defines species as groups of interbreeding natural populations that are reproductively isolated from other such groups, continues to draw support. However, there is a growing realization that many animal and plant species can hybridize with their close relatives and exchange genes without losing their identity. On occasion, such hybridization can lead to the origin of new species. A key to understanding what species are and the ways in which they originate rests to a large extent on a detailed knowledge of the nature and genetics of factors that limit gene flow between species and the conditions under which such isolation originates. The collection of papers in this issue addresses these topics and deals as well with some specific issues of hybrid speciation and the causes of species radiations. The papers included arise from a 1-day symposium on speciation held during the Sixth Biennial Meeting of the Systematics Association at Edinburgh in August 2007. In this introduction, we provide some background to these papers and highlight some key points made. The papers make clear that highly significant advances to our understanding of animal and plant speciation are currently being made across the range of this topic.     

Conditions for sympatric speciation: A diploid model incorporating habitat fidelity and non-habitat assortative mating

Summary Three types of genes have been proposed to promote sympatric speciation: habitat preference genes, assortative mating genes and habitat-based fitness genes. Previous computer models have analysed these genes separately or in pairs. In this paper we describe a multilocus model in which genes of all three types are considered simultaneously. Our computer simulations show that speciation occurs in complete sympatry under a broad range of conditions. The process includes an initial diversification phase during which a slight amount of divergence occurs, a quasi-equilibrium phase of stasis during which little or no detectable divergence occurs and a completion phase during which divergence is dramatic and gene flow between diverging habitat morphs is rapidly eliminated. Habitat preference genes and habitat-specific fitness genes become associated when assortative mating occurs due to habitat preference, but interbreeding between individuals adapted to different habitats occurs unless habitat preference is almost error free. However, nonhabitat assortative mating, when coupled with habitat preference can eliminate this interbreeding. Even when several loci contribute to the probability of expression of non-habitat assortative mating and the contributions of individual loci are small, gene flow between diverging portions of the population can terminate within less than 1000 generations.     

No evidence of intrinsic reproductive isolation between two reciprocally non-monophyletic,ecologically differentiated mountain plants at an early stage of speciation

Adaptation to dissimilar habitats can trigger phenotypic and genetic differences between populations, which may, in the absence of gene flow, ultimately lead to ecological speciation. Reproductive isolation of diverging populations is a critical step at the onset of speciation. An excellent example for exploring the extent of reproductive isolation at early stages of speciation is provided by Heliosperma pusillum and H. veselskyi (Caryophyllaceae), two reciprocally non-monophyletic, ecologically differentiated species from the Alps. Interspecific gene flow—as revealed by recent genetic studies—is rare even between geographically close populations. Cross pollinations and fitness experiments revealed no evidence of intrinsic reproductive barriers, since fitness parameters measured under uniform conditions were not lower in inter- than in intraspecific crosses. Further, morphometric analyses of the offspring clearly showed that the differentiation of parental species is heritable. As parental phenotypes are likely adaptive, the intermediate morphology of hybrids may lead to reduced hybrid fitness in parental habitats. Altogether, H. pusillum and H. veselskyi provide an increasingly well characterised model system offering exciting insights into early stages of ecological speciation.     

Individuality,pluralism, and the phylogenetic species concept

The concept of individuality as applied to species, an important advance in the philosophy of evolutionary biology, is nevertheless in need of refinement. Four important subparts of this concept must be recognized: spatial boundaries, temporal boundaries, integration, and cohesion. Not all species necessarily meet all of these. Two very different types of pluralism have been advocated with respect to species, only one of which is satisfactory. An often unrecognized distinction between grouping and ranking components of any species concept is necessary. A phylogenetic species concept is advocated that uses a (monistic) grouping criterion of monophyly in a cladistic sense, and a (pluralistic) ranking criterion based on those causal processes that are most important in producing and maintaining lineages in a particular case. Such causal processes can include actual interbreeding, selective constraints, and developmental canalization. The widespread use of the biological species concept is flawed for two reasons: because of a failure to distinguish grouping from ranking criteria and because of an unwarranted emphasis on the importance of interbreeding as a universal causal factor controlling evolutionary diversification. The potential to interbreed is not in itself a process; it is instead a result of a diversity of processes which result in shared selective environments and common developmental programs. These types of processes act in both sexual and asexual organisms, thus the phylogenetic species concept can reflect an underlying unity that the biological species concept can not.     

“整合物种概念”和“分化路上的物种”

已有的各个物种概念对物种的认识类似盲人摸象, 只包含了物种的某一个方面; 而一个分化后期的成熟物种应涵盖了所有的物种概念。但是, 尚未到达分化后期的物种往往又已开始新一轮的物种分化; 自然中存在的多数“物种”处于分化路上。这种循环往复连续分化产生的物种, 存在种间生殖隔离不彻底、基因流频繁发生、网状进化突出等现象。此外, 对于不同的物种对, 最早开始分化的基因以及不同物种概念所要求的条件的分化顺序不是统一的, 而是随机的。定义一个适合所有“分化路上的物种”概念存在较大困难。但是, 应采用尽可能多的物种概念来界定分化路上的物种、发表新种和进行分类处理; 也应承认种间可能广泛存在不完全的生殖隔离和有限的基因流, 即有不属于两个物种群体的杂交或回交个体的存在。这样划分的物种比只依据一个物种概念认定的物种具有更高的客观性和科学性。     

Speciation centres and sustainable development

Biodiversity can be regarded as the result of the dynamic processes starting with speciation and ending with species extinction. Speciation urges populations of organisms within an already‐existing species to change as a consequence of ecological change. It can occur everywhere as the selective pressures causing it are randomly distributed ( Dobzhansky et al., 1977 , p. 4); hence, a need to promote a development policy that does not endanger these natural processes. This conservation concept addresses a global ecological policy and is different from the more classical concept of conservation based on the promotion of natural parks to preserve rare species and their direct habitats. The latter concept has the disadvantage to lead to the protection of limited surfaces, which cannot harbour most of speciation centres and leaves the rest of the world unprotected. Examples will illustrate the dangers faced by continental and insular speciation centres.     

物种与物种多样性

本文首先讨论生物物种的科学概念和生物学本质，分析物种客观存在的自然属性和物种概念的局限性，认为物种的生物学属性和物种多样性的科学属性之间有着本质联系。物种多样性研究的实质是研究生物物种的生物学多样性。度量物种多样性程度有多种方法，但物种数目是物种多样性程度最直接、也是最基本的表达，估计物种多样性数目是当前国际上物种多样性研究的核心与热点内容。物种多样性产生的根源是物种形成，物种绝灭速率是维持物种多样性的关键因素。本文简要总结了物种形成与绝灭的基本模式和机制，通过分析生物地理区系与物种多样性研究的密切关系，说明物种的区系成份分析是物种多样性大尺度格局研究的重要内容。     

What is wrong with absolute individual fitness?

One of the most basic facts about evolution is that fitness is a relative concept. It does not matter how well an organism survives and reproduces, only that it does so better than other organisms bearing alternative traits. Nevertheless, many evolutionary arguments are framed in terms of absolute individual fitness. The absolute fitness criterion (AFC) can be justified in terms of relative fitness only given certain assumptions that are frequently violated in nature. In particular, interactions must occur in groups that are randomly formed and phenotypic variation among groups must be tightly coupled to genetic variation. Complicating the genotype-phenotype relationship can cause phenotypic variation among groups to become nonrandom, even when the groups are randomly formed, favoring traits that do not maximize absolute individual fitness. Complex genotype-phenotype relationships and complex population structures require explicit models of evolutionary change based on relative fitness differences within and among groups.     

Slight differences among individuals and the unified neutral theory of biodiversity

The unified neutral theory of biodiversity provides a very simple and counterintuitive explanation of species diversity patterns. By specifying speciation, community size and dispersal, and completely ignoring differences among individual organisms and species, it generates biodiversity patterns that remarkably resemble natural ones. Here I show that adding even slight differences among organisms generates very different patterns and predictions. In large communities with widespread dispersal, heritable differences in viability among individual organisms lead to biodiversity patterns characterised by the overdominance of a single species comprising organisms with relatively high fitness. In communities with local dispersal, the same differences produce rapid community extinction. I conclude that the unified neutral theory is not robust to slight deviations from its most controversial assumption.