this post was submitted on 08 Jan 2026
192 points (99.0% liked)

Science Memes

18063 readers
1454 users here now

Welcome to c/science_memes @ Mander.xyz!

A place for majestic STEMLORD peacocking, as well as memes about the realities of working in a lab.



Rules

  1. Don't throw mud. Behave like an intellectual and remember the human.
  2. Keep it rooted (on topic).
  3. No spam.
  4. Infographics welcome, get schooled.

This is a science community. We use the Dawkins definition of meme.



Research Committee

Other Mander Communities

Science and Research

Biology and Life Sciences

Physical Sciences

Humanities and Social Sciences

Practical and Applied Sciences

Memes

Miscellaneous

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] whotookkarl@lemmy.dbzer0.com 19 points 2 days ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (3 children)

There's multiple species definitions and none of them are very satisfying because it's trying to impose a clear distinction where one doesn't really exist.

species categorized by fertile offspring want to describe a situation like this with clear, distinct boundaries between populations:

abstract picture with rows of distinct colors with clear boundaries

But evolutionary groups tend to be more like gradients & gaps like this:

abstract picture with a few colors overlapping each other and areas with no color

You can try adding specific boundaries to the 2nd, but there'll always be some weird edges that don't really fit, like asexual reproducers for example.

[–] Zagorath@quokk.au 1 points 12 hours ago

Honestly your first picture could also be a good example to demonstrate ring species, which are a great countertexample to the "reproduce to produce fertile offspring" definition of species.

As a visual learner this really helped me to understand. +1 good explaining. I would like to subscribe to you newsletter.

[–] gandalf_der_12te@discuss.tchncs.de 0 points 2 days ago (1 children)

downvoting because it's not really true what you said. sure there's always exceptions in biology that don't fit into the species concept, but i dare say for lots of living beings, including practically all eukaryotic organisms, with very few exceptions, it's a good categorization scheme.

the exceptions you mentioned (asexual reproduction; edge cases where interbreeding is difficult but not impossible) are the exception, not the rule. that doesn't make the rule meaningless though.

[–] flora_explora@beehaw.org 3 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

Lol, have you not seen the OP or have ever looked at plant taxonomy before? There are many different groups where it is dubious if we can apply some sort of species concept.

And you talk about the species concept as if there was only just one?