|
bibliography: Zagorodniuk, I. 2021. On species, its reality and types of species. Geo&Bio, 20: 34–49. (In Ukrainian) title: On species, its reality and types of species Про вид, його реальність та типи видів doi: http://doi.org/10.15407/gb2006 authors (with orcid and affiliation): Igor Zagorodniuk http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0523-133X National Museum of Natural History, NAS Ukraine (Kyiv, Ukraine) summary: An analysis of the concept of "species" in view of the reality of its existence in the theoretical constructions of eidologists and in the practice of research and description of biotic diversity (BD) is presented. The work includes five main sections. The first considers the concept of species as a designation of individuality (speciesness) in the structure of BD. The etymology and connotations of the terms that were used previously or are used now to denote the category of eidos in Ukrainian, English, and related to Ukrainian Slavic languages are considered (genus, specie[s], kind). The significant influence of the connotative load on dominant species concepts and, in particular, the stable and long-lasting predominance of typology is noted in works of scientists of the 20th century, after the introduction of the term “species”. In the second part, the issue of reality of species and the phenomenon of diversity of its realities, in particular different realities in different contexts, are analysed. It is postulated that the reality of the concept of species is actually determined by the concept of separateness (individuality), three distinct forms of which are proposed: morphological (mostly in museum collections), phyletic (in phylogenetic studies), and biotic (within communities). The third section "On kinds of species and the diversity of species concepts" is devoted to the analysis of systems that describe the diversity of species as concepts, including species categories, kinds (classes) of species, and types of species. The fourth section "Emergent properties of species" discusses emergence and key features of species common for most concepts, as well as biosemiotics as one of the systems for maintaining the integrity of species. Finally, the last (fifth) section deals with the one-dimensional model of "species", the actual concept of "species within a community", when a species is defined not through the closest sister forms (with which it essentially does not intersect anywhere), but through other species with which it is part of the same guilds and communities. It is shown that this aspect of consideration of a species is the closest to its initial interpretation as an object of actual BD within local or regional biotic communities, in which the species is determined through other species with which it coexists and interacts. This significantly distinguishes the species as an element of BD among other interpretations, especially of the phyletic type, in which the species is determined not through ecosystem interactions with sympatric species, but through sister taxa. Key words: species concepts, reality of species, speciesness as separateness, evolution of speciesness. Correspondence to: Igor Zagorodniuk; National Museum of Natural History, NAS Ukraine; 15 Bohdan Khmelnytsky St, Kyiv, 01030 Ukraine; e-mail: zoozag@ukr.net; orcid: 0000-0002-0523-133X References (DOI = 9) Atran, S. 1990. Cognitive Foundations of Natural History: Towards an Anthropology of Science. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, England, i-xii + 1–360. Bigon, M., J. Harper, K. Townsend. 1989. Ecology. Individuals, Populations, Communities. Volume 2. Transl. from Engl. by V. N. Belov & A. G. Pelymsky. Mir Publ. House, Moscow, 1–477. (In Russian)\Grodzinskii, D. M., Yu. R. Sheliag-Sosonko, T. M. Cherevchenko, I. G. Emelyanov, V. G. Sobko, A. P. Lebeda. 2001. Problems of Conservation and Restoration of Biodiversity in Ukraine. Academperiodika, Kyiv, 1–106. (In Ukrainian) Casetta, E. 2014. Are species social objects? Some notes. Rivista di estetica, 57: 173–183. https://doi.org/10.4000/estetica.741 Claridge, M. F., H. A. Dawah, M. R. Wilson (Eds). 1997. Species. The Units of Biodiversity. Chapman & Hall, London, Weinheim, New York, Tokyo, Melbourne, Madras, 1–439. (The Systematics Association Special Volume Series 54). Cook, O. F. 1899. Four categories of species. The American Naturalist, 33 (388): 287–297. https://doi.org/10.1086/277215 Dobzhansky, Th. 1937. IX. Species as natural units. Genetics and the Origin of Species. Columbia Univ. Press, New York, 303–322. Emelyanov, I. G., I. V. Zagorodniuk, V. N. Khomenko. 1999. Taxonomic structure and complexity of biotic communities. Ecology & Noospherology, 8 (4): 6–17. (In Russian) Kamelin, R. V. 2016. Plant systematics as art. Turczaninowia, 19 (4): 18–24. (In Russian) https://doi.org/10.14258/turczaninowia.19.4.2 Klokov, M. V. 1978. Biological differentiation in taxonomic and phytoeidological aspects. News of Taxonomy of Higher and Lower Plants 1977. Naukova Dumka, Kyiv, 50–73. (In Russian) Kovaliv, Y. I. 2007. Semantics. In: Kovaliv, Y. I. (comp.). Literary Encyclopedia: in 2 volumes. Volume 2 (M – Ya). Academy Press, Kyiv, 376. (In Ukrainian) Kull, K. 2016. The biosemiotic concept of the species. Biosemiotics, 9 (1): 61–71. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12304-016-9259-2 Liubishchev, A. A. 1971. On the criteria of reality in taxonomy. In: Informational Issues of Semiotics, Linguistics and Automatic Translation. Issue 1. VINITI, Moscow, 67–81. (In Russian) Lyubarsky, G. Yu. 2015. The Birth of Science. Analytical Morphology, Classification System, Scientific Method. Languages of Slavic Culture, Moscow, 1–192. (In Russian) Mayr, E. 1968. Zoological Species and Evolution. Mir Publ. House, Moskva, 1–336. (Russian edition) Padial, J. M., M. Aurélien, I. De la Riva, M. Vences. 2010. Integrative future of taxonomy. Frontiers in Zoology, 7 (1): 16 [1–14]. https://doi.org/10.1186/1742-9994-7-16 Panocchini, S. 1923. On the establishment of Ukrainian natural history taxonomy. Ukrainian Zoological Journal, 2: 2–4. (In Ukrainian) Panocchini, S. 1928. In the case of establishing a Ukrainian natural taxonomy. Bulletin of the Institute of Ukrainian Scientific Language, 1: 39. (In Ukrainian) Paramonov, S. J. What is a species in biology. Soviet Botany, No. 2: 3–18. (In Russian) Pavlinov, I. Ya. 1992. Is there a biological species, or what is the “harm” of taxonomy? Journal of General Biology, 53 (5): 757–767. (In Russian) Pavlinov, I. Ya. 2009. The problem of species in biology is another look. In: Alimov, A. F., S. D. Stepanyants. (eds). Species and Speciation. Analysis of New Attitudes and Trends. St. Petersburg, 259–271. (Proceedings of ZIN RAS; Suppl. No. 1). (In Russian) Protasov, A. A. 2002. Biodiversity and Its Estimation. Conceptual Diversicology. Institute of Hydrobiology, NAS of Ukraine. Kyiv, 1–105. (In Russian) Queiroz, de, K. 1998. The general lineage concept of species, species criteria, and the process of speciation. In: Endless Forms: Species and Speciation, Oxford University Press, 57–75. https://s.si.edu/3of03Yl Salt, G. W. 1979. A comment on the use of the term emergent properties. The American Naturalist, 113 (1): 145–148. doi:10.1086/283370 Selyagh-Sosonko, Yu. R., I. G. Yemelyanov. 1997. Conceptual foundations of the scientific biodiversity interpretation. Convention on Biological Diversity: Public Awareness and Participation. Stylos, Kyiv, 11–23. (In Ukrainian) Stetsula, N., Z. Barkasi, I. Zagorodniuk. 2016. Diversity of muroid rodent communities in key habitats of the Skole Beskids (Eastern Carpathians). Proceedings of the Theriological School, 14: 139–146. https://doi.org/10.15407/ptt2016.14.139 Zagorodniuk, I. V. 2001. Species in biology as continuous system. In: Emelyanov, I. (ed.). Phenomenon of Coexistence of Two Paradigms: Creationism and Evolutionary Concept. NVP Vyrij Press, Kyiv, 153–181. (In Ukrainian) Zagorodniuk, I. V. 2002. Transitive taxonomic systems and their pattern in susliks (Spermophilus). Reports of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine, No. 9: 185–191. (In Russian) Zagorodniuk, I. V. 2003. Invasions as way to speciation. Reports of the NAS of Ukraine, No. 10: 187–194. (In Ukrainian) Zagorodniuk, I. V., I. G. Emelyanov. 2003. Species in ecology as population system and member of biotic community. Visnyk of the Dnipropetrovsk University. Series Biology & Ecology, 11 (1): 8–13. (In Ukrainian) Zagorodniuk, I. V. 2004. Biological species as amplify essence: attributes of buffering and modes of shifting. Scientific Bulletin of the Uzhgorod University. Series Biology, 14: 5–15. (In Ukrainian) Zagorodniuk, I. 2008. Mammal diversity and species richness of guilds. Scientific Bulletin of Uzhgorod University. Series Biology, 24: 11–23. (In Ukrainian) Zagorodniuk, I. 2011. Interspecies hybridization and factors of its formation in the East-European mammalian fauna. Studia Biologica, 5 (2): 173–210. (In Ukrainian) Zagorodniuk, I. 2012. Rotation of biodiversity through a prism of changes in knowledge, fauna and paradigms. In: Zagorodniuk, I. (ed).Dynamics of Biodiversity 2012. Luhansk National University Press, Luhansk, 37–43. (In Ukrainian) Zagorodniuk, I. 2019. Species concepts in biology: analysis of essences. Geo&Bio, 18: 77–117. (In Ukrainian) https://doi.org/10.15407/gb1807 Zagorodniuk, I. 2019. Range dynamics in sibling species: facts and reconstructions for the mammal fauna of Eastern Europe. Theriologia Ukrainica, 18: 20–39. https://doi.org/10.15407/pts2019.18.020 Zagorodniuk, I. 2020. Theoretical and material species and the concept of speciesness (about the reality of species, types of species and their diversity). Geo&Bio, 19: 32–53. (In Ukrainian) https://doi.org/10.15407/gb1905 Zagorodniuk, I.2021. Emergent features of species: existence between populations and communities. In: Zagorodniuk, I. (ed.). Species in Biology: Theory and Practice. National Museum of Natural History, NAS of Ukraine. Kyiv, 39–51. (Series: Natural History Museology; Vol. 6). Zavadsky, K. M. 1968. Species and Speciation. Nauka, Leningrad, 1–404. (In Russian) |