Invisible <voi### [at] devnull> wrote:
> On 12/01/2011 04:12 PM, Warp wrote:
> > Invisible<voi### [at] devnull>  wrote:
> >> If you can't, take a look at dogs. Some kinds can't interbreed with each
> >> other, if only due to huge differences in size. Humans did that.
> >
> >    I don't think that is what defines a species. It's about genetics.

> How about this: There are two species of grasshopper that never 
> interbreed. The females of species A ignore the songs of males of 
> species B. However, if you mute the male and play back a recording of a 
> male of species A, the two will mate, and produce viable offspring. It's 
> just that this only ever happens in the lab.

  The definition of species is related to genetics, not to behavior.

> Similarly, there are probably classes of birds where you could do the 
> same thing by putting coloured visors over the bird's eyes, or moths 
> where you could mask one chemical pheromone with another. Are these 
> separate species?

  It's about genetics, not about behavior.

> You can apparently mate a lion with a tiger, producing either a "liger" 
> or a "tiglon". (Go look them up.) But this never happens in the wild (as 
> far as we know). Are these separate species?

  The offspring must be fertile. Ligers and tigons aren't.

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message