Talk:Race (biology)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] Suggestion to move the Anthropology marker

Maybe the anthropology marker should be moved to Race, as the anthropological use of race is defined there and not in this entry. 87.123.164.154 21:44, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Why this page should be deleted

Someone needs to put this on Votes for Deletion. I have never done it before. Jokestress 03:15, 18 July 2005 (UTC)

Can you explain what your problem is with the article and why you consider that it should be deleted? Guettarda 04:14, 18 July 2005 (UTC)

This article constitutes a dictionary definition with examples, and Wikipedia is not a dictionary. Also, the quality of the page is low (spelling and usage errors abound). At a bare minimum, the human-related content should be removed and a referral to Race substituted. --DAD T 04:43, 18 July 2005 (UTC)

I've fixed the human stuff. I think a Vote for Deletion is likely to fail as the page does include some content. If you'd like to nominate the page for VfD, feel free. --DAD T 04:48, 18 July 2005 (UTC)
I've now cleaned up the article a bit. The dog/wolf example was incorrect; dogs belong to Canis familiaris while wolves belong to Canis lupus. (They may still interbreed and constitute a race, but do not belong to the same species as the article said.) Also, a look at Rosa quickly shows that different colors of roses do not fall into any simplistic pattern of species or subspecies. --DAD T 05:02, 18 July 2005 (UTC)

[edit] subspecies

the other article that this could be merged with is Subspecies --Rikurzhen 04:55, July 18, 2005 (UTC)

Yes, race is an archaism with limes, I suspect. I have always heard subspecies. Cat subspecies are usually called breeds, especially when domesticated. I agree with this merge. Jokestress 05:11, 18 July 2005 (UTC)

Disagree. The terminology is basic with honeybees. The page should be expanded. Pollinator 05:14, July 18, 2005 (UTC)
There seems to be confusion regarding these levels - which makes sense inasmuch as everything below species is rather confused. Race is a level below subspecies. "Race" is usually used for animals, as something between subspecies and variety. In plants "land race" is used for traditional cultivars.
Cats breeds are definitely not subspecies, and AFAIK, have never been described as such. Guettarda 05:26, 18 July 2005 (UTC)

I found this 1897 reference to cat races: http://www.bigcats.org/swc/wildcattaxonomy.html Indeed, as early as 1897 Edward Hamilton, writing in the Annals of Scottish Natural History, warned "It would seem that the original Wild Cat, as found in the early historic times as well as in the Middle Ages, has for a long time been quite extinct in this country, its place being taken in the first instance by a mixed breed, in which the hereditary strain of the original wild race predominated. Later on, as the imported domestic race increased in numbers and localities, this was superseded by a still more modified form of the domestic cat, in which the foreign characteristics of the ancestral progenitors of the domestic race, viz. the African cat, were in the ascendant and prevail up to the present time."

I think part of the concern regarding this term is that it's archaic. I'd feel better seeing that it's in common use today. --DAD T 05:36, 18 July 2005 (UTC)

Host-Race Formation in the Common Cuckoo. Science, Vol 282, Issue 5388, 471-472 , 16 October 1998
Karen Marchetti, * Hiroshi Nakamura, H. Lisle Gibbs
The exploitation of a new host by a parasite may result in host-race formation or speciation. A brood parasitic bird, the common cuckoo, is divided into host races, each characterized by egg mimicry of different host species. Microsatellite DNA markers were used to examine cuckoo mating patterns and host usage in an area where a new host has been recently colonized. Female cuckoos show strong host preferences, but individual males mate with females that lay in the nests of different hosts. Female host specialization may lead to the evolution of sex-linked traits such as egg mimicry, even though gene flow through the male line prevents completion of the speciation process.

and

Transcriptionally Active MuDR, the Regulatory Element of the Mutator Transposable Element Family of Zea mays, Is Present in Some Accessions of the Mexican land race Zapalote chico. Genetics, Vol. 149, 329-346, May 1998
María de la Luz Gutiérrez-Nava, Christine A. Warren, Patricia Leóna, and Virginia Walbot
To date, mobile Mu transposons and their autonomous regulator MuDR have been found only in the two known Mutator lines of maize and their immediate descendants. To gain insight into the origin, organization, and regulation of Mutator elements, we surveyed exotic maize and related species for cross-hybridization to MuDR. Some accessions of the mexican land race Zapalote chico contain one to several copies of full-length, unmethylated, and transcriptionally active MuDR-like elements plus non-autonomous Mu elements. The sequenced 5.0-kb MuDR-Zc element is 94.6% identical to MuDR, with only 20 amino acid changes in the 93-kD predicted protein encoded by mudrA and ten amino acid changes in the 23-kD predicted protein of mudrB. The terminal inverted repeat (TIR) A of MuDR-Zc is identical to standard MuDR; TIRB is 11.2% divergent from TIRA. In Zapalote chico, mudrA transcripts are very rare, while mudrB transcripts are as abundant as in Mutator lines with a few copies of MuDR. Zapalote chico lines with MuDR-like elements can trans-activate reporter alleles in inactive Mutator backgrounds; they match the characteristic increased forward mutation frequency of standard Mutator lines, but only after outcrossing to another line. Zapalote chico accessions that lack MuDR-like elements and the single copy MuDR a1-mum2 line produce few mutations. New mutants recovered from Zapalote chico are somatically stable.

Is this adequate? It only took a few seconds to find each one. Guettarda 07:32, 18 July 2005 (UTC)

Here race is used interchangeably with subspecies

Subspecies: There is only one recognized race of Northern Saw-whet Owl on mainland North America and Mexico. There is another recognized race that is restricted to the Queen Charlotte Islands of British Columbia. These are the only two races of Northern Saw-whet Owl. The Saw-whet Owls are found nowhere else in the world but there is another species of Saw-whet Owl found in Central America (Unspotted Saw-whet Owl - Aegolius ridgwayi) that appear somewhat similar to the deep brown brooksi race of the Charlotte Islands.

Jokestress 07:41, 18 July 2005 (UTC)

Here's a chameleon where trinomials seem to be contested, and:

Distribution: Known range extends from N Africa and Spain to W Asia; including Turkey and Cyprus with a vertical distribution to 700 m. It is stated that the Cyprus race of this species belongs to C. chamaeleon recticrista (Böhme & Wiedl, 1994; Göçmen et al., 1996a). In spite of Hillenius (1978) who considered it to be a synonym of C. chamaeleon chamaeleon, these authors maintain this trinomial nomenclature. Material from Turkey (Göçmen et al., 1996a) and Grecee (Böhme, 1989; Böhme & Wiedl, 1994), suggest that eastern Mediterrenean specimens attain larger dimensions than western ones (Portugal, Spain). Furthermore, there seem to be slight hemipenial differences between the two groups (Böhme & Wiedl, 1994). Thus, the population of Cyprus belongs to the eastern Mediterranean form, i.e., C. chamaeleon recticrista.

and a skink where subspecies is interchanged:

Distribution: Its range extends from N Africa, Anatolia, Cyprus Island to W and Middle Asia with a vertical distribution to 1800 m. In Cyprus, the nominate race, E. schneideri schneideri (Douidin, 1802), an endemic subspecies, lives.

Jokestress 07:48, 18 July 2005 (UTC)

Color me convinced. Clearly not archaic. Whether race and subspecies are equivalent is still unclear, and probably fundamentally so. If you feel strongly, yank the merge. --DAD T 21:30, 18 July 2005 (UTC)
Like everything in taxonomy - what is a species, what is a family, what is a subspecies, etc., there are differing opinions as to what the boundaries are. I had a conversation with a systematist just a few days ago as to what constitutes a "subspecies"...there is no single answer. While "race" overlaps with subspecies in some usage, it also overlaps with variety in others. I think it's notable not so much in and of it self, but in association with the race article, which deals with only the use in humans. The idea that there is a valid biological race against which you can compare human races is useful information, especially for less informed readers. The article requires clean-up, not being changed into a redirect. Guettarda 21:36, 18 July 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Dogs

Canis familiaris is usually considered a distinct species from Canis lupus, but it can be argued they are really subpecies of Canis canis, in that the two regularly interbreed, cannot be distinguished from each other at the anatomic level, and on the whole, display remarkably similar behaviors. Dogs have immense genetic diversity (in comparison Homo sapiens does not), which underlays the enormous diversity in size, shape, coloration and behavior. At the same time, we would never trust a wolf in the ways we trust dogs. I am arguing here that dogs are a distinct subspecies, one that is perhaps on its way to full speciation.

The word "race" is sometimes used with dogs: terriers, spaniels, and hounds, as I recall, with terriers being the most recently bred. Here the distinction is largely behavioral, tho' with hounds you can see that the superficial relationship to wolves is closer.

Under this we have breeds, where enormous variety within a given breed is again experienced, particularly in downsizing, as with the continuum of very large standard poodles down thru the toys to the teacups. Similarly, there are two kinds of corgi, distinguished only by their coats.

My point is that 'race' is a sometimes useful term, tho' another more neutral term might be used, but what that is I don't know.

From my point of view, 'race' should not be used with humans, because of the lack of genetic diversity. The way we apply 'breed' to dogs, tho', might work. --FourthAve 02:08, 6 August 2005 (UTC)

actually, dogs are already officially a subspecies of Canis lupus, C.l. familiaris.--FourthAve 02:35, 6 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] critique

most biologists reject the concept of race (I mean, applied to dogs, bumblebees, etc). We need some acknowledgment of this. Slrubenstein | Talk 12:59, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] critique

most biologists reject the concept of race (I mean, applied to dogs, bumblebees, etc). We need some acknowledgment of this. Slrubenstein | Talk 12:59, 30 October 2007 (UTC)