Re: Oregon: Teacher Fired Over Bible References

In message <1174524958.350028.298950@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, bimms@xxxxxxxx writes

Actually you haven't. You've made it perfectly clear that you're
adopting an extremely non-standard definition of speciation - one that
makes ducks, swans and geese a single species. This makes the speciation
FAQ rather irrelevant to your demands for "rigorous falsification".


No. I am going off the BSC, which is falsifiable.

No. You're going off a caricature of the BSC.

What, can ducks,
swans and geese produce viable offspring that can continue the line?
If so, then according to the BSC they are the same species. I don't
think they can, but if they can, they may actually be the same
species, related to one another way back.

You are inconsistent with the "continue the line" qualification. In fact you abandon it further down your post.

Never mind that "continue the line" is an ambiguous phrase.

Extensive wide hybridisation occurs in several taxa, including among plants cacti (Cactaceae), orchids (Orchidaceae) and pomiferous plants (Maloideae), and among birds waterfowl (Anatidae) and game birds (Galliformes), and has also been observed, inter alia, between camels and llama.

An old survey paper on hybrid waterfowl is

* Johnsgard, Hybridization in the Anatidae and Its Taxonomic Implications, The Condor 62: 25-33 (1960)

Many of the crosses have been observed to be fertile, but I expect that some are sterile. From the paper, there appear to be four groups as defined by the ability to produce hybrids - the magpie duck, the whistling ducks, the stifftail ducks, and swans, geese and most ducks - though not every combination has been recorded. On the other hand the paper does cite, skeptically, a report of a hybrid between the main group and a whistling duck.

Did you fail to notice that someone referred you to one of the Senecio
eboracensis papers?


Yes, I did fail to notice this. Would you mind cutting and pasting the
link, so I can read it?

I distinctly remember reading this and thinking that it was a case of casting pearls before swine, but I am unable to locate the post in Google Groups, so it's possible that my recollection is in error.


I happen to have no formal education in Biology beyond the age of 14,
but I am still aware of a fair number of papers describing the
observation, replication, or experimental production, of speciation.

Perhaps you would be so kind as to cut and paste them?




When the shocking lack doesn't exist, but is a figment of your rhetoric,
then yes it would seem that you are lying.


No, the only way it would be me lying, is if I KNEW they existed, but
pretended that I did not know. Again, why don't you prove me wrong, by
cutting and pasting one of these papers, or by providing a link so I
can read them? Thank you.



Having copies of several such papers on my computer, it obviously
doesn't occur to me.


So why don't you cut and paste one, so I can verify it?

I don't find the cereal breeding literature particularly accessible; much of it is published in Theoretical and Applied Genetics, the back issues of which are available online only on a subscription basis.

However, among the group (Triticeae) include wheat, rye and barley

+ Bread wheat (Triticum aestivum) has been resynthesised from its parents.
+ The allopolyploid x Haynoldotriticum sardoum has been experimentally synthesised, and has also been observed spontaneously in Italy; as one parent (Triticum durum) is not native to Italy we can infer that this represents speciation within historical time.
+ Three different species of Triticosecale have been produced by agronomists and are in cultivation, these being x Triticosecale semicereale, x Triticosecale neoblaringhemii and x Triticosecale rimpaui.
+ There are several other allopolyploids which have been producted by agronomists.

The following are a few relevant papers from my files.

* Cheng et al, Intermediate fertile Triticum aestivum (+) Agropyron elongatum somatic hybrids are generated by low doses of UV irradiation, Cell Research 14(1): 86-91 (2004)
* Martin et al, A Fertile Amphiploid Between a Wild Barley (Hordeum chilensis) and Crested Wheatgrass (Agropyron cristatum), Int. J. Plant Sci. 160(4): 783-786 (1999)
* Fernandes et al, Cytogenetics and immature embryo culture at Embrapa Trigo breeding program: transfer of disease resistance from related species by artificial resynthesis of hexaploid wheat (Triticum aestivum L. em. Thell), Genetics and Molecular Biology 23(4) 1051-1062 (2000)
* Ellneskog-Staam & Merker, Chromosome composition, stability and fertility of alloploids between Triticum turgidum var. carthlicum and Thinopyrum junceiforme, Hereditas 136: 59-65 (2002)
* Yang et al, Molecular cytogenetic characterization and disease resistance observation of wheat-Dasypyrum breviaristatum partial amphiploid and its derivatives, Hereditas 142: 80-85 (2005)
* Ellneskog-Staam & Merker, Genome composition, stability and fertility of hexaploid alloploids between Triticum turgidum var. carthlicum and Leymus racernosus, Hereditas 134: 79-84 (2001)
* Wojciechowska & Pudelska, Hybrids and amphiploids of Aegilops ovata L. with Secale cereale L.: production, morphology and fertility, J. Appl. Genet. 43(4): 415-421 (2002)
* Wojciechowska & Pudelska, Production and characterization of amphiploids of Aegilops kotschyi and Ae. biuncialis with Secale cereale, and of backcross hybrids of Ae. biuncialis × S. cereale amphiploids with 2x and 4x S. cereale, J. Appl. Genet. 46(2): 157-161 (2005)
* Stebbins and Vaarama, Artificial and Natural Hybrids in the Gramineae, Tribe Hordeae. VII. Hybrids and Allopolyploids Between Elymus glaucus and Sitanion spp, Genetics 39: 378-395 (1954)
* Ozkan et al, Allopolyploidy-Induced Rapid Genome Evolution in the Wheat ( Aegilops – Triticum ) Group, The Plant Cell 13: 1735-1747 (2001)

Another group (Brassicinae) which has been extensively worked on by agronomists is that include cabbage, mustard, rocket and radish. Here

+ The three tetraploid species Brassica napus, Brassica juncea and Brassica carinata have been experimentally resynthesised
+ Hexaploid and octaploid Brassicas have been experimentally produced.
+ Several hybrid species of x Raphanobrassica have been produced.
+ A hybrid x Erussica species has been produced.

Some papers on Brassicinae are

* Schranz & Osborn, De novo variation in life-history traits and responses to growth conditions of resynthesised polyploid Brassica napus (Brassicaceae), American Journal of Botany 91(2): 174-183 (2004)
* Pires et al, Flowering time divergence and genomic rearrangements in resynthesized Brassica polyploids (Brassicaceae), Biological Journal of the Linnean Society 82: 675-688 (2004)

Papers referring to speciation in other groups of flowering plants include

* Abbott et al, Plant introductions, hybridization and gene flow, Phil. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B 358: 1123-1132 (2003)
* Abbott et al, Recent Plant Speciation in Britain and Ireland: Origins, Estabishment and Evolution of Four New Hybrid Species, Proceedings of the Royal Irish Academy 105B(3): 173-183 (2005)
* Lowe & Abbott, Routes of Origin of Two Recently Evolved Hybrid Taxa: Senecio vulgaris var. hibernicus and York Radiate Groundsel (Asteraceae), American Journal of Botany 87(8): 1159-1167 (2000)
* Verne Grant, Frequency of Spontaneous Amphiploids in Gilia (Polemoniaceae) hybrids, American Journal of Botany 89(8): 1197-1202 (2002)
* Verne Grant, Selection for Vigor and Fertility in the Progeny of a Highly Sterile Species Hybrid in Gilia, Genetics 53: 757-773 (1966)
* Verne Grant, Linkage Between Viability and Fertility in a Species Cross in Gilia, Genetics 54: 867-880 (1966)
* Verne Grant, The Origin of a New Species of Gilia in a Hybridisation Experiment, Genetics 54: 1189-1199 (1966)
* Gross et al, Origin(s) of the diploid hybrid species Helianthus deserticola (Asteraceae), American Journal of Botany 90(12): 1708-1719 (2003)
* Gross et al, Reconstructing the Origin of Helianthus deserticola: Survival and Selection on the Desert Floor, Am. Nat. 164(2): 145-156 (2004)
* Ungerer et al, Rapid hybrid speciation in wild sunflowers, PNAS 95: 11757-11762 (1998)
* Ayres & Strong, Origin and genetic diversity of Spartina anglica (Poaceae) using nuclear DNA markers, American Journal of Botany 88(10): 1863-1867 (2001)
* Baumel et al, Retrotransposons and Genomic Stability in Populations of the Young Allopolyploid Species Spartina anglica C.E. Hubbard (Poaceae), Mol. Biol. Evol. 19(8): 1218-1227 (2002)
* Ainouche et al, Hybridization, polyploidy and speciation in Spartina (Poaceae), New Phytologist 161: 165-172 (2003)
* Yannic et al, Uniformity of the nuclear and chloroplast genomes of Spartina maritima (Poaceae), a salt-marsh species in decline along the Western European Coast, Heredity 93: 182-188 (2004)
* Kovarik et al, Rapid Concerted Evolution of Nuclear Ribosomal DNA in Two Tragopogon Allopolyploids of Recent and Recurrent Origin, Genetics 169: 931-944 (2005)
* Cook & Soltis, Mating system of diploid and allotetraploid populations of Tragopogon (Asteraceae). I. Natural Populations, Heredity 82: 237-244 (1999)
* Skalická et al, Rapid evolution of parental rDNA in a synthetic tobacco allotetraploid line, American Journal of Botany 90(7): 988-996 (2003)
* Soltis & Soltis, Polyploidy: recurrent formation and genome evolution, TREE 14(9): 348-352 (1999)
* Pontes et al, Chromosomal locus rearrangements are a rapid response to formation of the allotetraploid Arabidopsis suecica genome, PNAS 101(52): 18240-18245 (2004)
* Madlung et al, Remodeling of DNA Methylation and Phenotypic and Transcriptional Changes in Synthetic Arabidopsis Allotetraploids, Plant Physiology 129: 733-746 (2002)
* Madlung et al, Genomic changes in synthetic Arabidopsis polyploids, The Plant Journal 41: 221-230 (2005)
* Sãll et al, Chloroplast DNA indicates a single origin of the allotetraploid Arabidopsis suecica, J. Evol. Biol. 16: 1019-1029 (2003)
* Weir & Ingram, Ray Morphology and Cytological Investigations of Senecio cambrensis Rosser, New Phytologist 86: 237-241 (1980)
* Ingram & Noltie, Ray Floret Morphology and the Origin of Variability in Senecio cambrensis Rosser, a Recently Established Allopolyploid Species, New Phytologist 96: 601-607 (1984)
* Lowe & Abbott, Reproductive isolation of a new hybrid species, Senecio eboracensis Abbott & Lowe (Asteraceae), Heredity 92: 386-395 (2004)
* MacNair, MacNair & Martin, Adaptive speciation in Mimulus: an ecological comparison of M. cupriphilus with its presumed progenitor, M. guttatus, New Phytologist 112: 269-279 (1989)


Since speciation observation papers are not that difficult to find, and
can be found by persons with no formal tertiary education in biology, it
is not true that they are difficult to find; I am skeptical that the
speciation FAQ would lead you to this position.


Have you actually read the FAQ?

I hadn't recently, but having referred to the FAQ this morning, I find that your claim that the FAQ doesn't cite such papers is factually inaccurate.

The FAQ includes references, among others of a more general nature, to the following papers, which appear at first sight to cover observed instances or replications of speciation. (I haven't seen most of these papers myself, but I know from other sources that some of the work described does include observation or replication of speciation.)

* Butters, F. K. 1941. Hybrid Woodsias in Minnesota. Amer. Fern. J. 31:15-21.
* Butters, F. K. and R. M. Tryon, jr. 1948. A fertile mutant of a Woodsia hybrid. American Journal of Botany. 35:138.
* Callaghan, C. A. 1987. Instances of observed speciation. The American Biology Teacher. 49:3436.
* Digby, L. 1912. The cytology of Primula kewensis and of other related Primula hybrids. Ann. Bot. 26:357-388.
* Frandsen, K. J. 1943. The experimental formation of Brassica juncea Czern. et Coss. Dansk. Bot. Arkiv., No. 4, 11:1-17.
* Frandsen, K. J. 1947. The experimental formation of Brassica napus L. var. oleifera DC and Brassica carinata Braun. Dansk. Bot. Arkiv., No. 7, 12:1-16.
* Karpchenko, G. D. 1927. Polyploid hybrids of Raphanus sativus L. X Brassica oleraceae L. Bull. Appl. Botany. 17:305-408.
* Karpchenko, G. D. 1928. Polyploid hybrids of Raphanus sativus L. X Brassica oleraceae L. Z. Indukt. Abstami-a Verenbungsi. 48:1-85.
* Macnair, M. R. and P. Christie. 1983. Reproductive isolation as a pleiotropic effect of copper tolerance in Mimulus guttatus. Heredity. 50:295-302.
* Muntzing, A. 1932. Cytogenetic investigations on the synthetic Galeopsis tetrahit. Hereditas. 16:105-154.
* Newton, W. C. F. and C. Pellew. 1929. Primula kewensis and its derivatives. J. Genetics. 20:405-467.
* Owenby, M. 1950. Natural hybridization and amphiploidy in the genus Tragopogon. Am. J. Bot. 37:487-499.
* Soltis, D. E. and P. S. Soltis. 1989. Allopolyploid speciation in Tragopogon: Insights from chloroplast DNA. American Journal of Botany. 76:1119-1124.


If your statement is meant as a challenge, you need to do something
about your presentation; you would seem to be too successful in
simulating insincerity.

Email is very good at giving the wrong tone. But how does one
"simulate insincerity," anyway?



It's already been pointed out to you that there's no point presenting
you with the papers, because firstly you are adopting an extremely
non-standard definition of speciation (in the hope that you can define
away observed instances of speciation), and secondly because your
definition of rigour is quite possibly mobile.

Ah, here is the crux. So there is "no point" in presenting me with the
papers? You know what? That seems just a little too convenient. In
otherwords, since I only accept falsifiable BSC models of speciations,
does this mean you can only provide me with speciations that are non-
falsifiable? (phenetic, morphological, or otherwise?)

Your engaging in a falsehood again, by offering a false dichotomy between your caricature of the BSC, and phenetic/morphological species concepts.


My definition of rigor is NOT mobile. Do I need to repeat it? Have
there ever been any serious attempts to falsify claimed observations
by artificially inseminating the (known to be fertile) claimed
descendent-specimen with the (known to be fertile) claimed anscestral-
specimen several times? This is not a mobile model! It is very
testable, and makes a very clear prediction: that the claimed
descendent will be able to reproduce with the anscestral, if it is
attempted enough times!

The "attempted enough times" does allow the movement of goalposts. Here you write "several times". I seem to recall on other occasions you have specified larger numbers.



Because the FAQ is not required to address your extremely non-standard
definition of what is a species.


Ah. So I am just supposed to accept the non-falsifiable phenetic/
morphological definition of species? This is a cloaked fallacy of
appeal to authority, don't you think?

Your engaging in a falsehood again, by offering a false dichotomy between your caricature of the BSC, and phenetic/morphological species concepts.
--
alias Ernest Major

.