jaibot comments on Open thread, Dec. 8 - Dec. 15, 2014 - Less Wrong

6 Post author: Gondolinian 08 December 2014 12:06AM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (289)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: jaibot 08 December 2014 06:19:52AM 0 points [-]

All of the organisms descended from a most recent common ancestor; we pick the MRCA semi-arbitrarily based on criteria like "sexual compatibility of descendents".

Comment author: sixes_and_sevens 08 December 2014 01:52:26PM 4 points [-]

we pick the MRCA semi-arbitrarily based on criteria like "sexual compatibility of descendents".

"I know we're both humpback whales, but he's nowhere near as adventurous as I'd like him to be..."

Comment author: solipsist 08 December 2014 11:05:55AM *  1 point [-]

I think species can be paraphyletic. If we sent a family of llamas into outer space and they evolved into Space Llamas, there would be no common ancestor which included all terrestrial L. glamas but excluded L. astrollama.

Comment author: Romashka 09 December 2014 02:01:57PM 0 points [-]

And there are groups (like oribatid mites) where parthenogenesis is very common. No sex at all, though males occur. (Here's a challenge: you think of anything common among vertebrates, then look for invertebrates (including single-cellular animals) for whom it's not common. The sea-dwellers are very good for this search.)

Some people would tell you that only Homo sapiens exists as a species. Suppose a 'species' exists as a set of disjointed populations, which will never meet each other (or the probability of it happening is so much smaller than of them going extinct)...

Comment author: tut 08 December 2014 01:54:12PM 0 points [-]

No, that's a clade or a monophyletic taxon. Most species are clades, but as solipsist points out not all species are necessarily clades, and most clades are not species.

Comment author: gjm 09 December 2014 04:42:18PM -1 points [-]

No, it's more specific because of based on criteria like "sexual compatibility of descendants".

Comment author: ChristianKl 09 December 2014 03:01:04PM 0 points [-]

There are various genetic issues that make individuals sterile. We don't say that they are suddenly another species just because they are sterile and thus not sexually compatilbe.