Heck, I will likely always think of the corn snake as
Elaphe guttata guttata till the day I die.
I think before anything else, a STRONG definition and test criteria of what actually makes "a species" needs to be developed.
I've always heard this common definition used:
Quote:
the major subdivision of a genus or subgenus, regarded as the basic category of biological classification, composed of related individuals that resemble one another, are able to breed among themselves, but are not able to breed with members of another species.
|
So where does that put the "species" of snakes that have been used to create hybrids? How can either species from which the two parents of a hybrid be considered as a distinct species if they are able to breed together and produce viable offspring? Doesn't that simply defy the definition of "species" altogether? So either the definition of "species" is incorrect, or the designations of a bunch of supposedly different types of snakes as being separate species is incorrect.
"Taxonomy" appears to be a structure that has been built on quicksand anyway. Perhaps that needs to be firmed up first.
What was the purpose of taxonomy in the first place? Has that goal been successful? Do facts have to be ignored in order to make it work?
IMHO.