What the fuck is a subspecies? Is there an actual animal known

A subspecies is something that is usually still able to breed with the type species, but is in the process of diverging into its own species. This often occurs with regional borders and bottlenecks creating isolated breeding populations, and each gene pool will start to take on traits different from eachother (divergence).

>>2413834
So would an Asian elephant be able to breed with an African elephant, or only other elephants within the Asian elephant species?

>>2413839
Nvm, I think I understand. This shit is confusing. The African bush elephant and the African forest elephant are different species. No living subspecies exist. The Asian elephant is a species, with 3 - 4 subspecies. This shit is confusing.

>>2413818
"Subspecies" refers to a regional variation of a species. They may differ in appearance, but if they produce fertile offspring then they are nearly always considered to be the same species.

>>2413818
It's nonsense.

>>2413922

This. They have to produce fertile offspring. If the offspring are infertile they are in the same genus, but a different species. A liger is fertile(we used to think they weren't), so therefore lions and tigers are a different subspecies, but the same species. A mule is infertile, so a horse and a donkey are the same genus, but a different species.

File: 1495886455958.webm (687KB, 720x720px) Image search: [Google]

687KB, 720x720px

>>2413974
>so therefore lions and tigers are a different subspecies, but the same species. A mule is infertile, so a horse and a donkey are the same genus, but a different species.
is this bait

>>2413818
A species in a species.

Like human races.

>>2414002
racist

Correct me if i'm wrong, but subspecies also happens when an animal is domesticated from another. For example, dogs came from wolves, and they can still have fertile offspring. They're the exact same animal, but with a few differences from domestication. Same thing with junglefowl and chickens, pigs and boars, cats and African wild cats (the actual species called "African wild cat", not lions or cheetahs or whatever), etc.

>>2414003
But race doesnt exist thus racism cannot be a thing you moron.

>>2413981
Male ligers are sterile, only the females are fertile.

>>2414032
lions and tigers are still not subspecies of each other

>>2414032
That doesn't make lions and tigers subspecies at all. Lion is Phantera leo, tiger is Phantera tigris. It's different from, say, the red junglefowl (Gallus gallus) and the domestic chicken (Gallus gallus domesticus).

>>2414033
>>2414041
Never claimed that they are subspecies, to be a subspecies they need to have completly fertile offspring. They aren't because male liger are sterile.

File: 1405188746744.jpg (50KB, 408x439px) Image search: [Google]

50KB, 408x439px

>>2414062
>Never claimed that they are subspecies
>so therefore lions and tigers are a different subspecies, but the same species

>>2414002
this is correct

>>2414009
No, those aren't subspecies usually. They are domesticated morphs.

At what points could dog breeds be called subspecies? They originate from the same species, sure, but a great dane and a pug have more differences than a siberian tiger and south chinese tiger.

okay but nobody answered ops 2nd question, is there an elephant that you could define solely as an asian elephant? or will it always be one of the subspecies?

Subspecies confuse me when it's just something like a slightly different coat color or a minor physical difference, like an extra pore in a bone or some shit.

Exactly how different does an animal need to be from one to another to be classified as a subspecies? Or is it being even just slightly different and from a different/isolated region count enough?

>>2414202
You can point at any of them and call it an Asian elephant. It's not wrong. It's like calling a dog a dog, a cat a cat, etc. If you say lion I'm going to assume you mean the run of the mill African lion, or a wolf would be a grey wolf. Up to you and why you're mentioning them whether or not you want to be more specific or not.

>>2414080
When they stop being able to breed with each other, I'd think.

>>2414066
They are different species in the same genus.

>>2413974
>If the offspring are infertile they are in the same genus, but a different species.
No, that's not how a genus works.

Anything above species level is arbitrary.

>>2414003
>>2414002


In most languages Breed and Race are the same. So yeah, subspecies is acurrate.

This thread is confusing af

>>2414744
Oh, and to make it more confusing, you can also breed two different species together to make hybrids.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_genetic_hybrids

>>2414244
But it IS true. Horses and donkeys are in the same genus, and their offspring are infertile.

The very truth is that "species" don't really exist. They are human construcs made for classifing diferent animals.
Sure, we are of a diferent species than an whale, for exemple, that much is obvious. But when you try to find a fine line that separete very similar individuals you will start to run into problems.
There isnt a single definitve meaning for species, and in fact there are many diferent definitions. Some try to specify diferent species by genetic groups, others by capability of reproduction and among others.

>>2414881
I don't think someone who makes more spelling errors than a grade schooler is qualified to talk about this subject.

>>2414882
Whatever helps you sleep at night

>>2414080
They can, and they are

>>2414881
This anon is right. Species are used for classification, they are only a method of making things easier for humans.
Taking classifications as set in stone is a mistake.

>>2414002
This made me wonder, are there actually races/breeds in humans? I'd think so, but trying to search for info on this brings up lots of leftist/clickbait articles about how you're awful for asking that

>>2414972
Funny thing. We are all humans, the same species, white, black, asian. But aboriginal people from australia MAY (there are studies on the subject, but there inst a consensus) be from a different species, or subspecies of homo sapiens.

>>2414972

No. The concept of race or breed comes from domestication. There are no biological human breeds.

>>2414832
So an indian elephant and a sumatran elephant bred together is still an asian elephant but an african bush elephant and an african forest elephant bred together is a hybrid. what psychopath came up with this shit

File: afcf92c4-c171-428a-9aa7-121243edc6e2..jpg (116KB, 768x768px) Image search: [Google]

116KB, 768x768px

>>2414985
>>2414988
That's bullshit. If there was a higher being on Earth using the same taxonomy chart as us they would separate blacks and whites (for example) into different subspecies. If they can separate the black rhino into EIGHT, there are more than enough differences to separate the human races.

File: 1495978815813.png (75KB, 325x244px) Image search: [Google]

75KB, 325x244px

>>2415021
>taxonomy

You know taxonomy is completely obsolete and only genetic data matters right?

>>2413841
Does that mean whites and blacks are different species and or subspecies of each other? Not being a poltard, here serious question.

>>2415066
>Does that mean whites and blacks are different species and or subspecies of each other? Not being a poltard, here serious question.

Its neither because blacks and whites are really close, genetically speaking, and their offspring are just as fertile and viable as another human.

BUT, if it was to be one way or the other, the i would say that white people are a subspecies of black people, because humans came first from Africa and then migrated elsewhere.

>>2414873
Well all of these beetles are in the same genus as well, and they can't produce any offspring: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carabus#Species

Meanwhile this orchid is a mix of species from 3 different generea (Catasetum, Clowesia and Mormodes) and produces fertile offspring.

Genus and any other higher classification is arbitrary.

>>2415021
>morphology
kek

humans of all races have COI divergences of less than 1% and are thus not separate species or subspecies

there is also no barcoding gap

>I don't know what that means
Then get out, you're not qualified.

File: fredclafdablmag_2_.jpg (49KB, 600x600px) Image search: [Google]

49KB, 600x600px

>>2415071
forgot my image

File: 87088670-6ff8-4734-84e6-0c46da848fc9..jpg (809KB, 1424x1902px) Image search: [Google]

809KB, 1424x1902px

>>2415061
Way to avoid the question over an 'arbitrary' term, troglodyte

>Only genetic data matters
Thanks for proving my point

>>2415069
>Its neither because blacks and whites are really close, genetically speaking, and their offspring are just as fertile and viable as another human.
AKA the definition of a subspecies

>>2415075
Literally less of a divergence between the Western Sumatran rhino and the Bornean rhino yet they're both Sumatran rhino subspecies. Funny isn't it?

>>2415082
many subspecies are no longer valid as they were erected either purely by morphology, locality or often just vanity (gotta have your own beetle "subspecies" named after you of course)

there is currently a lot of revising going on to bring things up to a modern standard

Also with there rhinos there is a clear barcoding gap between the two even if divergence is low, which means no geneflow, which means valid subspecies

>>2415021
Ayy lmao
There is more morphological differences between craniums in Africa than anywhere else in the world.
The only way to believe that shit is if you want to stay ignorant.

>Human phenotypes are highly polygenic
And now you understand why we can have so much phenotypical variation with absolute minimal genetic change.

File: carlcuck.jpg (39KB, 600x615px) Image search: [Google]

39KB, 600x615px

>>2415209
>There is more morphological differences between craniums in Africa than anywhere else in the world.
Yeah then those should be separated into subspecies too, you stupid ass. It's always funny when an ESL motherfucker tries to sound smug.

>The only way to believe that shit is if you want to stay ignorant.
Pic related is you. The differences are there, open your eyes.

>>2415218
>>2415209
>>2415086
>>2415082
>>2415075
>>2415069
>>2415066
>>2415061
>>2415021
>>2414985
>>2414972
Stop talking about humans in my elephant thread