On species, its reality and types of species

Abstract

An analysis of the concept of "species" in view of the reality of its existence in the theoretical constructions of eidologists and in the practice of research and description of biotic diversity (BD) is presented. The work includes five main sections. The first considers the concept of species as a designation of individuality (speciesness) in the structure of BD. The etymology and connotations of the terms that were used previously or are used now to denote the category of eidos in Ukrainian, English, and related to Ukrainian Slavic languages are considered (genus, specie[s], kind). The significant influence of the connotative load on dominant species concepts and, in particular, the stable and long-lasting predominance of typology is noted in works of scientists of the 20th century, after the introduction of the term “species”. In the second part, the issue of reality of species and the phenomenon of diversity of its realities, in particular different realities in different contexts, are analysed. It is postulated that the reality of the concept of species is actually determined by the concept of separateness (individuality), three distinct forms of which are proposed: morphological (mostly in museum collections), phyletic (in phylogenetic studies), and biotic (within communities). The third section "On kinds of species and the diversity of species concepts" is devoted to the analysis of systems that describe the diversity of species as concepts, including species categories, kinds (classes) of species, and types of species. The fourth section "Emergent properties of species" discusses emergence and key features of species common for most concepts, as well as biosemiotics as one of the systems for maintaining the integrity of species. Finally, the last (fifth) section deals with the one-dimensional model of "species", the actual concept of "species within a community", when a species is defined not through the closest sister forms (with which it essentially does not intersect anywhere), but through other species with which it is part of the same guilds and communities. It is shown that this aspect of consideration of a species is the closest to its initial interpretation as an object of actual BD within local or regional biotic communities, in which the species is determined through other species with which it coexists and interacts. This significantly distinguishes the species as an element of BD among other interpretations, especially of the phyletic type, in which the species is determined not through ecosystem interactions with sympatric species, but through sister taxa.

The biodiversity concept in crisis? Global tendencies and a view from Ukraine

“…Різноманіття не можна описувати чи вивчати одним способом і з однією міркою. Подібні думки виникають при аналізі концептів виду в біології, різноманіття яких по сумі є природним і визначається різноманіттям систем формування і підтримання окремішностей, дуже різних в різних групах живого і на різних еволюційних щаблях розвитку живого[Zagorodniuk 2021]. Власне, «різність різноманітності» випливає і з моделі ієрархічних рівнів різноманіття[Sheliag-Sosonko & Emelyanov 1997], в якій пропонується розрізняти декілька «ліній» ієрархії, всі з яких починаються з рівня організму.Очевидно, що така модель не є довершеною: наприклад, там немає рівнів гільдій та угруповань, не передбачено й поліморфізму й гетерозиготності популяцій, різноманіття життєвих стратегій чи міграційного статусу, росту й розвитку.…”