Natural Hybridization of Salvia apiana and S. mellifera

Epling, Carl

doi:10.2307/2405405

Cited by 32 publications

(49 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…For example, Anderson ( 1954b) showed the ecological isolation of certain Adenostoma fasciculatum biotype groups in a wide variety of open and closed niches. The integrity of the interfertile Salvia apiana and S. mellifera, as demonstrated by Epling ( 1947) and later by , results, at least in part, from their preferential selection by different habitats. Lenz (1958Lenz ( , 1959) discovered ecological differences to be a basic cause of species separation in the California series of Iris.…”

Section: Variation and Its Implied Significancementioning

confidence: 85%

Variation and Hybridization in Southern California Populations of Diplacus (Scrophulariaceae)

Beeks¹

1962

aliso

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Variation and Its Implied Significancementioning

confidence: 85%

Variation and Hybridization in Southern California Populations of Diplacus (Scrophulariaceae)

Beeks¹

1962

aliso

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…The existence of interfertile entities maintained by ecological barriers avoids the restriction of future evolution which may otherwise accompany intense specialization (Epling, 1947;Stebbins, 1950Stebbins, , 1958Clausen, Keck, and Hiesey, 1945;Clausen and Hiesey, 1958).…”

Section: Distance From Base Of Slope (Metersmentioning

confidence: 99%

INTERSPECIFIC HYBRIDIZATION IN THERANUNCULUS LAPPACEUSGROUP

Briggs¹

1962

Evolution

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Accordingly, we suggest that a premium more cogent to evolution is put on the maintenance of a restricted degree of gene exchange, even at the specific level (Epling, 1947). The fact that the genetic systems represented by some species can be preserved for long periods without reproductive isolation suggests that isolation may prove to be no more than a by-product of the reproductive adaptedness and mating character developed in certain groups (see Fisher, 1936).…”

mentioning

confidence: 95%

“…However, this latter is true only of some. Evidence is accumulating to indicate that in many groups of organisms, populations stabilised in type, but still able to exchange genes, can coexist for long periods (for example Hubbs, 1943 Wharton, '944;Epling, 1947;Stebbins et al, 1947;Hovanitz, 1949) ; they are species even though they are not reproductively isolated. The evidence of their specific status lies in the fact that each maintains its identity despite reproductive contact with one another.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The relation of taxonomic method to an explanation of organic evolution

Epling

Catlin

1950

Heredity

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

THE impact of Charles Darwin's classic, The Origin of Species, has been incalculable. The concept of evolution that he made explicit, and cogently documented, now permeates and gives direction to all biology. Yet, paradoxically, the orientation of his argument, directed as it was toward an explanation of the origin of species, has provided an impediment to study of the causal factors involved in evolution.Species or specific types had been the focus of attention since the beginning of the Greek development of biology. Within the span of man's memory each kind seemed immutable, and their permanence, accorded religious sanction, had scarcely been challenged. In view of the evidence he had adduced, which could be adequately understood only in terms of an evolutionary hypothesis, it is not surprising that Darwin should have emphasised his refutation of the fixity of species. His monumental contribution, however, was his thesis that evolution proceeds from the natural selection of individual variants. Being handicapped by the lack of genetic evidence, he was forced to frame his argument in taxonomic terminology. He presented extensive data to show that characters which are individual in some instances are subspecific in others, and specific in still others. He also pointed to parallel variation in higher categories. He inferred from this evidence that specific and other typical character results ultimately from the particular differences of individual adaptedness.Darwin's successors were no more able than he to explain the adaptive process involved in the formation of typical character. Imbued with taxonomic concepts, and impressed by the role of isolation in maintaining specific character for long periods, they regarded the species not only as a taxonomic category but also as an evolutionary unit. This view resulted from the failure to distinguish potential exchange of genetic materials within a species from the actual exchange which alone can be effective in evolution. As a consequence their efforts were directed toward description of the succession of organic types. The origin of a type was explained in terms of change of an earlier type rather than in terms of causally effective individual differences.This taxonomic conception of evolution still persists. It persists, for example, in the use of categories, such as species, ecotypes, and biotypes, to denote the effective vehicles or so-called dynamic units 313

show abstract

Natural Hybridization of Salvia apiana and S. mellifera

Cited by 32 publications

References 8 publications

Variation and Hybridization in Southern California Populations of Diplacus (Scrophulariaceae)

Variation and Hybridization in Southern California Populations of Diplacus (Scrophulariaceae)

INTERSPECIFIC HYBRIDIZATION IN THERANUNCULUS LAPPACEUSGROUP

The relation of taxonomic method to an explanation of organic evolution

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About