Systematics of the Artiodactyla of China in the 21<sup>st</sup> century

Colin GROVES

doi:10.13918/j.issn.2095-8137.2016.3.119

Volume 37 Issue 3

May 2016

Turn off MathJax

Article Contents

Article Navigation > Zoological Research > 2016 > 37(3): 119-125

Colin GROVES. Systematics of the Artiodactyla of China in the 21st century. Zoological Research, 2016, 37(3): 119-125. doi: 10.13918/j.issn.2095-8137.2016.3.119

Citation:

Colin GROVES. Systematics of the Artiodactyla of China in the 21^st century. Zoological Research, 2016, 37(3): 119-125. doi: 10.13918/j.issn.2095-8137.2016.3.119

Colin GROVES. Systematics of the Artiodactyla of China in the 21st century. Zoological Research, 2016, 37(3): 119-125. doi: 10.13918/j.issn.2095-8137.2016.3.119

Citation:

Colin GROVES. Systematics of the Artiodactyla of China in the 21^st century. Zoological Research, 2016, 37(3): 119-125. doi: 10.13918/j.issn.2095-8137.2016.3.119

PDF( 166 KB)

Systematics of the Artiodactyla of China in the 21^st century

doi: 10.13918/j.issn.2095-8137.2016.3.119

Colin GROVES

School of Archaeology & Anthropology, Australian National University, Canberra, ACT 2600, Australia

More Information

Corresponding author: Colin GROVES
Received Date: 2015-12-10
Rev Recd Date: 2016-05-10
Publish Date: 2016-05-18

Abstract

Abstract

In this paper, I have introduced the concept of the Evolutionary Species, and shown how it affects the taxonomy of the Artiodactyla of China. The "traditional" taxonomy of the Artiodactyla, which has remained almost unchanged for 100 years, relies on ill-formulated notions of species and subspecies, only slightly modified by the population-thinking of the 1930s. Species are populations (or metapopulations) differentiated by the possession of fixed heritable differences from other such populations (or metapopulations). In the Artiodactyla, there are many more species than "traditionally" recognised; this is by no means a drawback, as it enables the units of biodiversity to be identified in a testable fashion, and brings the taxonomy of large mammals into line with that long practised for small mammals. Species are likely to differentiate where there are natural gaps in the distribution of a genus, such as mountain blocks (for example in the genus Budorcas) or otherwise dissected habitat (for example in the genus Cervus). Natural hybridisation between distinct species is not an uncommon phenomenon, again illustrated well in the genus Cervus, where hybridisation between the elaphus and nippon groups occurs today and evidently occurred in the past, as shown by the distribution of mtDNA.
- Artiodactyla,
- Taxonomy,
- China,
- Evolutionary species,
- Phylogenetic species concept

FullText(HTML)

References(18)

References

[1]	Cotterill FPD, Taylor PJ, Gippoliti S, Bishop JM, Groves CP. 2014. Why one century of phenetics is enough:response to ‘Are there really twice as many Bovid species as we thought?’. Systematic Biology, 63(5):819-832, doi: 10.1093/sysbio/syu003.
[2]	De Queiroz K. 2007. Species concepts and species delimitation. Systematic Biology, 56(6):879-886.
[3]	Gentry A, Clutton-Brock J, Groves CP. 2004. The naming of wild animal species and their domestic derivatives. Journal of Archaeological Science, 31(5):645-651.
[4]	Groves CP, Grubb P. 2011. Ungulate Taxonomy. Baltimore:Johns Hopkins University Press.
[5]	Groves CP. 2013. The nature of species:A rejoinder to Zachos et al. Mammalian Biology, 78(1):7-9.
[6]	Heller R, Frandsen P, Lorenzen ED, Siegismund HR. 2013. Are there really twice as many Bovid species as we thought?. Systematic Biology, 62(3):490-493.
[7]	Liu ZX, Groves CP. 2014. Taxonomic diversity and colour diversity:rethinking the taxonomy of recent musk-deer (Moschus, Moschidae, Ruminantia). Gazella, 41:73-97.
[8]	Lydekker R. 1913-1916. Catalogue of the Ungulate Mammals in the British Museum (Natural History). London:British Museum (Natural History)
[9]	Trustees.
[10]	Lydekker R, Blaine G. 1914. Catalogue of the Ungulate Mammals:In the British Museum (Natural History). London:British Museum (Natural History) Trustees.
[11]	Mardan T, Jiang ZG, Groves CP, Yang J, Fang HX. 2013. Subspecies in Przewalski's gazelle Procapra przewalskii and its conservation implication. Chinese Science Bulletin, 58(16):1897-1905.
[12]	Mayden RL. 1997. A hierarchy of species concepts:the denoument in the saga of the species problem. In:Claridge MF, Dawah HA, Wilson MR. Species:The Units of Diversity. London:Chapman and Hall, 381-423.
[13]	Mayr E. 1963. Animal Species and Evolution. Harvard:Belknap Press.
[14]	Meijaard E, Groves CP. 2004. Morphometrical relationships between South-east Asian dear (Cervidae, tribe Cervini):evolutionary and biogeographic implications. Journal of Zoology, 263(2):179-196.
[15]	Pan T, Wang H, Hu CC, Sun ZL, Zhu XX, Meng T, Meng XX, Zhang BW. 2015. Species delimitation in the genus Moschus (Ruminantia:Moschidae) and its high-plateau origin. PLoS One, 10(8):e0134183, doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0134183.
[16]	Pitra C, Fickel J, Meijaard E, Groves CP. 2004. Evolution and phylogeny of old world deer. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution, 33(3):880-895.
[17]	Waddell PJ, Okada N, Hasegawa M. 1999. Towards resolving the interordinal relationships of placental mammals. Systematic Biology, 48(1):1-5.
[18]	Zachos FE, Apollonio M, Bärmann EV, Festa-Bianchet M, Göhlich U, Habel JC, Haring E, Kruckenhauser L, Lovari S, McDevitt AD, Pertoldi C, Rössner GE, Sánchez-Villagra MR, Scandura M, Suchentrunk F. 2013. Species inflation and taxonomic artefacts-a critical comment on recent trends in mammalian classification. Mammalian Biology, 78(1):1-6, doi: 10.1016/j.mambio.2012.07.083.