The CONCEPT of the SPECIES

we can look at biodiversity at many levels mostly we are looking at conserving all the different 'kinds' of things

this usually means the SPECIES

The composition and levels of biodiversity Ecological diversity biomes bioregions landscapes ecosystems habitats niches populations Genetic diversity Populations Individuals Chromosomes genes nucleotides Organismal diversity kingdoms phyla families genera species subspecies Populations individuals

SPECIES can be defined in many ways

1. reproductively -individuals able to interbreed with each other (the traditional definition) mostly relevant to animals (hybridization is relatively common in plants)

 there are many ways that populations can become reproductively isolated eg Kangaroo Paw there is variation in flower length which can result in reproductive isolation

flower length determines the type of pollinator visiting flowers results in genetic isolation between adjacent plants of different species

2. morphologically

- individuals look alike and form a distinctive group

where do we draw the line ?

traditionally flower (or reproductive structures) have been emphasised to define species these are relatively stable within plant groups

3. chemically - individuals which can be consistently identified using a range of compounds

volatile oils, flavonoids, proteins, enzymes useful in detecting hybrids

current emphasis is on DNA and proteins

eg flavonoid patterns detected by paper chromatography

Species 1

Species 2

Hybrid

flavonoids are chemicals extracted from leaves

parent1

parent 2

hybrid

or proteins detected by gel electrophoresis

gel

electric current
proteins

Species 1 Species 2

Hybrid

Sometimes differentiation of species gives different views: eg chemical races morphologically identical, but chemically distinct examples: Eucalyptus oil types Heath (Epacris impressa) flower colours hemp (Cannabis sp) psychoactive compounds

 some morphologically uniform species can be genetically extremely variable

eg Stylidium in WA

 16 chromosome races which were unable to interbreed what is their status ? are they all the same species ?

 are some characters intrinsically more important than others ?

ie should we rely on morphology, or are chemical and genetic structure just as important genetic make-up is generally accepted now as the most important characteristic

EXAMPLES 1. Eucalyptus yarraensis (Yarra Gum) now widely accepted as a well defined 'species' has been recognised as rare and threatened and listed under Flora and Fauna Guarantee legislation once included as a rough-barked variant of Eucalyptus ovata (Swamp Gum) which is very common, not needing protection

Eucalyptus yarraensis

Eucalyptus ovata

SO . is it
common, and needing no protection

OR
rare, in danger of extinction and needing protection depending on the TAXONOMIC STATUS of this tree, legislative protection and resources for conservation will vary

2. Eucalyptus X studleyensis
the X indicates a hybrid originally described as a species, but now accepted as a hybrid between E. ovata (Swamp Gum) and E. camaldulensis (River Red Gum) as a hybrid it cannot breed true should we treat it as a 'once-off' oddity, or worthy of protection ?

3. Eucalyptus crenulata (Buxton Gum)

only known from two sites at Yering (with only a few trees) and Buxton (with a few hundred trees) populations are morphologically and chemically virtually identical

 it is easy to propagate - do we need to conserve both populations ? do we need any natural populations ?? ($$$$)

consider as an umbrella or flagship species to conserve the community (which has some other interesting species such as Sphagnum moss ) ?

SHOULD WE EMPHASISE MORPHOLOGY OR EVOLUTIONARY RELATIONSHIPS IN OUR RECOGNITION OF SPECIES ? (phenetics or phylogeny)

phenetics based on how species appear ie morphological similarity phylogeny based on inferred past evolutionary relationships

Eucalyptus - one genus or nine ??

one recognisable group Eucalyptus OR nine groups which are virtually indistinguishable using adult morphology base classification on the number of opercula ('caps') in buds which reflects past evolution Monocalyptus, Symphyomyrtus etc groups are accepted generally, but given different RANKS

eucalypt flowers have a cap or operculum (instead of separate sepals and petals)
scar some species have two caps (separate fused sepals and petals)

so either:

1. one genus and all groups = Eucalyptus

OR
2. several genera such as Corymbia Symphyomyrtus Blakella

Monocalyptus etc
(which we can only separate on microscopic characters)

ARE SOME SPECIES WORTH CONSERVING MORE THAN OTHERS ? such as Isophysis tasmanica (Hewardia) in Tasmania

Isophysis
only one species in a genus (monospecific species) are species with a unique gene pool more important than others ?

HOW MUCH OF EACH SPECIES SHOULD WE CONSERVE ? ALL ? probably not economically or politically possible

SOME ? use genetic analysis to decide how to conserve a representative gene pool
use morphological and chemical markers to indicate likely genetic variation

 in the end, it is our ideas about the nature of species and the variation within them that guides our attempts to conserve as much as possible of the gene pool of species how much we actually conserve depends on the resources we have available $$$$$