No. If you accept the criterion of monophyly (that any given taxon should contain all the descendants of a common ancestor, a clade), DNA reconstruction of phylogeny can make you pretty confident that certain individuals shouldn’t be lumped together. However, clades in a phylogenetic tree can nest to an arbitrary depth. Both lumping together a pair of sister clades as one taxon and treating them as two separate taxa produce a monophyletic classification; which approach to adopt is a matter of taxonomic judgment. There’s no quantitative measurement obtained by DNA sequencing that defines a boundary between “conspecific” and “not conspecific”. (At least not for eukaryotes; with microbes things are somewhat different, see https://mbio.asm.org/content/11/1/e02475-19 for some background.)
choess
17
Related topics
| Topic | Replies | Views | Activity | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Help with reading a notation on a LINN herbarium specimen | 6 | 388 | December 6, 2020 | |
| What's the point of having "ssp" in scientific names on iNat? | 44 | 4173 | December 19, 2022 | |
| Conventions for Scientific Name Synonyms: 1-1 vs. "Contained Within" vs. "Overlap" Relationships | 26 | 3377 | February 7, 2022 | |
| Recognize the nominate subtaxon if you recognize any other subtaxon, always | 35 | 1061 | November 24, 2024 | |
| Treating cultivars different than wild taxa to have the option to exclude them from searches | 14 | 1591 | January 30, 2020 |