The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Species Concepts and Species Delimitation
Abstract
The issue of species delimitation has long been confused with that of species conceptualization, leading to a half century of controversy concerning both the definition of the species category and methods for inferring the boundaries and numbers of species. Alternative species concepts agree in treating existence as a separately evolving metapopulation lineage as the primary defining property of the species category, but they disagree in adopting different properties acquired by lineages during the course of divergence (e.g., intrinsic reproductive isolation, diagnosability, monophyly) as secondary defining properties (secondary species criteria). A unified species concept can be achieved by treating existence as a separately evolving metapopulation lineage as the only necessary property of species and the former secondary species criteria as different lines of evidence (operational criteria) relevant to assessing lineage separation. This unified concept of species has several consequences for species delimitation, including the following: First, the issues of species conceptualization and species delimitation are clearly separated; the former secondary species criteria are no longer considered relevant to species conceptualization but only to species delimitation. Second, all of the properties formerly treated as secondary species criteria are relevant to species delimitation to the extent that they provide evidence of lineage separation. Third, the presence of any one of the properties (if appropriately interpreted) is evidence for the existence of a species, though more properties and thus more lines of evidence are associated with a higher degree of corroboration. Fourth, and perhaps most significantly, a unified species concept shifts emphasis away from the traditional species criteria, encouraging biologists to develop new methods of species delimitation that are not tied to those properties.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Mayr, E. (1963) · doi:10.4159/harvard.9780674865327 · Cited by 10,175
Cited by
How many species of mammals are there?
Burgin, C. J., Colella, J. P., Kahn, P. L., & Upham, N. S. (2018) · Journal of Mammalogy · doi:10.1093/jmammal/gyx147 · Cited by 1,168
Quantitative criteria for species delimitation
TOBIAS, J. A., SEDDON, N., SPOTTISWOODE, C. N., PILGRIM, J. D., FISHPOOL, L. D. C., & COLLAR, N. J. (2010) · Ibis · doi:10.1111/j.1474-919x.2010.01051.x · Cited by 1,092
Cryptic species as a window into the paradigm shift of the species concept
Fišer, C., Robinson, C. T., & Malard, F. (2018) · Molecular Ecology · doi:10.1111/mec.14486 · Cited by 574
Shedding light on the grey zone of speciation along a continuum of genomic divergence
Roux, C., Fraïsse, C., Romiguier, J., Anciaux, Y., Galtier, N., & Bierne, N. (2016) · PLOS Biology · doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.2000234 · Cited by 525
Coates, D. J., Byrne, M., & Moritz, C. (2018) · Frontiers in Ecology and Evolution · doi:10.3389/fevo.2018.00165 · Cited by 460
Metadata
- Authors
- De Queiroz, K.
- Venue
- Systematic Biology
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2007-12-01
- Volume
- 56
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 879-886
- ISSN
- 1063-5157 (ISSN-L)
- 1076-836X
- OpenAlex
- W2166972836
- Cited by
- 4,091
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 43.52
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Species Concepts and Species Delimitation. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1080/10635150701701083
- The paper
- De Queiroz, K. (2007). Species Concepts and Species Delimitation. Systematic Biology. https://doi.org/10.1080/10635150701701083
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.