Talk:Hybrid speciation

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Molecular Biology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Molecular Biology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Molecular BiologyWikipedia:WikiProject Molecular BiologyTemplate:WikiProject Molecular BiologyMolecular Biology
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Genetics task force (assessed as Mid-importance).

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 5 January 2021 and 12 March 2021. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Vg81620.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 00:05, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds like 1995

This article on hybrid speciation seems written from a 1995 perspective. As animal genomes get analyzed (not simply read), especially if compared to archaeological ancestors, introgression and hybrid speciation become apparent in nearly all. Apparently this contradicts accepted wisdom, which holds hybridization to be a dead end. It's anything but. Could this be an example of a field that will only change when the senior scientists retire?

I suggest referencing articles by Mallet, Abbott et al., Comeault and Matute, and Rose and Oakley. If I have time I'll try to write it up.

removed paragraph

I removed the following paragraph:

In most cases however nature has its own interspecies genetic barriers to guard against genetic pollution to keep species distinct. When rarely hybridization does occur naturally as in hybrid zones where the ranges of closely related wild species overlap, the hybrid crosses produced, even though they may display hybrid vigour (heterosis) in the first generation (F1 hybrid), are in the long run less fit than the two parent species which have evolved over hundreds of thousands of years specializing in exploiting their own particular niche in nature. It is extremely rare that the hybrids ever become fitter than the two wild parent species so that natural selection may then favor these individuals and it is even more extremely rare that reproductive isolation is ever achieved to lead to the birth of a new species through the process known as Hybrid speciation.

For the most part, this paragraph is redundant with the existing text, and not written as well. It seems to have a lot of handwaving explanations: the fact that a process is typically deleterious does not stop it from having a big impact on evolution. For instance, mutations are generally deleterious, and in general any novelty-producing process is generally deleterious. I think the term "genetic pollution" is being misused--at least, I've never heard it used this way and it contradicts the definition given in the article on the topic.

== removed paragraph ==136.142.169.66 (talk) 17:48, 15 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Human hybridization

There is evidence, that Neanderthals and human ancestors have hybridized into modern humans. this is in accord with the formation of new species happening predominantly at fluctuating and changing environmental conditions like the ice age. Reference: http://dx.doi.org/10.1142/S0219525911003359 - should this be included because it is interesting, even though this is still novel science? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.36.123.92 (talk) 08:50, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Has it been suggested that a new species arose because of this hybridization? If not, then Introgression would be a more appropriate place. Nadiatalent (talk) 14:40, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that the evidence overwhelmingly supports introgression.--Curtis Clark (talk) 16:53, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

There's one problem with that. The resulting hybrid wasn't a new species, as Sub-Saharan humans and other humans are still the same species. It is an example of a speciation that failed to establish as separate from (one of) the parent species, or an introgression as Nadiatalent wrote. Perhaps it can be used as an example of of that. Petter Bøckman (talk) 20:58, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I contend that there is not even evidence of it being failed speciation. Introgressive hybridization is a common phenomenon in plants, and not all that unusual in animals. The statement in that article "major cause of speciation in the sympatric mode" is unreferenced, and is at best an unusual occurrence.--Curtis Clark (talk) 05:48, 17 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Hybrid speciation. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/20100705233832/http://www.cbc.ca/canada/north/story/2010/04/30/nwt-grolar-bear.html to http://www.cbc.ca/canada/north/story/2010/04/30/nwt-grolar-bear.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 00:22, 18 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Hybrid speciation. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20070628021930/http://rocek.gli.cas.cz/Reprints/Bernor%20et%20al.pdf to http://rocek.gli.cas.cz/Reprints/Bernor%20et%20al.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:56, 21 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Hybrid speciation. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110807201833/http://www.cbs.umn.edu/lionresearch//about/faq.shtml to http://www.cbs.umn.edu/lionresearch/about/faq.shtml

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:46, 7 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

bird hybridization

Genetics of hybridization

Current sentence: "For a hybrid to be viable, the chromosomes of the two organisms will have to be very similar, i.e., the parent species must be closely related, or else the difference in chromosome arrangement will make mitosis problematic."

Don't the problems arise during meiosis not mitosis? Mitosis I think should be unaffected as there is no crossing over, no issue of the separation of 'homologous' chromosomes. HFHah (talk) 17:46, 14 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]