|
|
|
|
|
by jacquesm
4291 days ago
|
|
Being able to interbreed is the very definition of a species. So if two specimen are capable of breeding and the resulting offspring is not sterile they are considered to be of the same species. Being from an un-contacted tribe has nothing whatsoever to do with speciation. |
|
Being genetically capable of interbreeding makes sense as a definition of speciation, but that is not how species are currently identified. Natural range, aesthetics, and more than that, whether or not they DO interbreed in the wild (vs physically/genetically capable) play a more significant role in determining species.
There are many 'hybrid' species in nature, which is what I feel warrants some revision, perhaps using genetic data to restructure many classifications as subspecies rather than independent species.
edit: Sorry, I think I may have misinterpreted what you said to some extent and think we generally agree. I will maintain that according to the classification methods described, people such as the Sentinelese, may well be considered a separate species to an unbiased observer using the same guidelines we apply to other animals due to slightly different physical characteristics and social/geographical reproductive isolation prevents the possibility of breeding with anyone outside of their group.