Hacker News Reader

Comment by dataflow | Hacker News Reader

That doesn't answer my question. What definition of species is that using?

The same that they use for the rest of the already known tiger cat species?! This one diverged from its closest relatives 1.3 million years ago. There are other tiger cat species that diverged later than that. Read the paper if you want to know more. You sound like there’s a >epsilon probability you, a random HN reader, found a gotcha in a paper by the experts of the field because you’re so smart that you know that the definition of "species" is sometimes fluid. Great job, I’m sure the authors don’t know that.

Could you maybe be a little bit more charitable than snarky? "Just read the paper" is not helpful when the paper is like 50 pages. It's not like I know what makes the other cats different species either. Nobody is trying to "gotcha" the researchers here, I'm just trying to understand what makes the cats a different species vs. a subspecies. We all know the definitions are fluid and I've heard of a couple in the past but I've never heard of one that solely looks at DNA divergence, so I'm pretty clueless and trying to learn something here. If you know the answer, this is not the way to share it.

Typically they’ll draw a species boundary if two individuals from the two distributions can not create a sustainably procreating line of descendants.

So either they can’t have kids, or their kids can’t have kids.

There are probably other rubrics but that’s the one I’m familiar with.

In this case I think I read that this animal has a different chromosome count than its siblings? Which would make reproduction basically impossible

Oh wow, chromosome difference is the kind of thing I was looking for, that's amazing. Thanks!

Reply on news.ycombinator.com