Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-p9bg8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T16:19:29.047Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Subspecies in Palaeontology

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 May 2009

P. C. Sylvester-Bradley
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The neontological concept of a species as a group of “unit populations” divided into geographical races or subspecies is applied to the palaeontological record, and the intrinsic similarities of geographical and chronological subspecies are discussed. It is concluded that the variety and the subspecies are different entities both of which have value in palaeontology. Quantitative measures of the level of specific and subspecific distinction are proposed.

Type
Articles
Information
Geological Magazine , Volume 88 , Issue 2 , April 1951 , pp. 88 - 102
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1951

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Bather, F. A., 1927. Biological classification: past and future. Quart. Journ. Geol. Soc., lxxxiii, pp. lxii–civ.Google Scholar
Brinkmann, R., 1929. Statistisch-Biostratigraphische Untersuchungen an Mitteljurassischen Ammoniten über Artbegriff und Stammesent-wicklung. Abh. der Gesellsch. Wissensch. zu Göttingen, Math.-Phys. KI., N.F., xiii, 3.Google Scholar
Burma, B. J., 1948. Studies in quantitative paleontology. Journ. Paleont., 22, 725–761.Google Scholar
Carruthers, R. G., 1910. On the evolution of Zaphrentis delanouei in Lower Carboniferous times. Quart. Journ. Geol. Soc., lxvi, 523–538.Google Scholar
Elias, M. K., 1950. The state of paleontology. Journ. Paleont., 24, 140–153.Google Scholar
Gilmour, J. S. L., and Gregor, J. W., 1939. Demes: a suggested new terminology. Nature, cxliv, 333.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haldane, J. B. S., 1949. Suggestions as to quantitative measurement of rates of evolution. Evolution, iii, 51–6.Google Scholar
Hemming, F., 1950. On the status of names of forms of less than specific rank. Bull. Zool. Nomen., iii, 55–68.Google Scholar
Hudson, R. G. S., 1949. Discussion on paper by Wright and Wright, 1949, q.v.Google Scholar
Leitch, D., 1940. A statistical investigation of the Anthracomyas of the basal Similis-Pulchra Zone in Scotland. Quart. Journ. Geol. Soc., xcvi, 13–37.Google Scholar
Lousley, J. F., 1950. Distribution of British Plants. Nature, clxv, 787–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mason, H. L., 1949 Evidence for the genetic submergence of Pinus remorata; in Genetics, Paleontology and Evolution, 356–362. Princeton.Google Scholar
Mayr, E., 1942. Systematics and the origin of species. Columbia.Google Scholar
Mayr, E., 1949. Speciation and systematics; in Genetics, Paleontology and Evolution, 281–298. Princeton.Google Scholar
Newell, N. D., 1947. Infraspecific categories in invertebrate paleontology. Evolution, 1, 163–171 (reprinted: Journ. Paleont., 22, 225–232).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rensch, B., 1947. Neuere Probleme der Abstammungslehre. Stuttgart.Google Scholar
Simpson, G. G., 1940. Types in modern taxonomy. Amer. Journ. Sci., 238, 413–431.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sylvester-Bradley, P. C., 1947. The shell structure and evolution of the Mesozoic ostracod Cypridea. Quart. Journ. Geol. Soc., ciii, p. viii.Google Scholar
Sylvester-Bradley, P. C., 1949. The Ostracod genus Cypridea and the zones of the Upper and Middle Purbeckian. Proc. Geol. Ass., lx, 125–153.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sylvester-Bradley, P. C., 1951. Biometry and Systematics; discussion. Proc. Linn. Soc., in Press.Google Scholar
Trueman, A. E., 1924. The species-concept in palaeontology. Geol. Mag., lxi, 355–360.Google Scholar
Trueman, A. E. and Weir, J., 1946. A monograph of British Carboniferous non-marine lamellibranchs. Palaeont. Soc.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wright, C. W., and Wright, E. V., 1949. The Cretaceous ammonite genera Discohoplites Spath and Hyphoplites Spath. Quart. Journ. Geol. Soc., civ, 477–497.Google Scholar
Wright, W. B., 1938. The Anthracomyas of the Lancashire Coalfield. Summ. Progr. Geol. Surv. for 1936, pt. 2, 10–26.Google Scholar