Thanks for the clarification, Emilio. The concept of non-gradational
buffaloes and crocodiles simply never occurred to me.
 
Right.
 
Actually I wrote something to the same effect myself, then took it out
because I didn't want to write a book. Also, it was time for lunch. Anyway,
you should recognize poetry when you read it.
 
Let's stir up another discussion instead of attacking straw men, shall we?
Suppose there's one animal group that has high genetic diversity, but it's
all in unexpressed DNA, so they all look alike. (Yes, there are animals
like this.) Then, let us suppose, there's a mutation in one gene, but it's
a very important gene, and the animal's offspring is completely changed.
Miraculously, they survive and breed. Is this a new species, based on a
large morphologic difference and just one important genetic difference?
Even if the variation of DNA within the parent group is higher? And how
does this reflect on the relative weight of DNA and morphology as taxonomic
criteria?
 
Just asking, folks; I don't have answers, or even strong opinions. But if
there are people lurking on this listserve who do DNA analysis for a
living, let's hear from them!
 
Andrew K. Rindsberg
Conchological Survey of Alabama? Not.