Originally Posted by
My First Timbs
great question
the answer is vey simple
the % of genetic difference is of little consequence
it could be as little as a .05% genetic homology or as great as 99% genetic difference. the percentage or "amount" of genetic difference plays little role
what is important (and the deciding factor) is how the genetic difference (however small it is in relation to the entire genome of the animal/species) manifests itself in the actual creature/species.
the chimpanze is about 10% (give or take a few %) genetically different than us and we cant produce offspring.. in contrast, the bengal tiger and the african lion are about 26% genetically "different", yet the two can indeed mate and produce offspring. (even tho the offspring are not fertile, but the point is made)
your question is simply answered but has a much deeper foundation... that being how does one define a "species"
do we simply define a species as a group or population that can interbreed? or do we define a species gentically? or do we define a species by some other classification.. that is the crux of the issue and is still heavily debated in science.
we cant simply define a species as a group of individuals who have ability to interbreed, because of course that leaves out a carload of organisms that do not reproduce through sexual means.
Bookmarks