[tdwg-content] New terms need resolution: "Individual"

Gregor Hagedorn g.m.hagedorn at gmail.com
Thu Jul 14 18:13:35 CEST 2011

On 14 July 2011 15:18, Nico Cellinese <ncellinese at flmnh.ufl.edu> wrote:
> Populations and metapopulations are real entities but subspecies is definitively an artificial concept. Now that is I deed an opinion!

I don't know the difference between a geographically defined
subspecies and a meta-meta population. Do you define them differently?
I believe (sic!) you can define either either exact or poorly.

> But aren't individuals populations taxa etc etc all biologicalEntities?

Yes, but so, I believe, are ecosystems, organelles, enzymes, and
probably much more.
Also, crucially, the term and concept sought here seeks to exclude
taxa, while you include it into your list.

In my thinking taxa classify individuals or populations. Without
objects that they classify, they don't make (biological) sense. That
is why I proposed (past tense) this term, but with widespread
opposition it is not a good term.

LifeInstances - why not? Or IndividualOrPopulation?


More information about the tdwg-content mailing list