Hi Jim, DNA has not just added quantitatively to the body of morphological data of some use in distinguishing one species from another. It is rather in the process of changing what we mean by "species." It may be that traditional taxonomists don't see this coming, but it really is. I've been watching science change for as long as I can remember,and it is changing. It is following a trajectory. We will one day very soon be defining a species by its DNA, and the old definitions of "species" -- all of them, and several were really never very good anyway and all of them had problems -- will be lost sight of as science focuses on the molecular. I don't expect many here to agree with me. Just wait -- you'll see. Jim Shields At 06:03 PM 1/17/2013 -0800, Jim McK. wrote: >.... If we accept a species concept based on a shared gene pool, it >follows that similarities - at the gross morphological level or at the >more finely granular molecular level - do not in themselves prove that two >entities are conspecific. >... ************************************************* Jim Shields USDA Zone 5 P.O. Box 92 WWW: http://www.shieldsgardens.com/ Westfield, Indiana 46074, USA Lat. 40° 02.8' N, Long. 086° 06.6' W