Talk:Ernst W. Mayr

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.
Biography Portal
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ]
Peer review This article was externally reviewed (December 14, 2005) by Nature. It was found to have 3 errors. These have been addressed
This article is part of the History of Science WikiProject, an attempt to improve and organize the history of science content on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. You can also help with the History of Science Collaboration of the Month.
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale.
Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale.


Contents

[edit] Punctuated evolution

In what way is allopatric speciation the basis of punctuated evolution ? Shyamal 12:11, 20 May 2004 (UTC)

Updated to peripatric speciation, based on a statement in an article of his, although that is obviously not independent verification. Noisy 09:56, 9 Jul 2004 (UTC)

--- I can't identify the "Rothschild collection" at AMNH> Collection of what? Wetman 07:39, 4 Sep 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Rothschild collection

Have modified it - bird collection !

[edit] Errors ID'd by Nature, to correct

The results of what exactly Nature suggested should be corrected is out... italicize each bullet point once you make the correction. -- user:zanimum

  • The entry says that Mayr solved the species concept - but, take it from me, there are still dozens of people arguing about it: this is a bit misleading.
  • Mayr was not sent to PNG by Rothschild, but by the American Museum of Natural History.
  • The original statement in the article was substantially correct: Rothschild was a sponsor of the NG expedition. I have edited this section to include what the original (i.e. pre-Nature correction) editor stated and the account that Mayr himself gave in his 1932 paper in Natural History (already cited in Other notable publications).--MayerG 09:18, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
  • The statement that "He continued to reject the view that evolution is the mere change of gene frequencies in populations, maintaining that other factors such as reproductive isolations had to be taken into account" is a bit odd; in that reproductive isolation presumably depends on the evolution of a genetic barrier - ie a change in gene frequencies.

[edit] References

Hi, User:Vsmith. Not sure why you removed the two references I put in. They were among the references I consulted in looking into the question of Rothschild's involvement with Mayr's expedition to New Guinea, and provide verifiable sources for some of what's in the article. (I am 131.210.4.95-- a cached page made it look like I was logged in when I actually wasn't, so the reference edit appeared as an anonymous one.)--MayerG 04:34, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Nature dispute is finished?

I am assuming that the current updates are not related to the Nature dispute and that we can remove the NatureDispute template. -- Pinktulip 08:51, 25 January 2006 (UTC)


[edit] species concepts debates

I added a short paragraph that points out that Mayr was a staunch champion of the biological species concept against the many alternatives that were proposed. Karebh 03:54, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] species concept : BSC

In "What makes biology unique?" Mayr himself wrote that it is a mistake to give him the paternity of the BSC concept, and cites Bouffon, Jordan, Poulton Streseman and Rensch as the fathers of this concept.

--& Darwin discusses reproductive isolation as the defining distinction between species as well, although he did not strongly advocate it. The "modern" BSC, however, is best attributed to Dobzhansky. --Patrick Alexander —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.123.95.29 (talk) 06:04, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] PhD?

The use of PhD to refer to the German university Diplom is possibly misleading. It gives the title Doktor, but is the completion of a normal, though extended (5 or 6 years) higher education. The BA/PhD scheme is a great American invention, which is gradually replacing the long-cycle first degrees of central Europe (cf. Bologna process.) The Diplom thesis is not therefore the result of 2 or 3 years' specific research training, but something more like the requirement for an M.Sc.or B.Phil. I would suggest changing "PhD" to the more general "doctorate". James Wimberley88.23.182.194 08:10, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

Changes made, although it was probably included due to Jared Diamond's note here, but this is a good point. The Nature review never pointed this out. Shyamal 08:39, 9 June 2007 (UTC)