|WikiProject Genetics||(Rated Stub-class)|
|WikiProject Evolutionary biology||(Rated C-class)|
Adding to introduction
I propose new language for the entry preceding Haldane's definition. I think that it's important to note that this rule asserts itself not only during the early stages of speciation, but also in situations of secondary contact after allopatric speciation. Here is my proposed language:
Haldane's rule represents a remarkable observation in early stage of speciation. The rule also applies to two species which, after allopatric speciation has occurred, form hybrids when secondary contact in an area of sympatry results in incomplete reproductive isolation.
Apparently this expression needs to be disambiguated in a slightly entended description. Is there a biologist ready to help?--Wetman 20:03, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
I don't follow
I don't really understand this paragraph. One possible rationalisation of the rule is that in two subspecies, a gene necessary for fertility or viability may be absent from the homozygous chromosome of one of the subspecies, and so not be transmitted to some hybrids with the heterozygous sex. As speciation progresses, this is likely to start with a reduction in fertility, and then of viability, of one of the sexes of hybrids, at which point the rule can be seen; if it then affects both sexes then the two subspecies stop being able to interbreed and become different species.
A gene necessary for fertility absent from one subspecies. What does that mean? If it is really valid, please rephrase and reinsert it. thanks. --Seb951 15:26, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
also, and confusingly, given as: I have no doubt that in reality the future will be vastly more surprising than anything I can imagine. Now, my own suspicion is that the universe is not only queerer than we suppose, but queerer than we can suppose. . disambiguation needed at some point? Pseudomonas(talk) 16:44, 18 March 2008 (UTC)