Talk:Allochronic speciation

Asynchrony of Seasons Hypothesis

I still need to work on the Asynchrony of Seasons Hypothesis section as it is a major factor in the widespread phenomenon of allochronic speciation. Andrew Z. Colvin • Talk 21:01, 19 December 2020 (UTC)

Done! Andrew Z. Colvin • Talk 20:55, 22 December 2020 (UTC)

Copyediting requested

Anyone that wants to jump in and make grammar and spelling corrections that I missed, feel free. Andrew Z. Colvin • Talk 21:07, 19 December 2020 (UTC)

Did you know nomination

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Gatoclass (talk) 19:03, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

(

• Comment or view
• Article history

)

• ... that the timing of reproduction (such as breeding season in animals or the timing of flowering in plants) can cause the formation of a new species in a process known as allochronic speciation? Coyne & Orr (2004)
  • ALT1: ... that allochronic speciation has occurred in periodical cicada populations that only emerge every 221 years? Source: Taylor & Friesen (2017)
  • ALT2: ... that the timing of flowering or breeding seasons in organisms can cause the formation of new species in a process known as allochronic speciation? Coyne & Orr (2004)

Created by Andrew Z. Colvin (talk). Self-nominated at 20:36, 19 December 2020 (UTC).

General: Article is new enough and long enough
New enough: Long enough:

Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Adequate sourcing: Neutral: Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing:

Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
Cited: Interesting:

QPQ: Done.

Overall: I think the one about cicadas and 221-year cycles is much more interesting, but either could be fine. jp×g 05:12, 20 December 2020 (UTC)

• I recently reviewed Template:Did you know nominations/Rohana Muthalib. I also cited the paragraph in question. I also like the ALT1 as it's more interesting. Andrew Z. Colvin • Talk 19:22, 22 December 2020 (UTC)

Excellent! Looks good to me. jp×g 18:22, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

• Returned from prep per discussion at WT:DYK#Allochronic speciation. The ALT1 is incorrectly phrased and the ALT0 reads like a textbook entry. Please suggest a different hook. Yoninah (talk) 00:28, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

We didn't have a page on allochronic speciation?

• ALT3: ... that an Inurois moth species is allochronically speciating into early and late winter species due to it being too cold to breed mid-winter?
• ALT4: ... that some marsupial mice may have become different species due to breeding at different times, thanks to their responses to daylight?
• Or wait till April: ALT5: ... that having sex at different times may produce new species?

CMD (talk) 07:09, 1 January 2021 (UTC)

The April one would be pretty funny.

• Maybe: ALT6: ... that allochronic speciation may partially cause the high biodiversity found along Earth’s equator? Martin et al. (2009) Andrew Z. Colvin • Talk 02:57, 4 January 2021 (UTC)

Hmm so I just wanted to say that while all the new hooks sound good, I would personally vote for the April Fool's version. That one is so witty! --LordPeterII (talk) 00:08, 8 January 2021 (UTC)

Honestly, I’d have to agree. All the DYKs I submit are speciation-based, so why not have one happen for a unique day? Andrew Z. Colvin • Talk 10:26, 10 January 2021 (UTC)

Yoninah, then would you approve ALT5 for April's Fool? Since this was returned from prep I don't know who should approve. --LordPeterII (talk) 00:21, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

Yoninah hasn't been active lately so another editor may need to sign off the idea. @JPxG:? Narutolovehinata5 ^tccsdnew 11:05, 30 January 2021 (UTC)

ALT1 is really fascinating to me, personally (it's backed up by the article and the sources, right?) But the author seems to think the joke one is good, so we can just run with that one then. jp×g 03:34, 2 February 2021 (UTC)

I also like Alt1 but it was struck for some reason. It's one of the most cited and most studied examples in allochrony, so it definitely is relevant. I'm okay with it or the April Fool's one. Andrew Z. Colvin • Talk 23:15, 4 February 2021 (UTC)

I'm willing to approve ALT5, I just need the relevant sentence and source to be specified so I can try verification (or if it's an offline source, approve under AGF). Narutolovehinata5 ^tccsdnew 06:36, 4 February 2021 (UTC)

I wrote it as a generic summary, but would "Allochrony can involve a number of factors that induce the formation of a new species...Many organisms also breed at different times of the day, different seasons in the year, and even over multiple years or decades." sourced to [1]"Allochrony can act over different timescales – over the day, between seasons or between years – and clearly can automatically result in assortative mating...64 case studies were found, of which nine appear to be true or incipient allochronic speciation (in bold in Table S1) and a further eight may be true allochronic divergence but further study is needed..." suffice? CMD (talk) 06:50, 4 February 2021 (UTC)

I think this suffices well. It alines with the source well. Andrew Z. Colvin • Talk 23:16, 4 February 2021 (UTC)

Thanks. I think there is some consensus here to go with ALT5 for April Fools. It's based on the article wordings, and it has been verified in the provided source. As such this is now good to go. Narutolovehinata5 ^tccsdnew 03:18, 5 February 2021 (UTC)

Is there something specific that needs to be done to get it ready for April Fools? Sorry, I’m not familiar with all the functions DYK. Andrew Z. Colvin • Talk 05:53, 29 March 2021 (UTC) Oops, I did not notice it was already placed there! Disregard. Andrew Z. Colvin • Talk 05:56, 29 March 2021 (UTC)