Is population subdivision different from speciation? From phylogeography to species delimitation

Abstract

Abstract Species‐level diversity and the underlying mechanisms that lead to the formation of new species, that is, speciation, have often been confounded with intraspecific diversity and population subdivision. The delineation between intraspecific and interspecific divergence processes has received much less attention than species delimitation. The ramifications of confounding speciation and population subdivision are that the term speciation has been used to describe many different biological divergence processes, rendering the results, or inferences, between studies incomparable. Phylogeographic studies have advanced our understanding of how spatial variation in the pattern of biodiversity can begin, become structured, and persist through time. Studies of species delimitation have further provided statistical and model‐based approaches to determine the phylogeographic entities that merit species status. However, without a proper understanding and delineation between the processes that generate and maintain intraspecific and interspecific diversity in a study system, the delimitation of species may still not be biologically and evolutionarily relevant. I argue that variation in the continuity of the divergence process among biological systems could be a key factor leading to the enduring contention in delineating divergence patterns, or species delimitation, meriting future comparative studies to help us better understand the nature of biological species.

Keywords

• phylogeography
• population subdivision
• speciation
• speciation continuum
• species delimitation