Interrelations of the Populations of the Rana pipiens Complex

  • John A. Moore
Part of the Recent Results in Cancer Research book series (RECENTCANCER, volume 1969)


Measures of similarities and differences among organisms are basic to many branches of biology. Systematics is the codification of such information. Lewontin (4) has stated recently that “the major unsolved problem of descriptive population genetics is an adequate specification of the genetic difference between two closely related species as compared to the genetic difference between populations of the same species.” A reasonable solution to this problem cannot be expected until it becomes possible to state the problem more precisely. For example, one cannot expect “an adequate specification of the genetic difference between two closely related species...” unless there is an adequate specification of specific and intraspecific categories. Then again, biologists have never agreed on what they have meant by genetic differences, genetic relatedness, etc. Usually some measure of total difference is implied though, of necessity, only a minute and unknown fraction of the total difference is actually dealt with.


Genetic Relatedness American Museum Diploid Hybrid Leopard Frog America South 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Clausen, Jens: Stages in the evolution of plant species. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1951.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Cope, E. D.: The Batrachia of North America. Bulletin of the United States National Museum 34:397–406, 1889.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Kauffeld, Carl F.: The status of the leopard frogs, Rana bvachyccphala and Rana pipiens. Herpetologica 1:84–87, 1937.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Lewontin, R. C.: Population genetics. Annual Review of Genetics 1:37–70, 1967.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    McAlister, Wayne H.: Variation in Rana pipiens Schreber in Texas. American Midland Naturalist 67:334–363, 1962.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    McCarthy, B. J. and E. T. Bolton: An approach to the measurement of genetic relatedness among organisms. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 50:156–164, 1963.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Mecham, John S.: Evidence of reproductive isolation between two populations of the frog, Rana pipiens, in Arizona. Southwestern Naturalist 13:35–43, 1968.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Moore, John A.: Geographic variation in Rana pipiens Schreber of eastern North America. Bulletin of the American Museum of Natural History 82:345–370, 1944.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Moore, John A.: Incipient intraspecific isolating mechanisms in Rana pipiens. Genetics 31:304–326, 1946.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Moore, John A.: Hybridization between Rana pipiens from Vermont and eastern Mexico. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 33:72–75, 1947.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Moore, John A.: Further studies on Kana pipiens racial hybrids. American Naturalist 84:247–254, 1950.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Moore, John A.: Diploid and haploid interracial hybrids in Kana pipiens. Genetics Today. Proceedings of the XI International Congress of Genetics 2:431–436, 1964.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Moore, John A.: Diploid and haploid hybridization of different populations of the Kana pipiens complex. I. Experiments with females from Mexico. Journal of Experimental Zoology 265:1–20, 1967.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Moore, John A.: Diploid and haploid hybridization of different populations of the Kana pipiens complex. II. Experiments with females from Oklahoma. Journal of Experimental Zoology 265:461–474, 1967.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Post, Douglas D. and David Pettus: Variation in Kana pipiens (Anura: Ranidae) of eastern Colorado. Southwestern Naturalist 22:476–482, 1966.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Schmidt, Karl P.: A check list of North American amphibians and reptiles. Sixth Edition. American Society of Ichthyologists and Herpetologists, 1953.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Turesson, Gote: The species and the variety as ecological units. Hereditas 3:100–113, 1922.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Turesson, Gote: The genotypical response of the plant species to the habitat. Hereditas 3:211–350, 1922.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag New York Inc. 1969

Authors and Affiliations

  • John A. Moore
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Biological SciencesColumbia UniversityUSA
  2. 2.Department of HerpetologyAmerican Museum of Natural HistoryNew YorkUSA

Personalised recommendations