What is the Largest Family in the Entire Animal Kingdom?
Вставка
- Опубліковано 1 чер 2024
- There are over 1.4m species in the animal kingdom, split between more than 7 thousand families but which is the largest?! Join us on a journey through the animal kingdom as we explore all of the major groups of vertebrates before diving into molluscs and arthropods to determine the largest family in the entire animal kingdom.
Chapters
0:00 Taxonomic ranks
0:49 Mammals
2:13 Birds
3:36 Amphibians
4:49 Fish
6:45 Reptiles
8:02 Phylums
8:23 Invertebrates
8:46 Molluscs
9:46 Arthropoda
10:09 Arachnida
11:11 Insecta
More rabbit holes to dive into!
Relatives: tbtrvl.com/relatives
Parks: tbtrvl.com/parks
Most Popular: tbtrvl.com/popular
Newest Videos: tbtrvl.com/newest
Creative Commons Attribution
Pyramidellidae Shells Albano PG et al / WikiCommons
Arctic Woolly Bear Moth 1 Mike Beauregard / WikiCommons
Arctic Woolly Bear Moth 2 Oskar Liset Pryds Hansen / WikiCommons
Editorial Attribution
Golden ground beetle (Carabus auratus) Martin Dlugo / Shutterstock.com
Media & Attribution
Unless stated above, all still images are used under license from Shutterstock.com. Thank you to everyone who makes their work available for use. Covering all of the wonderful species in these videos would not be possible without your incredible work.
Sources & Further Reading
Listed below are the sources used to create the video.
Sources
Total for Vertebrata (75,472) = Totals from the 5 individual sources listed below: Fish - 36,775 + Reptiles - 12,060 + Birds - 11,195 + Amphibians - 8,724 + Mammals - 6,718
Total for Chordata (78,626) = 5 * Totals from Vertebrata (75,472 sp / 1,192 fam) + Cephalochordata (30 sp & 1 fam) + Tunicata (3,124 sp & 35 fam) from Catalogue of Life.
Catalogue of Life Checklist
www.catalogueoflife.org/
Bánki, O., Roskov, Y., Döring, M., Ower, G., Hernández Robles, D. R., Plata Corredor, C. A., Stjernegaard Jeppesen, T., Örn, A., Vandepitte, L., Hobern, D., Schalk, P., DeWalt, R. E., Ma, K., Miller, J., Orrell, T., Aalbu, R., Abbott, J., Adlard, R., Aedo, C., et al. (2024). Catalogue of Life Checklist (Version 2024-01-24). Catalogue of Life. doi.org/10.48580/dfrdl
Global Biodiversity Information Facility
www.gbif.org/
GBIF Secretariat (2023). GBIF Backbone Taxonomy. Checklist dataset doi.org/10.15468/39omei accessed via GBIF.org on 2024-02-11.
Mammal Species
www.mammaldiversity.org/index...
Bird Species
datazone.birdlife.org
Amphibian Species
Frost, Darrel R. 2024. Amphibian Species of the World: an Online Reference. Version 6.2 (Date of access). Electronic Database accessible at amphibiansoftheworld.amnh.org.... American Museum of Natural History, New York, USA. doi.org/10.5531/db.vz.0001
Fish Species
researcharchive.calacademy.or...
Reptile Species
reptile-database.reptarium.cz/
Tapanuli Orangutan Discovery
www.nature.com/articles/natur...
Microhylidae
animaldiversity.org/accounts/...
Pristimantis - most speciose vertebrate genus
www.nature.com/articles/s4159...
About Textbook Travel:
Exploring interesting topics and places.
Educational content about the most fascinating elements of our planet and the study surrounding them. Current content includes:
Current content:
Relatives - a series exploring the most fascinating families in the animal kingdom
Wildlife Enthusiast's Guide - a series exploring the wildlife in the world's most spectacular countries
There is currently no upload schedule so please consider turning on all notifications to be notified when a new video is released. Thanks!
Subscribe: tbtrvl.com/subscribe
Website: www.textbooktravel.com
#textbooktravel #animals #taxonomy
The new thumbnail Is way better!
Thank you! This one was a lot more fun to make as well! Lesson learned, thank you for the feedback 😊
@@Textbooktravel thank you, love your high quality videos! They are very educational but also entertaining.
Evolutionary biologist and geneticist J.B.S. Haldane quipped that if a god or divine being had created all living organisms on Earth, then that creator must have an “inordinate fondness for beetles.”
7:34 is a giant new caledonian gecko, not a Solomon Island Skink.
you're god damn right!
Oh jeez, you're right! I will be more careful next time, thank you
Definitely gonna be rewatching this later! Love that the Colubridae are ranked so high, its so awesome to see their incredible diversity and beauty, and i was surprised to see they ever beat out the skinks!
Who else knew before watching that colubrids were the largest vertebrate family and weevils were the largest family of animals?
I know its beetles
I did not, but it definitely didn't surprise me
The sourcing, the graphics, the narration… incredible work
4:03 His face 😂
Excellent video a lot of research went into this, thankyou its helpful to me!
absolutely beautiful video!
love this video, love ur content in general, super cool
Thank you so much for making this video!
Thank you for watching!
Excellent video 😊
Excited to your next video.
You are very underrated youtuber
NERRRRDDD, is what I say to myself as I rewind a couple dozen times to watch this extremely well done informative video. Great Job!! I use nerd as a term of endearment FYI. Lastly, I have to mention that the pictures of the animals used with the species labeled in the corner was the cherry on top.
Bacteria: “Hold my beer”😂
I never though wevils could get that big or be that cute
Could you make a video about corvids, please?
You said there were four main groups of Repitilia. I'm guessing it's Squamates, Archosaurs, Testudines, and Rhynochephelians? Just curious what you were referring to.
According to the Integrated Taxonomic Information System (ITIS), Arthropoda has 2759 families, while Vertebrata has 1078 families. Mollusca has 707 families.
I'm guessing either beetles, whales, or sauropods. That would depend on what criteria you use to determine "largest".
7:36 is not a Solomon Island skink looks like a new Caledonian Leachianus gecko
And Evangelicals think that they all fit on Noah’s Ark😂😂😂
Don't all Christians think that
And the mental gymnastics they do make it make sense. 😂
I mean, insects were not in the Ark, nor marine animals
So, I guess you were there, and you witnessed it, at least one person saw it. 😂😂😂@@irmaosmatos4026
@s4life Not really, many Christians don't take the Bible stories in the old testament as literal History.
LMAO at the autocaptions putting "tigers" instead of "tanagers"
The bird labled as Couche's Kingbird is actually a Social Flycatcher.
Haven’t watched yet, but my money is on either Scarabs/Rhino/Dung beetles, Ground beetles, or Weevils
You should know, Chondrichthyes and Osteichthyes are not valid taxa anymore, they are both paraphyletic to tetrapods (clade Tetrapoda), Chondrichthyes is now replaced with Holocephali and Elasmobranchii both now evaluated into full classes and Osteichthyes is now replaced with Actinopterygii and Sarcopterygii both now evaluated into full classes, both lobe-finned fish (class Sarcopterygii) and tetrapods (clade Tetrapoda) are grouped together under the clade Neoteleostomi, whereas ray-finned fish (class Actinopterygii) are basal to both, both Actinopterygii and Neoteleostomi constitute the clade Euteleostomi (Bony Vertebrates), elasmobranchs (class Elasmobranchii) are now thought to be more closely related to bony vertebrates (clade Euteleostomi) than to holocephalans (class Holocephali), thus placing them elasmobranchs and bony vertebrates together under the clade Teleostomi, while holocephalans are considered the most basal of all the extant jawed vertebrates.
I've never heard of chondrichthyes being paraphyletic before, as far as I knew it's generally an accepted taxon? Obviously not im disagreeing that osteichythes is paraphyletic with regards to Tetrapoda, thats well known, but I've never seen a study that claims elasmobranchs are more closely related to bony fish than to holocephali
Beware of a commenter called Indy Reno posting nonsense taxonomy and other flawed info. He does this all the time and stubbornly ignores criticism. Further, when confronted, he frequently replies; 'actually' followed by a wall of even more flawed taxonomy, none of which addresses the first round of nonsense.
@@nefelpitou Beware of a commenter called Indy Reno posting nonsense taxonomy and other flawed info. He does this all the time and stubbornly ignores criticism. Further, when confronted, he frequently replies; 'actually' followed by a wall of even more flawed taxonomy, none of which addresses the first round of nonsense.
lets goooo weevil time baby
Very sorry to be that guy, but 1:47 is a Nutria, amazing video nonetheless and amazing work!!
Take a shot every time he says species :D
2:03 Birds are Reptiles. Unless you also don‘t count Crocodylomorphs as Reptiles, but then the Crocs are missing here.
True though by that logic we'd have to consider all tetrapods to be subgroups of fish...
@@sqrt2295 if you consider fish with lungfish and hagfish and rays/sharks/etc as fish yes, but if you consider only bony fish as fish then no
You mean ray-finned fish because lungfish and coelacanths are bony fish.
@@indyreno2933 yes
12:46 respectfully, hotwheels sisyphus (spider) is cooler i think. han solo (trilobite) as well
💖
Beetles.
"Referred to as the tree frogs and their allies" I guess that makes sense since a group of frogs is called an army. Still, calling related species "allies" is very funny to me.
Why did you reupload it?
Bad Thumbnail, horrible performance because of that
You should know that there are actually more than ninety-three extant families of reptiles, within the infraorder Iguania of lizards (suborder Lacertilia) among the squamates (order Squamata), the Iguania infraorder is actually split into eighteen extant families under five superfamilies and two parvorders, with the eighteen extant families of iguanians being Agamidae (Western Chisel-Toothed Lizards), Draconidae (Eastern Chisel-Toothed Lizards), Chamaeleonidae (Chameleons), Polychrotidae (Bush Anoles), Anolidae (True Anoles), Leiocephalidae (Curlytails), Crotaphytidae (Collared Lizards and Leopard Lizards), Phrynosomatidae (North American Spiny Lizards), Basiliscidae (Helmeted Lizards), Cycluridae (Primitive Iguanas), Hoplocercidae (Spiny-Tailed Iguanas), Liolaemidae (South American Swift Iguanas), Uranoscodontidae (Mophead Iguana), Tropiduridae (Lava Iguanas), Iguanidae (True Iguanas), Leiosauridae (Leiosaurs), Brachylophidae (Togan Iguanas), and Opluridae (Malagasy Iguanas), the five superfamilies of iguanians are Agamoidea (Chisel-Toothed Lizards (contains Agamidae and Draconidae)), Chamaeleonoidea (Chameleons and Fossil Relatives (contains Chamaeleonidae)), Anoloidea (Anoles (contains Polychrotidae and Anolidae)), Basiliscoidea (Helmeted Lizards and Relatives (contains Leiocephalidae, Crotaphytidae, Phrynosomatidae, and Basiliscidae)), and Iguanoidea (Iguanas (contains Cycluridae, Hoplocercidae, Liolaemidae, Uranoscodontidae, Tropiduridae, Iguanidae, Leiosauridae, Brachylophidae, and Opluridae)), and the two parvorders of iguanians are Acrodonta (Chameleons and Chisel-Toothed Lizards) and Pleurodonta (Iguanas, Helmeted Lizards, North American Spiny Lizards, Collared Lizards, Leopard Lizards, Curlytails, and Anoles).
The number of recognised families likely depends on which source you are using for taxonomy. The ranking of clades is inherently pretty arbitrary, so different sources will likely classify things differently resulting in different numbers of recognised families - for example, one source could consider a group to contain 4 distinct families, whereas another considers it to be only a single family with four subfamilies.
@@fubberpish3614 Beware of a commenter called Indy Reno posting nonsense taxonomy and other flawed info. He does this all the time and stubbornly ignores criticism. Further, when confronted, he frequently replies; 'actually' followed by a wall of even more flawed taxonomy, none of which addresses the first round of nonsense.
@Dr.Ian-Plect, the Iguania infraorder of lizards is split into eighteen extant families: Agamidae (Western Chisel-Toothed Lizards), Draconidae (Eastern Chisel-Toothed Lizards), Chamaeleonidae (Chameleons), Polychrotidae (Bush Anoles), Anolidae (True Anoles), Leiocephalidae (Curlytails), Crotaphytidae (Collared Lizards and Leopard Lizards), Phrynosomatidae (North American Spiny Lizards), Basiliscidae (Helmeted Lizards), Cycluridae (Primitive Iguanas), Hoplocercidae (Spiny-Tailed Iguanas), Liolaemidae (South American Swift Iguanas), Uranoscodontidae (Mophead Iguana and Fossil Relatives), Tropiduridae (Lava Iguanas), Iguanidae (True Iguanas), Leiosauridae (Leiosaurs), Brachylophidae (Tongan Iguanas and Fossil Relatives), and Opluridae (Malagasy Iguanas), it is also split into five extant superfamilies: Agamoidea (Chisel-Toothed Lizards), Chamaeleonoidea (Chameleons and Fossil Relatives), Anoloidea (Anoles), Basiliscoidea (Helmeted Lizards, North American Spiny Lizards, Collared Lizards, Leopard Lizards, and Curlytails), and Iguanoidea (Iguanas).
@@indyreno2933 As usual, responding with a wall of text neither undoes your misinformation nor impresses.
@@Dr.Ian-Plect ah, thanks for the info. Had a similar interaction with this commenter on a video about parrots.
Isn't it time we start thinking about lumping birds over with the reptiles?
Forgot to mention incredible beatles' albums)
ants, so many ants, just guessing
Um bro you showed a new caledonian giant gecko for the solomon islands skink
Yep, beetles are God's most beloved children 😊
First, substantiate a god exists.
ar throp id a? shouldn't it be more like arth ro poda?
I mean, I alrdy know which animal has the most number of species... beetles, like a 1/4 of all animal species r beetles
Vespoidae
Rodentia?
Order, not family.
Actually, parrots (order Psittaciformes) are now officially split into eight extant families under three different superfamilies, with the three superfamilies of parrots being Strigopoidea (New Zealand Parrots), Cacatuoidea (Cockatoos), and Psittacoidea (True Parrots), the new zealand parrots (superfamily Strigopoidea) are the most basal of the three parrot superfamilies and are split into two extant families: Nestoridae (Kaka and Kea) and Strigopidae (Kakapo and Fossil Relatives), the cockatoos (superfamily Cacatuoidea) are split into two extant families: Nymphicidae (Cockatiel and Fossil Relatives) and Cacatuidae (True Cockatoos), and the true parrots (superfamily Psittacoidea) are the largest parrot superfamily and are split into four extant families, with the most basal of the four extant families to be Pezoporidae, which contains all true parrot populations native to Oceania, then followed by Psittaculidae, which is native only to Asia, leaving the most recent split to be between Psittacidae that includes all parrot populations native to Africa and Aridae which is where all parrots native to the New World belong to.
Which taxonomy splits the parrots into 8 families? I use eBird's Birds of the World for family-level taxonomy, and they recognise only four families - Strigopidae, Cacatuidae, Psittacidae and Psittaculidae
@fubberpish3614, there are actually eight: Nestoridae (Kakas and Kea), Strigopidae (Kakapo and Fossil Relatives), Nymphicidae (Cockatiel and Fossil Relatives), Cacatuidae (True Cockatoos), Pezoporidae (Oceanian True Parrots), Psittaculidae (Asiatic Parrots), Psittacidae (African Parrots), and Aridae (New World Parrots), they are also split officially into three superfamilies: Strigopoidea (New Zealand Parrots (contains Nestoridae and Strigopidae)), Cacatuoidea (Cockatoos (contains Nymphicidae and Cacatuidae)), and Psittacoidea (True Parrots (contains Pezoporidae, Psittaculidae, Psittacidae, and Aridae)), based on here, Strigopidae includes only the kakapo (Strigops habrotilus), while all other living new zealand parrot species being the Kea (Nesopsittacus notabilis), South Island Kaka (Nestor meridionalis), and North Island Kaka (Nestor septentrionalis) belong to the family Nestoridae, not all cockatoos belong to the family Cacatuidae, the cockatiel, which is the smallest living cockatoo species is placed in its own family, which is Nymphicidae, whereas Cacatuidae is restricted only to the larger cockatoo species, Psittaculidae is rendered as paraphyletic and Psittacidae is rendered as polyphyletic, all african parrot populations belong to the family Psittacidae, which therefore redefines Psittacidae as an exclusively African family, which does evaluate new world parrots into a full family that is still the sister group to Psittacidae, all populations of true parrots native to Oceania are now thought to be grouped together under one family called Pezoporidae, which is shown to be the most basal of the four extant families of true parrots, this helps broaden the exclusively oceanian origin of parrots (order Psittaciformes), so for this reason, there are eight extant families of parrots and parrots are also split into three superfamilies, which does mean that true parrots (superfamily Psittacoidea) are split into four extant families with the family Pezoporidae that includes all true parrot populations native to Oceania being the most basal, then followed by the asiatic parrots of the family Psittaculidae, leaving the most recent split to be between the african parrots of the family Psittacidae and the new world parrots of the family Aridae, both new zealand parrots (superfamily Strigopoidea) and cockatoos (superfamily Cacatuoidea) are split into two extant families with the two extant families of new zealand parrots being Nestoridae (Kakas and Kea) and Strigopidae (Kakapo and Fossil Relatives) and the two extant families of cockatoos being Nymphicidae (Cockatiel and Fossil Relatives) and Cacatuidae (True Cockatoos).
@no2933 that I understand, I am not saying you are wrong. There are papers supporting this 8-family arrangement. But what I'm asking is which, if any, bird taxonomy source has accepted this change? Every single source I can find (Birds of the World, IOC, etc) follows the 4-family classification of parrots.
Also, as for the position of the Cockatiel, I was under the impression it was more closely related to the "white cockatoos" (Cacatua, Eolophus, Lophochroa) than to the "black cockatoos" (Zanda, Calyptorhynchus and Probosciger), making a Cacatuidae excluding Nymphicus paraphyletic. Not sure where Callocephalon falls into this however. Although, I could be wrong.
@fubberpish3614, cockatoos are defined by the superfamily Cacatuoidea, which is actually now split into two extant families: Nymphicidae (Cockatiel and Fossil Relatives) and Cacatuidae (True Cockatoos), the latter contains all of the larger cockatoo species, while the cockatiel, which is the smallest living cockatoo species is different enough to have a family of its own, also, the subfamilies that true cockatoos (family Cacatuidae) are now split into are Callocephalontinae (includes Callocephalon), Eolophinae (includes Eolophus and Licmetis), Proboscigrinae (includes Calyptorhynchus, Zanda, and Probosciger), and Cacatuinae (includes Cacatua, Flavolophus, and Lophochroa), thus still making Cacatuidae excluding Nymphicus monophyletic, which officially makes Strigopidae and Nymphicidae the only two extant parrot families to have a single surviving species, with the Kakapo (Strigops habrotilus) being the only surviving member of the family Strigopidae and the Cockatiel (Nymphicus hollandicus) being the only surviving member of the family Nymphicidae, meaning all new zealand parrots belong to the superfamily Strigopoidea but not the family Strigopidae and all cockatoos belong to the superfamily Cacatuoidea but not the family Cacatuidae, which is the reason why both new zealand parrots (superfamily Strigopoidea) and cockatoos (superfamily Cacatuoidea) are split into two extant families, for the new zealand parrots (superfamily Strigopoidea), the two extant families are Nestoridae (Kakas and Kea) and Strigopidae (Kakapo and Fossil Relatives), whereas for the cockatoos (superfamily Cacatuoidea), the two extant families are Nymphicidae (Cockatiel and Fossil Relatives) and Cacatuidae (True Cockatoos), also, there are actually four families of true parrots (superfamily Psittacoidea) not two, which is the reason why it is now said that there are eight extant families of parrots (order Psittaciformes), with the four extant families of true parrots (superfamily Psittacoidea) being Pezoporidae (Oceanian True Parrots), Psittaculidae (Asiatic Parrots), Psittacidae (African Parrots), and Aridae (New World Parrots), because parrots (order Psittaciformes) as a whole are officially accepted to have originated exclusively from Oceania, explaining why new zealand parrots (superfamily Strigopoidea) are the most basal of the three parrot superfamilies and cockatoos (superfamily Cacatuoidea) are primarily native to Oceania, the family Pezoporidae, which is a family of true parrots that contains all exclusively Oceanian populations is treated as the most basal of the four extant families of true parrots (superfamily Psittacoidea), with Psittaculidae, which is redefined as an exclusively Asian family being the second most basal, while Psittacidae is now redefined as an exclusively African family and contains all african populations of the superfamily, while new world parrots have been evaluated into the family Aridae, which is in fact the sister group to Psittacidae, which officially makes african parrots (family Psittacidae) and new world parrots (family Aridae) two the most derived families of true parrots (superfamily Psittacoidea), based on here Psittaculidae no longer includes african parrots other than grey parrots (genus Psittacus) and silver-headed parrots (genus Poicephalus) or true parrots native to Oceania, which is why Psittacidae is redefined to include only all parrot populations native to Africa and all true parrot populations native to Oceania are now lumped together into the family Pezoporidae, thus officially rendering Psittaculidae paraphyletic to new world parrots (family Aridae), with all of its african members now moved back to Psittacidae, which is the sister group to Aridae, while Pezoporidae is the most basal and distantly related from all the four extant families of true parrots (superfamily Psittacoidea) whereas Psittaculidae (now found only in Asia) is the sister group to the Psittacidae + Aridae split.
@@fubberpish3614 Beware of a commenter called Indy Reno posting nonsense taxonomy and other flawed info. He does this all the time and stubbornly ignores criticism. Further, when confronted, he frequently replies; 'actually' followed by a wall of even more flawed taxonomy, none of which addresses the first round of nonsense.
Eumetazoa
The plural of phylum is phyla
Haven’t watched, my guess is a beetle
my apologies
Only the actinopterigians are considered as true fishes, birds are dinosaurs and dinosaurs are reptiles so birds are reptiles
Fish are not a valid class.
Correct, they are six different classes: Myxini (Hagfish and Fossil Relatives), Petromyzontida (Lampreys and Fossil Relatives), Holocephali (Chimaeras and Fossil Relatives), Elasmobranchii (Sharks and Batoids), Actinopterygii (Ray-Finned Fish), and Sarcopterygii (Lobe-Finned Fish).
I'm actually one of those weirdos that would consider 9 classes of fish.
If we want to consider fish, as a valid clade or a natural group we would have to include all of the living descendants of that group (following the definition of a monophyletic group).
1. Myxini (the hagfish)
2. Petromyzontida (lampreys)
3. Chondrichthyes (all cartilaginous fishes)
4. Actinopterygii (ray-finned fishes)
5. Actinistia (coelacanths)
6. Dipnoi (lungfishes)
7. Amphibia (frogs, salamanders and caecilians)
8. Reptilia / Sauropsida (including birds)
9. Mammalia (including humans)
Following this perspective, we would virtually synonymize the term "Fish" with "Vertebrate", which would render the term useless.
So personally, I always like to say, that fish (in the traditional sense) simply don't exist in modern scientific classification.
@ultimulcretin5795, Chondrichthyes is not valid anymore, it is paraphyletic to the bony vertebrates (clade Euteleostomi), based on here, sharks and batoids, which are collectively known as elasmobranchs are more closely related to bony vertebrates than they are to chimaeras and their fossil relatives, which are known as holocephalans, for this reason, Holocephali and Elasmobranchii are now evaluated into full classes, just like Actinopterygii and Sarcopterygii are evaluated into full classes because Osteichthyes is invalidly paraphyletic, the clade that elasmobranchs and bony vertebrates constitute is called Teleostomi, the clade that lobe-finned fish (class Sarcopterygii) and tetrapods (clade Tetrapoda) constitute is called Neoteleostomi, also, there are actually now ten extant classes of vertebrates: Myxini (Hagfish and Fossil Relatives), Petromyzontida (Lampreys and Fossil Relatives), Holocephali (Chimaeras and Fossil Relatives), Elasmobranchii (Sharks and Batoids), Actinopterygii (Ray-Finned Fish), Sarcopterygii (Lobe-Finned Fish), Amphibia (Amphibians), Reptilia (Reptiles), Aves (Birds), and Mammalia (Mammals).
@@indyreno2933 Chondrichthyes is no longer valid? Wow, I didn't know that, thank you for sharing, I will definitely have to look more in to this.
Also, I'm pretty sure Sarcopterygii shouldn't be considered a class, it includes lungfish and coelacanths, lungfish being more closely related to tetrapods than they are to coelacanths, indicating that Tetrapoda is a subgroup within Sarcopterygii as well.
@ultimulcretin5795, Neoteleostomi is the actual name of the group that both lobe-finned fish (class Sarcopterygii) and tetrapods (clade Tetrapoda) constitute.
Ai generated video
not Al generated
I knew beetles are super cool. That is why I have had some as pets recently, and will soon buy new larvae 🪲
Even as a Zoologist, the inability of modern academics to finally agree on what a Species actually is definitely leaves me incredibly disenchanted & honestly unimpressed by modern phylogenetics.