User:Isabel Pond/Draft
Comparing Evolution Paths in Xeno-Taxonomy through Translation
Dr Isabel Pond, PhD (Medicine), BSc (Xenobiology)
Abstract
This paper analyses a method of translating planet-specific taxonomical systems into Federation Standard through a two step process. This leads to species from different planets with the same taxonomical name. It is therefore necessary to introduce an assigning system of species and origin.
The advantage of translated names is an easier way to compare the evolution paths on different planets. A method to do so is shown, as well as an outlook on possible findings a thorough application of the methods could have.
Introduction
Over a few decades of history, taxonomy on each planet faced various difficulties, generally because scientists started to classify species before the biological and evolutional background was entirely clear.
Each society has its own taxonomic system. This is a good starting point, since each planetary ecosystem has evolved separately. However, scientists struggle with comparing the paths. The first step allowing for comparison is logically transcript each system into Federation Standard. This is a problem, because the naming scheme is based on outward characteristics which are sometimes unrelated to genetic relationships. Consequently, the translated taxonomic classifications are sometimes the same, even though there is a significant difference in lineage.
This problem only occurs with specific classifications, which are ordered differently in different systems. Some systems might be entirely compatible. This paper aims to prepare the groundwork to compare makro-evolution in a galactic scope.
Methods
To compare planetary taxonomic systems, one has to use the classic taxonomic methods. After one has translated the systems which are to compare, these methods are used to compare the evolutionary paths on different planets. The second method of course is the translation itself.
Taxonomic Methods
All life forms on a planet are classified in the planet’s taxonomic system. Various taxonomic ranks are used to show relationships between species. Ideally, these represent the genetic/evolutionary relationships as well.
Taxonomic Ranks
The Federation Code for Nomenclature of Lifeforms suggests eight major taxonomic ranks, however, this can differ between planetary systems. Additionally, a number of minor ranks can be and were introduced in each systems.
- Domain
- Kingdom
- Phylum
- Class
- Order
- Family
- Genus
- Species
These structure will generally lead to an eight-leveled tree diagram. This is obviously not enough to show the complex process that is evolution. Sub-ranks can be introduced if the application benefits from them. In Federation Standard, they are normally indicated by prefixes, common ones include besides others Sub-, Infra- or Super-. A species is often described by its genus and species name, while the genus us often abbreviated to the first letter.
Evolutionary Outcomes Compared
Evolution is the adaption to the environment through accidental mutation and selection. The adaption is not steered by the species, but by the success of a variation of said species.
Divergency is the process in which two different characteristics are evolved from the same origin. The process is called homologous, the different outcomes a homologous pair. An example would be the bones of the vertical fins of Terran whales and bones of the human hand. They have distinctive similarities which suggest a common origin, but serve completely different functions.
Convergency is the process in which the same characteristic is evolved from different origins. The process is called analogue, the outcomes are a analogous pair. A classic example are the two Terran species ichthyosaur (extinct) and the dolphin. Although not directly related, they both developed the same form, as it is ideal for hunting smaller fish under water. Here, similarities serve the same function, but their origin is completely different.
Stumbling Blocks in Taxonomy
Efforts to describe and classify species often start way before the concept of evolution is discovered. Therefore, an early classification is often based on the general appearance. Even though the inner structure provides more evidence to the true affinity, it can still be misleading.
As a result, many classification systems do not always show evolutionary relationship. While most systems get updated according to the newest scientific results, this is not always possible or feasible. Instead, markers are introduced to warn from such discrepancies. They can be applied to any taxonomic rank.
- Monophyletic: The taxonomic group is related as described
- Paraphyletic: The taxonomic group is related as described, but some branches of it are wrongly ordered elsewhere
- Polyphyletic: The taxonomic group is not related
Translating Taxonomic Names
The process of translating names is debatable. There would be good reasons to not translate names and program universal translators in that way as well. This prevents confusion in both the scientific and the general community. However, it is not helpful for understanding.
As an example, the Trill domestic cat. Its species name in the Trill taxonomic system is Amunga Maneva. Nobody outside of Trill would know what you are talking about. It is difficult enough to remember the most important animals of ones home world alone and nearly impossible to do so for the core Federation worlds, let alone all the worlds out there.
Since evolution faces comparable problems, the results are comparable as well. We see that in the general similarities of many humanoids. This is the basis for the translation of the taxonomic names. How this is achieved will be shown at the same example of the cat.
Maneva means home, derived from the capital city Leran Manev. Amunga is the word stem of Amun, describing the general appearance of the animal, -ga is a suffix that in this case indicates both likeness and is a diminutive. The general appearance is the one what in Federation Standard would be described as a cat. The translated name would therefore be small domestic cat-like animal.
- Trill Taxonomic Name => Federation Standard
- Amunga => Amun, cat ; -ga, diminutive, indicating likeness
- Maneva => home, domestic
In Federation Standard, taxonomic names are often derived from an ancient Terran language, which in turn can be translated into Federation Standard. Those translations are, like the translation from Trill, unhandy. This is the reason why those Terran specific names have survived into Federation Standard. In conclusion, the translated name must be turned into its taxonomic equivalent.
- Federation Standard => Taxonomic Name
- Small cat-like => Felis
- Domestic => catus
The taxonomic name of the Trill domestic name in Federation Standard is therefore Felis catus and can and must be compared to other species translated to the same name and the Terran house cat which has traditionally that name.
Comparing Taxonomic Systems
The methods of comparing taxonomic Systems depends heavily on the question to answer. However, it must be taken in consideration that the Trill Felis catus must not necessarily have the same taxonomic line as the Terran Felis catus.
It is advisable to restrict the analysed part of the whole taxonomic system to a group. One must be very careful to do so. A monophyletic group on one planet can include on another one include other branches and would therefore be paraphyletic.
Results
It is shown that taxonomic systems can be translated into Federation Standard. This arises two questions. First, how can confusions be avoided and what does it mean if two species names are translated to the same taxonomic name in Federation Standard.
Avoiding Confusion
It is unavoidable to introduce a code to specify the taxonomic system it was translated from. A three letter code for mayor worlds and a four letter code for minor ones is suggested. They are issued by solar system. A figure-suffix can be added if more than one planet in the same solar system has originally evolved life.
Unfortunately it is not possible to use the widely known four letter code of the Intelligent Lifeform Index (ILI), since the same intelligent life form is likely to have colonised more than one planet with specific evolution processes.
Next to the code, it is of course possible to make the origin of each species out of context. One can also introduce the origin in the beginning and omit it in the rest of the text, if there is no reason to believe the planet in question could change.
- … the species TRL F. catus is widely known for …
- … the Trill F. catus compared to the Terran F. catus is more likely to …
In cladograms, the place of origin is introduced only on the first branch.
| TRN Petauridae |
| ||||||||||||||||||
Meaning of Name Equivalents
If there is an equivalent with the same name on different planets, the biologist is of course interested in the meaning. In this context, a new term is introduced: Galactic Convergence. It is a sign that evolution has found the same solution for the same problems entirely separately on different planets.
The differences generally lay in the paths to get there. This can be illustrated with the already used example of the house cat. It is already established that two species, one from Trill and one from Terra, has the same translated name in Federation Standard. This means that the two species have found their place in the same way in the same ecological niche. Both species are considered to be Mammals in both taxonomic systems, which makes this the easiest entry point.
From there, the path to the species in the respective system is translated in the same way the species itself was. The outcome is vastly different.
| TRN Mammalia |
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| TRL Mammalia |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
While relying on the already well founded analysis of each taxonomic system itself, we can compare evolution paths between planets without making further expensive field research. From there, it is possible to simulate effects of interplanetary migration, make assumption about interspecies compatibility and over all further the understanding of evolution.
Discussions
Impact on Evolution Theory
It is not expected that this paper or results learned with its method will question our understanding of evolution. It is entirely designed on the premise that this theory is correct and aims to understand its complexity more thoroughly.
The system also does not contradict alternative evolution explanations. Especially the controversially discussed Seeding hypothesis, which is based more on xenoarcheological evidence than biology, allows for the same methods.
Artificial habitats
In the time of space travel, it is a question how to treat planets that had been made feasible for life through terraforming or other means. It is recommendable to introduce only species from one world to such an artificial habitat, as this allows for predictions about the near future of the planets ecosystem.
It requires further analysis how the taxonomy of such places should be handled. It is reasonable to believe it most practical to copy the evolution tree from the planet of origin, mark the non-imported species as extinct and continue from there.
A mixed world likely requires very complicated merging of the two cladograms. It might be of interest to just star anew with the species at hand. In both cases, a new taxonomic system has to be introduced, as there is no exchange with the origin anymore.
Conclusion
This paper has shown that it is not only possible to translate each taxonomical system from its main language into Federation Standard through a two step process. It is also practical to do so for simplification and new research data can be learned from analysing the similarities. The method requires the introduction of a system to assign species to their respective taxonomical system.