From a typological point of view, view - is a collection of individuals similar to each other, inhabiting a certain area, capable of interbreeding with each other, producing fertile offspring, similar to their parents and differing in a number of ways essential features from other similar aggregates.
The basics of the typological concept of the species were developed by C. Linnaeus. Linnaean view– this is a perfect and unchanging form, i.e. unable to evolve; This perfect view, which corresponds to the concept of “eidos” (idea). Typological concept of the species lies at the basis of all taxonomy: a species is the basic unit of taxonomy, the minimum possible perfect taxon.
Aristotle used the term “species” to characterize similar animals. The facts of stability and constancy of species in nature led to the dominance of the idea of \u200b\u200bthe immutability and creation of species ( creationism). In the fight against creationism, he developed transformism(J, Buffon), J. Lamarck, carried away by the idea of the variability of species, began to deny the reality of the species in general, reducing any variability in nature to speciation. Charles Darwin developed ideas about their instability and dynamism. At the beginning of the twentieth century. there is a breakdown of the concept of the species as a morphologically homogeneous unity (typological" or "monotypic" concept of the species). In the studied groups of plants and animals, the main unit of classification became geographical race, which was further considered indivisible. A species came to be regarded as a group of such geographical races (or subspecies); in addition to binomial, three nominal nomenclature arose: in Latin name the name began to be included genus, species and subspecies. The next important steps in the development of ideas about the species were discovery of seasonal, ecological or physiological races within seemingly homogeneous subspecies.
But real revolution in views on the species occurred in connection with successes of genetics. Experimental work by geneticists has revealed the complex genetic structure of the species. At the beginning of the 30s of the twentieth century, mainly thanks to the work of geneticists from the schools of N.I. Vavilov in Russia and J. Clausen in the USA, the problem of the species began to approach a solution. Individuals of one species have a common gene pool and are protected from the penetration of genes of another species by isolation barriers (biological concept of a species, E. Mayr, 1942). A species may include forms (subspecies, groups of populations) that are different in lifestyle and structure, and representatives of these forms can interbreed from time to time and produce fertile offspring. This understanding of the species contributed to the development modern concept of polytypic species. Thus, in our time, points of view on the view as the main structural unit organic world and appears as a complex, multifaceted and sometimes difficult to establish dynamic system in nature.
View- a qualitative stage of the evolutionary process. View- this is a set of individuals that have common morphophysiological characteristics and are united by the possibility of crossing with each other, forming a population system that form a common (continuous or partially broken) area; Under natural conditions, species are usually separated from each other and represent genetically stable systems. The above formulation requires additions. Any species also represents a system of populations that form a set of ecological niches in the corresponding biocenoses. Only an insignificant part of the species of living organisms has currently been studied so fully as to satisfy all the requirements of the above formulation when describing them. In practice, species in nature can differ either in morphological, or physiological, or ecological or ethological characteristics, or, finally, in geographical distribution. Theoretically, the most important characteristic of a species is its genetic resistance in natural conditions, determining the independence of evolutionary fate.
Topic 1.2 Marketing - management concept
The first marketing concept is the concept of production improvement. It is the oldest and argues that consumers will favor products that are widely available and affordable, and therefore management should focus on improving production and increasing the efficiency of the distribution system.
This concept is applied in two cases: firstly, when demand exceeds supply and secondly, when production costs are high and need to be reduced, increasing productivity and making the product available to the buyer.
The second concept is the concept of product improvement. It focuses production on improving the quality and performance properties of goods. However, it often leads to marketing myopia. Indeed, no matter how you improve a product, if there is no need for it or it has decreased, there will be no sales either.
The third concept is the concept of intensifying commercial efforts. It is also called the sales concept. Unlike the first two, which are based on improving production and profit of the company, the sales concept emphasizes significant efforts in the field of sales and demand stimulation. The sales concept marks a turn towards traditional marketing. The first two concepts, although they force us to study the market, are still more applicable in mass production conditions. The intensification of commercial efforts strengthens the contacts of sellers with buyers, activates individual approach to the client and increases information about him. However, the sales concept also ignores the needs of the buyer and focuses on the needs of the seller.
The fourth concept, the concept of traditional marketing, states that the key to achieving the company's goals is to identify the needs and requirements of target markets and provide the desired satisfaction with more effective and productive ways than competitors. The concept of traditional marketing reflects the firm's commitment to the theory of consumer sovereignty. The company produces what the consumer needs and makes a profit by fully satisfying his needs.
The fifth concept, the concept of social and ethical marketing, is a more recent phenomenon. It states that the firm's mission is to identify the needs, wants, and interests of target markets and to provide desired satisfaction in ways that are more efficient and effective than competitors, while preserving and enhancing the well-being of the consumer and society as a whole. This concept is designed to connect the interests of society, consumers and producers. It overcomes the shortcomings of the traditional marketing concept and takes into account the degradation of quality environment, shortage natural resources, global inflation and neglect of the social services sector.
Species is one of the basic categories of biology. When discussing biological diversity, first of all they write about species diversity—the number of species in the biosphere, a given region, a given ecosystem. The general biological significance of the species problem, or species theory, is that many manifestations of the vital activity of organisms at all levels of organization, from molecular to otological and population-species, are species-specific. Species specificity allows you to extrapolate data obtained from a limited sample to the species as a whole, and, at the same time, does not allow extrapolation of species-specific features to other species. Therefore, a clear distinction between species is necessary for a biologist of any specialty, and the concept of species, as the basis of systematics in the applied aspect of this science - the inventory of biological diversity - penetrates into all areas of biology. At the same time, species arise in the process of evolution and the biologist who studies them deals not only with the diversity of species, but also with the diversity of stages of their differentiation. Hence the difficulty of generalizing the huge variety of situations existing in nature, and the multiplicity of approaches to such generalizations.
Concepts of species—explanations of the essence of this phenomenon—emerged and developed as evidence accumulated and the theory of evolution developed. It should, however, be noted that some modern concepts represent the well-forgotten and rediscovered old ones, and some old concepts have not yet lost their meaning. Therefore, it is advisable to present the presentation of the concepts of the species in the form historical review.
The term "species" was first used by Aristotle (384-322 BC). However, in his works this category was logical, not biological. A species, as a group of organisms similar to each other, denoted their community, more particular than a genus - a broader community. However, this broader community was treated as a species in relation to an even more diverse collection. Modern understanding Aristotle's species corresponded to the concept of "breed". He described about 500 animal breeds. This interpretation of the species lasted until the 17th century, when the English botanist J. Ray (1686) formulated the idea of a biological species as a collection of organisms that differ from each other no more than the children of the same pair of parents differ. Thus, Rey turned a logical category into a biological one. He also has the honor of introducing the term “species” -species (from the Latin speciere - looking at, looking at) and the introduction binary nomenclature.
Species became a basic category of biology only as a result of the work of C. Linnaeus (1701-1778). Linnaeus was the first to formulate the idea that there is not a single organism on Earth that does not belong to
to any kind. Thanks to Linnaeus, species became the main category of systematics, and systematics (= taxonomy) itself became a science. Linnaeus introduced taxon diagnoses and the hierarchical organization of taxonomic categories. Diagnosis - short description characters that are invariant in all individuals of a given taxon. The invariance of the characteristics of a species, as well as the dominant idea of divine creation, implied the immutability of species over time - the absence of evolution. Variability is the fluctuation of traits around and within a typical organization. It is not the characteristics that determine a species, but membership in a given species determines the characteristics of its constituent organisms.
Linnaeus' ideas are the essence of the typological concept of species. According to this concept, species are discrete. Each species is separated from other species by a hiatus - a break in the gradual change in characteristics. As collections of organisms, species actually exist in nature. In practical taxonomy, the typological concept meant the need to compare an individual with a type specimen of a species - a holotype, paratypes, or with a type series. Holotype is the individual from which the species was first described. Comparison was carried out according to external signs, accessible for observation without dismembering the individual. This made it possible to use museum collections and create them while preserving holotypes.
The typological concept still works in the practical taxonomy of many groups of animals and plants. It is used in cases of the first description of species, in cases where the taxonomy of the taxon is poorly developed and allows only comparison by appearance when there are few individuals in the hands of a taxonomist, etc.
However, as material accumulates, especially as we move from descriptions of local faunas and floras to broader descriptions within large territories, it began to become clear that species characteristics are not so stable, and species are not always limited from each other by a clear hiatus. A question arose about the criteria for the species. In this regard, attention was paid to reverse side criterion for species membership proposed by Ray: if a species is a community of organisms that reproduce their characteristics in the offspring, then when crossing individuals of different species, the specific characteristics should not be reproduced. J. Buffon (1707-1788) - the second largest French naturalist half of the XVIII c., came to the idea that all organisms that, when crossed, produce normal fertile offspring, belong to the same species, while those organisms that cannot be crossed, or when they are crossed, there are no offspring, or the descendants are sterile, or are not viable, belong to different species. Buffon's criterion of non-crossing allowed the species to be enlarged. The offspring of crosses between closely related species are often quite normal and fertile. In addition, this criterion made it possible to preserve the
the assumption of discreteness of species in cases where it was not possible to identify hiatus by external signs of the phenotype. Uncrossability was considered an objective criterion for a species until the beginning of the 20th century, when, as material accumulated, it gradually became clear that intergeneric hybrids were often normal and fertile, and in some cases, descendants from crossing individuals of different populations of the same species were sterile or not viable. Despite the fact that E. Mayr (1968) categorically objected to the use of the non-crossability criterion, it is still used as an auxiliary one.
Buffon's student J.B. Lamarck initially adhered to the idea of the immutability and discreteness of species. However, having formulated the first theory of evolution, he abandoned this point of view. The absence of clear boundaries between closely related species, due to their variability, served him as one of the arguments confirming the existence of evolution. The idea of inheritance of acquired characteristics dictated the idea that in the course of evolution it is not species that change, but individuals in a series of generations. As a result, Lamarck came to deny the real existence of species in nature. He wrote: “...It can also be argued that in reality nature did not form among its products either constant classes, orders, families, genera, or species, but individual individuals, successively replacing each other and similar to those that gave birth to them.” "(Lamarck. Philosophy of Zoology. T. I. 1935. P. 33). Contrasting evolution with the immutability of species, Lamarck created the nominalistic concept of species. Nomen-name, title. The views are not real. There are only their names, invented by people for their own convenience; in nature, only individuals exist. As a result, a dilemma arose: either species without evolution, or evolution without species and, thus, the problem of the reality of the species.
Some of Darwin's statements allowed a number of evolutionists to consider him a supporter of the nominalistic concept. In the conclusion to “The Origin of Species...” he wrote: “We will also be forced to admit that the only difference between a species and well-defined varieties is only that the latter, as is reliably known or assumed, are related to each other at the present time by intermediate steps, while the species were connected in the same way in the past. Hence, without discarding the consideration that at the present time there are intermediate stages between any two forms, we will be forced to weigh more carefully and appreciate more the extent of the real difference between them. It is quite possible that forms now generally recognized as varieties will hereafter be recognized as worthy of special specific names; and in this case the language of science and ordinary speech will achieve greater agreement.
In a word, we will treat species in the same way as those naturalists treat genera who admit that genera are only artificial combinations invented for the sake of convenience. For many, this prospect may not smile, but we will forever be freed from the vain search for the hitherto elusive and elusive essence of the word “species.”
(Origin of Species 1937, pp. 663-666). On the other hand, Darwin
in the sixth chapter of “The Origin of Species...” wrote: “To sum up what has been said, I believe that species have fairly well-defined boundaries, and at no period is there an insoluble chaos of changing and intermediate links." (ibid., p. 396). This quotation, indicating the discreteness of species, serves as a basis for other biologists to consider Darwin as a supporter of the reality of species.
Regardless of the interpretation of Darwin's views, it must be admitted that evolutionary theory, having proved the variability of species and their formation on the basis of varieties, called into question the idea of the reality of the species and of the species as an elementary community of organisms.
The question of the reality of the species in modern literature has been resolved positively. Actually, neither practical taxonomists nor ecologists have ever doubted the reality of the species. However, the idea of the reality of the species needs to be justified. Proponents of the biological concept denied the real existence of species in organisms that do not reproduce sexually with the participation of two parents. type="I"> A species is real, as a community of organisms (a system of populations that have common origin, inherited from its ancestors and acquired, in the process of speciation, characteristics characteristic of all individuals of this species. The consequence of species specificity is the limited adaptive capabilities of the species when the conditions of its existence change. For example, the carp Cyprinus carpio is distributed throughout the Palearctic, from the Iberian Peninsula to China. The species lives in both fresh and brackish waters and forms both aquatic and anadromous populations. The Aral subspecies C. carpio aralensis lived in the Aral Sea, the Amur-Darya and Syr-Darya rivers, and Lake Balkhash. The optimum salinity in the Aral Sea for this subspecies was 8%. Before the environmental disaster caused by the drying out of the lake-sea and the increase in the salinity of its water, carp catches accounted for about 30% of the total fish production in this reservoir. An increase in salinity to 12-14% led to the fact that in the mid-70s of the 20th century. In the Aral Sea, the carp became extinct. When salinity increases to 10%, a decrease in the viability of sperm and a decrease in fertilization of eggs begins; from 12%, the number of malformations of embryonic development increases; at a salinity of 14%, one and a half month old fry die (Andreev, 1999). The boundaries of adaptive capabilities inherited from ancestors are a common characteristic of all individuals of a given species (in the example given, a subspecies).
The same example shows that at any given moment in time a species is real as an ecological component of the ecosystem, occupying its own, unique ecological niche. A consequence of ecological specificity is the mutual replaceability of populations belonging to the same species and the non-replaceability of populations of different species. The interchangeability of populations determines the possibility of re-acclimatization of species in those territories where this type died out or was destroyed. An example is the restoration of the habitats of the sable Martes zibellina shown in Fig. 75. A similar example is the restoration of the range of the beaver Castor fiber. Thus, in the Komi Republic, the reacclimatization of the beaver began in 1938 and ended in 1973. During this period, 102 beavers caught in Belarus and 131 beavers from Voronezh region. These beavers belong to the Western European and Eastern European races, respectively. Voronezh beavers have very dark fur, while Belarusian beavers are lighter. There are also morphological differences. Beavers in Komi have taken root, mixed and settled throughout the territory of the republic. At the same time, they acquired characteristics not inherent in hybrids between races, but in those beavers that were destroyed in this territory in late XIX V. The fur became lighter, like that of Norwegian beavers, the body size increased, the shape of the skull and a number of other characteristics changed (Soloviev, 1991).
gt;L Range boundaries
Distribution of sable in the 20th century H 30s |jjj 70s
Rice. 75. Restoration of the range of sable Martes zibellina (from Yablokov, Yusupova, 1989) 216
Thus, populations within a species are truly interchangeable. Populations of different species are not interchangeable. Half-species or species of shrikes coexist without mixing. A species is not only a system of interchangeable populations, it is an integrated system. At the genetic level, integration is maintained by the exchange of genes between populations, ensured by the migration of individuals. On the phenotypic level - congruences, interorganismal correlations (S. A. Severtsov, 1951). Examples of congruences and adaptations that reduce the severity of intraspecific competition include ritualized aggression, including “tournament” “weapons” that do not damage the enemy—the horns of artiodactyls, used by males in battles for a female; caring for offspring, including protecting them from predators; mutual notification of danger, and similar reactions, often harmful individuals, but useful to mind generally.
Thus, at any given moment in time, the species is real, as a component of the biosphere. This does not contradict the continuity of evolution. As shown above, species, having arisen, long time exist in a stationary state. That is why they “have fairly well-defined boundaries, and in no period is there an insoluble chaos of changing and intermediate links.” In fact, there are very difficult cases to resolve (see below).
A reaction to the recognition of evolution was the search for elementary species, begun by Jordan (1873), who identified several non-segregating lineages in the self-pollinating spring cereal plant Erophlia verna. The idea of elementary species, called Jordanons, was picked up at the beginning of the 20th century. the first geneticists. De Vries's work on mutations in Lamarck's aspen Oenothera Iamarqiana and Jogasen's work on pure lines in beans belong to this line of research. Jordanon, as a further indivisible true species, was contrasted with Linneon, the species of practical taxonomists, containing varieties, and therefore not elementary and not true.
Studying species in nature has led to the opposite result. At the beginning, an idea was formed about the range of a species—that part of the earth's surface in which the species exists because it is adapted to these conditions. Then, Semenov-Tyan-Shansky (1910) formulated the idea that Darwin’s “varieties,” being a stage of speciation, have a geographic location. He introduced the category of subspecies and proposed a trinary nomenclature. The return to the Darwinian evolutionary approach was most clearly expressed by Academician. Komarov (1927), who gave the definition that “a species is a set of generations descending from a common ancestor, and under the influence of the environment and the struggle for existence, isolated by selection from the rest of the world of living beings, at the same time the species is a certain stage in the process of evolution.”
The fact that the species and the result and the stage of evolution was remembered 40 years later. This was expressed in the “Evolutionary Concept of a Species” (Haffer, 1986), according to which a species is a system of populations that has its own phylogenetic history and its own trends in further evolution. E. N. Panov (1993) agreed with this approach. Despite the undoubted correctness of this interpretation of the species, the difficulty lies in the fact that it is applicable to any intraspecific categories, starting with the local population, that is, it does not allow us to identify the specificity of the species level.
Recognition of the ecological-geographical differentiation of a species as a system of subspecies meant the emergence of the concept of a polytypic species. This concept contrasted complex structure species in nature to Jordanans. However, Jordanons were forgotten by the 30s of the 20th century, when, as genetics developed, it became clear that their isolation was artificial. The polytypic concept, on the contrary, developed and, as facts accumulated, more and more complex organizations of more or less closely related population systems were revealed.
If an ecologist or population geneticist works at any point, in one ecosystem, for example, in the Karakum Desert or on the Putorana Plateau, he explores only a small part of the species range and, thus, easily distinguishes even closely related species coexisting in this territory. In such studies, when their subject is one or more neighboring local populations, the concept of a one-dimensional (more precisely, nondimensional) species is applicable (Mayr, 1968). Within this concept, intraspecific differences can be ignored.
If a species is studied within its range, differences in geographic populations - subspecies, ecological races and allochronic structures - are revealed. With this approach, the researcher is forced to use the concept of multidimensional view (Mayr 1968), which is further development polytypic to the concept. Apparently, the first biologist who formulated the concept of a multidimensional species, but did not use this term, was N. I. Vavilov (1931). He interpreted the Linnaean species as a system consisting of interacting geographic and ecological races, each with its own ecological and genetic specificity. When settling into new territories, the species “uses the genetic potential of those races or subspecies that best suit the new conditions.” This work of Vavilov was about 30 years ahead of its time. The idea of a multidimensional view came into use in the 60s of the 20th century.
Since evolution is continuous, researchers sometimes catch population systems at such a stage of their divergence, when it is difficult to consider the species as a single one, but, at the same time, the diverging groups have not yet reached
They have become completely isolated and it is difficult to give them the rank of independent species. Such systems are often treated as superspecies, and the groups included in them as semispecies. Examples of superspecies consisting of half-species are the differentiation described above in great tits and in black and hooded crows. Formozov et al. (1993) consider Parus major, including P. bokharensis, which in nature hybridizes with P. major major as a superspecies. As a superspecies, Corvus cogonae interprets the level of differentiation of the hooded and black crows by Meise (Meise, 1975). The taxonomic status of such systems usually causes debate. For example, Stepanyan (1983) considered the hooded and black crows as ex-conspecies. This may be why in recent decades researchers of such complex cases differentiation of species use the more neutral term “complex”. Thus, the above-described relationships of diploid, triploid and tetraploid spined loach are considered by the authors of this study as a complex. K. A. Savvaitova (1989), based on many years of studying Arctic char throughout the Palearctic, formulated the idea of a complex Salvelinus alpinus complex, including 23 allopatyric and sympatric forms located on different levels divergence (Fig. 76). Research
Populations:
I - Kola Peninsula lake. Far (Lena delta) lakes of the Chaunskaya Bay river. Indigi (Czech Bay) lake. Dalny (Kamchatka) lake. Nachikisky (Kamchatka) lake. Transitional (Lena delta) - lakes of Taimyr - deep-water char of Taimyr 10-neiva lake. Ueginsky
11 - Davatchana lake. Frolichi of Kuando-Chara char 03. Elgygytgyn of Yakut char (Lena delta) 03. Azabachye (predator) 03. Azabachie (molus eater) lake-river lake. Nachikinsky Stone char (Kamchatka) river. Kamchatka, r. Anadyr, lake Kronotsky, Komondor and Kuril Islands, Amur basin - char Taranets -S. Leucomaenis S fontimalis S. (Crstivomer) namacush
Rice. 76. Structure of S.alpinus complex and the genus Salvelinus (from Savvaitova, 1989).
of this complex continue. Over the past years, a number of clarifications have been made, up to the assignment of species rank to some of its members, but the essence is a system of forms varying degrees the isolation that arose within a huge area on the basis of various triggers of divergence remained unchanged.
The next management construct after vision, goal and mission, actively used in the strategic management process, is concept. To implement strategic management of the development of any business organization or government agency - any management object - a professionally developed concept plays an important role.
If the mission gives general characteristics why the organization was created, its positioning in outside world and purpose, then the purpose of the concept is to determine the key areas of activity of the management object, which includes identifying ways and technologies for achieving set goals, highlighting the main factors for achieving them.
At the same time, the concept should not be confused with strategic or tactical planning, the purpose of which is specific activities to implement the strategy and solve short-term tasks or problems that have arisen. A well-thought-out concept is, first of all, the directions, priorities and technologies for the development of a managed object for the long term.
The concept should present the highest priority directions for the development of the management object for a specific period of time or until the set goal is achieved. It essentially serves as presented in general view scenario for achieving goals, which should also be clarified during the concept development process. In addition, the concept defines the paths of transition from the current position of the control object to the desired one in accordance with the goals set by the control subject.
A concept is a management structure that contains a general systemic representation of the paths of transition from the current position of the control object to the desired one.
The concept of development of a management object can be considered a kind of prologue to the development of a strategy for its development.
Types of concept
Just like the mission, the concept can be enlarged and detailed. Enlarged the concept only gives general idea about ways to develop a management object or ways to solve a major management problem. Detailed the concept gives them a more complete picture.
The enlarged concept should contain the following components.
- 1. general description and assessment of the state of the control object and its position in the external environment.
- 2. Development goals of the management object for a given period.
- 3. Problems and tasks that must be solved to achieve strategic goals.
- 4. Paths and stages of achieving strategic goals.
- 5. Expected results and state of the control object at the end of a given period.
- 6. Indicators by which the degree of achievement of strategic goals can be assessed.
- 7. Characteristics of the management system that ensures the achievement of strategic goals.
The developed concept should develop general requirements for technologies and necessary resources, key factors, capable of ensuring the achievement of set strategic goals or, as they are called, key success factors. Since obtaining the expected results is impossible without effective management, the concept should provide for an organizational solution to issues that arise in the process of implementing the strategy and implementing the strategic plans that will be developed on its basis.
Even a detailed concept, not to mention an enlarged one, does not require complete detail. It should contain thoughtful, comprehensively discussed ideas on how and due to what the transition from the current position of the control object to the desired one will take place.
A concept, just like a vision, can be trajectory And point.
Concept development, depending on the depth of elaboration of issues, may consist of several stages. Moreover, each subsequent stage differs from the previous one in greater depth of elaboration. When developing the concept, it is advisable to consider various alternative options for the development of the management object, their elaboration and evaluation. At the final stages of concept development, it may be possible to provide experimental verification main provisions of the concept, especially if we're talking about on the production of a new type of product, the introduction of new equipment or new technologies.
The developed and adopted concept is a completed document, on the basis of which a development strategy and a strategic action plan for its implementation are developed. The concept should outline the most preferable option among those considered during its development. If a decision is made to develop the concept in more depth, the developed version of the concept becomes starting point for subsequent more in-depth and detailed study.
Let us take as an example the development of the concept of creating a car of the 21st century. models Prius, in accordance with the concept development technologies adopted by the company Toyota. It consisted of three stages. First, the general concept of the new car was developed, then a refined concept was developed, and the development was completed by a deeply worked out detailed version of the concept.
The concept in the company is developed when it is necessary to solve a new, complex, intractable problem. The concept sets the vector of movement towards achieving the goal. It outlines general directions the work to be done, the general contours of the project, and the indicators to be achieved are determined only tentatively.
The original idea was simple - to develop an economical, compact car with the lowest possible fuel consumption, as opposed to bulky cars that have become gas guzzlers. At the same time, despite the relatively small dimensions of the model, its interior had to be roomy and spacious. At this stage of concept development, the requirements for the future car were determined:
- 1) the most spacious canopy with the minimum dimensions of the car:
- 2) fuel efficiency.
At the second stage, the base model for further development was chosen Corolla, in which a gallon of gasoline was consumed in 30.8 miles. The goal was that a gallon of gasoline would last 47.5 miles for the new car, which is 50% higher than the existing car. Three months were allotted to develop a refined concept of the project. By the end of the period, the group not only presented ideas, but also completed drawings on a scale of 1: 2. The requirements for the future car were specified in comparison with the first stage of concept development:
- 1) spacious interior due to the maximum length of the wheelbase;
- 2) relatively high seat placement for comfortable entry and exit from the car:
- 3) streamlined body shape with a height of 1500 mm;
- 4) fuel consumption - 47.5 mpg, etc.
The refined concept was the result of extensive research work and was supported by specific calculations of the parameters and characteristics of the future car. It was approved by the company's senior management.
At the third stage of concept development, it was planned to develop drawings of the future car. Six months were allotted for this. According to practice Toyota At the final stage of concept development, a prototype should be manufactured. However, Mr. Uchiyamada, who headed this stage, considered that there should be no rush to produce a prototype, since not everything was still clear. He wanted all possible alternative options for implementing the project to be considered and evaluated before making a final decision, which was called " parallel design based on a number of alternatives." Final decision it was intended to be accepted only after their consideration and evaluation.
It was very important not to “drown” in discussing details. In particular, the discussion of the transmission took a lot of time. This was a dead-end path, to which the leader pointed out to the development group: “This needs to stop. Stop thinking about hardware. We engineers are used to thinking only about hardware. But we must decide what the concept of the future machine is, and not its material embodiment. Let's forget about hardware and return to the concept of a qualitatively new machine that needs to be created."
Held" brainstorm"led the developers to an understanding of the key problem - the need to create an environmentally friendly car. This problem was to become one of the main ones when developing the model Prius. The fact is that until now it was possible to solve this problem within the framework of an electric vehicle. But then the car turned into a means for transporting too bulky batteries. The concept was saved by the idea of a hybrid engine, with the help of which it was possible to realize an optimal engine connection internal combustion and an electric motor. Their optimal mode sequential operation determined using a built-in computer.
The idea of creating a hybrid engine had been considered before, but was considered too risky, since it required many fundamentally new solutions. And what conceptual model the new car led to the creation of a hybrid engine, which served as the impetus for the beginning of its creation.
However, one idea, or rather the possibilities that appeared during its development, gave rise to others. Since a hybrid engine will be created, it is necessary to squeeze everything possible out of it in terms of economical fuel consumption, because a revolution in automotive energy consumption has become real. The new class engine opened up other possibilities in the layout of the created car.
At the request of the head of the concept development group, the best specialists companies. The principle of “parallel design based on a number of alternatives” was again used. 80 alternative hybrid engine options were considered. Of these, about 10 “viable” ones were selected. After the comparative analysis and evaluations, four options remained that were of greatest interest. Each of them was carefully studied using computer modeling, on the basis of which the most preferable option was selected. Thus, the development of the concept was completed and it was possible to move on to the development and implementation of a strategy for organizing mass production of a car, the first in the world to have a hybrid engine.
To develop the concept, it is advisable to form a group, which may include specialists in the relevant subject area, as well as specialists who own the necessary management technologies. If the concept is intersectoral or multifunctional in nature, then specialists in the relevant fields should be included in its composition professional activity. The group leader must be given the necessary authority and be responsible for the document developed by the group.
All provisions of the presented concept must be justified. It is advisable to openly discuss the presented concept and take into account the proposals expressed during its preparation.
The greatest danger is the formal attitude to the development of the concept, its clearly expressed declarative nature. In this case, it cannot perform the functions of a document, taking into account which the strategy is developed and strategic plans its implementation. The concept should not include provisions whose feasibility is questionable.
The purpose of developing the concept was to create a management structure capable of defining strategic goals and key directions for developing a strategy for the development of a management object (Fig. 4.11).
A.P. Kryukov
« ... I will give a list of concepts of the type, each of which, as a rule, corresponds There are several definitions of the species (1-2 of the most successful ones were selected). Species concepts must be distinguished from the criteria by which a practicing taxonomist distinguishes species. Different concepts may use the same criteria.
Biologicalthe species concept is usually associated with the New Taxonomy or the Evolutionary Synthesis. Species are "groups of actually or potentially interbreeding natural populations that are reproductively isolated from other similar groups" ( Mayr , 1942; Mayr, 1968, p.31). There are many variations of this definition, which has become very popular in national biology, has been discussed many times and therefore there is no need to dwell on it.
Limitations to the application of this concept are also well known, imposed by unisexual or clonal reproduction, hybridization, subjectivity of decisions during allopatric distribution and the inability to distinguish between species over time.
Polytypicthe species concept is essentially the broader equivalent of the biological concept. A species consists of a number of populations (having the taxonomic rank of subspecies), only partially isolated from each other.
Insulatingthe species concept emphasizes the reproductive isolation of species and is in fact reminiscent of the previous one. “A species is a system of populations; gene exchange between these systems in nature is limited or prohibited due to reproductive isolating mechanisms or, possibly, a combination of several such mechanisms" ( Dobzhansky, 1970, p. 357).
Recognition the concept, unlike the previous one, emphasizes not the mechanisms of isolation, but the unification of members of the species. "A species is the largest population of individual bisexual organisms that share a common fertilization system" ( Paterson, 1985, p .15). Members of the species are recognized as having the ability to recognize sexual partners. The presence of a species-specific system for recognizing sexual partners -specificmalerecognitionsystem- leads to the formation of a population of interbreeding individuals, reproductively isolated from other species. Therefore, the application of isolation and recognition concepts leads to similar results. It is assumed that a taxonomist can determine how important a given sign or feature is for the body to recognize a partner, which in fact is almost impossible.
Geneticthe concept defines a species as a reproductive community of bisexual individuals with cross-fertilization, sharing a common gene pool ( Dobzhansky , 1950). An attempt to rely on genetic differences between taxa would be justified if it were not confronted with a number of difficulties. Such as uneven rates of divergence in different genes and in different lines, the inability to establish the minimum required level of interspecific genetic differences and finally, uneven and insufficient genetic knowledge of species. Therefore, in practice, the genetic concept turned out to be no better than the biological one.
Genotypic species cluster By definition, species are identifiable genotypic “clusters recognized by deficiencies of intermediate individuals, both at single loci (heterozygote deficiency) and at multiple loci (strong correlation or disequilibrium between loci that have diverged between clusters)” ( Mallet, 1995, p. .296). When such species come into contact, no or few intermediate individuals are formed. The author has attempted to provide a definition independent of any theories of the origin and maintenance of species. Like the phenetic concept, the identifiability of species is emphasized, but with an emphasis on genetics.
Evolutionarythe concept understands by species “... a pedigree (sequence of populations from ancestors to descendants), evolving independently of others (lines) and having its own evolutionary role and tendencies” ( Simpson, 1961, p .153). The concept is based on the observation that a population maintains its integrity despite the possibility of some exchange with others. This definition emphasizes the extent of a species over time. A species retains its identity compared to others, has its own evolutionary tendencies and historical fate. This concept applies to any type of species, including asexual organisms, and is quite popular, although not operational.
Ecologicalconcept. “A species is a lineage (or a series of closely related lineages) occupying an adaptive zone minimally different from any other lineage in its range, and evolving independently of all lineages outside its range” ( Van Valen, 1976, p . 233). The importance of natural selection in maintaining the species is emphasized. This definition can be considered as a development of J. Simpson's concept. It is assumed that niches are discrete adaptive zones with gaps between them. However, in the real world, identifying adaptive zones is difficult. In addition, the concept is based on the false premise that it is impossible for two people to occupy one niche. different types, even for a short time.
Concept clutch.“A species is the largest population with the potential for phenotypic linkage (cohesion) due to internal linkage mechanisms,” that is, the ability for genetic and/or demographic exchange ( Templeton , 1989). This concept combines components of evolutionary, ecological, isolation and recognition concepts. Linkage mechanisms are emphasized that preserve the genetic relatedness of evolutionary lines through microevolutionary processes such as gene flow, genetic drift and natural selection. At the same time, isolating mechanisms prevent gene flow and thus delimit populations. The need for a niche is recognized as leading also to coupling. The concept also applies to taxa that reproduce without sexual reproduction. However, it is operationally difficult to recognize coupling in nature and therefore apply this concept in practice.
Phylogenetic the species concept is one of the most popular in Lately, including in domestic biology. It arose within the framework of the ideology of phylogenetic systematics or cladistics and actually combines three varieties.
The first definition is also known as cladistic species concept ( Ridley ,1989) or Henning's concept ( Nixon, Wheeler , 1990). A species is “...a series of organisms between two acts of speciation, or between one event of speciation and one event of extinction, or descended from an act of speciation” ( Ridley, 1989, p .3). This concept emphasizes cladogenesis as lineage separation and its applications in relation to species boundaries.
Second phylogenetic the concept is based on monophyly and the application to the species of W. Henning’s understanding of the difference between monophyly and paraphyly. “A species is a population or group of populations defined by one or more apomorphic characters ( Rosen , 1979, p.277). Species are real if they are monophyletic and supported by apomorphies. Another definition: "a monophyletic group of organisms recognized as a lineage on the basis of common, inherited characters and assigned to a species because of causal factors that support lineages as the smallest important monophyletic groups recognized in formal classification" ( Mishler, 1985, p.213).
Thirdvariety phylogenetic the concept is the most practical because it relies on the diagnosticity of features, regardless of whether these features are apomorphic. “A species is the smallest aggregation of populations (sexual organisms) or lineages (asexuals) diagnosed by a unique combination of character states in the organisms being compared” ( Nixon, Wheeler, 1990, p . 218). Another definition: “A species is the smallest diagnosable cluster of organisms within which the parental relationships of ancestors and descendants are observed” ( Cracraft, 1983, p .170). This concept has become popular in ornithology. Monophyleticity of a phylogenetic species is usually assumed, although this is difficult to demonstrate. In practice, it is usually reduced to a narrow morphological concept, so its application leads to a sharp increase in the number of species in the lists. More detailed characteristics This concept in comparison with the biological one is presented in the article by A.A. Nazarenko in this collection.
Genealogical the concept reflects the ideas of systematics and population biology. “A species is an exclusive group of organisms in which genes converge ( coalesce ) in an ancestral state within that group more recently than between any member of the group and any organisms outside it" ( Baum, Shaw, 1995, p .290). In other words, all members of a species are more related to each other than to any organisms outside it. Some classify this definition as a phylogenetic or monophyletic concept.
Pheneticthe concept arose within the ideology of numeric taxonomy. “A species is (a) the smallest (most homogeneous) cluster that can be recognized by some given criteria as distinct from other clusters, or (b) a phenetic group of defined diversity below a subgeneric category” ( Sneat, Sokal, 1973, p .365). A more convenient use of this definition in taxonomic practice is expected.
Morphological the concept of a species presupposes the presence of a clear break - hiatus - in some way from any other species. It cannot be considered modern, but is still widely used by practical taxonomists. Recently, it is precisely this method that has been used, explicitly or implicitly, when working with not only morphological, but also molecular-genetic, behavioral signs, chemical and physiological characteristics And so on.
The considered concepts do not exhaust the list of proposed species concepts: agamic species, composite species, evolutionarily significant units, genealogical correspondence, gene pool, internodal, dimensionless, polythetic, reproductive competition, successional and taxonomic ( Mayden , 1997). All concepts can be assessed in terms of their theoretical significance, universality, operationality and applicability (to a particular class of biodiversity). Corresponding classifications of concepts of the form ( Mayden , 1997), their hierarchy was developed demonstrating the position that they all reflect a single general concept of the species ( de Queiroz , 1998). It has been noted that attempts to make any concept more operational lead to a theoretically flawed design ( Hull, 1997)".
Problems of evolution. T.5. Vladivostok: Dalnauka, 2003. P.31-39.
P.S. . The phylogenetic concept of a species and all others based on the idea of monophyly (and the definition of a species as a separate clade, isolated on the tree of divergence of subspecific forms of the parent species; the separation of such a clade is marked by specific apomorphies, no matter morphological or molecular) raises strong doubts in me. After all, evolution at the subspecies and even near-species level is reticulate and not divergent - even completely isolated isolates can next stage of its history to enter into secondary contact and form a “spreading” hybrid zone with the merging of species. And as the daughter species separate from the marginal populations of the mother, the transition from the “network” to the “tree”, the disintegration of the “cell” of the first into isolated “branches” of the second, occurs gradually, and not abruptly, as is tacitly assumed in the divergent model.
That's why . I think, a species differs from a species not by those characters that differentiate clades and themselves differentiate due to divergence, but by those that ensure the mutual isolation of population networks different forms(even if individuals are their elements, they collide with each other in the hybrid zone, “make mistakes,” mate and produce quite fertile hybrids, which in turn interbreed with one and the other form).In exact accordance with catchphrase Myra about the fact that species are distinguished not by differences, but by isolation (the first and second are related to different events and labeled different signs). And the constantly occurring breaks in areas, leading to the divergence of allopatric forms in isolates and, conversely, secondary contacts with hybridization, leading to the formation of more or less constant hybrid zones, are natural experiments that “test” similar forms for isolation. Based on their results, we judge whether the form has reached the species level or not.