German wikipedia defines a biological species as a group where individuals can reproduce offspring with other members of the group, but not with individuals outside of the group.
First of all, to the best of my knowledge, proper sexual reproduction only happens with Eukaryotes. Then this means that no bacteria ever reproduce offspring with other individuals, and therefore each bacterium is its own species.
But that is a meaningless definition. If each bacterium is its own species, then the categorization into species becomes meaningless.
On top of that, bacteria have "pseudosexual" horizontal gene transfer (HGT) which allows them to exchange genetic material with any other bacterium (if the circumstances are right; if i understand this correctly). So all bacteria are in a single species if you look at it that way.
I understand that bacteria normally don't undergo HGT with all other bacteria because some might only open up at hot temperatures while others only open up in cold temperatures - thus creating a natural barrier. But it is also my understanding that while such barriers exist, they're not permanent and can be overcome in nature (without human intervention) for example due to certain virus infections and similar circumstances.
Long story short:
Wouldn't it make more sense to just consider that the concept of "species" only apples to eukaryotes and not to bacteria at all? Wouldn't that save all of us a headache? Maybe we should consider bacterial species to be less strict that eukaryotic species. Maybe we should describe bacteria by their individual features and give that group a name, instead of expecting that diverging lines of evolution cannot ever come together again.
I prefer ‘species agnosticism’ when it comes to bacteria, most of the time. It doesn’t matter very often what species something is in environmental scenarios like biogas digesters or composting. Their general function is more important than exactly what species they may be according to current schemes.
The only folks who need to identify ’species’ in bacteria are in medical fields, and even then the real concern is whether the bacteria of interest carry specific genes, such as EPEC/EHEC in E. coli. E.coli is everywhere, but only some types carry the genes that make them dangerous.
So my answer is ‘meh’. It’s useful to be able to categorize things, but it can also become an unproductive obsession. Use the classification scheme that works for your application domain. Leave the gnat-straining and bean-counting to the academics.
yeah you put it very well, the function and genes of bacteria are more important than their species; that's what i'm saying. Thank you for clarifying :D