Endosymbiosis = Hybridization Speciation?

[GaryGaulin]

I need to determine which type of speciation logically includes endosymbiosis and was wondering what you think I should do.

We know that endosymbiosis results in the formation of a new species. And as another new discovery shows it is sometimes hard to notice or tell whether endosymbiosis occurred at all or how it was produced:

Research Reveals Major Insight Into Evolution Of Life On Earth

ScienceDaily (Aug. 20, 2009) — Humans might not be walking the face of the Earth were it not for the ancient fusing of two prokaryotes — tiny life forms that do not have a cellular nucleus. UCLA molecular biologist James A. Lake reports important new insights about prokaryotes and the evolution of life in the Aug. 20 advance online edition of the journal Nature.

Endosymbiosis refers to a cell living within another cell. If the cells live together long enough, they will exchange genes; they merge but often keep their own cell membranes and sometimes their own genomes.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/20 ... 135436.htm

As in the article words like "fusing" are used to describe a process which could also result where two organisms being smashed together by wave action against a rock then survived. How they fused is not easy to determine, with it being arguable that one took up residence inside another as in classical endosymbiosis. Even in plant hybridization the two species are still noticeable in the hybrid.

For the sake of theory and to simplify a problem that should only worsen when more of these are found and there are cases where it is unclear which it is, I want to include endosymbiosis as a type of hybridization speciation. Some will argue that hybrids are only formed sexually but in a lab produced induced hybrid that would not be true either but they are still called hybrids. So if you see what I am saying, the logic keeps bringing endosymbiosis back to being a form of hybridization speciation. In either case two species fused, with the only difference being how it was accomplished.

I'm wondering what your thoughts are on this. Being a new theory I have to make endosymbiosis fit into its logical structure. In this case it has to read something like this or else the section on speciation becomes illogical and leads to ambiguity that makes it impossible to determine placement of organisms that are more of a hybrid than a classical symbiosis:

Hybridization Speciation (immediate)

Common in plants and used in agriculture a hybrid species is produced when two species combine to form a new non-sterile species. In single cell organisms one species may retain all or part of its original form inside of the other (endosymbiosis). In complex animals hybridization can be more difficult. Horses and donkeys normally give birth to a sterile mule but on rare occasions a fertile mule is born.

I can reword it to say "in this theory includes endosymbiosis" or something like that but it doesn't seem necessary. Or as in the article above say something like "Endosymbiosis refers to a cell living within another cell. If the cells live together long enough, they will exchange genes; they merge but often keep their own cell membranes and sometimes their own genomes.".

What do you think?