That question has been around for a while. Mayr had proposed a definition that essentially said a species was a collection of animals or plants which had the capacity of breeding among each other. As Kevin de Queiroz has stated:
Ernst Mayr played a central role in the establishment of the general
concept of species as metapopulation lineages, and he
is the author of one of the most popular
of the numerous alternative definitions of the species category.
Reconciliation of
incompatible species definitions and the
development of a unified species concept require rejecting the
interpretation of
various contingent properties of
metapopulation lineages, including intrinsic reproductive isolation in
Mayr's definition,
as necessary properties of species. On the
other hand, the general concept of species as metapopulation lineages
advocated
by Mayr forms the foundation of this
reconciliation, which follows from a corollary of that concept also
advocated by Mayr:
the proposition that the species is a
fundamental category of biological organization. Although the general
metapopulation
lineage species concept and Mayr's popular
species definition are commonly confused under the name “the biological
species
concept,” they are more or less clearly
distinguished in Mayr's early writings on the subject. Virtually all
modern concepts
and definitions of the species category,
not only those that require intrinsic reproductive isolation, are to be
considered
biological according to the criterion
proposed by Mayr.
In the current Nature there is an ongoing debate as to the many conflicting definitions. The authors state:
The assumption that species are fixed entities
underpins every international agreement on biodiversity conservation,
all national environmental legislation and the efforts of many
individuals and organizations to safeguard plants and animals. Yet for a
discipline aiming to impose order on the natural world, taxonomy (the
classification of complex organisms) is remarkably anarchic. There
is reasonable agreement among taxonomists that a species should
represent a distinct evolutionary lineage. But there is none about how a
lineage should be defined. 'Species' are often created or dismissed
arbitrarily, according to the individual taxonomist's adherence to one
of at least 30 definitions.
Crucially, there is no global oversight of taxonomic decisions —
researchers can 'split or lump' species with no consideration of the
consequences.
The problem is that especially in plants we have a significant amount of inbreeding potential between what we call species. The plants have the same number of chromosomes of the same length with genes in the same positions, almost. Then why call them different species? All too frequently it is in the eye of the beholder.