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.
"Maybe we should describe bacteria by their individual features and give that group a name"
We already do that. The function and genes of bacteria are what defines a bacterial species (or genus, family, or order). I do agree that the Wikipedia definition of "species" doesn't strictly apply to bacteria due to asexual reproduction and HGT. But it is still a useful tool for classifying bacteria.
Giving it a name makes talking about the organism easier. If I know that a person is infected with Staphylococcus aureus I know that the characteristics and treatment are going to be very different than if they were infected with Pseudomonas aeruginosa. Giving it a species name is a lot easier than saying they are infected with a coagulase positive, gram positive coccus.
I think i might have to write down that phrase somewhere, as it seems an interesting phrase.
thanks for the well-balanced answer anyways :D