In the comment on How do we define this?, user g s wrote a deleted comment indicating that things could be defined using "type-which-corresponds-to" (exact quote from memory). They followed up with four examples, emphasis mine:
An apple tree is the type of plant whose genes and splicing correspond to the gestation of apples. Genes do not gestate. Apple trees do not always fruit.
A female is the type of organism whose genes correspond to the production of the larger, less motile gamete of a sexually reproducing species. Genes do not produce ova except at the end of a long and involved process involving many other things. Females only occasionally produce ova, and some do not at all.
[do not debate gender here. This is just one person's definition of a female]
An internal combustion engine is a machine whose design corresponds to the use of internal combustion to do mechanical work. Designs do not use internal combustion or do work, or anything else except for reflecting the occasional bit of light into the eye of an engineer. Internal combustion engines only sometimes run, and some are broken.
A country is that territory which corresponds to a particular government or political structure. Territories are not governments. Countries often have disputed borders. Etc, etc, etc.
The format seems to be: X is the category of things whose Y corresponds to Z. Even though not every X does Z, they are members of the group X if they have Y that corresponds to Z.
I can't make head nor tail of this concept. What does it mean - what is meant by "corresponds to"? How could we tell if a plant has genes and splicing that "correspond to" the gestation of apples? I suspect it might be something from teleology.