[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Index by Month]

Re: List of ID corrections was Ap. jurua

Well said Randy. I have a hard time placing too much stock in genetic
studies myself. For one, as you say we don't yet fully understand DNA, and
second, any lines of distinction drawn between species will be rather weak
because of subjectivity in determining where genetic variation in one
species ends and a new species begins. It is probably unreasonable to expect
any sort of consensus if for no other reason than not everyone is going to
agree about how they will define species.

I do have to agree with Mike with regards to playing it safe, though not
necessarily for the same reasons. The way I see it, if an Apisto can
successfully cross with another form, it's already questionable whether it's
a different Apisto at all. However, even if an Apisto ends up being the same
species as one already described, it may have unique attributes that might
not show up normally, and careless breeding could lose that. That doesn't
mean I have a problem with experimenting. If someone wants to try out a
cross and see what they get, that's fine and dandy with me. Could be
interesting. They should just be honest about it in their dealings and not
try to pass it off as something it's not.


This is the apistogramma mailing list, apisto@listbox.com.
For instructions on how to subscribe or unsubscribe or get help,
email apisto-request@listbox.com. apisto-digest@listbox.com also available.
Web archives at http://lists.thekrib.com/apisto