[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Killietalk] Conflicting info by Caraway
> I discussed this subject with Ken Lazara a couple of years ago. As I
> recall his explanation, he was unwilling to follow the European trend on
> GAR, because the whole group had not been systematically studied.
I agree that the gardneri/nigerianus area is a difficult one. Captive
breeding over decades with the same stock has shown to throw all sorts of
> We may heartily debate this point, with him, but if the AKA is to serve
> as our "Standards Organization on Nomenclature" then we, in the US,
> should follow the KMI4, which I believe the BOT has blessed as our
> standard for shows and F&E listings. To that end, *nigerianus* is a
> sub-species of *gardneri* until the next KMI revision.
It seems everyone is sitting on the fence waiting for someone to put a paper
out to start a discussion. (or rip it to pieces).
> For those of us in the US, the proper question is "Which locations
> belong to *Fp. gardneri nigerianus*?" I think that KilliData is pretty
> definitive on locations, but hasn't a clue about collection codes. Just
> look under *Fp. nigerianus* but not *gardneri*.
What location codes are you referring to Wright? Huber lists no codes in the
book or website.
My data refers to codes:-
NSC 6 & P82 = nigerianus
Akure 02 = clauseni
C89/5 = lacustris
HAH 98, CSK 95/6, CSK 95/26 (corruption?) & GPE 90/10 = mamfensis
I don't profess to know all the codes & would welcome additions to my
> IMHO, the *nigerianus* is and should be a separate species, but I'll
> follow the rules on labelling them for sale and shows in the US. Both
> are really neat fish, and we should keep a few in our fishrooms.
Interesting stuff Wright......... Tim
To join the AKA see http://www.aka.org/pages/join.html
Archives are at http://fins.actwin.com/killietalk/