[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Re: NFC: DP returning fish to the wild



Daryl wrote:
>though adding to genetic diversity may be percieved in the positive, as has
>been pointed out, it also works in the other direction. the additions to an
>existing gene pool can also be weeker and less resistant to disease and
>therefore weeken the existing population. it seems not worth the risk  : )

Incorrect - remember that we are talking about a "population" and not
individuals in the population.  In a population, the addition of new genes
to a population (i.e., disease resistance genes, growth genes) increases
the "overall" genetic makeup of the population.  Addition of genes that are
considered "weak" in one genetically shallow population, added to a
genetically diverse population, will probably never be seen; based on
genetic statisticts.

 Again, this is a pure genetic stance - not a plea for release into the
wild.  I am in agreement with you all that release of natives into a
non-indigenous site is wrong.  But, genetically, increased variation in a
population maintains a healthy population.  This is why dogs and cats from
the pound (inbred animals) tend to be healthier and devoid of the common
small animal diseases and genetic defects.

__________________________________________________________
Matthew T. Mason
Doctoral Student
The Ohio State University
Department of Molecular Genetics
mason.163 at osu_edu

The most absurd and reckless aspirations have sometimes led to
extraordinary success.

 --Vauvenargues




















References: