Re: NANFA-- subspecies (was fantail darters)

R.W.Wolff (
Sat, 22 Jan 2000 13:43:44 -0600

I hope that this "new" method of classification is not what is propelling
all the splitters out there. I'm not into clumping, but when they begin
all this splitting, its hard to tell what critter is related to what other
critter. I find this in the new genus names for many African killifish.
I'm dont know if you even familiar with the species, so this may not make
sense. There "was" a group that was in the genus aphysemion which was the
bulk of African killifish that were not annuals. This group was split
down, which it should have been. The "genus" I am working with , and give
me the most interest were known as " roloffias" , although this term was
never mutually accepted, it served its purpose. Now these "
archiaphysemions" ( another term to describe this group) has been split
into several genus, archiaphysemion, scriptaphysemion and some others.
then this goes on to say that some in this group no longer are nearly
related to each other.
All I'm saying is classification needs to follow one set of guidlines,
and that I also agree subspecies is not a good term. If anything it means
that the subspecies is an inferior " critter " to the species it "subs".
Placing "affinus" after the specific name is a good way to do this. It
denotes that this is a critter that is very close to the documented
species, but seems different enough. That way it is still easy to know
where its classing came from, but not that it is some degenerate species.

/"Unless stated otherwise, comments made on this list do not necessarily
/ reflect the beliefs or goals of the North American Native Fishes
/ Association"
/ This is the discussion list of the North American Native Fishes Association
/ To subscribe, unsubscribe, or get help, send the word
/ subscribe, unsubscribe, or help in the body (not subject) of an email to
/ For a digest version, send the command to
/ instead.
/ For more information about NANFA, visit our web page,