Re: NANFA-- Re: Fundulus blairae

Bruce Stallsmith (
Thu, 05 Sep 2002 10:38:29 -0400

>The American Fisheries Society continues to recognize F. blairae in their
>upcoming list of the scientific and common names of fishes.
>Chris Scharpf

The keys to separate species status or not are whether each putative species
is generally reproductively isolated, even in sympatry, and have they
maintained this isolation for some period of time. Straight out DNA evidence
isn't always the absolute determiner of separate species. If you look at DNA
work done on the various cichlid species flocks of the Rift Lakes in Africa,
some lakes will have 400 identifiable species by standard morphological
techniques, but the genetic differences between very different appearing
species will be much less than what could be found between me and anyone
reading this (presumably we're all human...). Species differences appear to
be based on different genetic regulatory mechanisms rather than the
possession of different genes. So you have to interpret a wide range of data
for species determination in a lot of cases, which can often be

--Bruce Stallsmith
Huntsville, AL, US of A
"I'm ready for 'Revenge of the Gene Jockeys Part II'"
/"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,