My intent of this discussion certainly wasn't to compare a fish such as a flowerhorn, to a midevil, even though they are both indeed hybrids. I'm not looking to start WWIII.
The point that I was attempting to make was that unless a fishes provenance can be traced back to the original wild source, including the geographical location of where those fish were collected, the term "pure" can sometimes become open to interpretation.
The Midas complex is a classic example of why the geographical location of where the original wild fish were collected can later become so important. When one goes back to the original A. citrinellus, and A. labiatus that were collected & imported in the late 60's early 70's you will find that there was much confusion as to what was pure, even by those such as George Barlow who were collecting & studying this genus in the wild. This topic is mentioned in the following article by Paul Loiselle (originally published in 1980)
http://www.cichlidae.com/article.php?id=106
....... where he states;
Second, the small numbers of fish initially imported, the confusion over the number of species involved and the great eagerness to spawn them led initially to a great deal of indiscriminate hybridization. While all these cichlids display strong preferences for conspecific mates, they will hybridize in a no-choice situation (Bayliss, 1976). There is even some evidence that introgressive hybridization between A. labiatus and A. citrinellus may have occurred in the past in some of the smaller crater lakes (Barlow, 1976). The progeny of such shotgun marriages are as viable and fertile as the parental species. Thus the first few tank-reared generations were pretty much of a genetic omelette. With the passage of time, these fish have converged phenotypically on A. labiatus. Subsequent commercial importations have consisted exclusively of large-lipped, bright red animals. These obvious A. labiatus have been pond-bred in Florida for nearly ten years, and their offspring have dominated the market during this interval. The original hybrids have been effectively swamped through crossing with such pure A. labiatus.
Today, most tank-reared Red Devils are phenotypically recognizable A. labiatus, though one still encounters the odd individual whose deeper body and blunter snout proclaim the presence of a Midas Cichlid in the rock pile in the recent past!
The above was written 30 yrs ago, yet what Paul Loiselle stated;
"The original hybrids have been effectively swamped through crossing with such pure A. labiatus." , has certainly NOT proven to be true. Buy a 100 juvie "red devils" at your LFS and it's almost a 100% guarentee that some will mature having a citrinellus appearence, and some like a labiatus. The original hybrids have certainly not been
swamped through as Loiselle suggested 30 yrs ago.
I'm not pointing fingers at anyone, simply suggesting that even if one is buying and breeding "wild caught" fish from the midas complex, in order for any offspring to remain "pure", both parents should come from the exact same geographical location, not just one of the various crater lakes in CA.
I suspect that exact collection locations seldom enter into the equation and most hobbyists wouldn't think twice about breeding a wild caught citrinellus, or labiatus, to another wild caught specimen, whether they knew the original collection location of each fish, or not. This type of breeding only encourages the advancement of more midevils into the hobby.
Before long we'll be right back to where George Barlow was 40+ yrs ago.