JD7.62;2833449; said:Just because its black doesnt mean its a subspecies.
Take gar for instance, there are black gars (mostly long nose) and gold gars (mostly Florida) though rare individuals exhibiting these traits are found generally in the same area. The genes for these genetic freaks are probably more common in that area as opposed to other populations. This could be what has happened with the GATF.
bignootch;2834588; said:Yes, I remember reading an account by game fisherman D.Dann stateing that there's a tributary river to the upper Congo river, I belive it was also called the "Black river" and it flows in a s/w erdly direction and eventually mixes with the Congo river. And on certain stretches of the Black river, the Black Goliath tigerfish is said to reside, and be caught. I must reexamine the info. maybe there's been some helpful updates.
Here's your pics.CichlaRyan;2835024; said:
BigJ;2834821; said:I agree from what i've herd and read not the same species. But i could be wrong? Won't be the first time.. Hopefully we'll gather some good info.
BigJ;2834998; said:Was it a small fish? Or did it have some size to it? Just wondering how big it would be now?
koop171;2835471; said:I color morph found only in certain areas should be defined as a sub species. with the black only being caught in a specific area of the black river. that would make it as close to a sub species as possible. It's like the RBPs with the black spot on there gill plate they are not RBPs but a different species b/c of there point of collection and color variants.
Yes this is the same inof I have gathered from exerts I have seen from the book. When My copy gets here in a week or so I'll know more. Or at least what the book knows.
Here's your pics.