Originally Posted by
Citrinellus 
After searching through my big book of central cichlids, I came up with... Theraps sp. "Conkel" from Lago Catemaco, Mexico.
cchhcc,
What makes you think so?
On what basis have you that sp. 'Conkeli' (then called by TFH) is "NOT" a new species?
"More of the same" Hansel seems to still be straying along a fairly deliberate line of useless X-information - no facts, just rumor.
On July 22, 1997, Donald Conkel submitted what was then believed to be a newly discovered species (P. sp. Catameco) for mtDNA cytochrome b testing to Dr. Charles Lydeard, Ph.D.
Biological Sciences, Dept of Biology, University of Alabama. http://www.stri.org/english/about_stri/headline_news/news/article.php?id=514
Dr. Lydeard was subsequently determinate in his analysis: sp. catemaco was indeed a new species - Theraps sp 'Catemaco.' The tree constructed by Lydeard appears below:
Above the top node appears the 'Catemaco,' using the Theraps grouping including fenestratus. As customary, Lydeard then sent the specimen to the Natural History Museum for Mary Styasni's dichotomy. Lydeard et. al. paper has yet to be published. I believe that the population shown in this thread is the "pearl red" found on the north shore of the lake. Ira will have to give the final say on that one.
Interestingly enough, the American giant in the field of ichthyology, Dr. Robert Bussing, had provided correspondence to Don that has obviously been borne out:
The 2nd paragraph of Dr Miller's letter reads: "I have thought for a long while there may be two spp. of
Cichlasoma in L. Catemaco: C. fenestratum & undescribed sp. [i.e., Don or Ira's sp. Catemaco] that is white & red (or pink). Again, do you have preserved specimens?"
Of note is how thoroughly "accurate" the majority of Miller's taxonomy has been when compared to the genetics (so far). It's highly informative to read his published papers. In several cases it would help for hobbyists to do that before they jump to "ID this species." His meristics and morphology are accurate to the umpteenth detail, not to mention his detailed pencil drawings.
So another part of a pattern of snide, antagonistic, unwarranted and/or downright ignorant commentary by this one individual (amongst a crew of a few) directed towards Don Conkel is appropriately de-gassed.
At some point, many, many among us will be wondering, "What is this person's PROBLEM?" and "What can this person's unsavory AGENDA possibly be?"
Incidentally, if anyone has any doubts about the veracity of whether or not this is a new species, feel free to contact Dr. Lydeard, and he will happily provide confirmation of the DNA analysis. DNA Chris doesn't lie. Only Chris liars do.
Of note, Don mentioned in passing today that although he wouldn't mind doing so, he has never spoken about tropicals in any respect whatsoever, neither recently, nor in the past, with any "Chris" or "Christopher" in Virginia Beach. Mr. Conkel, however, is on exceedingly good terms with the TF store owner there, his good friend Bob Hames, and said that they would be discussing a few things in the morning.
Back to the Thread, Yo john I might want some fry to from that amazingly new DNA tested pair