dogofwar;3929007; said:the problem with that approach is that it assumes a discrete number of collection and differentiation between one and another.
What's to keep the vendor or collector from naming fish from one throw of a cast net one (made up) location...and a throw from a few yards down the bank another one ("super green" for example). There WILL be diffrences in the fish from both casts...and within the casts.
There is natural variation in any population...and unless there's some sort of feature that permanently keeps one "location" from mixing with another, then isolating and breeding fish from one spot in a population is less authentic than taking fish from a broader pool (that may or may not be named differently by the collector / vendor).
Matt
cchhcc;3929049; said:Exactly. You can't capture a few fish from the wild, start a breeding program with a few fish that are likely siblings, and consider the resulting similarities in their offspring charateristics of a new "race" until you significantly broaden your gene pool and still see the same unique characteristics.
I hear what you guys are saying, it all makes complete sense.
If, lets just say we were to refer to all the Carpinte in this region as H. Carpinte 'Panuco', i for one wouldnt feel comfortable for instance, purachasing a new female for my male. I would be concerned that even though my newly purchased female is a Carpinte, from roughly the same region as my male, she may possess different characteristics to my male.
In a perfect world, where we could completely trust the word of the collectors/vendors, regarding the EXACT catch locations of certain fish. I would feel much more confident purchasing a female from an area very close to the area my male origionated from, EVEN though there could still be a strong possibility of diversity.
LOL Maybe im just looking into all this to much. Gotta say, ive enjoyed all the recent Vontehillo threads, theyve been very interesting, entertaining and informative.





