>On Sun, 25 Aug 1996, Cary Hostrawser wrote:
>> Just a theoretical question - if one of these crosses escaped into the
>> wild and became a viable population, would it eventually be recognised
>> as a species?
>
>Depends a little on ones philosophy regarding species. There are a
>number of described species which are obviously, or at least thought to
>be of hybrid origin. The cyprinid genus Gila and some pupfish are good
>examples. There is a unique cichlid that lives in the Colorado River.
>It probably comprises genes from three species and has formed a stable
>hybrid swarm. I'm sure there have been numerous species created via natural
>hybridisation than many folks realise. I think the word natural is the
>key one in whether or not they would be recognised at species or not.
I think natural or not, eventually overtime it will be recognised as a
species if it is a viable population. Just as non-native inbtroduced
creatures will eventually be thought of as native species when enough
time passses. Maybe not in our life time but wait a couple hundred
years and the new folks will not even realize those fish were not
there all along. It may be noted in the scientific journals as having
been created from a cross and introduced. But eventually they'll have
to be recognised as something.
Cary Hostrawser
()
/||\ Rainbowfish Study Group
|||| <))))<< http://home.earthlink.net/~sbuckel/index.html
|||| <))))<<
|||| Minnesota Aquarium Society
/||||\ http://www.mn-aquarium.org/