Re: [RML] RE: Re: M. herbertaxelrodi/trifasciata

Bruce Hansen (bhansen at ozemail.com.au)
Mon, 16 Dec 1996 08:35:56 +1100

Just as a point of interest in this fascinating and important thread - I
have heard a whisper that recent unpublished DNA work on Cairnsicthys
places them much closer to Pseudomugil than Melanotaenia.

Bruce Hansen
ANGFA

email: bhansen at ozemail.com.au
Don't miss the ANGFA web pages at -
http://www.ozemail.com.au/~fisher/angfa.htm

----------
From: peter.unmack at ASU.Edu
To: rainbowfish at pcug.org.au
Subject: Re: [RML] RE: Re: M. herbertaxelrodi/trifasciata
Date: Monday, 16 December 1996 2:33

On Sun, 15 Dec 1996, Cary Hostrawser wrote:

> Just a question to maintain clarity Peter
> Does the Melanotaeniinae subfamily consist the following genera?
> Cairnsichthys
> Chilatherina
> Iriatherina
> Glossolepis
> Melanotaenia
> Rhandinocentrus

Yes, that is correct.

> From a layman's point of view the Iriatherina has never seemed to have
> much in common with those other genera. So I was wondering if they
> didn't mess around with its classification.

This study didn't actually examine Iriatherina, Cairnsichthys, or
Rhadinocentrus.

A little abreviated quote from the text.

The interrelations of melanotaeniinae genera are not addressed in this
study because we are unable to include I, C, and R in the analysis of all
characters. Other authors have placed them in the melanotaeniinae. The
combinations of characters used by these authors, however, suggest these
genera could be either related with melanotaeiines or with other
melanotaeniid subfamilies.

Tootles

Peter Unmack