RE: Lets be careful

Bruce Hansen (bhansen at oznet02.ozemail.com.au)
Fri, 24 May 1996 07:53:48 +-1000

Peter Unmack posted on the difference between < sexual selection and the much broader natural selection> and it seems like a valid point except to me the concept of natural selection would appear to be the tribal or population result of numerous "sexual

selections" at the individual and school level.

Also surely every one of is familiar with the phenomenon of "the predominant or dominant" male in a group of Rainbows either mixed species or not. It seems to me that this fish often seems to have characteristics of bigger finnage, brighter colours, slig

htly different pattern, or spawning behavoir performance that makes him more attractive as a mating partner and therefor acceptable to be"raped" by. Presumably females can swim as fast as males or schools would consist only of males after predation, so ex

cept in the artificial confines of an aquarium compared to a stream or lake the opportunities for escape for unreceptive/unwilling/uninterested/anything-else females would be almost unlimited. That is the problemwith broadly transposing our aquarium obser

vations to the population as a whole without back-up evidence from observations in the wild/nature.

Perhaps he could consider posting some of our material from the RML tothe ACN list for some input from the geneticists who occasionally post there?

Bruce Hansen AN GFA .

<<Any rainbow can turn silver in which case they would all look alike.
Rainbows don't always have strong colour in the wild and many species
have silvery or plain females. It would be easy for a male to mimic
that. Also, many species have males that will mimic females to get in on
the act when the males are spawning with one or more females? I don't
believe anyone has looked for this and I would be surprised if it didn't
occur at least in some populations.>>

Attachment Converted: c:\eudora\attach\RE Lets be careful3