Previously the interesting "little" fish couldn't get a look-in for
research funds since they were all being spent (if any were allocated at
all) on the larger edible-type commercial species. It is very nice to see
that even your "Rainbow-phobia" hasn't prevented you from finding them
interesting enough to investigate :-)
> There is actually a lot more than a "bit of interest" in rainbows at the
> moment. Over the next few years you will see quite an increse in rainbow
> work via Craig Moritz's lab. He is extremely interested in the group. I
> am about to tackle 2 odd rainbows in western Qld to figure out what they
> are, then hopefully expanding it out to look at the relationships between
M.
> doboulayi-fluviatilis-s. splendida and M.s. tatei-inornata.
Yes Peter,
I was indulging in a little "bureaucrat bashing" , just to see if it felt
good. And guess what, it does! Now I know why they do it to us aquarists.
Because we mostly deserve it! And so do they.
>
> Jee Bruce, are you just being a little cynical? :-) To the best of my
> knowledge no one has suggested anything at all other than mother nature
> as being responsible for all this.
>
BTW, I hope nobody thinks it would be a good idea to do the Eachamensisx
Splendida hybridisation thing at home and speed things up for mother Nature
, just to see how they are likely to turn out in a few thousand years :-)
Cheers
Bruce Hansen