Erik ÅhlanderMin uppfattning var att han undvek just den aspekten...
Här är Heikos uppfattning på frågan i ett annat forum
1. Kullander, whom I respect very much and is probably at this moment the ichthyologist who knows more about cichlids than any other, has given the highest regards to my when new book, when in came out in May this year. He congratulated me and was in total agreement with my work in so far, that there are 3 species in the genus Symphysodon. (Before, and since 1986, he was convinced that there are only 2 good Symphysodon species.) He also wrote me, that I had now written more on all wild discus than anyone can, or will, ever write.
2. As Sven (Kullander, whom I consider a friend) saw my new book and appreciated it, he also knew that a scientific paper with the DNA results (by Axel meyer et al.) is in press (mentioned in my book), they tried to print this paper before !
3. It has also, as my in book, 3 species, but he named one S. tarzoo, because this name was written in a popular magazine in 1959, one year prior the revision by Schultz. But Schultz in his scientific work placed the name, which was written just as a appreviation for Tarpon Zoo, the fish-company from Leticia (Columbia) and their affiliation in Florida, in synonomy. This Kullander disputes now.
4. But in addition to this dispute of names, their are some terrible mistakes in their scientific paper, which is called Discus fishes: mitochrondrial DNA evidence for a phylogeographic barrier in the Amazon geus Symphysodon (teleostoi:Cichlidae). One is, that they have not seen that of the 3 type specimens from Pellegreen 1904, two belong to one of the described species and the third one to another described species...therefore this name change cannot stand.
5. Hopefully soon the announced scientific paper with a revision will be published and it should place it agan in the perspective as given in my book.
Anyhow, there are, as I wrote 3 good species and we will hopefully soon know more which of the names are the ones to be applied to each.
Definately for the Heckel discus S. discus Heckel, 1840 will remain, but if for the blue and brown discus the name will be S. aequifasciatus Pellegrin 1904 or S. haraldi Schultz 1960 will stand we will see. The same applies for the green discus S. aequifasciatus Pellegrin 1904 or if it will be S. tarzoo Lyons 1959 (which cannot, because of pririty stand).
But again, as there is quite some confusion in their paper, which I cannot go into every detail here, we will hopefully soon have the correct answers.
Best regards
Heiko Bleher
PS: If someone would really read my book, than tyhese questions here would not even come up...
_________________
