I am corrected: the fish Frank assumed were Venezuelas blacks were sold as the offspring of fish reputed to be from the Venezuelan strain.
Not quite accurate. What I said was, "I understand, from the person that I obtained my original spawning group from that the fish were imported from Venezuela. Beyond that I have no definitive answers.
Using the word "strain" in this way is only adding to the confusion, at this point.
The definitive statement, as I see it, is the one Ian put forth that,
"there are NO naturally pure black Corys in the wild, so the dense black Corys we have in the hobby have all descended from the German strain."
Think about it. Has anyone every opened a box of Corys imported from anywhere in S. America and found a Cory that resembles the "Blacks" currently being sold by a few hobbyist? The simple answer is, no! What we have here is another example of the paucity of verifiable data and the abundunce of anecdotal evidence conspiring to create a confluence of confusion. I was as misinformed as anyone in the "Black" fiasco and I apologize for my part in same.
With that being said, I want to state something that I am forced to reiterate, from time to time. There seems to be a great deal of weight given to my supposed "expertise" on the incredibly vast area of all things Corydoradine. Although extremely flattering, my actual experience and knowledge do not, in fact, warrant such praise - and I'm not trying to be modest. Although I have kept fish for decades, I have been keeping Corys seriously, for just over 5 years. Most of what I know stems from my personal experience of just observing the creatures while providing them a healthy environment. Any spawning that takes place is not the result of anything I do. It is simply the result of "natural processes" that occur when nature decides the time is right. Most of what I have learned in addition to that, I have learned from Ian, so I am always going to defer to his point of view, or opinion - until I have a point of contention worthy of his debate and where I believe I have a realistic chance of presenting a plausibly intelligent case. I do not believe in arguing points that can't be proven. Now, expecting me to have definitive answers to questions that even the ichthyologists haven't weighed in on, is not only unrealistic, but, my doing so would only add murkiness to the current body of knowledge, as opposed to "making things clearer." The "Black" scenario is a perfect example of that. I added nothing truly helpful to the debate, although my intentions were honorable.
Being able to put the proper name on a fish is always nice. Unfortunately, until the scientific community decides to sort this all out, which I don't believe will be happening anytime soon, there will always be debate on certain points
(with the C. aeneus and C. elegans groups being perfect examples). What any of us say, whether we be exporters, importers, transhippers, hobbyist, breeders, farmers, or the world's best authorities on the subject, can rarely amount to anything more than an educated, albeit oftentimes, highly educated supposition.
Just my final 2¢ on the topic.
Frank
