In many scientific collections, "weird looking" fish are found. The process (from a biologist standpoint) is to look at morphological characteristics and determine why the specimen is "weird". Is it genetic abnormalities? Hybrid? My theory has always been "if it looks distinctly like two different species...it most likely is a hybrid" But at what point is a hybrid confirmed? I realize genetic analysis can be done between the suspected parental types for determination... but this isn't possible once the specimen has been fixed in formalin. I do not want to do anything more than stick a name on a voucher specimen, I could just write (Notropis sp.) and be done with it... but in the back of my mind I know it is a very good possability that it is a hybrid.
For example, I just found a fish that was "weird" to me. It looks most like a Mimic shiner Notropis volucellus and a Comely shiner Notropis amoenus. This is what I came up with.

(see attached spreadsheet)

Is this system ok? Are there other methods that I can use in the future? Anybody have similar species that they might have dealt with?

Thanks,
Wertz

I come across this situation with herps pretty frequently, particularly toads and skinks. My solution is to label the specimen as "Genus sp." and append a comment such as "Appears intermediate between Genus species and G. otherspecies". This prevents your parental hypothesis from carrying more authority than it may deserve. Now, if you have genetic confirmation or can compare it to confirmed hybrids, you'd be more justified in using your hypothesis as the official identification.

That's a very interesting comparison. I would love to see photos, especially of the head.

I come across this situation with herps pretty frequently, particularly toads and skinks. My solution is to label the specimen as "Genus sp." and append a comment such as "Appears intermediate between Genus species and G. otherspecies". This prevents your parental hypothesis from carrying more authority than it may deserve. Now, if you have genetic confirmation or can compare it to confirmed hybrids, you'd be more justified in using your hypothesis as the official identification.

That sounds like very sound advice. I was thinking along the same lines. Since the specimen is already fixed I would have to go back to the site this year and try to find a needle in a haystack to confirm parentals. I will just call it a Notropis sp. with a "hybrid?" along with it. If in the future if a reputable source proves the existence of this hybrid I will have something to cofirm it against.

That's a very interesting comparison. I would love to see photos, especially of the head.

Irate,
I do not believe these two have ever been documented to hybridize. In fact, the literature I have read says any hybrid involving N. amoenus is extremely questionable. Since I am not in any way an expert, I would not label this as a hybrid until qualified experts looked at it... or I was able to find another specimen and compare parentals. Here are a few pics, sorry about the quality (I hold a camera over the scope lense).

Thanks

Wertz