Chris:



I suspect you are correct about the individual's personal knowledge about C. bottae. When I used the term 'insightful' I was really referring to the individuals analytical ability as contained in those critiques. And to be honest, I cannot comment on his or her interpretations of the mtDNA data but felt the analysis of the morphological information was on target.



Since I sent an email to RS Newton and have not received a response, your suspicions about the individual being a grad student is probably correct. I now get the impression that perhaps those posts were for my benefit as I am working on taxonomic issue dealing with C. bottae.



I did not know that the mtDNA paper had been hashed over on this forum before. Can you tell me what the general concensus might have been at the time.



I know that Collins and group at U. of Kansas has already voted to recognize the SRB at the species level which in my estimation is premature with but a single paper providing only mtDNA evidence. The fact of the matter is that there still is no solid morphological evidence to support the separate species scenario but essentially I am the only one that knows that to be the case. And that was why I was impressed with the analysis of the individual rising to the same conclusion, without knowing the details, by use of a rational set of arguements.



Thanks for your input as your suggestion that it may be a grad student gives me a hint at whom it may be.



Richard F. Hoyer

[ Show Entire Thread ]