Sounds like we agree John?
On some things, no doubt, but your quotes are nastily out of context. You haven't included what I was refering to in them. If you read the full version of those quotes, you'll see I'm not talking about confirming Australian chondros as Australian chondros.
As you now say, there isn't a definitive DNA test available to confirm an Australian chondro as such. Without sampling virtually every individual it's not possible. We can make some guesses, but it's not definite.
All Australian/exotic hybrids actually show up as whatever race their maternal lineage originates from.
Is it only done with mitochondria at present? That's going to cause problems, especially when captive populations which may well have been crossed are concerned, but even with nuclear DNA you can't be sure after the F1 generation. For others reading; a mitochondrial analysis will show a hybrid to be a clone of its mother's mother's mother's mother's...... and not show any sign of any other genetic material in its genome (for the non geneticists: the rest is nuclear DNA and basically speaking, is the stuff which determines your phenotype - all the traits like colour, size, gender, temperament... all the things which control what you look like and how you'll behave... once again, basically speaking). For captive collections, mitochondrial analysis is not really appropriate, especially for chondros, because any hybrid will be identified as a clone of a pure animal!
None of the cases I'm familiar with have shown up as "pure Aussie"
That doesn't surprise me at all, looks like we agree on something! (or at least don't disagree)
Good to have some common ground
I'm surprised you'd refer to that "deemed Australian" thread, as it was full of inaccuracies and the most vocal in it were using third or fourth hand information.
The 'deemed Australian" thread, as you say, was pathetic at best (more common ground
). However, as you no doubt know, there are several people who claim to have tested their chondros and been given a confirmation that they are Australian (which has been false, either they are lying or the person who did the test is incompetent or lying), others have used this to (in some cases knowingly) falsely convince others that the offspring they are buying are Australian. The thread is rubbish as you say, but highlights some of the problems that can come from people thinking that geneticists can do things that they can't. This site is littered with absurdities on the topic, as you were pointing out.
As useful as the analyses may be in looking at phylogenies, populational origins etc, I think in this case, at present, they need to be used extremely carefully to avoid doing more harm than good and even if used properly probably have little value. Saying that there is a test available to determine that a chondro is Australian is misleading and this is quite damaging as it leads to dishonest breeders and "breeders" pretending to have taken this fictional test, or taking the results of their tests too seriously, allowing them to rip naive people off or themselves being fooled.
ime getting worried though mate,sadji is making so much sense lately and even peter agrees with him
Yep, that's pretty friggin' worrying indeed! :shock:
