Talk:Mexican tetra

message: Apart from the fact that "argument" against evolution doesn't actually make sense, who cares about every little criticsm the Flat Earthers have about scientific explanations of biology? On a zoological entry all that matters is science, not religion.
Neale Monks 20:06, 6 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd say its important to keep some form of this, as the fish is an excellent example of evolution. I'm rewriting it though, to give what I hope is a more balanced view. In particular, the bit about it being evidence of god's creation deteriorating since "the fall" is a tiny minority view, and completely in unacknowledged contradiction to the rest. the section is also entirely unsourced. Loxlie 04:05, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Opponents of evolution

message: The text sugests it is an advantage because that way the fish can use the energy devoted to the development of the eye in feeding, breading, etc..
It seems to me that the real reason is because the lack of that sensitive and soft tissue with no use, is an advantage in a dark cave were the eyes could be hurt and infect. (Sorry for the english)
:That is a perfectly valid suggestion, and well worth adding to the text. The only criticism I might make is that many deep sea fish have no eyes, but they do not bump into things. Your English is fine! Please go ahead and make any changes! We all make mistakes here, and other people fix them for us. Cheers, Neale Neale Monks 23:39, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I hope I've adressed this issue in my edit - there's currently no single definitive answer as to the advantage of losing the use of eyes. In fact there's several. But the fact that there's more than one contender shouldn't be interpreted to mean there's no reason why they shouldn't - quite the contrary. On the issue of bumping into things: 1. like many aquarists who have kept such fish, I can verify they are perfectly good (shoaling) swimmers, and studies show they compensate by using other, heightened senses. 2. still, fish living in caves inevitably face more potential bumps than creatures living in the open ocean - however deep - where there is almost literally nothing to bump into. Loxlie 04:05, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

text: In their article To See or Not to See: Evolution of Eye Degeneration in Mexican Blind Cavefish  Jeffery et al. present experimental and detailed observational evidence showing that the economics of embryological development, involving pleiotropy, is at play: when the lens (which controls embryologic eye development) undergoes apoptosis, embryologic signaling throughout the head region becomes more efficient, allowing for the same genes that would have played a part in eye development to be expressed differently (through pleiotropy). Thus, it is not the survival economics of the mature, or even freshly hatched fish that are pertinent here, but rather advantageous to the process of embryology, involving pleiotropy. In the conclusion of their article, they hold that natural selection is therefore involved, albeit coupled with neutral mutation.AtomAnt (talk) 09:07, 28 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why is blindness advantage 

message: "Modern genetics has made clear that the lack of use does not, in itself, necessitate a feature's disappearance[1] - as seen in humans with useless evolutionary retentions such as wisdom teeth and the appendix."
Does no one consider that we may still be in the process of loosing our wisdom teeth and appendix? It takes thousands of generations for needless features to disappear. Do we know that it's been thousands of generations since we needed them? I want this sentence removed. Altonbr 23:57, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unverified claims? 

message: Yes .. it started out as a pet for my twin daughters room 17 years ago .. these fish are still with us .. has anyone ever heard of such a thing ? We fill there tank with well water (hard) if that has anything to do with it . But i would like to document this somehow as maybe the lomngest living pair of blind cave fish .. please help me .. :donsherri2000@aol.com       also here's a link to see my fish :  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g7HeWneyu_E  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Breadmanhere (talk • contribs) 21:21, 2 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  17 year old pair of Mexican blind cave fish .... 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Mexican tetra. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060515160857/http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1134/is_5_114/ai_n13811128 to http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1134/is_5_114/ai_n13811128
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:42, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified