Dan, IMO those that think No4 is a RES are using body coloration or pattern or markings for their identification, which can be very risky in some fish identifications. Note that the body marking pattern on the gill cover of No 4 is not the same as on fish No.1. This is more pronounced when you look at the lower half of the gill cover on both fish. The typical RES body pattern extends on to the gill plate of fish 1 but they do not continue onto the gill of No4. This is another reason fish No 4 is not a RES in my opinion. I think if the gill rakers were exposed in fish No.4 they would be identical to those of a BG not a RES.
Last edited by Bill Cody; 08/31/07 09:50 PM.
