Though there is much discussion, more recent work by Jeffery and colleagues  supports earlier work by Dowling and Strecker that suggests the definition of Astyanax mexicanus sp. encompases that of Astyanax jordani; i.e. Astyanax jordani is not a species in its own right, but a subpopulation of Astyanax mexicanus. I suggest Astyanax jordani page be merged with Astyanax mexicanus page.
^Jeffery, W. Regressive evolution in Astyanax cavefish. Annu. Rev. Genet. 43, 25–47 (2009)
^Bradic, M., Beerli, P., Garcia-de Leon, F. J., Esquivel-Bobadilla, S. & Borowsky, R. L. Gene flow and population structure in the Mexican blind cavefish complex (Astyanax mexicanus). BMC. Evol. Biol. 12, 9 (2012).
^Dowling, T. E., Martasian, D. P. & Jeffery, W. R. Evidence for multiple genetic forms with similar eyeless phenotypes in the blind cavefish, Astyanax mexicanus. Mol. Biol. Evol. 19, 446–455 (2002).
^Strecker, U., Faúndez, V. H. & Wilkens, H. Phylogeography of surface and cave Astyanax (Teleostei) from Central and North America based on cytochrome b sequence data. Mol. Phylogenet. Evol. 33, 469–481 (2004).
I support this, but this would deviate from the usual taxonomic standard of FishBase and I'm open to other options. However, the current articles manage to confuse the matters completely: The full cave form (blind, colorless, etc) of Astyanax mexicanus = Astyanax jordani. Either you accept jordani as a valid species and no full cave forms of mexicanus exists, or you accept that mexicanus has full cave forms and jordani is a synonym. Instead we have several articles that all confuse them, as if they are different. I've now corrected some, but the taxonomic mess remains. RN1970 (talk) 18:56, 26 April 2017 (UTC)