The ugly truth is we would rather save Nemo than plain fish

‘We found that less beautiful fish are those recognised as threatened’

THE “real bastard trumpeter” is an unfortunate fish.

Not only has it been saddled with a ludicrous name, but research has now shown that humans think it is too ugly to save from extinction.

A study has found that bland, visually unappealing fish are more likely to be threatened with annihilation than their colourful, more flamboyant counterparts. Humans, it seems, are more committed to saving Nemo – Disney Pixar’s orange and white striped clownfish – than ensuring the survival of his drabber reef-mates.

Dr Nicolas Mouquet, of the University of Montpellier, said: “We found that less beautiful fish are those recognised as threatened. Our study highlights important mismatches between potential public support for conservation and the species most in need of support.”

Researchers asked 13,000 people to rank hundreds of fish, then used their responses to train a computer programme to assess the aesthetic merits of 2,417 reef species.

They found fish listed on the IUCN Red List as “threatened” or whose conservation status has not yet been evaluated were rated as less beautiful on average than those categorised as of “least concern”.

The real bastard trumpeter – officially called Mendosoma lineatum – ranked bottom of a list of attractive fish, along with the “breaksea cod”.

It is unknown if the trumpeter is under threat as it has never been evaluated. The breaksea cod is listed as “near threatened”. In contrast, the reef fishes that were ranked most attractive tended to be the lowest priority for conservation support. Fish which ranked highest for aesthetic merit included the eyecatching “queen angelfish”, the pouting “striped cowfish” and the jolly-looking “greensnout parrotfish”, none of which are currently threatened.

It is not the first time that attractive species have been found to have the upper hand when it comes to conservation.

In 2016, Murdoch University, in Perth, Australia, found that aesthetically challenged animals are routinely ignored by researchers in favour of “cuter” species.

The team found that “unfashionable” animals such as native bats and rodents attracted little research attention, with scientists choosing instead to focus on koalas and kangaroos.

In 2012, the Ugly Animal Preservation Society was established to raise the profile of unbecoming wildlife such as the Proboscis monkey, with its odd shaped orange nose, the gelatinous blob-fish and the naked mole rat.

The nightmare-inducing gob-faced squid, the Surinam toad – which looks like it has just been run over – and the squidgy Chinese salamander are some of the other animals championed by the society. Researchers say that human preference for certain shapes and colour is likely to be innate but it can mean species most in need of public support are the least likely to receive it.

Dr Mouquet said that the ecological and evolutionary distinctiveness of unattractive fishes made them important for the functioning of the whole reef, and their loss could have a disproportionate impact on these high-biodiversity ecosystems.

The research was published in the journal