Re: panduro vs. "pandurini"

[Ken Laidlaw <K.Laidlaw@roe.ac.uk>]

Julio,

Thanks for the information, my membership of the ACA has 
lapsed so I missed the BB article.

With reference to the black spot you describe I had a look 
at the two images available on the web of a male A.panduro, 
these are:
http://www.cco.caltech.edu/~aquaria/Krib/Apisto/A-pandurini-male.jpg
http://www.geocities.com/Heartland/Plains/7918/Pandurini1.jpg

None of these images show the spot (unless I am missing 
something).  

I understand that this spot could come and go 
depending on mood but since the colours of Apistos can 
change very quickly anyway it will not to my eye be easy to 
tell the difference.

Best Wishes,
Ken.

On Wed, 3 Dec 1997 15:50:00 -0500 Jota Melgar 
<76644.2370@compuserve.com> wrote:

> Ken,
> 
> Uwe Romer recently described A. panduro in the last issue of the BB. This
> has pissed off some ichtyologist but that's a different story. Males A.
> panduro are easily distiguished from A. nijjseni by the prescence of a
> black triangle that goes from the back insertion of the anal fin, through
> the caudal peduncle, and almost to the red margin of the caudal fin 
> 
> Uwe reports on some unsuccesful crosses between A. nijjseni and A. panduro
> of wild caught fish. Females would not accept heterospecific males. F1s did
> breed but the offspring proved to be sterile. This however is not definite
> prove but a strong suggestion that they are different species. Anyone
> interested in doing some molecular systematics on these guys?
> 
> Julio