Re: A. sp Erdfesser (A. pulcher ID)

[Marco Lacerda <marcolacerda@ax.apc.org>]

Mike & Diane Wise wrote:
> 
> In my opinion the fish in Aqualog SAC-II, page 56 (S03805-4), is a male A.
> pulchra. I know that it only has a spotted pattern in the upper caudal lobe and
> the lateral band pigmentation extends far back into the tail, and that this is
> more typical of A. gephyra. What makes me think it's A. pulchra is the shorter
> length of the dorsal fin base on the back of the fish. In the original
> description of A. gephyra Kullander states:
> 
> "From A. pulchra it is well separated by the longer dorsal fin base (56.3-61.8%
> of SL, mean = 59.3%; in A. pulchra 55.1-57.8%, mean = 56.2%)."
> 
> Besides, the caudal pattern appears to be variable on A. pulchra. In the original
> description of A. pulchra Kullander states that there are:
> 
> "Three types of caudal fin pattern: a) up to 5 ill-defined vertical spot-stripes
> on dorsal half near middle in upper lobe, b) immaculate, c) about 6 bars along
> middle, continuing band continuation and broader than it."
> 
> His English phraseology wasn't too good in c), but the way I read it he means
> that the upper lobe has 6 spot stripes in the middle and the lateral band appears
> to continue into the tail, where it is broader than the lateral band on the
> flanks. This form appears to be similar to the fish we're talking about.
> 
> And anyone who is intelligent enought to think that I have all this stuff
> memorized and on the tips of my keyboard fingers, well I've also got some nice
> ocean front property just a mile east of Miami Beach I'll sell cheap! Knowing how
> to research is a valuable tool.
> 
> Mike Wise

Mike, I respect your opinion, but I note following points which make me 
believe the Aqualog fish is NOT pulchra:

1) Regarding the caudal-fin pattern on Kullander, like you described 
above - Yes, that's true that sometimes the caudal-fin is unspotted, or 
the lower half unspotted; when this happen, the unspotted region is 
ALWAYS red in color, like it happens in the A. sp. Red-tail Xingu. I 
have noticed that and confirmed after seeing more than 100 wild males 
from the type locality, since 1994.

2) In A. pulchra, ALL WILD MALES (and also all F1 and F2 offspring) have 
ALWAYS a conspicuous yellow stripe over the lateral black band (like you 
described for A. maciliensis males). In the japanese book (page 36) you 
see it easily, and also in all other photos of A. pulchra, pls check it.
There is no sign of such stripe in the Aqualog fish.

3) The caudal fin of A. pulchra is never slightly pointed, but truncate; 
the Aqualog fish has it slightly pointed.

4) The caudal spot in the Aqualog fish is extended into the caudal fin, 
in A. pulchra, not. Pls check it also.

5) You are likely right and the Aqualog fish is not A. gephyra either. 
It is not very clear what A. gephyra indeed is. Even Kullander (pers. 
comm.) told me that after seeing samples collected by Chao in middle Rio 
Negro, he could not them tell apart from A. agassizii or A. gephyraŠ
I think this matter has been already discussed in this list, the fishes 
form the middle and middle-upper Rio Negro share characters of both A. 
gephyra and A. pulchraŠ



-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This is the apistogramma mailing list, apisto@majordomo.pobox.com.
For instructions on how to subscribe or unsubscribe or get help,
email apisto-request@majordomo.pobox.com.
Search http://altavista.digital.com for "Apistogramma Mailing List Archives"!