Internationale Gemeinschaft für Labyrinthfische e.V.

Telefon: +49 152 28868116 | E-Mail: gf@igl-home.de

Offene Paro-Fotogal...
 
Benachrichtigungen
Alles löschen

Offene Paro-Fotogalerie

252 Beiträge
27 Benutzer
0 Likes
161.7 K Ansichten
helene
(@helene)
Estimable Member
Beigetreten: Vor 18 Jahren
Beiträge: 127
 

Diese fisch ist eine von meine freunde in dänemark, und er fragt mich welsche ist, - weil es war wie deissneri verkauft. Ich habe sagen es ist nicht, aber ein p. bintan, aber welsche p.bintan bin ich nicht sicher, kann jemand mich hier helfen

kind regards helene
P.parvulus, P.quindecim, P.harveyi, P.sumatranus, P.anjunganensis, P.linkei, P.deissneri, P.Nagyi, P.sp.Nagyi(?)


   
AntwortZitat
(@peter-finke)
Noble Member
Beigetreten: Vor 21 Jahren
Beiträge: 1349
Themenstarter  

Meiner Meinung nach ist dies ein spec. "blue line". Bei einem harveyi müßten die Bauchflossenfilamente schwarz sein. Die jetzt nach Privatfängen aufgetauchten neuen Formen aus dem Distrikt Jambi auf Sumatra sind ähnlich, sie können es aber kaum sein, weil die hier gezeigten Fische wahrscheinlich aus dem kommnerziellen Handel stammen. Das spricht alles für die sog. spec. "blue line". Helene hat Recht, dies ist eine Form aus der formenreichen bintan-Gruppe. Ob es sich um eine eigenständige, bisher nicht wissenschaftlich beschriebene Art handelt, ist solange völlig unklar, wie wir keine verläßlichen Genanalysen haben. Vermutlich dürften manche sog. "Arten" der bintan-Gruppe nur Subspecies oder Semispecies (Formen auf dem evolutorischen Wege zur Abspaltung als eigene Art) sein.

Peter Finke, Bielefeld


   
AntwortZitat
helene
(@helene)
Estimable Member
Beigetreten: Vor 18 Jahren
Beiträge: 127
 

Vielen danke, - ich will erzählen das weiter zu meine freund. :D

kind regards helene
P.parvulus, P.quindecim, P.harveyi, P.sumatranus, P.anjunganensis, P.linkei, P.deissneri, P.Nagyi, P.sp.Nagyi(?)


   
AntwortZitat
(@zahar)
Trusted Member
Beigetreten: Vor 18 Jahren
Beiträge: 65
 

It's been quite some time since I last contributed here. No paros to play with until I got this fella last week.
It came as P deissneri, which I'm sure it's not. I can't get the origin data too. Any idea?


I am thinking of P bintan.

Regards,

Zahar AZ
Malaysia


   
AntwortZitat
 emha
(@emha)
Honorable Member
Beigetreten: Vor 19 Jahren
Beiträge: 693
 

Hi Zahar, very interesting, thank you!
It`s not easy to judge the fish only with two pics. I can see a roundtailed (caudal) paro-type without any red bands and without any marks or dots in the fins. There are only whitish bands. The whitish ventral-filaments (harveyi´s don`t have) seems to vote for "bintan". Parosphromenus bintan normaly shows (not very bright) turqoise bands. So I´m not shure, but it`s a type (perhaps a undiscribed one or an local form) near to P. bintan. You could compare them with the pictures from Hannes Svardal. They show real bintan from Bangka, you will find them here under "Frisch von Bangka mitgebracht: P. bintan".

Martin Hallmann


   
AntwortZitat
(@peter-finke)
Noble Member
Beigetreten: Vor 21 Jahren
Beiträge: 1349
Themenstarter  

I once had fish silmilar to these but with markedly longer whitish ventrals. At that time we called them "bintan". Maybe, these are local varieties as Martin suggests. P. bintan is said to occur not only on Bangka but in other localities at the mainland of Malaysia too. It would be quite normal if this would result in forming local varieties. But one has also to think of the fact that Kottelat described bintan rather early, years before he decided that there are other bintan-like fish to be taken as separate species (rubrimontis etc.). For me, the old hypothesis that bintan has rather a wide home-range is somewhat marred by these new descriptions. And in general, the whole thing of describing new "species" similar to the old bintan is dubious as long as we have no facts that exclude the existence of subspecies or semispecies.
I know that Martin takes similar views. So, at present we cannot be more precise than he was in his posting: it's a bintan-like fish. Maybe, some day that "wide" species bintan proves to be no longer acceptable and is split in various species or at least subspecies. Or, maybe, all those "bintan-like"fish including alfredi and rubrimontis and opallios and ... are lumped altogether in ... bintan.
What do you think, Zahar?

Peter Finke, Bielefeld


   
AntwortZitat
(@zahar)
Trusted Member
Beigetreten: Vor 18 Jahren
Beiträge: 65
 

Guys
Thank you for your comments. Actually I had expected this kind of reply. that's why I'm still trying to get better photos of this fish. but will take some times as he is yet to colour up (only 1 male in a group of 6).
I am very fussy about buying fish and would stay away from unknown species but lately, paros are very rare in the market in this region. So when this group came I just grabbed them.
They came P deissneri (sic!) and the exact collection location was not know (even after pestering the lfs owner). But what I gather is the shipment came from Sumatran side (not Borneon nor Malaysian). thst's why I put it as P bintan (just a guess for time being)

Regards,

Zahar AZ
Malaysia


   
AntwortZitat
(@zahar)
Trusted Member
Beigetreten: Vor 18 Jahren
Beiträge: 65
 

P. bintan is said to occur not only on Bangka but in other localities at the mainland of Malaysia too.

Can you be more specific about this. Kinda interesting.

It would be quite normal if this would result in forming local varieties. But one has also to think of the fact that Kottelat described bintan rather early, years before he decided that there are other bintan-like fish to be taken as separate species (rubrimontis etc.). For me, the old hypothesis that bintan has rather a wide home-range is somewhat marred by these new descriptions. And in general, the whole thing of describing new "species" similar to the old bintan is dubious as long as we have no facts that exclude the existence of subspecies or semispecies.
I know that Martin takes similar views. So, at present we cannot be more precise than he was in his posting: it's a bintan-like fish. Maybe, some day that "wide" species bintan proves to be no longer acceptable and is split in various species or at least subspecies. Or, maybe, all those "bintan-like"fish including alfredi and rubrimontis and opallios and ... are lumped altogether in ... bintan.
What do you think, Zahar?

I usually take the easy and simple way of describng things. More of lumper than splitter type. As for the fish issue I would insist locality to included when naming one species. As for the mentioned bintan-like fishes, I believe they are true species on their own. It depends on how we define and describe the genus. As for paros, the latest method is to look at their colour patterns, so those described are indeed different. Of course there would be some variations between populations and even within individuals within that particular population. But as long as the difference is minor, they all should be treated as one. Of course, to further strengthened the argument, the habitat data should be included.
Some may agrue on this but as long as no one with enough credential can produce robust data to refute the current method or come out with a totally different, acceptable way( eg going by DNA -way), it is status quo. At least for time being.
To me, P bintan is P bintan if it comes from the type localities or wherever in between. Other similarly coloured fish should have cf or aff tagged pending further examination by the authority.
of course the problem is, the fishes came without any data on its origin. :???: I think it's about time we, at the reciever end, insist of the locality data. If it can be done with killies, why can't we do so with paros?

Regards,

Zahar AZ
Malaysia


   
AntwortZitat
(@peter-finke)
Noble Member
Beigetreten: Vor 21 Jahren
Beiträge: 1349
Themenstarter  

Dear Zahar, I am widely unanimous with you. The usual method of discerning the species is by colouration of the males. But there are no sharp boundaries in some populations we have seen e.g. between rubrimontis, alfredi and tweediei. That is a problem of this method. I agree that we need descriptions on DNA-base, but presently we have none. I have hoped that the "barcode-of-life"-project would deliver them, but they obviously need much more time to do that.
So, we are left we the old method at hand, and with the problems tied to it. Just as you are, I am more a lumber type, too. As long as it is not refuted, for me those named fish are not true species but semispecies forming a superspecies.
(By the way: from Horst Linke I have got two pair of
rubrimontis stemming from your fish; very nice fish indeed. At what location did you you catch their parents?)
I totally agree with you in the importance of the location. It's a pity that we normally don't get that with the fish we buy in the pet shops. This should be changed better today than tomorrow.
As
bintan-locations is concerned, I relied on some citations in the literature. Presently I can't find them out. But I try.
A last question: Where do you get your Parosphromenus-fish from? From a local dealer's or do you catch them yourself every time?

Peter Finke, Bielefeld


   
AntwortZitat
(@zahar)
Trusted Member
Beigetreten: Vor 18 Jahren
Beiträge: 65
 

Thanks for the comment. Yes, DNA will sort out a lot of confusion about the species especially those that look very similar in appearance. It's good for scientific community but how will it help us, the hobbyists. One of the main problem for end users is knowing what fish he got. So how will DNA technology help us?
If this method confirms that all those similar looking fishes are indeed one, then it's okay. Things will be much easier. But if all these species are indeed truely unique (true species), yet look very much alike, we will still face the same problem. Well, unless the DNA typing can be done at home.
That's why I feel we still need to know where the fishes came from. The problem is getting this message to the other end of the system - the collector.

Regards,

Zahar AZ
Malaysia


   
AntwortZitat
(@zahar)
Trusted Member
Beigetreten: Vor 18 Jahren
Beiträge: 65
 

(By the way: from Horst Linke I have got two pair of
rubrimontis stemming from your fish; very nice fish indeed. At what location did you you catch their parents?)
.A last question: Where do you get your Parosphromenus-fish from? From a local dealer's or do you catch them yourself every time?

This is indeed a good news. Those fishes were caught a few km south of the type locality (of the holotype). No question about it's origin here. The type locality had a road construction going on at that time.

As for the above paros, I still don't know where they came from. Got them from a local shop. According to the shop owner, they are from Indonesia.
Now the male has started to show some reddish hue on the proximal part of the caudal fin but not enough to clearly describe the pattern. But the pelvic fins are as in the photo: blue with some distal black marks. The filaments are white or blueish. P opallios??

Regards,

Zahar AZ
Malaysia


   
AntwortZitat
(@peter-finke)
Noble Member
Beigetreten: Vor 21 Jahren
Beiträge: 1349
Themenstarter  

That's why I feel we still need to know where the fishes came from. The problem is getting this message to the other end of the system - the collector.

I totally agree with you, Zahar. We should know the place of collection. The collectors, however, are not inclined to let us know those places, I presume, because of commercial fears. Letting the public know where to find the fish could mean to give away a knowledge that enables them to earn some money to possible co-collectors.
Nevertheless, the dealers and the export companies should be informed. Otherwise there is always the risk of mingling species.
As DNA is concerned you are certainly right that this is a method for the scientists. But (1) there are some scientists interested in taxonomy and systematics of Parosphromenus; so why don't they use the most modern methods? And (2): Once the scientists are using them, our general knowlegde about systematics and evolution of the genus can become more precise. This does not enable the single aquarist to better decide which fish is which, but it probably would in the long run lead to a better declaration of the fish in trade. Intermingling of similar fish is nevertheless possible, of course.

Peter Finke, Bielefeld


   
AntwortZitat
(@peter-finke)
Noble Member
Beigetreten: Vor 21 Jahren
Beiträge: 1349
Themenstarter  

As for the above paros, I still don't know where they came from. Got them from a local shop. According to the shop owner, they are from Indonesia.
Now the male has started to show some reddish hue on the proximal part of the caudal fin but not enough to clearly describe the pattern. But the pelvic fins are as in the photo: blue with some distal black marks. The filaments are white or blueish. P opallios??

"Indonesia": that's quite a precise locality!!! Yes, it is a possibility that it is opallios. Kottelat and Ng write in the original description that the filament is "whitish". Their photograph (of a dead museum-fish) shows a rather short filament. Not extremely short as in nagyi but markedly shorter than with rubrimontis and especially alfredi. They name a town "Kalimati" near Pangkalanbuun (Kalimantan Tengah) as place of origin of the holotype.
Our fish (from trade origin) traded as opallios are of similar appearance than those you describe.
Do you know whether your dealer gets his fish directly from the local catchers, or is there an intermediate stage in the tanks of a big company?
In Germany, we have a very big internationally working import-export-company. Most of the asian fish sold in Germany and Europe are housed in their tanks before being sold to the different dealers in different countries. They are even sold to Japan; no joke. It's more than a curiosity, it's global commercial and ecological madness, I think.

Peter Finke, Bielefeld


   
AntwortZitat
 emha
(@emha)
Honorable Member
Beigetreten: Vor 19 Jahren
Beiträge: 693
 

I don`t think they are opallios. But I´m not shure. The males of our stock (possibly from only one import from Sukamara) shows a lot of red, but some of them no red. Also the very narrow white band (caudal fin) ist often found, but not every male has a narrow one (please lock at our gallery). Youngs often have no white band or a very narow one in caudal fin. Olds often have a broad one. The only typical charakter (in my opinnion) of opallios is the very broad black body-stripes of the males. The yellowish stripes are very weak and the middle (this through eye) nd the belly stripe together build a complete dark area. So the males seem to have only one narrow, yellow bodystripe (above the eye). You could compare them with the good picture in Linke (P. sp. "Sukamara"), it shows a very young male and our gallery.

PS. (Bintan, Bangka, Kalimantan and Sumatra also is Indonesia). We only know (but not shure) the paros are not from peninsular of Malaysia

Martin Hallmann


   
AntwortZitat
Surferbabe
(@surferbabe)
Reputable Member
Beigetreten: Vor 22 Jahren
Beiträge: 462
 

Hier ein paar Fotos von meinem Paros. linkei Männchen:

Parosphromenus linkei Galerie <- Dort klicken

@Liebe Grüße!!@
Anja

Mitglied in der Seerose Frechen
WWW.SEEROSE-FRECHEN.DE


   
AntwortZitat
Seite 13 / 17
Teilen: