A while back UmbeKing contacted me about this fish. We had an extended conversation where I basically outlined to the best of my knowledge how a fish is defined, both by the lumpers and splitters and by hobbyists. People don't just rush out to name or describe fish. As pointed out by R.D., the name association for hobbyists is pretty cut and dried. The species then the collection locale. Classic examples, Hericthys Sp. "Rio Salto", Paratheraps. "coatzacoalcos", Hericthy labridens "Media Luna", Parachromis fredrichshtali "La Cieba". Sometimes the fish comes with a common moniker...sometimes it doesn't.
It becomes a little more complicated to have it officially described. I have no idea what puts it on anyone's radar. What I do know is that one of the things they want to know is where the fish originated...collection locale. This because multiple samples are needed for extended examination, ray count, jaw structure, and a bunch of other stuff. Plus multiple samples of other fish in the habitat as much to determine what it's NOT. It could be another species of fish. When I spoke to Oliver he indicated that in his collection locale there were other fish that appeared to be Caquetaia, but could have been something else. He wasn't sure.
UK is certainly within his rights to with hold collection points. I don't see what purpose it serves. And until such information is available, he can call them whatever common name he desires. Gorrillus...black...whatever. What I told him was that unfortunately if the fish is described, he doesn't get to pick the latin name. That is reserved for the person describing the fish.
One of the things I would be very curious to see is if the pair throw ff 100% "black" umbee or if it's a mix..or at all. Many times, the natural coloration of fish relies heavily on the diet they maintain in the wild. Take away an ingredient and it could affect the fish coloration in the tank. The other is that in the tank...and in the wild, is the entire brood black, or just some, or is it a dominance coloration. Oliver seemed to think that it was more prevalent in color with the dominant males. I have a couple tanks full of "coatzacoalcos" and only two of four males are the bright blue coloration. The others are a mixture of blue and red.
Neil, hopefully I don't come across too abrasive but have you seen olivers atrato's? And have you seem Chris gorillus? There is clearly a difference in coloration. Granted Chris's and olivers umbees may be closer related than the normal blue varient, but olivers aren't black. Look I have nothin against Oliver at all. Im just saying facts are facts, Chris umbees are indeed very dark, almost completely black looking whereas olivers are not, that is all. And these new species will soon have a proper name so no need to worry about properly identifing collection points right now. They are just being referred to as such strictly for identifying purposes for now. I mean to me, all this debate of location names is just premature ejaculation... And I am not gonna be apart of this circle jerk!! When Chris is ready, he will properly name his new find and possibly some of the other location umbees. So untill then, everyone is just wasting their breath over the whole ordeal.
As for when they will be available... This summer coming to a tank near you
How can you be certain that the "new species will soon have a proper name"? Who's working on describing the fish now? As I said, Chris can call it whatever he chooses. THat doesn't mean that will be the name assigned the fish IF IN FACT it is a new species.
Jason - I wasn't questioning the fact that there is a difference between Oliver's "black" umbees, and Chris'. Nor was I questioning the quality of Chris's stock - they are clearly beautiful specimens.
This is what I'm talking about. From everything that I have seen & read, and according to Chris himself, his black umbees are Caquetaia umbrifera, not a "new species". They are a dark (black) morph of C. umbrifera. From a nomenclature perspective, the most simple, and precise way to describe these fish would be as previously suggested, Caquetaia umbrifera sp. Black "Rio Whatever". The same would apply to any/all other C. umbrifera that are currently being referred to as sp. Black, or that may possibly be collected in the future and referred to as such. No matter who is doing the collecting, or the selling.
Makes it very simple for everyone to know exactly what they are keeping and/or breeding, as well as for potential buyers of the offspring.
I'm not sure how much clearer I can be than that.
Spot on. Clear as a bell.
Yeah well, Oliver somehow came up with the name "black umbee" for his find but they aren't even black!! The ones umbeeking has are black. And since the gorillus are black, they will be referred to at times as black umbees. But I could really careless about the debate!!! Umbeekings are the real deal, like it or not!!!!
"Oliver somehow came up with the name "black umbee"." Did you read the article he published in the Cichlid News? What else should he have called it? The dark grey umbee? There's no debate here. UK has an umbee that is black. Oliver collected umbee that were black. The main difference is that Oliver indicated the collection locale. From my correspondence with UK, his primary concern was getting credit for "discovering the fish." This the secrecy...thus the naming. Whatever. It's a beautiful fish. Not one that I would invest time or energy in until a lot more of the variable were known. But I'm sre there's lots of folks that would love to have one.
hate,hate,hate
