I thought I did, but as you can see, I may have been wrong in that regard. I'm starting to think my original assessment of this species was right. One thing's for certain though, this fish grows much more slowly than the Indian giants do.
It would make sense if there's 2-3 mixed into that group. Its likely that there are in fact 2-3, maybe even four varieties in SE Asia. We know for certain that there's rutilus and the 'yarrelli', which I feel should be properly called lica. There is also supposedly a dwarf variety, but we can't seem to really nail down what they are, as the issue might be compounded by the similarity between them and the young possible-rutilus.
You mentioned the difference in your Indian goonches. This is no coincidence. In my discussions with Dr. Ng, he indicated to me that there is substantial evidence to support the notion that there are two different species of goonch in India: one that lives in the cool, oxygenated highland streams and a second species that lives in the warmer, less oxygenated rivers of the lowlands. There is anecdotal evidence to support this within the hobby of the marked difference between the looks of fish that are imported and the fact that some thrive in cold water while others die and that some thrive in warm water while others die. I'm inclined to believe in the two species hypothesis myself.
IF there is a warm-water species in India, I wouldn't be surprised to see it in SE Asia as well. That would make it the fourth species from Thailand. Interestingly enough, if my hypothesis pans out, the warmwater Indian variety would be B. yarrelli, so yarrelli would be in Thailand and India after all. In this same scenario, the highland giants would in fact be B. bagarius, as they were originally described a century and a half ago.
The dwarf species being described as B. bagarius has an interesting history as well. Roberts described the dwarf species based on a single specimen from the highlands in northern India. Based on this single specimen, he concluded that there was a dwarf species living in Thailand. Dr. Ng examined the Indian holotype and found it to be morphologically identical to a young specimen of the highland giants.
This would make what we currently call Bagarius yarrelli correctly known as Bagarius bagarius and would render the dwarf species nameless.
All of this stuff ties together in a way that I find fascinating. If I can succeed in getting to the point in my life where I'm pursuing my doctorate, I intend to do my thesis on a revision of Bagarius. That's a long (and I do mean LONG) way off, however; and with being married, having kids and bills and whatnot, it's a lofty goal.
Things like this situation are why I love this hobby. They make me think.
