help with sex and id
- Thread starter cris
- Start date
I suspect you have a female, and that it is a normal Texas . . . it looks a lot like the female I had (at that size) . . . it was sold as a "carpintis", but it was a Texas . . . this is a picture for comparison
The above picture is not a true cyano. The op's picture clarity is a bit fuzzy, but looks like a true over a carpintis. They are not green texas' either. They are Carpintis..
As the op's only looks a few inches, the lack of black in the dorsal would not guarantee it a male, looks to small to tell in my opinion..
As the op's only looks a few inches, the lack of black in the dorsal would not guarantee it a male, looks to small to tell in my opinion..
that picture is when she was young, and before her colors fully developed; also, it was taken with a cell-phone . . . as an adult, she was definitely a Texas (or, if a hybrid, was more Texas than Green Texas)
as for: "not a Green Texas, it's a carpintis", all I can say is, let it go . . . whether we like it or not, the terms "Texas" and "Green Texas" vs "cyanoguttatus" and "carpintis" are interchangeable, and also equally mis-applied
people who are really interested will learn that Green Texas = carpintis, and that Texas (or True Texas) = cyanaguttatus . . . and I don't see any problem with using those terms, as long as we try to apply them correctly
as for: "not a Green Texas, it's a carpintis", all I can say is, let it go . . . whether we like it or not, the terms "Texas" and "Green Texas" vs "cyanoguttatus" and "carpintis" are interchangeable, and also equally mis-applied
people who are really interested will learn that Green Texas = carpintis, and that Texas (or True Texas) = cyanaguttatus . . . and I don't see any problem with using those terms, as long as we try to apply them correctly
sick_lid;3314353; said:
agreed.
I dont subscribe to just calling it that because others do being the right choice. If everyone would correct those that do, it would probably clear things up.
Most only call it what they call it because they see it mistakenly identified as such on here.
just as a follow-up thought, bear in mind that they are both a type of herichthys cichlid; the "cyanaguttatus" and "carpintis" are their latin names, while "Texas" and "Green Texas" are examples of their common names
it's is no different than saying calling a Green Terror a "rivulatus", while calling a Blue Acara a "pulcher" . . . both are aequidens, but they are separate species under that family
to say "Green Texas" is incorrect and we should say "carpintis" - - while it may be your opinion - - doesn't really make a whole lot of sense to me based on how we call nearly every other fish by it's common name
I apologize for hijacking the OP's thread, but seriously, when did this go from being MFK to being the Latin club?
it's is no different than saying calling a Green Terror a "rivulatus", while calling a Blue Acara a "pulcher" . . . both are aequidens, but they are separate species under that family
to say "Green Texas" is incorrect and we should say "carpintis" - - while it may be your opinion - - doesn't really make a whole lot of sense to me based on how we call nearly every other fish by it's common name
I apologize for hijacking the OP's thread, but seriously, when did this go from being MFK to being the Latin club?
Since most pet stores use common names, I don't see any reason not to call carpentis blue texas or green texas. Heck, 'texas' is the common name for the entire genus really.
Much like blue acara is the common name for 4 differant species, and green terror is the common name for several species as well ( though both are not Aequidens Sab_Fin and haven't been for years, they used to be orphaned but are now Andinoacara fyi).
Much like blue acara is the common name for 4 differant species, and green terror is the common name for several species as well ( though both are not Aequidens Sab_Fin and haven't been for years, they used to be orphaned but are now Andinoacara fyi).