Synspilum Question

[calibigrob]

Actually, the presently accepted name is Paraneetroplus melanurus. Synspilus is no longer recognized as their species name. There are two color forms, the red, and the orange. Here's a pic of mine, the orange first and then the red.

Wow very nice I have nice male as well

Sent from my SPH-L710 using MonsterAquariaNetwork App

 

[chefwill]

On jacksonville fl.craigslist I saw a 13"being sold with an aquarium but no pic of it the other day, that is an awesome looking fish, never heard of them before.how big do they get?

Sent from my SGH-T999 using MonsterAquariaNetwork App

 

[Kramer123]

So picked the biggest fish out of each tank. Both are in with all my other cichlids and I will take some pics as soon as they settle. Very healthy little fish, both eating within minutes of being released.

 

[viejafish]

May be a happy way to name the fish are Paraneetroplus melanuras synpspillum and Paraneetroplus melanuras melanuras to satisfy both biologists and hobbyists.

Biologists have been struggling with distinguishing species from strains since at least the Darwin time. DNA mapping provides a new tool, but it still has not eliminated the vagueness on how to define a species. With more DNA ID, there will be more revision and confusion of species names. Peer reviewed names are only provisional, until some one comes up with new evidence to argue for changing the names.

 

[dogofwar]

That's not how the naming system works.

Matt

May be a happy way to name the fish are Paraneetroplus melanuras synpspillum and Paraneetroplus melanuras melanuras to satisfy both biologists and hobbyists.

Biologists have been struggling with distinguishing species from strains since at least the Darwin time. DNA mapping provides a new tool, but it still has not eliminated the vagueness on how to define a species. With more DNA ID, there will be more revision and confusion of species names. Peer reviewed names are only provisional, until some one comes up with new evidence to argue for changing the names.

 

[viejafish]

That's not how the naming system works.

Matt

True. It's not a scientific way to name fish, but a common way to name fish commercially.

 

[neutrino]

Official taxonomic registers are one thing, having their utility, and sufficing for me as more authoritative than hobbyist names.

On the other hand, taxonomy at the species (and often the genus) level is a moving target, anyway, as many are classified and then repeatedly reclassified, and as environments and organisms themselves undergo change. In fact, not a few biologists consider the whole notion of "species" as a unit of biodiversity to be problematic, debatable, or questionable, with "no generally applicable uniform species concept" (reference) and some considering the notion of "species" an outdated concept, an artificial construct, and inadequate to describe biodiversity, all the more so as "species" proliferate due to DNA testing. A sampling of references:

Species concepts – the continuing debate

Species as units of diversity An outdated concept

A critique of the biological species concept

A meeting at the gene

 

[dogofwar]

Absolutely - As I posted before:

Where taxonomy meets the marketplace (I want to buy fish that will turn out to look like I expect them to look like) is with provenance to a collection location. It's a roll of the dice without some knowledge of provenance. This is especially important in the world of Paratheraps...


Matt

Official taxonomic registers are one thing, having their utility, and sufficing for me as more authoritative than hobbyist names.

On the other hand, taxonomy at the species (and often the genus) level is a moving target, anyway, as many are classified and then repeatedly reclassified, and as environments and organisms themselves undergo change. In fact, not a few biologists consider the whole notion of "species" as a unit of biodiversity to be problematic, debatable, or questionable, with "no generally applicable uniform species concept" (reference) and some considering the notion of "species" an outdated concept, an artificial construct, and inadequate to describe biodiversity, all the more so as "species" proliferate due to DNA testing. A sampling of references:

Species concepts – the continuing debate

Species as units of diversity An outdated concept

A critique of the biological species concept

A meeting at the gene

 

[Kramer123]

May be a happy way to name the fish are Paraneetroplus melanuras synpspillum and Paraneetroplus melanuras melanuras to satisfy both biologists and hobbyists.

Biologists have been struggling with distinguishing species from strains since at least the Darwin time. DNA mapping provides a new tool, but it still has not eliminated the vagueness on how to define a species. With more DNA ID, there will be more revision and confusion of species names. Peer reviewed names are only provisional, until some one comes up with new evidence to argue for changing the names.

Exactly. Though not the preferred scientific method, as already stated, it would prove an effective method of better, and for that matter, more accurately describing and identifying these fish.

 

[dogofwar]

Why not just call them:

Paratheraps melanurus "Lago Peten", Paratheraps melanurus "Belize", Paratheraps melanurus "Lago Cenote Escondido, Tulum, Quintana Roo, Mexico", etc.?

Pics of each here: http://www.cichlidae.com/species.php?id=235&content=pictures

Matt

Exactly. Though not the preferred scientific method, as already stated, it would prove an effective method of better, and for that matter, more accurately describing and identifying these fish.