Taxonomical Study invalidates PBL, PPB, and PSM; renames PBB group to just PB


MFK Member
Jan 26, 2019
Funny thing to me is that they did a study on taxonomy but didnt even do a DNA test. They claimed that they had 148 specimen and they did dorsla fin counts and other stuff and decided that pbl, pbb and western lap are all the same polypterus bichir/PB, but they are unsure why the coloration are different.

To us hobbist we can tell that pbl and pbb are way different from western lap which are koliba,koloton and faranah lap.
148 specimens they have... Probably most dating back to the 1800s. I guess the KPBBs were the thing that could have gotten us what we needed in terms of scientific funding, it's just that they didn't "boom." Imagine a DNA pool that could have been made available to science.

A good example of this are the advances made in the field of scleropages formosus were all privately funded. Like how the only way to 100% determine the gender of an Arowana is through DNA testing, made possible by funding from MAFC in line with their efforts on "conservation engineering." This concept was taken in by QH and they started actively adding to the genetic mapping pool to -guess what- create genetically engineered "Designer Arowanas." Too bad the head of that project was caught smuggling Arowanas into Australia. Not sure where they're at now. But you get my gist.

The bottomline is, in an industry like this (let's face it) science always takes the back seat and while big businesses drive; because the only language that is a constant is money.

Disappointing for us hobbyists really. It's a hard pill to swallow.

We can still call our PBB's as P. Bichir "Bichir" and our laps as P. Bichir "Lapradei" - we've been doing it for ages anyways, that's why we have Koliba, Faranah, Tikinsso, Koloton, heck, you wouldn't call a Dabola an "Endli" or a "Lap" right?
  • Like
Reactions: Polyaddict86


Bronze Tier VIP
MFK Member
Dec 29, 2010
Pick one that you have an interest in. Page numbers listed. Advisable to read the Discussion segment towards the end on Page 91. I included a screenshot below. Appears the study is preliminary at best and further updates is necessary, lol.

*Ropefish page 5-11
32 Specimens
*Ansorgii page 15-19
7 specimens
*Bichir page 19-29
148 Specimens
*Congicus page 29-34
66 Specimens
*Delhezi page 34-38
44 Specimens
*Endlicheri page 38-44
64 Specimens
*Moke 44-48
32 Specimens
*Ornate page 48-54
63 Specimens
*Palmas page 54-63
135 Specimens
*Polli page 64-68
85 Specimens
*Retropinnis page 68-73
46 Specimens
*Senegal page 73-82
262 Specimens
*Teug page 82-86
13 Specimens
45 Specimens

  • Like
Reactions: thebiggerthebetter


Probation Member
Probation Member
Mar 1, 2014
White house 1600 Pennsylvania Ave NW, Washington
2 issues. Being wrong about something so obvious when talking about the upper/lower jaw in juvies and the excuse of over lapping data when speaking on finlet counts was enough for me to disregard. I can see eastern laps MAYBE but no way are flaps and koloton/koliba the same fish as pbb.

Several times it appeared he was taking jabs at schafer for no apparent reason.
  • Like
Reactions: Vancouver_98683