Vieja Genus Broken Up?

[loureyes]

All of this work reflects the use of new technologies to better understand the evolutionary development of cichlids - why they are the way they are...which evolved from which, etc.

Scientists have a lot of tools to use to accomplish this. Unfortunately, the tools available, the amount of funding for this kind of research (and the nature of life itself) don't lend themselves to absolute answers.

For the average hobbyist concerned about maintaining "pure" fish, it's much more important to concern yourself with the collection locations and provenance of the fish you keep/breed than the latest paper proposing to move this or that species from this genus or the other.

I find it interesting and illuminating to read about the different approaches and theories used to make determinations vs. worrying about relabeling the fish that I already have.
Matt

Well said I think its good they are breaking it all down, gives a better look on each species and its specific characteristics

 

[JK47]

It was what it was then, it is now what it is now. What it was then was close enough that we didn't know any better and the model of utility worked well enough. It is now what it is now because we have better information to get it more right than before. As new discoveries are made, it may well be changed again, and rightly so, because it will then be more right than it was before.

This video of Isaac Asimov's essay on the relativity of wrong might help explain how science's process of refinement works.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2tcOi9a3-B0

^ exactly, great post. Thank you as well Matt for the CRC link, good read.

 

[Chrisplosion]

I think I read this on another thread.

 

[JK47]

I think I read this on another thread.

Congrats on a pointless post..

 

[edburress]

They dont even know what theyre doing. If they did, there wouldnt be changes. Later Viejas and Parachomis switch place. Parachromis Synspilus. Vieja Dovii.

lol What? You never know anymore since it's happening right now.

making it unworthy to believe and follow by.

So you do not believe the earth is a sphere because we once thought it was flat?

 

[JK47]

So you do not believe the earth is a sphere because we once thought it was flat?

True true. I am curious to see if we start seeing threads pop up with the newly assigned genus or not? It would probably take Lee Nutall or another respected keeper in order for others to jump on the bandwagon. Just my opinion though.

 

[Aquamojo]

So you do not believe the earth is a sphere because we once thought it was flat?

 

[Aquamojo]

I thought this was interesting and pertinent to the conversation. Here's the Taxonomic history of Paratheraps melanurus:

• Heros melanurus, Günther, 1862, original combination.
• Heros melanopogon, Steindachner, 1864, junior synonym.
• Astronotus (Astronotus) melanurus, Eigenmann, 1893, new combination.
• Cichlasoma (Cichlasoma) melanurum, Jordan et al, 1896, new combination.
• Cichlasoma melanurus, Evermann et al, 1902, new combination.
• Astronotus melanurus, Eigenmann et al, 1903, new combination.
• Cichlosoma (Theraps) melanurum, Regan, 1905, new combination.
• Cichlaurus melanurus, Jordan et al, 1930, new combination.
• Paratheraps melanurus, All***er, 1989, new combination.
• Vieja melanura, All***er, 1991, new combination.

There's nothing wrong with changing the name. Most recently the shake up of Roccio octofasciatus and the variou brek out of the old Archocentrus nigrofasciatum into the various new "flavors of convicts". Not everyone follows the name change.

My rule of thumb is that when the name changes on the Cichlid Room Companion (source of the info above).

 

[Scatocephalus]

I thought this was interesting and pertinent to the conversation. Here's the Taxonomic history of Paratheraps melanurus.

You mean Paraneetroplus melanurus.

 

[Aquamojo]

You mean Paraneetroplus melanurus.

Nope. I meant to type Paratheraps. When Juan Miquel changes it on his site, I'll start typing Paraneetroplus.