what type of poly is this?

[milokai]

According to chnnagain, you have a pattern variation of Polypterus palmas buettikoferi. Others think you have palmas palmas, I'm confused now.



That's how I feel as well CDM, but I think what chnnagain will say is that they are all p. buettikoferi, albeit variations in pattern.

here are more pictures of the same bichir got it as a palmas palmas,,,maybe anyone can id it..for sure.

 

[Cohazard]

Okay I just read throught the Discussion about the palmas complex thread over at aquatic predators, and now I'm even more confused.

I'm starting to get the feeling that we have it backwards and what we think of as buettikoferi (thin bands tightly grouped) is actually palmas palmas, and that thick spaced out bands are actually buettikoferi???

 

[Bichirs4life]

I don't think there's any doubt it's a Palmas Palmas. Look they are basically the same.

 

[milokai]

I don't think there's any doubt it's a Palmas Palmas. Look they are basically the same.

cool..it does look like a palmas palmas..clear..thanks everyone

 

[Infblue]

i feel maybe not ...

below is a typical pattern,because it's from a technicality book. and this bichir has "reticulate-STRIPE"

let us looks other character

up..is from fishbase.org with it's http://www.fishbase.org/summary/SpeciesSummary.php?id=2386


can u give me a explain,it's my wrong or fishbase.org wrong?

thank u.

i had a juvenile exactly like the one in the picture. You can see that it has the same patterning scheme as the larger ones that people are showing in this thread.

Okay I just read throught the Discussion about the palmas complex thread over at aquatic predators, and now I'm even more confused.

I'm starting to get the feeling that we have it backwards and what we think of as buettikoferi (thin bands tightly grouped) is actually palmas palmas, and that thick spaced out bands are actually buettikoferi???

Check out my own quote below from page 1 of this thread from back then.

i recognize the fish and its either a different form of the palmas buettikoferi from a different population/locale or palmas palmas (unfortunately i can't really narrow it down one way or the other due to confusion over what exactly does a palmas palmas look like)

short answer is, i don't believe we have it backwards. What we call palmas buettikoferi is correct, as it matches the meristic values for the subspecies.
What we call palmas palmas looks distinctly different from palmas buettikoferi. However, if you look at the meristics for the two fish we have, they are the same, that's why i said what i said in my quote above.

really though it's unclear now what constitutes a palmas palmas as the holotype is lost. So there's not too much to go on. Basically what we have as 'palmas palmas' can only be one of the followings: 1) palmas palmas, or 2) palmas ssp. (i.e. undescribed subspecies), or 3) palmas buettikoferi variant as i said in the quote.

Frank Schafer believes it's (1), Another literature says (3) (perhaps? since no pic was shown, it was just word description). I'll stick with (1) for now, until proven otherwise.