What's the difference between Nandopsis dovii &. Parachromis Dovii?
- Thread starter Rid_Ether
- Start date
Are Grammodes, Cichlasome or Nandopsis?
Are grammodes cichlids, under cichlasoma or nandopsis? How come alot of their information such as their scientific name are incorrectly put? I've read such things and pix saying nandopsis dovii when they're parachromis. My guess is they just recently found out that they're in the wrong...
www.monsterfishkeepers.com
Scientific names have changed a few times which is is why. Currently they are:
Parachromis dovii
Chiapaheros grammodes
Parachromis fredrichsthalii
No more Loisellei. They were found to be fredrichsthalii.
Parachromis dovii
Chiapaheros grammodes
Parachromis fredrichsthalii
No more Loisellei. They were found to be fredrichsthalii.
Although they were once combined......
The genus Nandopsis was recently restricted to only those cichlids native to the Caribbean islands (Cuba, Hispanola, Antilles) by characteristics, unique to their 50 million year evolutionary separation from the cichlids of the Central American mainland, so similar mainland species, needed to be removed from the genus Nandopsis, hence given the genus name, Parachromis.
The genus Nandopsis was recently restricted to only those cichlids native to the Caribbean islands (Cuba, Hispanola, Antilles) by characteristics, unique to their 50 million year evolutionary separation from the cichlids of the Central American mainland, so similar mainland species, needed to be removed from the genus Nandopsis, hence given the genus name, Parachromis.
Last edited:
... and the former P. friedrichsthalii is now P. multifasciatus.
Not from my search. All I can find is forums suggesting it’s multifasciatus. I couldn’t even find anything suggesting they are synonyms, which is what I originally thought..
I am refering to Rico Morgensterns work :Fishes collected by Emanuel Ritter von Friedrichsthal
in Central America between 1838–1841
" Cichlasoma loisellei (Bussing, 1989), is synonymized with Parachromis friedrichsthalii (Heckel, 1840). The species hitherto referred to as P. friedrichsthalii takes the valid name Parachromis multifasciatus (Regan, 1905). "
It shows that the multifasciatus Regan described 1905 was mistaken as a synonym of P. friedrichsthalii. Since Heckel described 1840 a different Fish ( ex loisellei) before as friedrichsthalii, it (multifasciatus) is not a synonym and valid.
in Central America between 1838–1841
" Cichlasoma loisellei (Bussing, 1989), is synonymized with Parachromis friedrichsthalii (Heckel, 1840). The species hitherto referred to as P. friedrichsthalii takes the valid name Parachromis multifasciatus (Regan, 1905). "
It shows that the multifasciatus Regan described 1905 was mistaken as a synonym of P. friedrichsthalii. Since Heckel described 1840 a different Fish ( ex loisellei) before as friedrichsthalii, it (multifasciatus) is not a synonym and valid.