Naming conventions for apistogramma's

[parkap]

Hi All,

I'm still way at the bottom of the learning curve when it comes to apistogrammas, so this might seem a very basic question, but I haven't seen an explanation of this yet.

Basically, what's the difference between the following naming conventions:
Apistogramma xxxx
Apistogramma sp. xxxx
Apistogramma cf. xxxx, eg. Apistograma cf. viejita "Rio Pebas"

I've seen the same term used to describe a apistogramma's but under the different naming convention. For example, and I'm making these up so don't get annoyed if because they're wrong and make no sense:

Apistogramma Trifasciata "Macliensis" versus
Apistogramma sp. Macliensis.

The main reuse of the describing term I see used is when the territory a species of apistogramma comes from, eg. "tefe", is used simply as sp. "tefe" without the species actually being names, eg: (again I'm making this up)
Apistogramma Agazissii "Tefe" versus
Apistogramma sp. Tefe.

Does this simply mean the actual species hasn't been categorised yet but this apistogramma comes from that area? If so, I'd have thought such a term under the sp. usage could literally be used to describe numerous different types of apistogramma.

And I've no idea what the cf. one is for.

Peter.

[kevkoi]

Hah.. ok...

Ok, we all know that scientific names consist of the "Genus" name (Apistogramma) and followed by the "Species" name (agassizi). The propper naming is that the Genus should start with a capital letter, and the species name in lower case.

So:
Apistogramma agassizi = correct
Apistogramma Agassizi = incorrect

Next, sometimes a certain fish has not been propperly given it's due species name, hence the species part of the name is left as "sp." (short for species. - un-named). Hence, Apistogramma sp. "---"
(There's not a lot of money for science to study little fish like apistogramma u know.)

These yet to be named fish usually come attached with some form of common identification such as (usually), location of collection and an identifying characteristic if there are 2 variants in the same river for instance.
Hence: Apistogramma sp. "Rio Mamore red tail"

In the case of cf./aff., it just literally means "similar to" the documented specimen, but we are still unsure because there are sligth differences visually with the described specimen.
So, hence we have: Apistogramma cf. juruensis "Black Chin". (It looks like a juruensis, but we're not sure, and it has a black chin.)

Comprendo? Taxonomy.... even I don't get it.

[parkap]

Thanks Kev, that's cleared a lot up.

I suppose I'd be cast into the never-ending levels of the underworld if I were to, for example, try to breed A. agazissi "xxxx" with an A. cf. agazissii?

So when are you going to organise an expedition for hobbyist to South America to check out where these little guys actually come from?

Regards,
Peter.

[kevkoi]

Oh and to complicate matters further... sometimes, a famous Apistogramma guy decides to tentatively name the fish after himself....

So, we get things like:

Apistogramma sp. "Wilhelmi"

This fish has 2 variations... one has a red tail and the other has a black tail, so sometimes we see: Apistogramma sp "Wilhelmi red" and Apistogramma sp "Wilhemi".

Then there are OTHER ppl who refuse to accept this name and instead name it after the river location they are from and believes that this fish is similar to the agassizi group, so we have:

Apistogramma cf.agassizi "Rio Abacaxi" and "Rio Abacaxi red".

So, essentially:

Apistogramma wilhelmi (not official)
Apistogramma sp. "Wilhelmi" and "Wilhelmi red"
Apistogramma sp "Rio Abacaxi" and "Rio Abacaxi red"
Apistogramma agassizi "Rio Abacaxi" and "Rio Abacaxi red"

........ are all the same fish.

[Th0mas]

Peter,

Here's from what I understand (may not be totally correct).

Firstly the name of a species is ALWAYS lowercase. Hence Apistogramma agassizi/panduro/bitaeniate etc will always be lower case as convention.

Those with the sp. are already classified as species, but aren't formally named (I think).

And finally the one with cf, these are yet to be classified as species and only grouped them as possible variant to a species.

As in your example for trifasciata "Macliensis" and agassizi "Tefe", these are variant of the species.

Here's a link to a similar discussion in thekrib site:

http://www.thekrib.com/Apisto/latin.html

As for apistogramma macliensis - well it is a bit of a mess at the moment. Take a read at this link: http://www.thekrib.com/Apisto/A-maciliensis.html

Thomas.

[kevkoi]

Heck, I haven't even been on one yet... There's suppose to be one near the end of this year going into Brazil (Mostly a discus expedition). Was itching to go....

Oh, and A.trifasciata "macilensis"..... oh what a mess- trully.

I recently got sent a batch from Germany labelled as A.trifasciata "guapore high fin red", looks bloody the same to me!!

Oh well, off to separate all the fish labelled "Guapore red" from my supposed population of A.trifasciata "maciliensis".....

[Th0mas]

Looks like Kev beat me to the submit button.....



Oh well, he did answer most if not all the questions.

Thomas.

[Th0mas]

Have heard colleage went there for a sight seeing trip, but I wouldn't go as the Australian regulation requires all sort of shots to be taken (yellow fever, etc) before you're clear to go, otherwise you may not allow to come back.

Anyhow, I hate needles

Thomas.

[parkap]

Thanks Thomas and Kev. Some really great information here. Hopefully others have found it useful as well. It's definitely made things clearer for me.

I'll leave Kev to organise the "Apistogramma Sight Seeing Tour of South America - 2007". Let us know how you go Kev... :P

[Reillin]

My last understanding of naming conventions is that you cannot name a fish after yourself.

However you can name a fish after anyone else but yourself. So those explorers and collectors name a fish after their best mate and their best mate does the same for them. All a conspiracy in my views. Forget about petrol price fixing, lets get these guys!!! Lol.

Cheers,
Vien.