PlanetCatfish.com

Placeholder or one for Marc.

This species should have a load of synonyms. Lots of them are in "hobby use". Such as Zonancistrus, Peckoltia pulcher, D. picta and all the variants thereof.

Jools

In verifying that my new functionality in the species search, I filled in a couple of Dekeyseria entries [including a few updates to the species page itself].

Marc: Don't worry, you still have a few things to do! ;)

--
Mats

Err, yeah, but my view was to follow Isbrucker...

Jools

You mean change it all to Zonancistrus, or just which species are valid?

--
Mats

MatsP wrote:You mean change it all to Zonancistrus, or just which species are valid?

The latter. as valid and everything else out of the Rio Negro as a synonym.

Jools

Couple of points.

1) These are all currently considered valid spp, are we (PC) making a taxonomic call? Is that PC's perogative? I realize that some times we are forced to make a call when there is conflicting information, but this case is not one where we have to choose between competing or conflicting views. (Note: This does not mean that I disagree with the possibility that D. brachyura (Kner, 1854) and D. pulchra (Steindachner, 1915) are possibly synonyms of D. picta (Kner, 1854).

2) As alluded to above, D. picta is senior (was described before) to D. brachyura. If PC does go with Jools' suggestion above these fish would all fall under D. picta.

3) I am baffled by the fact that Kner described both D. brachyura and D. picta. Wouldn't this suggest that he thought the two fish were different? I do realize that Dekeyseria are real chameleons, do we think he described two different color phases of the same fish?

4) If PC elected to go with D. picta, the range would include: Upper Negro and Orinoco rivers and Canal Casiquiare basin, Brazil, Colombia, Venezuela (Fisch-Muller, 2003). So would PC include L052 also as a "jr synonym" of D. picta?

-Shane

Shane wrote:Couple of points.

You can't count!

Shane wrote:1) These are all currently considered valid spp, are we (PC) making a taxonomic call? Is that PC's prerogative? I realize that some times we are forced to make a call when there is conflicting information, but this case is not one where we have to choose between competing or conflicting views. (Note: This does not mean that I disagree with the possibility that D. brachyura (Kner, 1854) and D. pulchra (Steindachner, 1915) are possibly synonyms of D. picta (Kner, 1854).

I think it is a conflicting call at least from the perspective that D. brachyura appears to be the name used in hobby literature.

Shane wrote:2) As alluded to above, D. picta is senior (was described before) to D. brachyura. If PC does go with Jools suggestion above these fish would all fall under D. picta.

Agreed, if the thing is decided on the basis of which appears first in the same paper (as opposed to alphabetical order). Yet Isbrucker plumped for D. brachyura as the type species for Zonancistrus. I will look into that. There is a LOT written about this in German in the Welse Atlas Vol2. Any of our German friends care to summarise?

Shane wrote:3) I am baffled by the fact that Kner described both D. brachyura and D. picta. Wouldn't this suggest that he thought the two fish were different? I do realize that Dekeyseria are real chameleons, do we think he described two different color phases of the same fish?

Absolutely, yes. Even the names chosen suggests this. The clincher for me is the lovely drawings of both. Table IV, Fig. 2 in Kner's paper shows the head of a Dekeyseria with typical "butterfly" pattern. Fig 1a shows a plainish fish.

Shane wrote:4) If PC elected to go with D. picta, the range would include: Upper Negro and Orinoco rivers and Canal Casiquiare basin, Brazil, Colombia, Venezuela (Fisch-Muller, 2003). So would PC include L052 also as a "jr synonym" of D. picta?

I've not read Fisch-Muller, 2003. It seems plausible. Which author states what species is in the Orinoco?

I agree, there is something that doesn't add up in all this.

Cheers,

Jools

I take it no one has decided exactly what to do here?

--
Mats

Lots of e-mails went around on this topic and I suspect we will have some (scientifically) published resolution at some point as several folks have noted the issues raised above.
Making the changes suggested above is really a reflection of how far we want to go out on a limb. That said, that limb looks pretty sturdy
-Shane