Dixon1990 Posted November 2, 2008 Report Share Posted November 2, 2008 Phil is auctioning "yellow sailfin pleco's". I don't know to what success. But if he got of his ass and did the homework I bet there would be a market For Hypostomus Hemicochlidon Phil would recognise the location of this fish I know but he's not reading this anymore cause the cots empty. So I guess I shouldn't expect to see the name change on the auction eh! http://www.planetcatfish.com/catelog/sp ... es_id=1325 Or Pterygoplichthys punctatus Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
firenzenz Posted November 2, 2008 Report Share Posted November 2, 2008 Yeah That was an option, and I'm not going to say that it isn't. I've based mine on the Location . All the plecs that Phil brought in llike Iquitos Tigers, and the other panagolus are from upper Amazon and came through A peruvian supplier. As does the Hypostumus. The point is that he will know or could have known but seems to prefer 'his' names Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dixon1990 Posted November 2, 2008 Report Share Posted November 2, 2008 Well, the first photo in Pterygoplichthys punctatus is actually a photo of one of phils apparently, and he thinks its the same fish. But i never looked at the location, and going by that i agree with you now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
firenzenz Posted November 2, 2008 Report Share Posted November 2, 2008 The first photo in Phil's Auction is a photo off Planet Catfish and was contibuted by the Peruvian Aquarium Group. Phil may well be a member of that group, and the photo may be his and of his fish- I don't know. If it is then he is submitting photo's of a fish only has the common name for and putting out to world as something based on his whim and a prayer, and it looked like something. If so , seem his bad habits aren't confined to our shores. I wonder if he has reddish/orangey ones. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
new zealand discus man Posted November 2, 2008 Report Share Posted November 2, 2008 Well, the first photo in Pterygoplichthys punctatus is actually a photo of one of phils apparently, and he thinks its the same fish. But i never looked at the location, and going by that i agree with you now. The photo is mine..And Mine alone..It was sent to the supplier to confirm but with changes there no one has put enough importance to it... ALSO >>>>> Rubbish you are talking because all pleco's { Hypostomus } have a max on 8 rays in dorsal fin and sailfins have 9 to 13 rays..Dixon is close but its still not confirmed as puntatus..So now who knows zip about fish... Also when i first started breeding Malawi they were all Pseudotropheus..And could and did import many different lines......Now legal is just by the maf link posted...Real answer here is im prepared to grow out Firebird and then breed them..To other auctions as show..Not my concern as i will tell him to keep the name i have shown as listed overseas........To Houses...Fish Room...You can have mine for 1.5 million ...Cash ..............Phill Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
firenzenz Posted November 2, 2008 Report Share Posted November 2, 2008 You fell into that thanks Phil. Look up irony next time your in the web. What I did was to illiustrate a point . Fool! Goose/Gander thing. Seems specifics are something you care about after all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
new zealand discus man Posted November 2, 2008 Report Share Posted November 2, 2008 The irony is a lot of guess work here with out true facts.....Phill Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marto Posted November 2, 2008 Report Share Posted November 2, 2008 sounds all very confusing to me. I bought this one as a Aulonocara Hansbaenschi. Does it look like one? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
new zealand discus man Posted November 2, 2008 Report Share Posted November 2, 2008 http://www.malawicichlidhomepage.com/ha ... nschi.html Red Shoulder ..See link.....Phill Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ryanjury Posted November 2, 2008 Report Share Posted November 2, 2008 Not really that confusing just buy from descent sources with descent names especially if you plan to breed and pass fish on.. Beware of common names.. Especially be very wary of who you buy from as some people are just out to make a quick buck and are hung up with random internet links and even more random common names as reference for definate ids of fish.. Hmm again depends what hansbaenshi you have there are many different varients and the name is associated with many fish. They are all stuartgranti now... However that fish does look good for a red shouldered hansbaenshi as sold in NZ. http://www.cichlid-forum.com/profiles/c ... .php?cat=3 Could be any of the stuartgranti listed.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David R Posted November 2, 2008 Report Share Posted November 2, 2008 Alulonocara Rubescens is a man made deritive of Aulonocara Maleri, through line breeding a deeper reddish colour and more compacted body shape. Named after Peter Rubin who developed the line in germany. Well unless "A. rubescens" has been described and accepted as a new species that name is as nonsensical as any common name. Hybrids or man-made varieties from line breeding etc do not get a proper Latinised species name. If it is a line-bred strain of A. maleri, then the correct name would be Alulonocara maleri Rubens or A. maleri Peter Rubens, or what ever the person giving that variety a name would like to call it, so long as it is not Latinised and used instead of a species name. Regardless of how much line breeding or inbreeding has taken place and regardless of how far removed from its natural form the fish is, if there has been no hybridising the fish is still Alulonocara maleri. If it were a hybrid it should be called Alulonocara 'Rubens' or A. 'Peter Rubin'. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Navarre Posted November 2, 2008 Report Share Posted November 2, 2008 I would like to say thank you to the mods for not removing this thread. It has had its flames (sorry for the play on words). Despite having raised my head earlier on as a potential target...lol....this thread has certainly identified a few people whom I shall be... or stay... in contact with, as I strive to "keep" quality fish. This has been a great topic and I have learnt a lot. Thank you to you all..well nearly all of you.... Navarre Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
firenzenz Posted November 2, 2008 Report Share Posted November 2, 2008 Well unless "A. rubescens" has been described and accepted as a new species that name is as nonsensical as any common name. Hybrids or man-made varieties from line breeding etc do not get a proper Latinised species name. If it is a line-bred strain of A. maleri, then the correct name would be Alulonocara maleri Rubens or A. maleri Peter Rubens, or what ever the person giving that variety a name would like to call it, so long as it is not Latinised and used instead of a species name. Regardless of how much line breeding or inbreeding has taken place and regardless of how far removed from its natural form the fish is, if there has been no hybridising the fish is still Alulonocara maleri. If it were a hybrid it should be called Alulonocara 'Rubens' or A. 'Peter Rubin'. David As far as I'm aware it has been this fish is recognised as it's own species and therefore its own name, but I do agree that A. sp maleri Rubens would be probably a name that would better suit the fish if the objeact was to classify it as you suggesting. Starts to get crazy though. German Red would be 'Aulonocara Maleri chipoka german red'. There is no doubt that in Europe where F0 and F1 stocks the naming of fish is adhered to by enlightening breeders. The equivalent in new world is hard to find, except perhaps plecs where varietal of same species are given different L#'s. The point of this thread at the end of the day isn't whether a particular fish has a correct Latin name, although I agree with your rationalle. It is whether a fish is actuallly what it was thought to be, and if you can't be 100% yes on that answer, what then is your philosphy. And that is where differences ly. Where Ego can elevate one's decision making to that of flying in the face of what is now popular thought. As of interest and based on your view - Should blue Dempsey have its own Nomeclature. Is it hybrid or own species, line bred or genotype. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
livingart Posted November 2, 2008 Report Share Posted November 2, 2008 As of interest and based on your view - Should blue Dempsey have its own Nomeclature. Is it hybrid or own species, line bred or genotype. oh no agree with davids last post and with you too firenzenz it is good that some breeders are taking the "firebirds" seriously maybe its time to call them "nz reds" as phil has said the future will define this for us Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
firenzenz Posted November 2, 2008 Report Share Posted November 2, 2008 NZ reds- Ambulance at the bottom of the cliff, when a small fence of the top would have sufficed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
new zealand discus man Posted November 2, 2008 Report Share Posted November 2, 2008 As long as there is a river at the bottom of the cliff i might even find a new fish line there to..But Trout will do....Phill Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
livingart Posted November 2, 2008 Report Share Posted November 2, 2008 the small fence would require experienced fencers some very good arguements from both sides of the fence Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
new zealand discus man Posted November 2, 2008 Report Share Posted November 2, 2008 Just dont ask doc to built it or ministry of works or be the till the next xx years..To posts yes several words were un called for but i like to stay nice and clean evern if it gets stilly.......Phill Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David R Posted November 2, 2008 Report Share Posted November 2, 2008 As of interest and based on your view - Should blue Dempsey have its own Nomeclature. Is it hybrid or own species, line bred or genotype. I have no idea as I'm not aware of the origins of that form. The fact that they don't 'breed true' (ie crossing two EBJD's won't get you a spawn of EBJD's) would suggest to me that it is most certainly not a seperate species, or even subspecies, and is most likely either a colour morph selectively bred by us. Interesting that the A. rubescens have been given species rank. I think in any situation, unless you can be 100% positive in your identification then it is best to call them an unknown entity. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tropheus Posted November 3, 2008 Report Share Posted November 3, 2008 A couple of pointers for all newbys wanting to purchase Aulonocara Cichlids: 1- Read as much as you can first about the species/varient before you purchase 2- Buy from a reputable Retailer or Private seller. If you see more then one species of Aulonocara in the same tank DO NOT PURCHASE. 3- DO NOT purchase then mix Aulonocara with the same name from two different suppliers as there are alot of variants that look similar. 4-Just because someone has been breeding fish for 1000 years doesnt make them a expert. (EG Winston Peters, not a fish keeper but a joke) :lol: :lol: And ENJOY THE HOBBY Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.