LOGIN

RSS Facebook Twitter YouTube
GLOSSARY       

SEARCHGLOSSARY

A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z

PROFILESEARCH

Loach Id Required

Home Forums Fresh and Brackish Water Fishes Loach Id Required

This topic contains 0 replies, has 1 voice, and was last updated by  Matt 6 years, 6 months ago.

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 15 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #302074

    Matt
    Keymaster

    Any opinions on this one?

    Attached files

    #347509

    Jakub
    Participant

    Ok, I am a rookie here but from ventral fins before dorsal: Lepidocephalichthys? Maybe tomaculum?

    #347510

    Thomas
    Participant

    Lepidocephalichthys is my idea too. No suggestion about the species.

    Cheers,
    Thomas

    #347512

    andy rushworth
    Participant

    Possibly L.hasselti ?

    #347514

    Matt
    Keymaster

    Collection locality is northern Peninsular Malaysia if that helps.

    #347521

    Mark Duffill
    Participant

    I would say definitely Lepidocephalichthys, my guess at species would be furcatus?

    #347522

    Jakub
    Participant

    QUOTE (Mark Duffill @ Mar 8 2012, 07:32 AM) < {POST_SNAPBACK}>
    I would say definitely Lepidocephalichthys, my guess at species would be furcatus?

    I think caudal fin doesn’t fit…

    #347536

    Matt
    Keymaster

    Cheers guys. Was asking this for a friend who collected it. It’s been identified by an ichthyologist as L. tomaculum but exhibits some differences from the diagnosis for that species so he was interested to know others’ opinions.

    I should add that I initially said it was a Paramisgurnus so don’t think he’ll ask again mind…

    #347537

    Thomas
    Participant

    QUOTE
    I should add that I initially said it was a Paramisgurnus


    Matt, don’t drink and determine

    #347538

    Jakub
    Participant

    QUOTE (Matt @ Mar 9 2012, 02:14 PM) < {POST_SNAPBACK}>
    (…) It’s been identified by an ichthyologist as L. tomaculum but exhibits some differences from the diagnosis for that species (…)

    If they feel L. tomaculum doesn’t quite fit maybe it is worth considering Kotellatlimia? I think there was a fish once classed as Lepidocephalichthys that was then moved to Kotellatlimia (pristes)? Differences must have been very fine…

    #347540

    Thomas
    Participant

    K. pristes and K. katik were in the genus Lepidocephalichthys but there is at least one big different: at the males of Kottelatlimia is the second ray of the pectorale thickened, at Lepidocephalichthys it’s the last ray.

    Kottelatlimia male:

    Lepidocephalichthys male:

    I’m not sure if there are other “good to see” differences, except for the pectorals I would also say this two genera are very similar (at least in their aquaristic care).

    Cheers,
    Thomas

    Attached files

    #347546

    Matt
    Keymaster

    QUOTE (Thomas @ Mar 9 2012, 03:25 PM) < {POST_SNAPBACK}>
    Matt, don’t drink and determine /rolleyes.gif” style=”vertical-align:middle” emoid=”:rolleyes:” border=”0″ alt=”rolleyes.gif” />

    Lepidocephalichthys doesn’t seem to be in question, just whether it’s something undescribed or not.

    #347560

    andy rushworth
    Participant

    QUOTE (Matt @ Mar 9 2012, 02:14 PM) < {POST_SNAPBACK}>
    Cheers guys. Was asking this for a friend who collected it. It’s been identified by an ichthyologist as L. tomaculum but exhibits some differences from the diagnosis for that species so he was interested to know others’ opinions.

    I should add that I initially said it was a Paramisgurnus so don’t think he’ll ask again mind… /thumbs_up.gif” style=”vertical-align:middle” emoid=”:thumbsup:” border=”0″ alt=”thumbs_up.gif” />

    #347561

    The.Dark.One
    Member

    I’d go with tomaculum too.

    #347606

    Matt
    Keymaster

    Cheers Your Darkness and all, have passed it on. /laugh.gif” style=”vertical-align:middle” emoid=”:lol:” border=”0″ alt=”laugh.gif” />

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 15 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.