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

Questions On Rasbora

Home Forums Fresh and Brackish Water Fishes Questions On Rasbora

This topic contains 139 replies, has 5 voices, and was last updated by  David Marshall 8 years, 11 months ago.

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 140 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #300087

    Matt
    Keymaster

    This is the next genus up for editing in the Knowledge Base (given up on Osteochilus for now

    Attached files

    #312949

    Mark Duffill
    Participant

    You have started with a good one Matt, that looks the same as the fish considered to be R. argyrotaenia by most sites but I have had these and I bought them as Rasbora cf daniconius and would consider them to be that rather than R. argyrotaenia, R. argyrotaenia in my experience tend to be more silver in body colour.

    #312950

    Matt
    Keymaster

    Right and the morphological info on FB doesn’t say anything about that prominent lateral stripe either although it does state ‘Origin of dorsal between tip of snout and caudal’ which I would have taken as a given.

    #312951

    mickthefish
    Participant

    is that a JJ pic then Matt?.
    i’m not sure on that beind a daniconius, i’ve had them as well as Andy a good few times and i can’t remember the markings in the caudal being that prominent.

    mick

    #312952

    Matt
    Keymaster

    Aye Mick; I’ve lost that much faith with his ids now I’m asking you guys on any I’m not 100% on. The Osteochilus pics are his an’ all. Any ideas what that Rasbora might be if it isn’t danionicus?

    Mark I’ve been reading up on argryotaenia the last hour or two and came across these pics of yours on rasboras.com. Pretty please we can use them?

    Attached files

    #312953

    Mark Duffill
    Participant

    Yeah no probs Matt

    #312954

    Mark Duffill
    Participant

    QUOTE (mickthefish @ Mar 15 2009, 09:39 PM) < {POST_SNAPBACK}>
    is that a JJ pic then Matt?.
    i’m not sure on that beind a daniconius, i’ve had them as well as Andy a good few times and i can’t remember the markings in the caudal being that prominent.

    mick

    Originally many moons ago Mick there were that many variations of daniconius that there were thought to be up to 5 different species, eventually these were put down to regional variations.

    I have had daniconius from 4 separate shipments before and all had differences to patterns and markings.

    #312955

    Matt
    Keymaster

    7″SL?

    #312956

    Mark Duffill
    Participant

    QUOTE (Matt @ Mar 15 2009, 10:47 PM) < {POST_SNAPBACK}>
    7″SL?
    #312957

    Matt
    Keymaster

    Ah ok mate thanks sorry I misunderstood. Thought you meant that most places state 7″ as TL but you’d seen them at that size SL. Think the sun’s getting to me…

    #312975

    Matt
    Keymaster

    I’ve added a profile for R. agilis today but can’t find any detailed info about where it comes from outside of Borneo. Any of you guys have references to occurences in Sumatra and/or Peninsular Malaysia?

    Also does anyone know how to differentiate this and R. pauciperforata as they look rather similar to me…

    #312977

    David Marshall
    Participant

    Hey Matt

    One and the same?

    Rasbora agilis , given full species status by Ahl in 1937, is one of those fish that causes much confusion amongst the scientific community? Some members of this community believe it to be a valid specie whilst others, in the majority, pronounce it as a synonym of R. pauciperforata (which we know as the Red-lined Rasbora). In aquarium literature agilis/this form of p., is often mistaken for R. gracilis.

    It is easy to see why p. could cause such problems as this specie is known from Borneo, Malaya, Thailand, Sumatra and Cambodia.

    Regards David

    #312978

    Mark Duffill
    Participant

    It depends what lierature you want to go by Matt

    R. agilis was deemed a none valid species and a variant of R. pauciperforata, after that R. agilis was again classed as a distinct species but this fish was renamed as R. gracilis by Kottelat.

    The picture you have for R. agilis is actually R. pauciperforata.

    Personally I would just link the R. agilis profile straight to R. pauciperforata.

    #312979

    Matt
    Keymaster

    I think I’ll just update the profile for pauciperforata when I get to it and omit agilis entirely lads. Will make mention of all this in the notes section of that profile. Honestly I’m so glad we’ve got such a knowledgeable lot on here otherwise the site would be doomed!

    #312982

    David Marshall
    Participant

    Hey Matt

    I would never tell you what do but in my opinion MD is right as you should link, rather than omit, agilis .

    Have done some Internet searches and Fishbase and a few other sites still class agilis as a valid specie (showing different photographs for a. and p.). To take this further, sorry, some also state that taeniata is a synonym of agilis and mention no link to either of these species with p.

    This begs the question are t., a. and p. different colour/regional variants of the same fish?

    Brilliant.

    Regards David

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 140 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.