P. fasciata is rarely seen in the trade and is typically available only as bycatch among shipments of Sinibotia spp., particularly S. robusta. According to current classification numerous species from several genera are considered synonymous with it.
It can be told apart from the similar-looking P. bimaculata by presence of a single (vs. two) dark spots at the caudal-fin base and from P. parva by presence of a single dark spot (vs. thin vertical bar) at the caudal-fin base.
Naseka & Bogutskaya (2004) state it can be differentiated from P. mantschurica by possession of 12-14 thin, regular dark stripes on the dorsal surface, flanks and belly, narrower than the spaces between (vs. dark body stripes widening on the dorsal surface, where they're broader than the spaces between).
P. lijiangensis is also very similar, sharing the dark caudal spot and basic patterning, but only has 10-13 body stripes with other defining characters including two dark bars on the head, two rows of greyish spots in the dorsal fin, 3-4 dark bands on the caudal-fin lobes, two bands in the anal-fin (one of which is subterminal) and two indistinct bars on the dorsal surface of the ventral fins.
The genus Parabotia was described in 1872 and remained valid until 1936 when Fang synonymised it with Hymenophysa. It was reestablished by Chen (1980) and has been accepted since with Nalbant (2002) listing the defining characters as: body slimmer than in Leptobotia; suborbital spine bifurcated (divided in two); cheeks scaled; body with vertical stripes; a black spot at the base of the caudal-fin.
In their definition Naseka & Bogutskaya (2004) list the characters above plus: relatively slim caudal peduncle (depth fitting 1.5-1.6 times in its length); pelvic-fin reaching midway between pelvic-fin origin and anal-fin origin; anus located distinctly posterior to dorsal-fin base and relatively closer to anal-fin base (midway between tip of pelvic-fin and anal-fin origin); dark body stripes relatively thin and numerous.
Modern studies have resulted in various changes to the taxonomy of both the family Botiidae and its constituent genera although Parabotia has been mostly unaffected.
It's been widely considered a genetically distinct grouping since Nalbant (2002), having previously been considered a subfamily (Botiinae) of the family Cobitidae. Nalbant also moved some previous members of Botia into the new genus Yasuhikotakia based on a number of morphological characters.
Later Kottelat (2004) made further modifications to the taxonomy, raising Chromobotia for B. macracanthus and confirming that species previously included in the genus Hymenophysa should instead be referred to Syncrossus.
The former alteration was based on colour pattern plus some morphological characters and the latter because Hymenophysa not only represents a spelling mistake (McClelland's original spelling was Hymenphysa) but is a junior synonym of Botia.
More recently Kottelat (2012) erected the genus Ambastaia to accommodate A.nigrolineata and A. sidthimunki, two former members of both Botia and Yasuhikotakia.
As a result of these works the family Botiidae is thus divided into two tribes within which Botia appears to be the most basal lineage:
Tribe Leptobotiini - Leptobotia, Parabotia, Sinibotia.
Tribe Botiini - Ambastaia, Botia, Chromobotia, Syncrossus, Yasuhikotakia.
Phylogenetic studies by Tang et al. (2005) and Šlechtová et al. (2006) have largely confirmed this system to be correct although the latter disagreed with the placement of Sinibotia, finding it to be more closely related to the tribe Botiini.
Ambastaia nigrolineata and A. sidthimunki were found to be more closely-related to both Sinibotia and Syncrossus than Yasuhikotakia, despite being considered members of the latter at the time. Šlechtová et al. also proposed the use of subfamily names under the following system:
Subfamily Leptobotiinae - Leptobotia, Parabotia.
Subfamily Botiinae - Botia, Chromobotia, Sinibotia, Syncrossus, Yasuhikotakia.
Within these Botia appears to be the basal, i.e., most ancient, lineage and in a more-detailed phylogenetic analysis Šlechtová et al. (2007) confirmed the validity of the family Botiidae with the genera listed above as members rather then being grouped into subfamilies. This more recent, simpler system is the one we currently follow here on SF.
Parabotia spp. also possess sharp, motile, sub-ocular spines which are normally concealed within a pouch of skin but erected when an individual is stressed, e.g., if removed from the water. Care is therefore necessary as these can become entangled in aquarium nets and those of larger specimens can break human skin.
Botiids are also susceptible to a condition commonly referred to as 'skinny disease' and characterised by a loss of weight. This is especially common in newly-imported specimens and is thought to be caused by a species of the flagellate genus Spironucleus.
It's treatable although the recommended medication varies depending on country. Hobbyists in the UK tend to use the antibiotic Levamisole and those in the United States Fenbendazole (aka Panacur).
Editing needs JavaScript. This is the text as it was last saved.