Caldasia, 32 (2)

[Stefan]

Three new species of Hyphessobrycon group heterorhabdus (Teleostei: Characiformes: Characidae) and key to species from the Orinoco river basin.

Hyphessobrycon acaciae García-Alzate, Román-Valencia & Prada-Pedreros, 2010
Hyphessobrycon mavro García-Alzate, Román-Valencia & Prada-Pedreros, 2010
Hyphessobrycon niger García-Alzate, Román-Valencia & Prada-Pedreros, 2010

Open access: http://www.ciencias.unal.edu.co/unciencias…2/cld320215.pdf

[MatsP]

I wish that all scientists writing papers on new species of fish would:
1. have colour photos of live fish.
2. write in English…

I expect these would make neat aquarium fish – but I can’t read Spanish to save my life, and can’t make out much about what the …

—
Mats

[Stefan]

1. Always including live photographs might not be possible; many type series have been collected many years ago and have been preserved from the date of collecting, and paired with no one keeping them make such a thing impossible. I’d say it would make a nice addition but not a neccesity.

2. English would be very handy indeed, I agree! But not mandatory.

[MatsP]

QUOTE (Stefan @ Dec 23 2010, 06:56 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

1. Always including live photographs might not be possible; many type series have been collected many years ago and have been preserved from the date of collecting, and paired with no one keeping them make such a thing impossible. I’d say it would make a nice addition but not a neccesity.

Yes, of course. I understand that. But quite often the fish being described aren’t 50 years old… In this case, I’m pretty sure they weren’t.

The Panaque description does have live (or life-like) photos of two of the new species…

—
Mats

[Stefan]

Very true! Though in the world of ichthyology having live specimens pictured isn’t all that important, whereas it’s the other way around in the hobbyist world. Add to that the enormous costs of placing colour plates in most paid journals (sometimes 500 Euro per pic) and the interest to do so quickly declines to an author or authors.

[MatsP]

QUOTE (Stefan @ Dec 23 2010, 10:45 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Very true! Though in the world of ichthyology having live speicmens pictured isn’t all that important, whereas it’s the other way around in the hobbyist world. Add to that the enormous costs of placing colour plates in most paid journals (sometimes 500 Euro per pic) and the interest to do so quickly declines to an author or authors.

But surely scientists also need to identify newly caught fish – at least at a rudimentary level.

And of course, besides other scientists (and how many are they?) the main “customer” for these papers are probably fish keeping hobbyists (and professionals, but that’s a small number again). Of course, a lot of fish hobbyists are happy to just follow books and websites…

#320053

[Matt]

I too appreciate that live pics aren’t always a viable addition but where they are they should be included! Surely it’s important to record the live colours of a species in the description whenever possible.

My other pet hate with species descriptions is the fad of publishing them in hobbyist magazines, particularly German ones, which thankfully has now stopped.

#320056

[Stefan]

QUOTE (Matt @ Dec 24 2010, 04:18 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I too appreciate that live pics aren’t always a viable addition but where they are they should be included! Surely it’s important to record the live colours of a species in the description whenever possible.

My other pet hate with species descriptions is the fad of publishing them in hobbyist magazines, particularly German ones, which thankfully has now stopped.

#320076

Colin

Participant

I personally like to see pics in a description, when possible, but it is not the ‘be all and end all’. And anyway, it is not always very helpful as many subjects looked stressed and nothing like they do when happy and healthy in an aquarium. My exploits with “Puntius tiantian” is testament to that.

As to it all being in English….. why should one’s lack of english restrict them from writing species descriptions? If it’s in Spanish then I’d say that that the onus was on us to learn Spanish or translate it some other way?

#320077

Stefan

Member

QUOTE (Colin @ Dec 24 2010, 10:34 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I personally like to see pics in a description, when possible, but it is not the ‘be all and end all’. And anyway, it is not always very helpful as many subjects looked stressed and nothing like they do when happy and healthy in an aquarium. My exploits with “Puntius tiantian” is testament to that.

As to it all being in English….. why should one’s lack of english restrict them from writing species descriptions? If it’s in Spanish then I’d say that that the onus was on us to learn Spanish or translate it some other way?

I agree. Another, although different, example is Badis juergenschmidti; take a look at the live pic in the description that show a beautifully coloured dominant or breeding male. Then look at the pic that I posted yesterday in the freshwater section, showing the species in its day-to-day colouration; if you saw that, would everyone be able to positively identify it? The moral: colour patterns in live specimens change depending on mood but preserved fish depict a vast pattern on which they can be easily identified.

Colin’s second argument: Although English would be the most convenient to many of us, indeed not everyone speaks the language and authors should not be discourages by their not managing the English language. So we also get French, Spanish, Vietnamnese and other flavoured papers of which some present an English abstract. And that’s perfectly fine by me.

[Colin]

I personally like to see pics in a description, when possible, but it is not the ‘be all and end all’. And anyway, it is not always very helpful as many subjects looked stressed and nothing like they do when happy and healthy in an aquarium. My exploits with “Puntius tiantian” is testament to that.

As to it all being in English….. why should one’s lack of english restrict them from writing species descriptions? If it’s in Spanish then I’d say that that the onus was on us to learn Spanish or translate it some other way?

[Stefan]

QUOTE (Colin @ Dec 24 2010, 10:34 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I personally like to see pics in a description, when possible, but it is not the ‘be all and end all’. And anyway, it is not always very helpful as many subjects looked stressed and nothing like they do when happy and healthy in an aquarium. My exploits with “Puntius tiantian” is testament to that.

As to it all being in English….. why should one’s lack of english restrict them from writing species descriptions? If it’s in Spanish then I’d say that that the onus was on us to learn Spanish or translate it some other way?

I agree. Another, although different, example is Badis juergenschmidti; take a look at the live pic in the description that show a beautifully coloured dominant or breeding male. Then look at the pic that I posted yesterday in the freshwater section, showing the species in its day-to-day colouration; if you saw that, would everyone be able to positively identify it? The moral: colour patterns in live specimens change depending on mood but preserved fish depict a vast pattern on which they can be easily identified.

Colin’s second argument: Although English would be the most convenient to many of us, indeed not everyone speaks the language and authors should not be discourages by their not managing the English language. So we also get French, Spanish, Vietnamnese and other flavoured papers of which some present an English abstract. And that’s perfectly fine by me.

[Author]

Posts