Lepidocephalichthys annandalei

[Thomas]

Thanks Jim, till now it looks good. They feed well and the Kottelatlimia takes their shyness. 😀

 

 

In the BSSW-Report 4/2011 is a short news about this loach. Gerhard Ott labeled it as L. spec. aff. annandalei, because of the different caudal fin showed in the “Revision of Lepidocephalichthys” (Havird and Page 2010)

The L. annandalei in this paper seems to have the same caudal fin pattern as the annandalei in the “Tekriwal Book” (page 1 of this thread).

So it looks to me that Gerhard is right, and our “L. annandalei” is an undescribed species which is similar but not identical with L. annandalei is.

Whats your opinions, guys?

[Matt]

Hi Thomas, initial thought was that the posterior ocellus depicted in the caudal-fin of the Havird and Page diagram (and earlier papers) is missing in the Tekriwal and Rao photo?

The larger fish in your last photo has caudal patterning reminiscent of L. annandalei from scientific papers to me but could be wrong?

Does anyone know what L. micropogon looks like in life?

[Thomas]

initial thought was that the posterior ocellus depicted in the caudal-fin of the Havird and Page diagram (and earlier papers) is missing in the Tekriwal and Rao photo?

It looks so, yes

 

The larger fish is a Kottelatlimia.

Does anyone know what L. micropogon looks like in life?

http://www.siamensis.org/category/tags/lepidocephalichthys-micropogon

 

For me the head shape of our annandalei and the Tekriwal annandalei looks different, too.

I have a pic of the pectoral fin of a male, the lamina circularis looks a bit similar to the annandalei lc in the harvid paper.

Cheers,

Thomas

[Matt]

Haha shows what I know.:D

Thomas, are you suggesting that the pic in Tekriwal and Rao is L. annandalei though?

[Thomas]

Glad you ask me this 😕 😉

Ok, we have three different annandalei pics:

The Menon annandalei: “Fauna of India”

 

The Havird and Page annadalei: “A Revision of Lepidocephalichthys”

 

And the Tekriwal annandalei: “Ornamental Aquarium Fish of India”

 

And to have all together: our annandalei caudale:

 

 

The caudal fin of the Menon and Havird annandalei seems to be nearly identical I would say. All in all i would say the Tekriwal annandalei caudale looks a bit different than the other two, but not totally different. Maybe it is a custom difference of the pictured loach?

 

But the body patterns looks also a bit different to the Menon and Havird pics, which shows the same species to my mind.

 

What about with the original description of L. annandalei?

[Plaamoo]

The first three pics all appear to have different caudal fins to me. Only the first resembles ours, but it’s a drawing isn’t it?

 

While comparing I noticed that the in most recent pics from Charles, the mouths are quite different than mine.

[Matt]

Just downloaded the description. The main difference between the fish we’ve been calling L. annandalei and the species sensu stricto is that the caudal fin should have a notch between the upper and lower lobes. This is clearly visible in the Havird and Page pic but missing in ‘our’ fish. Will post the plates up later on.

Jim, how does the mouth differ between your fish and Charles’ ones?

[Plaamoo]

Might be age or sex, but they look different to me?

[Thomas]

After reading the Original Description (many thanks Matt!) I don’t think we have L. annandalei anymore. The caudal pattern of ours is different to the one in the OD. And now I would say the Havird pic and the Menon pic shows L. annandalei. Our seems to be an undescribed species. Maybe such as G. Ott wrote, Lepidocephalichthys spec. aff. annandalei or let the numbers goes on…

I have measured some data of the OD, body depth in length, head in lenght – this fits, but not the caudale, as Matt also wrote above.

 

Cheers,

Thomas

[Matt]

Any preference as to what we call it in the Knowledge Base? L. cf. annandalei, L. sp. ‘peacock’ or L. sp. LE3 are the three choices that immediately spring to mind?

[mikev]

I don’t keep these but a general comment on naming: I think cf is a bad idea long-term since it is quite possible to have two or more L. cf. annandalei appearing eventually. Killie nomenclature includes notation like “CI-10” (==commercial import, 2010),… adding such a time stamp is most helpful when the fish is bred and lingers around for a long time… but still may be a useful approach in other cases.. thus perhaps “L. cf. annandalei CI-10” should be considered. Or “L.sp.CI-10” ?

[The.Dark.One]

Matt

Could you email me the OD please?

Looking at the Jayaram and Havird and Page fish, they look the same to me as our fish but with the ocellus drained of colour? The Tekriwal and Rao one looks a bit different but not massively so, again, could be down to colour/lighting/mood.

 

Why do you think they are different?

Here is a fat one from the Castleford show yesterday.

[Matt]

I don’t necessarily think they’re different. 😀 Do you think they’re the same?

[Nikhil]

Hi Gentlemen,

 

Here is what I received recently. These are Lepidocephalichthys annandalei ?

 

 

 

Regards

 

Nikhil

[Thomas]

Have to dig out this thread.

@Thomas said:
One of the cf. manipurensis has a very pointed head, looks like deformed. What do you mean? other ideas about the determination?

On Facebook (Andrew Rao) I have seen this (or at least a very similar) loach as Neoeucirrhichthys maydelli.

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=839591692745870&set=pcb.839591909412515&type=1&theater

Cheers,

Thomas

[Author]

Posts