L201 name

plecoboy · Post by **plecoboy** » 24 Feb 2007, 12:26

Now that L201 Hypancistrus contradens is described, can we chose a common name for it???

racoll · Post by **racoll** » 24 Feb 2007, 13:10

What about....

Cosmic Majesty Pleco?

plecoboy · Post by **plecoboy** » 24 Feb 2007, 13:56

How about Sunspot pleco ??

alga · Post by **alga** » 24 Feb 2007, 14:56

The reason for the latin names is to avoid common name confusion. How about Hypancistrus contradens?

YouTube · Post by **Jools** » 24 Feb 2007, 15:31

plecoboy wrote:How about Sunspot pl*co ??

I don't think it really needs another common name (it already has one in L201) and Sunspot pleco makes me think of .

I like the Venezuelan "inspired" diamonte pleco, but we're dealing with a black species with white spots, so it's pretty daft calling it a pleco - there are so many with this colour. Diamonte <em>Hypancistrus</em> is nice, but, for the reasons above, I don't really see a need for another name.

Jools

bronzefry · Post by **bronzefry** » 24 Feb 2007, 15:49

Sorry to burst your bubble, pl*coboy, but I try to steer clear of common names these days. I now understand why scientific names are important, since I've been trying to find matches for fish I already have. It becomes maddening. Take the H.inspector now H.contradens. I was at an auction last fall. There were (3)"H.inspectors" offered. One had small white spots. Another had large white spots. The third had yellow spots. All were considered the same species. I'll stick with Hypancistrus contradens. Rolls off the tongue nicely.

Amanda

apistomaster · Post by **apistomaster** » 24 Feb 2007, 16:54

Amen, Amanda,
I'm all for using valid scientific names as they become assigned to these utterly confusing L### or common names.

plecoboy · Post by **plecoboy** » 24 Feb 2007, 19:08

Ha, point taken. ouch. So nobody will refer Scobinancistrus aureatus as a Goldie anymore or Leporacanthicus galaxias as a Vampire ?

Yann · Post by **Yann** » 25 Feb 2007, 13:48

Hi!!

No... the scientific name described the fish 1'000'000 times better than any other name possible...

you get all the information you need with that...
River, size, diet etc... and you can understand somebody any where in the world because the name just don't change...

Cheers
Yann

bronzefry · Post by **bronzefry** » 25 Feb 2007, 15:26

Also, sometimes a common name means something where I live and another thing, say, where Jools lives. Massachusetts English is a bit different from English in Scotland. I believe this is one reason why the good folks that run this web site like us to put a generalised description of where we are from. It doesn't have to be an exact street address, but a general area. This helps understand why some people use certain words or phrases.

Amanda

(Shout out to Wisconsin!)

Boots n all · Post by **Boots n all** » 25 Feb 2007, 21:00

We have been buying and selling L201 as Hyp.
Inspector here in Australia? l am confused now as l did some research before buying but now????
If you go to http://www.plecofanatics.com/gallery/sh ... /allfields
you will see a photo and discription of what we and others have been buying and selling as L201 Hyp. Inspectors.
Yet here on planet catfish the Gallery shows a totally different fish.
Just for intrest sake here is the link to the search l did on planetcatfish 2 years ago, please note the title and the pictures, then compare for a current search here on planet catfish?
http://www.planetcatfish.com/forum/view ... hp?t=11414

racoll · Post by **racoll** » 25 Feb 2007, 21:06

There has been a lot of confusion in the past with this fish, but there seems to now be clarity in the form of a full description of the fish concerned.

L201 =

L102 =

Most people used to believe that L201 was H. inspector, but the recent Armbruster et al paper has cleared this up.

See this thread.

Boots n all · Post by **Boots n all** » 26 Feb 2007, 01:18

So all of these other people are wrong including planet catfish?
http://www.planetcatfish.com/catelog/sp ... ies_id=677

http://filaman.ifm-geomar.de/Summary/Sp ... p?id=58937

http://www.tropicalresources.net/phpBB2 ... s_L201.php

This one discribes the fish we have and it is by "Department of Biological Sciences"
http://apt.allenpress.com/aptonline/?re ... &page=0086

Then when l do a search on L102, l get Snowball Peckoltia ? Does this mean this is wrong also??

Shaun · Post by **Shaun** » 26 Feb 2007, 05:35

The real H. inspector was always L102, but the name was used in error when referring to L201. Now, recently, L201 has been scientifically described with the name Hypancistrus contradens.
Shaun

Boots n all · Post by **Boots n all** » 26 Feb 2007, 05:58

you have still not answered my question, Google it if you need to and you will be confused also?
According to the book "Aqualog"
L102 Snow pleco size 15cm.
L201 Hyp.Inspector size 9cm max. wich is what we have and breed, there is no way known that this fish could could get to 15cm

racoll · Post by **racoll** » 26 Feb 2007, 07:52

you have still not answered my question, Google it if you need to and you will be confused also?

Hi Boots n all.

Basically everyone had/has it wrong, Planet Catfish included (which has now been changed).

There were a few bright sparks on here who picked up on it a while ago though (Yann). See here.

The fish is definitely not a Peckotia sp. That is very wrong.

The original description of H. inspector wasn't entirely clear, but the new paper explains the difference thoroughly.

L201 (H. contradens) has spots on the head that are the same size as on the body. The spots on the caudal fin do not join to form lines.

L102 (H. inspector) has spots on the head which are smaller than that of the body. The spots can join to form lines on the caudal fin. The fish is also much larger than L201 (H. contradens) and has a black margin to the dorsal and caudal fins. The eyes are also bigger, hence the name.

I hope I explained this OK?

apistomaster · Post by **apistomaster** » 26 Feb 2007, 09:05

Hi Racoll,
You and Yann have made the case to my satisfaction and now I have a species new to me.

Carachama · Post by **Carachama** » 26 Feb 2007, 16:24

Hey All,

I hadn't even realized that the Hypancistrus MS had been published until one of you told me. The author is always the last to know. Anyway, we snipped off 4 more of the Hypancistrus, and there are a lot more to go. Lucia Rapp Py-Daniel is going to describe a bunch more from Brazil in the near future as well, so identifying any of these beasts is difficult. I revised my page on Hypancistrus and have the key to the current species up there. There are also links to my two papers on the subject. Since we submitted this paper, I have also found that many of the species are also found in Colombia from south of the Meta to the Atabapo. Something is going on with H. debilittera - the markings seem to change as you go North and the specimens from the Cinaruco of Venezuela that I have may be H. debilittera or may be new - need more specimens to tell.
http://www.auburn.edu/academic/science_ ... hypan.html

I agree that the L numbers are confusing. It is just another taxonomic scheme. With the normal taxonomy of loricariids so overwhelming and authors differing on what names to use for things, the L numbers just make life even more confusing. But, I guess it is a way of communicating.

Jon Armbruster

YouTube · Post by **Jools** » 26 Feb 2007, 16:45

Carachama wrote:With the normal taxonomy of loricariids so overwhelming and authors differing on what names to use for things, the L numbers just make life even more confusing. But, I guess it is a way of communicating.

To go back to some of the original posts and to reply to Jon, L-numbers like the binomial system itself, are by no means flawless. BUT, IMHO, it's a heck of a lot better than "super mega king clown green dragon hi-fin pleco from the Orinoco". L-numbers do have the fringe benefit of while fish may be changing from or , or or whatever else, numbers don't move as much and are easier for many to memorize.

The trick is to stop using them when something is described! Great to see these species being named - I saw written on a fish store tank last week - now that is progress!

If we are to invent common names, a generic common name for (excluding <em>H. zebra</em>) might not be a bad idea. I quite like stubby pleco. Then we can call one of these new species the Bandit Stubby pleco.

Jools

racoll · Post by **racoll** » 26 Feb 2007, 18:02

Jon,

I have a small query about your paper which I brought up in this thread.

Here it is.....

I am a bit confused about Figure 1 in the paper.

The top image of "H. inspector" clearly shows H. contradens according to Armbruster's definition on page 66?

The spots are the same size on the head as the body, and are not joined to form bands on the caudal fin.

There is also no black margins to the dorsal and caudal fins (not mentioned).

Is this anything to do with the mix up with some of the type specimens of H. inspector being H. contradens (page 68.), or is it a typo, or am I just being thick?

Thanks for your time in clarifying this.

apistomaster · Post by **apistomaster** » 26 Feb 2007, 18:06

Jools,
Maybe it's the sadistic streak of mine just showing through but making people use valid scientific names appeals to me.
Common names become corrupted or arbitralily assigned to make fish sound more valuable by vendors than they really are leading to confusion.

Then again, "stubby plecos", if it only refers to Hyancistrus, is a catchy name.

Boots n all · Post by **Boots n all** » 26 Feb 2007, 20:19

Firstly thank you Jon Armbruster for replying to my e-mail and thank you everyone for making it clear.
l will now go to the other forums where l have posted my L201 Hyp. Inspectors forsale and change it to "Fry forsale L201 Hyp. Contradens"

Common names can be somthing l would like to avoid, who gives it is common name? we had in Australia one person call his "Orange spots(L168)" ................
"Brown Peppermints" a common name for the L201's should be "Bilby's"

plecoboy · Post by **plecoboy** » 27 Feb 2007, 00:16

Not to further complicate the issue, but what about the variant in L201? I have 4 L201s, but one of them has spots that are at least twice the size of the spots on the other 3. Is this still considered just a variant?

racoll · Post by **racoll** » 27 Feb 2007, 09:21

Not to further complicate the issue, but what about the variant in L201? I have 4 L201s, but one of them has spots that are at least twice the size of the spots on the other 3. Is this still considered just a variant?

I would imagine so yes.

I have seen quite a lot of variability in this species.

L201 name

L201 name

Hmm

Hmm

L201

Hmm

New Hypancistrus

Re: New Hypancistrus

Hmm