petricola or lucipinnis

[flowaz]

How do you tell the difference between the two?
Iv already bought 3 'petricola' for $60 I really hope I got what I payed for!

[Mod edit: Make the text readable by not having it "pink" -- Mats]

[MatsP]

This thread
http://www.planetcatfish.com/forum/view ... 13&t=23921
has some explanation of the difference.

I will update the Cat-eLog tomorrow to reflect those comments, as the current Cat-eLog record is pretty vague on the subject.

--
Mats

[flowaz]

So the spots on the head should be smaller than the spots on the body?
Is that correct for cats as small as 1" long?

[Birger]

Is there any way you can upload to your post a picture of what you have?

[Richard B]

A pic will help us to ID a fish & is the best way.

There is also ilebrevis to consider & i don't even dare mention the dreaded "H" word.

$60 for 3 fish sounds a bargain for petricola, but about right for lucipinnis, but price is no way to ID a fish!

[flowaz]

I can post more if needed, sorry about the big size but i couldnt scale them down any.

[MatsP]

I'd say those are petricola based on the spots on the head. Of course, I could be wrong.

--
Mats

[Richard B]

I'd say these were Lucipinnis, based on the body spots being made of irregular shapes, particularly towards the rear of the fish. Petricola have more even sized spotting on the body

[worton[pl]]

Hey,

when very young spots on body of petricola also are irregular. However even very, very young true petricolas got a lot of very regular and very small spots on head .

So I would also put my cards on lucipinnis .

Regards.

[Birger]

l would go with

Synodontis lucipinnis

as well.

Birger

[flowaz]

That kind of really sucks, however Im going to keep them becauze ive grown too attached!
I think my S. eruptus enjoys their company to sooo . . . their here to stay.

Anybody else who agrees or disagrees about the lucipinnis please post.

[Richard B]

That kind of really sucks, however Im going to keep them becauze ive grown too attached!
I think my S. eruptus enjoys their company to sooo . . . their here to stay.

Anybody else who agrees or disagrees about the lucipinnis please post.

Hey, don't fret! Lucipinnis are a great fish to own - they're attractive, peaceful, active, can be kept in groups without aggro, they're breedable too.

I've seen thousands of lucipinnis in my time but probably less than 50 petricola - they really are that much more hard to come by

[flowaz]

Yes thats what made me wonder about the 'petracola' I have. They are great little fish and more active than any other catfish Ive kept. I also like how they stand up to my S. fryeri (big bully hap, incase you dont keep cichlids). They're so small and they bite back! Something my eruptus wont do.

[jerry58]

Hi flowaz

I was looking on the net and found this on practical fishkeeping site don't know if it helps I can't understand it but you might and if you don't as well, maybe someone could explain it please as I have some brought as petricola and wonder if they are but are a bit older than yours !

It goes like this.

Synodontis lucipinnis
The petricola-like Synodontis lucipinnis is believed to be the same species sold in the aquarium trade under the Dwarf petricola common name.

Reaching a size of up to 10cm/4" TL (some 3.5cm smaller than the largest petricola), morphometrically it differs very little from petricola, making the fish somewhat tricky to tell apart.

Synodontis lucipinnis can be distinguished from petricola by the lack of an axilliary pore and the presence of "light-coloured windows" at the bases of the rayed fins.

It is known only from the Musende Rocks of Mpulungu in Zambia, at the southernmost tip of the Lake.

Hope it helps

Jerry

[flowaz]

No I cant understand it either. Maybe it would help if I knew what the pore wass but I dont so . . . does anybody else?

[Birger]

the axillary pore is at the base of the pectoral spine and I believe in these fish are very difficult to discern visually(some other varieties of catfish it can be seen)

It takes a confident practiced eye and to see the differences between the two species but the differences are there...

Birger

[flowaz]

These guys are so small and so fast there is no way I would be able to see something small on them.

Seems like none of the LFS in my area know what they are selling, I have to tell them what they have and explain why that fish has whit polka dots all over it. I think I should get payed! I really dont expect to be totally sure what I have until they get older and the spots get smaller or stay bigger.

[MatsP]

Seems like none of the LFS in my area know what they are selling, I have to tell them what they have and explain why that fish has whit polka dots all over it. I think I should get payed! I really dont expect to be totally sure what I have until they get older and the spots get smaller or stay bigger.

That is, unfortunately, not a particularly unusual scenario. There are several "problems" that all contribute to incorrect naming in shops.
1. Old books used for identification. S. lucipinnis has only been scientifically described for a couple of years now, so books in the trade may not even have a picture or listing for this species.
2. Books having poor ID keys. Many of the books do not clearly state how to tell similar looking species apart.
3. Also a tendency of "if it looks like on the picture, it must be what is on the picture". In the S. petricola vs. S. lucipinnis, there is VERY LITTLE visual difference.
4. The LFS refusing to take responsibility for ID - the wholesalers identification is used to avoid responsibility - "That is what the wholesaler says they are, and we don't want to get it wrong by changing it - if it's wrong now, then it's not our fault".

Of course, there are also wholesalers, exporters and LFS's that actually intentionally try to fob fish A off as a more expensive species B - but I'd say that's much rarer.

--
Mats