Gender of L160 in Breeding Articles

[Borbi]

Hi,

I just realized that both Pseudacanthicus breeding articles contain the same picture of Pseudacanthicus sp. "L 160".
However, in the one on P. leopardus and L 114, it is titled a "gravid female",
while in the new one on P. spinosus, it is termed "male" (as does the catelog-entry for that picture).

Unless there is an unprecenced change in sex of Pseudacanthicus, both can´t be right, I think..

Cheers, Sandor

[MatsP]

Sandor, I think you are right, and I think the picture in P. spinosus article should be called "female".

--
Mats

[hotchiliz]

Sandor, I think you are right, and I think the picture in P. spinosus article should be called "female".

--
Mats

Hi Mat, the picture in the article is definitely a Male, a fat and well build Male.

For the picture of a gravid female, here is it:


" This is not the female that had spawn before. She has a shorter pectoral fin and an unattractive (smudgy) body markings as compared to those distinctive spots on the Male."


Mingxin

[Jools]

What happened here was that the image of a gravid P. spinosus female used in the first article (Breeding P. leopardus) was moved when I added the second article but not changed in the first article. I have fixed that now.

Jools