Type Locality Corydoras Aeneus
-
- Posts: 265
- Joined: 13 Apr 2013, 07:49
- My images: 2
- My cats species list: 1 (i:0, k:0)
- Spotted: 1
- Location 2: Holland
Type Locality Corydoras Aeneus
Mentioned is Trinidad (West Indies).
Aeneus is found in a great part of South America to my believe and I even have my doubts if so at Trinidad.
Am I wrong?
Cheers Aad
Aeneus is found in a great part of South America to my believe and I even have my doubts if so at Trinidad.
Am I wrong?
Cheers Aad
- Acanthicus
- Posts: 857
- Joined: 24 Jan 2011, 14:32
- My articles: 5
- My images: 91
- My cats species list: 29 (i:0, k:0)
- Spotted: 79
- Location 1: Kiel
- Location 2: Germany
- Contact:
Re: Type Locality Corydoras Aeneus
Hi,
the type locality is in Trinidad, yes. But similar forms are spread over huge parts of SA. The "C. aeneus" from Peru, Brasil and Bolivia etc. are for sure not identical with the real C. aeneus, they only look similar. They will turn out as many different species/forms one day I guess.
the type locality is in Trinidad, yes. But similar forms are spread over huge parts of SA. The "C. aeneus" from Peru, Brasil and Bolivia etc. are for sure not identical with the real C. aeneus, they only look similar. They will turn out as many different species/forms one day I guess.
Daniel
-
- Posts: 265
- Joined: 13 Apr 2013, 07:49
- My images: 2
- My cats species list: 1 (i:0, k:0)
- Spotted: 1
- Location 2: Holland
Re: Type Locality Corydoras Aeneus
Sorry for a stupid question : What exactly is meand by type locality than? I know there are several species (keeping 4 different ones myself) but just don't understand Trinidad being mentioned. Cheers Aad
- Tony C
- Posts: 24
- Joined: 26 Aug 2013, 17:28
- My cats species list: 13 (i:4, k:0)
- My Wishlist: 18
- Location 1: Columbia, SC
- Location 2: USA
Re: Type Locality Corydoras Aeneus
The type locality is where the original specimen(s) on which the species description is based was collected.CoryfanAad wrote:Sorry for a stupid question : What exactly is meand by type locality than? I know there are several species (keeping 4 different ones myself) but just don't understand Trinidad being mentioned. Cheers Aad
-
- Posts: 265
- Joined: 13 Apr 2013, 07:49
- My images: 2
- My cats species list: 1 (i:0, k:0)
- Spotted: 1
- Location 2: Holland
Type Locality Corydoras Aeneus
Ahaa sounds logicall. Thanks Tony. I didn't suspect that this would be at Trinidad, cause Aeneus is found so widespread over SA !!!!
In one way or the other I thought these fish wouldn't be found at an Island hahaha. Thanks again.
In one way or the other I thought these fish wouldn't be found at an Island hahaha. Thanks again.
-
- Posts: 627
- Joined: 01 Mar 2011, 15:57
- I've donated: $100.00!
- My cats species list: 100 (i:0, k:3)
- My BLogs: 29 (i:0, p:400)
- Spotted: 32
- Location 1: USA
- Location 2: Milwaukee, WI
- Interests: Whiptails, hoplo cats, corys, plecos
Re: Type Locality Corydoras Aeneus
Are we sure that the type location is not referring to the city of Trinidad in Bolivia? and not the island? Anyone have access to (Gill, 1858) where it was originally described?
Trinidad is very close to the continent so it is quite believable that at periods of lower ocean level they may have been connected. But it would seem odd that a fish with such geographical isolation from the rest of SA would have such a widespread distribution.
Andy
Trinidad is very close to the continent so it is quite believable that at periods of lower ocean level they may have been connected. But it would seem odd that a fish with such geographical isolation from the rest of SA would have such a widespread distribution.
Andy
- racoll
- Posts: 5258
- Joined: 26 Jan 2004, 12:18
- My articles: 6
- My images: 182
- My catfish: 2
- My cats species list: 2 (i:2, k:0)
- My aquaria list: 1 (i:0)
- Spotted: 238
- Location 1: London
- Location 2: UK
Re: Type Locality Corydoras Aeneus
You can read the description here.
No, the title of the paper is "Synopsis of the fresh water fishes of the western portion of the island of Trinidad, W. I.".Narwhal72 wrote:Are we sure that the type location is not referring to the city of Trinidad in Bolivia? and not the island?
-
- Posts: 1086
- Joined: 22 Oct 2009, 11:57
- Location 1: Corsham, UK
- Location 2: Bath, UK
- Interests: Natural History, Ecology, Plants, Biotopes, Taxonomy, Nitrification, Cricket & Northern Soul
Re: Type Locality Corydoras Aeneus
Hi all,
There are images from the type locality on the Cat-eLog page (taken by Colin Dunlop?).
cheers Darrel
They were until about 10,00 years ago, bio-geographically Trinidad is part of S. America, not the Caribbean island arc. On a more parochial level it is like the Isle of Wight, not the Azores. That is why Howler Monkeys, as well as Corydoras and Loricariids etc, occur on Trinidad.Trinidad is very close to the continent so it is quite believable that at periods of lower ocean level they may have been connected.
There are images from the type locality on the Cat-eLog page (taken by Colin Dunlop?).
cheers Darrel
-
- Posts: 265
- Joined: 13 Apr 2013, 07:49
- My images: 2
- My cats species list: 1 (i:0, k:0)
- Spotted: 1
- Location 2: Holland
Type Locality Corydoras Aeneus
Thanks all. Quite interesting to me!!!
- Jools
- Expert
- Posts: 16107
- Joined: 30 Dec 2002, 15:25
- My articles: 198
- My images: 948
- My catfish: 237
- My cats species list: 87 (i:237, k:1)
- My BLogs: 7 (i:10, p:202)
- My Wishlist: 23
- Spotted: 450
- Location 1: Middle Earth,
- Location 2: Scotland
- Interests: All things aquatic, Sci-Fi, photography and travel. Oh, and beer.
- Contact:
Re: Type Locality Corydoras Aeneus
Yeah, it's worth putting out a look at why and how this occurs like it does as (at least I) find this interesting. With apologies to the professionals, here's the vernacular:
So, type locality, as it says in the glossary, is where the individual specimen that was chosen to represent the species (the holotype) came from. With species that have been around for a while, it is interesting to note these are usually where Europeans, and later on North Americans too, came in contact with new rivers. So we see new species beginning to be described from the Caribbean coast and down by Buenos Aires etc. A lot of fishes also were described from fish markets where fishes were brought from upstream. Later on more and more expeditions are mounted and we see an increase of fishes described from further inland. Finally, we get to today where new species turn up anywhere.
However, when one describes a new species you have to compare it to everything else that has been described first to make sure it's not the same as an existing species. This is hard work, and must have been very hard pre-aeroplanes and still difficult pre email/internet. That is because the holotypes are spread out across the globe in whatever museums they ended up in. The papers in which new species are described are (until recently) only distributed in paper form.
So this is why we get synonyms. Imagine someone finds a cory in, let's say, 1880's Argentina, and calls it a new species and gives it a name. Only, say, a hundred years later, someone else looks at this and says, hang on, this is the same species as, for example, Corydoras aeneus (from 1858). So, the newer species becomes a junior synonym. Perhaps the author of the paper of the new species didn't know about the other description, perhaps they couldn't examine it or indeed perhaps they didn't accept it was the same. The clues to this are in the manuscripts and a great deal of rather holistic detective work is also required. In many cases it is mind bogglingly complex.
Meanwhile, I think I can move this issue to resolved.
Jools
So, type locality, as it says in the glossary, is where the individual specimen that was chosen to represent the species (the holotype) came from. With species that have been around for a while, it is interesting to note these are usually where Europeans, and later on North Americans too, came in contact with new rivers. So we see new species beginning to be described from the Caribbean coast and down by Buenos Aires etc. A lot of fishes also were described from fish markets where fishes were brought from upstream. Later on more and more expeditions are mounted and we see an increase of fishes described from further inland. Finally, we get to today where new species turn up anywhere.
However, when one describes a new species you have to compare it to everything else that has been described first to make sure it's not the same as an existing species. This is hard work, and must have been very hard pre-aeroplanes and still difficult pre email/internet. That is because the holotypes are spread out across the globe in whatever museums they ended up in. The papers in which new species are described are (until recently) only distributed in paper form.
So this is why we get synonyms. Imagine someone finds a cory in, let's say, 1880's Argentina, and calls it a new species and gives it a name. Only, say, a hundred years later, someone else looks at this and says, hang on, this is the same species as, for example, Corydoras aeneus (from 1858). So, the newer species becomes a junior synonym. Perhaps the author of the paper of the new species didn't know about the other description, perhaps they couldn't examine it or indeed perhaps they didn't accept it was the same. The clues to this are in the manuscripts and a great deal of rather holistic detective work is also required. In many cases it is mind bogglingly complex.
Meanwhile, I think I can move this issue to resolved.
Jools
Owner, AquaticRepublic.com, PlanetCatfish.com & ZebraPleco.com. Please consider donating towards this site's running costs.