Panaqolus: What is L329, L351 and P. nocturnus.

[Jools]

All,

I think it's quite likely that these species are mixed up (at least on this site). So, I thought I'd start a thread asking about everyone's opinion and see if I can gain consensus. None of these are fishes I have seen in person let alone kept.

L329

appears to have a striped tail adult and juvenile, DATZ article linked from this site.

L351

appears to have a variegated tail adult and juvenile, DATZ article linked from this site.

Panaqolus nocturnus

I am going to find the 1993 description, it's in the excellent but hopelessly expensive and closed-off Icthylogolical Exploration of Freshwaters, so this might take a while.

Working assumption is one of those l-numbers might be P. nocturnus but what I'd like to do is understand (without the aid of location) if we can visually tell them apart reliably.

Jools

[racoll]

Hey Jools,

PDF (crappy quality, massive file size) has been added to the Loricariidae share folder. Enjoy!

[Jools]

Thanks!

Jools

[bekateen]

Hi Jools,

I found another copy of the same article on ResearchGate. The text is a little cleaner, but alas the images are no clearer. I've uploaded it to the OneDrive I set up to share with you. For some reason, I still don't have my folder's capacity sync'd to your folder, so I can't just upload directly into your OneDrive.

Cheers, Eric

[Jools]

Many have helped with this, thanks. @lfinley58 sent me a hi-res scan of the holotype. It doesn't help (I think the holotype was preserved for a decade or more before the picture was taken) but I can see a lot of info in the description so will review and summarise shortly!

Thanks all!

Panaqolus nocturnus holotype

[Jools]

Panaqolus nocturnus appears to be from the right place to match either l-number, esp. L351. I can’t tell what the holotype looked like in life. The description mentions indistinct variegated light spots on a regional variant from the Maranon. The description also mentions P. nocturnus not having stripes which, even as an adult, L329 does have low contrast stripes in its fins. Which means it’s more likely to be L351. The holotype in the '93 description appears to be preserved since 1980, so between that and the black and white picture, nothing is given away on colour.

Investigations continue.

Jools

[bekateen]

Nice new photos on the P. nocturnus page. That said, are my eyes deceiving me, or does the fish in this photo have stripes on the caudal fin? https://www.planetcatfish.com/common/im ... ge_id=8174

Cheers, Eric

[Jools]

They do, but I think they're too subtle for the description to pick up and, also, I think it meant stripes on the body (ala P. maccus, which was in the paper too). If you have a moment to review the section, let me know what you think?

Jools

[bekateen]

They do, but I think they're too subtle for the description to pick up and, also, I think it meant stripes on the body (ala P. maccus, which was in the paper too). If you have a moment to review the section, let me know what you think?
Jools

Will do, but it will need to wait till next week. Work is intense till Saturday.

Cheers, Eric

[Acanthicus]

Heho

How where Johnnys specimens identified? They look exactly like my old L 351.

I'd agree that L 351 is likely the same as nocturnus, but I was not able to proof it yet with the material I have available to compare. Would be an interesting topic to discuss.

[Jools]

Nathan L ID via Peter Petersen at Blue Planet/Copenhagen. I am not sure, especially since reading the Welse atlas band II. Would be good to discuss. Sorry not a lot of time today, but soon!

Update: just to be clear the recent pictures were IDed by NL, the ones already there, by me or Peter.

Cheers,

Jools

[Jools]

Just looping in @Erlend D Bertelsen and @HaakonH, as well. Erlend and I have been discussing as well (he's collected/kept these) and Haakon has taken many photos of both. I have also moved a few pictures around today, so images above this point may have changed!

OK, deep breath, here goes!

L329

was introduced (2003) [here] with a 12cm individual pictured. The front half of the body has a network pattern, back half-striped which extends into the tail which pattern is, however, broken distally.

Generally accepted that L329 as =LDA27 (1996) and LDA28 (1997), however, if you check the images, (best place to do that readily in one place is the 2004 Aqualog All-Loricariidae book, pp232-233, you can see most combinations of the "Panaqolus upstream of Iquitos" at all sizes (young, sub adult and adult) and you quickly get a sore head. I am also left wondering if some of these fishes are P. gnomus. Also, young fish are labelled as "orange long fin" and look a lot like the fishes I photographed in Pier Aquatics, which are now in

L425

.

Seidel and Evers in their excellent "oh, I so wish it was available in English" Wels Atlas band II (p764) show L329 as a sub adult and adult which have no stripes what so ever. Generally, the fishes shown there have a more reddish hue. The species info also references a number of German articles on these fishes which, I suspect, would repeat a lot of what we're looking at here, bear in mind the authors (@Erwin in particular, were heavily involved in the creation of the genus Panaqolus). I don't have access to the Das Aquarium or the original pictures.

L351

appears simpler. The fish has a lower, rounded convex (versus typical sloped larger Panaqolus) head shape, the eyes are a little smaller and the patterning is an ill-defined network patterning. Mostly compared with

L350

in the 2004 DATZ article introducing it, it matches Wels Atlas Band II, and what we have here as

L351

now I've moved some pictures around. Some pictures of LDA28 are L351.

Upstream of Peru, the Amazon main channel splits into the Maranon and Ucayali. The Maranon heads broadly west which in turn splits into the Huallaga and then turns to flow roughly parallel with that tributary and the Ucayali. Although one cannot be fooled by their relative proximity, this is not flat terrain and each river flows in its own valley.

Conclusions? It seems simple now I have really looked into it that L351 is an undescribed species with a distinctive variegated pattern which has three phases from juveniles to much larger adult. In terms of shape, it is more similar to

Hemiancistrus pankimpuju

- the latter has no pattern and even smaller eyes.

L329 is more difficult. I don't know why the jump from the striped 12cm fish in DATZ to what is widely accepted now in the hobby literature ("hobby litt") was made, I can't also see why it = LDA29 (or some of them) either.

Morphologically, L329 appears close to

Panaqolus nocturnus

. Patterning in adults is different, the described species has no body pattern as adult. Geographically, L329 is widespread in northern Peru, imports from as wide as the area near Iquitos (possibly the Rio Yavari) which would also explain exports via Leticia/Bogota, and Rio Huallaga (Tingo Maria) are documented. It seems this could also be the Brazilian (just) species we have from the Rio Amonia,

Panaqolus sp`acre`

. NJ mentioned that P. gnomus and P. nocturnus are hard to tell apart as youngsters, this must mean they have stripes as juveniles. Indeed the picture sent by Nathan matches the DATZ picture closely.

So, L329 (DATZ) matches P. nocturnus - compare pictures here. However, L329 (hobby literature after DATZ) does not match P. nocturnus visually but might be considered, taxonomically, within the regional variation of the species. L351 is the longer, lower lyre-tailed species, which at least I had mixed up in some instances with the "hobby litt" L329 (that was silly, really, bad Jools - go visit the optician)!

The final question, what made the hobby literature broaden L329 from the DATZ striped fish to a non-striped fish?

Jools

[Erlend D Bertelsen]

Interesting, I am only thinking high here.

What if L-425 is the same fish as Werner introduced as L-329 in 2003 ? Have anyone kept the L-425 long enough to see any changes in coloration (from juvenile to adult?)

I would be conferrable to call P. nocturnus as the same fish as what we call L-329 (hobby litt) They do probably grow much bigger than L-425 and the original L-239 from 2003. They also normally are collected in rivers connected to each other. Rio Hullaga and Rio Maranon

What we se labels as LDA28 and LDA29 is probably a mix of P. nocturnus and the original L-329 (L-425)

I would the also keep the L-350 and L-351 as separate species. Alongside P. dentex

So i would suggest something like this.

L-425 = L-329
P. nocturnus = L-329 (Hobby litt)

Or maybe we should call them all the same? P. nocturnes.. What we see as L-425/L-329 is a juvenile form of P. nocturnus

This of course an easy answer to a much more complicated question.

An interesting question is; have anyone seen a small P. nocturnus? I have seen the picture of NJ and it resemble what we call L-425 or the original L-329
And @Jools se page 770 and 771 in Wels Atlas band II. This fish is collected to the Rio Ucayali river system.

E

[Jools]

Hi Erlend,

Thanks for joining in. NJ had said to me that small P. nocturnus are hard to tell apart from P. gnomus (at least in the field).

Re L425: For me, the colouration (it's more orange) and the patterning (it is striped, head to tail with stripes that are thinner than the eye diameter) at comparable size means L326 is not L425, then, on top, it's from a different river. Then, on top of on top (!) we tend to keep l-numbers distinct for fishes that are from a different river. I'd suggest it's more likely to more closely be related to P. gnomus. But that's a sidetrack for me. Probably @Andi knows about older/larger L425.

Jools