PlanetCatfish.com

Photo taken by Johnny Jensen at BAS a couple of months ago. Any ideas?

Jools

Jools, any provenience on this. It would help.
-Shane

having recently seen juvenile rita rita recently, my first thought was that this couldnt be rita, but now i'm at a loss, the ones ive seen were very dull grey.
jason

<i>Rita chrysea</i>....not your regular <i>R. rita</i>. Very nice.

They were being sold as Rita rita I think, with a cautionary label regarding their eventual size thankfully (Andy T. at BAS is good at this sort of thing, he should be higher up the hierachy there).
They also have Arius maculatus, be nice to see what they grow up like.

I'll need to double check that it's not <i>R. kuturnee</i> (I'm about 90% sure it's <i>R. chrysea</i> now), but both <i>R. chrysea</i> and <i>R. kuturnee</i> are the smallest species of <i>Rita</i>, reaching to only about 30 cm TL.

Oops...after careful checking, I conclude that it's <i>R. kuturnee</i> not <i>R. chrysea</i> as mentioned earlier. these two species are not easily distinguished when juvenile (unless you look at the toothplates).

Shane wrote:Jools, any provenience on this. It would help.

Pete,

Can you ask BAS/Andy T where these came from? I now have a nagging doubt they were labelled as <i>Arius maculatus</i>.

Jools

Jools wrote:Pete, Can you ask BAS/Andy T where these came from? I now have a nagging doubt they were labelled as <i>Arius maculatus</i>. Jools

Hmmm. I'm pretty sure at the time they had both Rita and Arius labelled up in separate tanks, and I thought the ones labelled as Arius had higher dorsals than the fish in the picture. Saying that though, it does look very similar, particularly around the head, I think subconciously that may be why I mentioned it.
I'll ask Andy to look at the pic, he's a forum member.

<i>Arius maculatus</i> would have a prominent black spot on the adipose fin (which would have been slightly longer than that of the <i>Rita</i>).

They originally came from India....(Kerala area) They were sent as Arius maculatus, but when looking at the photo, it's reasonably certain they aren't. We just didn't look close enough I guess. They do look Rita (ish). We have a photo in a book and they are shown as A.maculatus, but the book is full of mistakes so this may be one too.

That would make those definitely <i>Rita kuturnee</i>.

Cool, I will post it up as that then. Amazing to note this species belonged to Phractocephalus at one point in time!

Jools