Sold as Petricola?

[DJRansome]

These fish look quite different to me, are any of them Petricola?
Pic1

Pic2

Pic3

Pic4

Pic5

Pic6

Pic7

Pic8

Pic9

Pic10

Pic11

Pic12

Pic13
Pic1

[Mod edit: add "picX" to indicate which picture is which, so it's easier to follow for example Richard's post --Mats]

[Silurus]

These all look like

Synodontis lucipinnis

to me.

[Richard B]

My Oh my

what a selection of fish - i presume each is a separate individual? It would help if there were indications of sizes and they were all completely side on pics.

ID's are tricky but based on snout shapes, spotting etc, i'll tentatively suggest the following for discussion...I'm extremely bothered that the long snouted ones have a white leading dorsal! These could all be extremes of Lucipinnis...

Pic 1 Lucipinnis
Pic 2 Petricola (?)
Pic 3 Lucipinnis
Pic 4 Irsacae
Pic 5 Lucipinnis
Pic 6 Lucipinnis (?)
Pic 7 Lucipinnis (?)
Pic 8 ?
Pic 9 Lucipinnis
Pic 10 Lucipinnis
Pic 11 ? Irsacae/Tanganicae group
Pic 12 ? Irsacae/Tanganicae group
Pic 13 ? Irsacae/Tanganicae group

[DJRansome]

Yes, 13 individuals and the sizes are on pic properties. Also genders determined according to my best, inexperienced guess. In case that's a pain, here is the rundown:
01 Female 2.5"
02 Male 3.5"
03 Female 2.5"
04 Female 3.0"
05 Male 3.0"
06 Female 3.5"
07 Male 3.5"
08 Male 3.0"
09 Female 2.5"
10 Female 3.0"
11 Female 2.5"
12 Female 2.75"
13 Female 2.5"

I do have other pics of the group, so I might have a better snout or anal fin pic already taken. And I can take more of any that have a chance of being petricola. Thanks!

[DJRansome]

They do all have the white leading edge to the dorsal. Hybrids do you think? Or does the small size help ID them as lucipinnis?

These were bought at a catfish convention before Synodontis lucipinnis was established as a separate species.

[Richard B]

These are not hybrids but all genuine as far as i can see.

The problem is, i believe, there are still a number of undescribed species which people try to pigeon hole into one of the known names.

I was hoping Birger might have chipped in by now....where are you buddy??

Pics 1,3,5,7,9 & 10 all look like typical Lucipinnis (thanks to Mats for pic numbering )

Pic 13 reminds me of species 2 - the white zambian polli apart from the white leading edge to the dorsal

The fish in pic 11 looks like a fish being sold over here labelled tanganicae or dhonti by some retailers (& looks like it is a small individual)but again a white leading edge to the dorsal

Pic 2 looks to have too many body spots for Lucipinnis so therefore a slighty atypical petricola.

Pic 4 quite looks like my Irsacae but again a white leading edge to the dorsal.

[Birger]

I was hoping Birger might have chipped in by now....where are you buddy??

Sorry...been real busy.

Here is what I think

To start , what is the chance of the white leading edge on some of these being a trick of the flash.
This leading edge is a concern to me as well.

Males of lucipinnis vs. petricola are very difficult from one picture, I am getting where I would want to see some behaviour, size as well and or a good shot of the humeral as I am now (I think)being able to spot an axillary pore, notice here that it is the males (except for #5)that are thought to be maybe "petricola"

#1...luci
#2...luci/petricola
#3...luci
#4...irsacae
#5...luci
#6...luci/petricola
#7...luci
#8...luci/petricola
#9...luci
#10...luci
#11...irsacae
#12...luci
#13...luci...this last I would want to see another pic or two, I think it is just an odd position shot.

Birger

[DJRansome]

Oh males of course since the one I have already is a male, LOL. You think #6 is a male? I thought it was a female.

They all have a bright white edge in person, not a trick of the flash. Not even dull white like the maybe-polli I posted earlier.

Later this pm I will sift through my other photos of 2, 6 and 8 to see if there is a better one of the humeral.

Sizes? #2 and #6 are 3.5" and #8 is 3.0".

[DJRansome]

No clearer photos already taken on the humerals. I will have to net and photo more precisely. I'll try tomorrow, thanks for looking!

[Birger]

You think #6 is a male?

I guess I did, but you should have a better idea as the ventral area is unclear in the pic.

Birger

[senil]

Those were some wonderful pictures of the fishes (though they all looked more or less the same to me – but then I am just an amateur to this hobby!!) and the discussion about them was really awesome!! What a pleasure it is listening to experts talk and I look forward to coming with my doubts in a little while!

[DJRansome]

I was sidetracked with a bunch of other fish chores, including attending the American Cichlid Association convention July 22-23 but I do plan to try some photos of the axillary pore.