PlanetCatfish.com

I looked at and do not see why this is a distinct entry from .
Is there more background to this?
-Shane

Shane,

I moved this into the "Cat-eLog data issues", as I think that's where it belongs.

--
Mats

I moved this into the "Cat-eLog data issues", as I think that's where it belongs.

Moderating the moderators.

Wouln't it make more sense to discuss the issue in the appropriate forum in the original thread it was a part of... and then move it to this one when we have reached some sort of consensus? It may not be a cat-elog data issue at all.

-Shane

Shane,

I can see your logic, but I can also see Mats' interpretation of the this sub-forums description ("queries and corrections to the cat-elog should also be posted here.") as logical. It doesn't really matter if we track it in the other sub forum, but often posts like this get lost in that mass of pleco posts.

Anyway, to the point in hand, it doesn't look the same the me in terms of patterning? Also, there is no locality data for the A. sp. `colombia`. I guess I just went with Ingo's opinion which keeps them distinct.

Jools

Take a close look at and then go to and scroll down to the last two pics. at times (when relaxed) shows this net-like pattern.

Based on one pic though I admit it is hard to say. What are Ingo's reasons for believing it is distinct?

-Shane

Shane wrote:

I moved this into the "Cat-eLog data issues", as I think that's where it belongs.

Moderating the moderators.

Wouln't it make more sense to discuss the issue in the appropriate forum in the original thread it was a part of... and then move it to this one when we have reached some sort of consensus? It may not be a cat-elog data issue at all.

-Shane

I do apologize if I stepped on your toes, and if I didn't explain clearly my motive. Here is why: I don't expect the original contributors to the thread would add much to the discussion, I don't really see what the point is of keeping that in that thread. We may, of course, as Birger did, discuss in the original thread what the motivation for changing the thoughts on the ID, but as to discussing the validity of the entries in the Cat-eLog, I don't think that belongs in "I've got this fish, and I don't know what it is" thread.

Of course, what I could have done [still can do, but I still am not convinced that would be better], in hindsight, is to copy the post into a new thread here - but that also risks splitting the discussion and getting confusing.

[And by the way, I doubt being a moderator is a sign of being flawless in choosing places to post or otherwise needing "help" in various ways - I certainly make mistakes from time to time (maybe far too often)]. If you still want to move it back, I can do that, and delete the discussion in this thread.

--
Mats

Shane wrote:Take a close look at

Ancistrus sp`colombia`

and then go to

Ancistrus triradiatus

and scroll down to the last two pics.

Ancistrus triradiatus

at times (when relaxed) shows this net-like pattern.

Based on one pic though I admit it is hard to say. What are Ingo's reasons for believing it is distinct?

Basically, that where it came from is unknown beyond the country. Looking hard at the pics we have, I'd be more inclined to move the last two pics out to the . I've not really looked at Colombian much, so I am doubtful of that opinion, the distal white flashes in the dorsal seem different?

Jools

the distal white flashes in the dorsal seem different

Yes, they are, but with Ancistrus that feature (and white/yellow on the caudal) is so often age related.
-Shane

Shane wrote:

the distal white flashes in the dorsal seem different

Yes, they are, but with Ancistrus that feature (and white/yellow on the caudal) is so often age related.
-Shane

It is, but it stuck out a bit, however I don't see any real reason to keep them apart. Pretty content to move it then.

Jools

First off I understand You all are discussing the diffrences between the two species and my comments are more related to my fish vs these two Ancistrus. If you feel my comments are not helpful feel free to delete my reply. I will not be upset if you do.

I hope you all don't mind my adding to this thread. I may indeed not add much but here are my thoughts. The pattern of "spots" are different between the two. The white tips to the fins are present on all 4 of my specimens. They are wild caught from Colombia, region not specified and imported at different times according to the importer, so I can not say if the spots are age related, but you can see in some of the my pics the white tips are present on the dorsal, caudal, and the pectoral fins. In addition the nose or snout of the female, in picture 2 of the triradiatus, is sort of stubby, where as the snout on my specimens are seemingly longer with less of a stubby appearance. The area of the opercule appears to be more "round" in A.Triradiatus. That my be due to the picture (pictures 3 and 5).

I hope no one minds that I used Ingo Seidel to create a side by side picture between my fish and the catelog photo of Colombia, just for my own comparison. If you wish to remove it that is fine.

female

I hope you all don't mind my adding to this thread.

Your thoughts are very welcome, especially as (I believe) you are the only person looking at both fish with your own eye. I agree that in the "side by side" your fish looks just like Ingo's A. sp "Colombia."

I am not seeing are enough differences to make me think we are seeing anything other than normal variation that we could expect with sex, age, or even slight regional variations of the same species.

However, as you are keeping both and think they are different, I think we have to weigh that heavily. Beside your observations, I think we also all trust that Ingo would not have seperated them unless he thought they were different. Those two things combined point towards keeping them distinct until more information is available.

I'll add some notes to A. sp Colombia, so we don't forget why we kept them as two entries.

-Shane