The truth about Perrunichthys perruno!!!!
- Thread starter necrocanis
- Start date
Just about to post that question
lol, did you use to have a pictus catfish? I really want to get my hands on a frozen specimen for disection and preparation of the skeleton. I'm kind of like you on this. I love that it all seems concrete right now, but would love to prepare the skull of a pictus for my own comparison. based on the longibarbis skull shown I'd say the big marble I use to have was actually a longibarbis. Sold to me as a true perruno of course. lol. I should break down and get a pictus. Should be ok in my 100 gal 4' x 2' x 21" tank I would think for a very long time.
note worthy in this same presentation referenced here, Lundberg suggests that Leiarius arekaima is not a valid species. Seems that fishbase still has it lingering for some reason.
A-ah, I see. I guess I just didn't read it right.
Another question: it is stated that the number or dorsal rays increases from older to younger Leiarius on the evolutionary time scale: perruno -> pictus -> marmoratus/longibarbis.
I thought pictus had more rays than marmoratus... ?
thanks cliff this is definately going to clear things up for people it should also be made into a sticky considering the severity of this situation very happy that your a frequently active member again and hopefully will be for years to come your expertice and information are irreplaceable
Sent from my iPhone using MonsterAquariaNetwork app
Sent from my iPhone using MonsterAquariaNetwork app
Thank you for this well written post clarifying the situation of these two species. This is something that I've wondered about over time but I wasn't willing to do the crazy level of work necessary like I did with the tiger fish. Very well done sir. Thank you.
Fishbase does that. They still have Hydrocynus somonorum listed but it hasn't been valid since 1986. I won't get started on the pictures they have posted, either.
I don't put any faith in the claims of fishbase.
According to the study cited (which reviewed all of Leiarius, and Perrunichthys) it goes as follows. Please keep in mind that when counting the fin rays they only count the multibranched soft fin rays and not the leading heavily ossified fin spine in catfish.
Phractocephalus(as the extreme basal group that Leiarius branches from) 7 rays
perruno 7-8 rays
pictus 10-11 rays
longibarbis 10-11 rays
marmoratus 10-11 rays
other pimelodidae 6 rays
Let it be noted that longibarbis and marmoratus have the same number, but since marmoratus was not a valid species until after this study it is not included in the cladogram. As you can see all of the current valid species in Leiarius have the same number of fin rays. Although some individuals may have more or less depending on many factors.
thanks cliff this is definately going to clear things up for people it should also be made into a sticky considering the severity of this situation very happy that your a frequently active member again and hopefully will be for years to come your expertice and information are irreplaceable
Sent from my iPhone using MonsterAquariaNetwork app
That's 1 vote for a sticky. Thank you very much. I'll leave it up to MFK weather it should be a sticky. If enough people chime in on this then I will sticky it.
I am also very glad to be back on here. I really miss helping people and learning new things every day. There are some really knowledgeable people frequenting the catfish section right now. Luckily I have some friends in high places when it comes to catfish, esp. pimelodid catfish. I would like to see your write up on the tiger fish sometime. I see it in your sig. I'll check it out.Thank you for this well written post clarifying the situation of these two species. This is something that I've wondered about over time but I wasn't willing to do the crazy level of work necessary like I did with the tiger fish. Very well done sir. Thank you.
I like learning about all fish, I am just super addicted to catfish lol. I don't really trust many of the websites when it comes to catfish myself. I will reference them, but sometimes I will just scratch my head and say wait! That's not right lol. Lots of misinformation out there about catfish. Planet catfish is probably the best source right now as far as husbandry and keeping catfish, but many mistakes on there as well as far as pics and different things. I think the main issue with these sites is that they were started with good intentions, but they are not kept up on as far as current information and studies goes. Catfish is the fastest growing group of fish in research currently. They identify on average over 50 new species per year for the last 7 years. With all the work being done on them the information is constantly changing. Unless you can get all of the zoological information coming out as it is updated you will get left in the dark. There has been realignment of several species, families, and genus of catfish that I have not seen any site acknowledge yet. Makes me wonder if I should start my own informative catfish site. lol. Then again eventually I will tire of trying to stay current and the information will fall behind lol.Fishbase does that. They still have Hydrocynus somonorum listed but it hasn't been valid since 1986. I won't get started on the pictures they have posted, either.
I feel ya. I try to contribute to these websites whenever possible, but Fishbase seems to be fairly closed when it comes to their editing privileges. I want to contribute to that site and I know my way around the journals in such a way as to be able to make an intelligent contribution, but I can't figure out how. Its quite frustrating!
