Are honduran red points nigrofasciata now?

[Hybridfish7]

There is the possibility that they may have spent millions of years in the system we call rio danli and they could've evolved to be a sort of island dwarf type variant of either nigrofasciata or siquia, a reasonable amount of their features would point to such, such as their notoriously small broods, very downward angled mouths, slim bodies and iridescent scales.
Iridescent scales I'd assume is an adaptation to finding mates in murky water, and in the warzone that is the central american ecosystem, I would assume iridescent colors on such a small fish would point to low predation. Same goes for their miniscule brood sizes, rearing only around 50 fry (with biparental brood care) as opposed to hundreds in my opinion would point to there not being many factors that can harm their fry. Either that or it's that combined with a lack of resources in the area. On that note, a downward facing mouth would seemingly point to them being adapted to take advantage of sifting substrate or grazing surfaces. Which, combined with their naturally small seemingly maximum size, would point to there not being an abundance of nutrients in their ecosystem that would support larger growth in a species like that. Either that or all of this is just them evolving to be hermits living off of the bare minimums their ecosystem has to offer. While it has been shown that dwarf forms of species have formed in abysmal ecosystems, with this level of speciation I would assume something like this would be considered a completely different species.

 

[neutrino]

Interesting hypotheses, resembling what you'd read in science literature, with one common misconception. Geomorphology changes on a shorter time scale than many think (there's a ton of literature on such changes in Central and South America during the Holocene epoch beginning 11,650 years ago-- climate, geochemistry, hydrochemistry, changes to lake levels, watercourses, etc.) and the genetic mechanism in many cichlid types allows for rapid adaptation and speciation-- not all: Cyphotilapia, for example are an exception, believed to have changed little over long periods of time. In some cases, like Lake Malawi, very short time scales are involved. In other words, the mechanisms and "millions of years" paradigm for adaptation and species radiation many remember from their schooling often doesn't match the real world. Scientists continue studying this, still proposing and testing hypotheses. There's a ton of literature on this as well, and this is not just fish. A few, of many, examples in science literature:

Major low levels of Lake Malawi and their implications for speciation rates in cichlid fishes

Lake Malawi, the third largest lake in Africa, is several million years old. Lake levels have fluctuated to a considerable extent in the late Pleistocene. Although tectonism may have influenced earlier level changes, the more recent changes have been climatically controlled. Major recessions occurred in the period before 25000 years ago and 10740 ± 130 years ago, with further large falls between 1150 and 1250 A. D. and within the period 1500-1850.

...The species flock of rocky-shore dwelling Lake Malawi cichlids known as `Mbuna' contains about 200 species in Malawi's waters. Mitochondrial DNA differentiation shows that the flock as a whole is of extremely recent origin. Almost every rocky outcrop and island has a unique Mbuna fauna, with endemic colour forms and species. As many of these islands and outcrops were dry land within the last 200-300 years, the establishment of the faunas has taken place within that time.

Adaptive phenotypic plasticity in the Midas Cichlid fish pharyngeal jaw and its relevance in adaptive radiation

Phenotypic evolution and its role in the diversification of organisms is a central topic in evolutionary biology. A neglected factor during the modern evolutionary synthesis, adaptive phenotypic plasticity, more recently attracted the attention of many evolutionary biologists and is now recognized as an important ingredient in both population persistence and diversification... We performed a common garden experiment raising three groups of Midas cichlids on food differing in hardness and calcium content. Analyzing the lower pharyngeal jaw-bones we find significant differences between diet groups qualitatively resembling the differences found between specialized species.

City fish evolve different body forms than country fish

Generally, urbanization produces conditions that make water in streams flow more variably and more quickly during rain storms. So NC State biologists hypothesized that fish would quickly evolve a body shape that improves swimming efficiency in response to changes in stream water velocity caused by urbanization.

...In the field, one species of fish, a type of minnow called western blacknose dace (Rhinichthys obtusus), reflected predicted changes: its body shape became more streamlined in urbanized areas. Langerhans said the body shape changes likely help make it better able to handle changing water conditions. Meanwhile, its body shape in more rural areas, regions largely devoid of urban influence, remained less sleek.

Yet the study also showed that a minnow cousin, the creek chub (Semotilus atromaculatus), actually became less sleek in more urbanized areas. Creek chub in rural areas remained at baseline shape, while those living in streams surrounded by large amounts of impervious surfaces like roads and sidewalks developed deeper bodies.

... "Human activities are having real-time evolutionary impacts on the organisms capable of living in our human-dominated environments; some of these changes may be predictable and some may be difficult to predict," Langerhans said.

 

[Gman9272]

Aside from bio classes in high school and college I am no expert but it is clear the hrp is not nigrofasciata, as hrybridfish stated the difference between the two from physical characteristics to color and even how many eggs each fish lays the differences SHOULD BE ENOUGH to classify hrp as their own species but what do I know

 

[BC in SK]

even how many eggs each fish lays the differences SHOULD BE ENOUGH to classify hrp as their own species

No, it is just a competing breeding strategy that one environment may or may not select for. Even in the same population more then one competing breeding strategy will exist; sometimes dependent on the size/development of the fish or circumstances.
The reason aquarium strain convicts usually lay a lot of eggs is because there is selection for it. What is a breeder concerned with how many he can produce at the lowest cost going to choose? The female that produces 50 fry per spawn or the one that pumps out 500?
I purchased 6 convicts from another aquarist in the 1990's. I think they were fairly representative of aquarium strain cons at the time. I inbred these for over 20 years with NO outcross until very recently. Yes, i had a few older females that at one time or another could lay over 300 eggs, but that vast majority would only lay 50-100 eggs, even as 4 yr.old +. Interestingly enough, old females that lay few eggs (50-100) would lay very large eggs and the wigglers could take over a week to become free swimming. Having a bigger yolk sac is a better start in life as it should grow faster, at least initially. As my cons regularily protected fry for 4-6 weeks (one time over 10 weeks!), the larger the fry are when they are released the better their chances. So it's a trade off between larger numbers and a better start. When you leave the fry in the community tank and take survivors for the next generation......I think there is selection for the lower numbers, but faster growing broods.
Any ways, from what i have read on the internet, many people note that wild caught convicts produce a wide variation in their offspring right from the get go. William Heijns once joked that he could describe at least 3 species from a single brood of wild caught convicts in the manner that Schmitter-Soto had split convicts into 4 species.

 

[newworld]

Variation in wild convict fry? As in what? I’ve bred a bunch and they normally looked like the parents...

 

[neutrino]

many people note that wild caught convicts produce a wide variation in their offspring right from the get go. William Heijns once joked that he could describe at least 3 species from a single brood of wild caught convicts in the manner that Schmitter-Soto had split convicts into 4 species.

Assuming you mean variation in the number of offspring-- also true of other species.

And dare I even mention the whole can of worms that "species" is a debated, somewhat artificial, and some say outdated, construct? Which, of course, doesn't help answer the original question.

 

[neutrino]

Variation in wild convict fry? As in what? I’ve bred a bunch and they normally looked like the parents...

In the context of the earlier post he quoted, I think he meant variation in the number of eggs/fry.

 

[Kevin@TUIC]

Hey all. good stuff in here. Glad I was pointed to the topic. Happy to address a few comments in the topic.
so, before i get to the hrp topic ill point out to Toiletcar:

Changes in taxonomy aren’t always published on the internet and sometimes vendors find out first. But he still calls melanura synspilum like they are listed as two different species so there’s that. Maybe to show distinction but most other species don’t use another name for a catch location, the location is listed and that’s enough.

I list as Vieja melanura as Vieja melanura 'var. synspila' only to indicate these are the redheaded colored fish versus the mostly yellow fish but, never, ever, have I listed them as solely Vieja syspila. wrong vendor ... I personally wouldn't even use 'var. synspila' at all if it weren't for that fact that I receive half a dozen emails a day asking if they are the redheaded fish or the yellow fish EVERY DAY because other vendors still call them Vieja synspilum.

Below is a paragraph located in the Amatitlania nigrofasciata species profile of the Cichlid Room Companion (Cichlidae.com)
It is "the" place I go to find updated, yet valid info, on what is going on in cichlid-dom.


In April 1989, Ross Socolof, Harry Specht and Rusty Wessel collected in northern Honduras a geographical variety of Amatitlania nigrofasciata with a vivid blue hue, which it stroke them as so different from the regular aquarium strain (already washed out in coloration) that they considered it as potentially new and provisionally name it “Honduras red point” (Wessel, 2006). “Red point” (punto rojo) is a common name in Honduras for the convict. The given distribution range was from the Papaloteca drainage in northern Honduras, where the collected it at Rio Monda (referred to as “Rio Mongo”) south to Danli (east of Tegucigalpa) in the Patuca drainage at Los Almendros river (referred to as “Rio Los Amadros”), this form apparently has being established in the aquarium hobby and quite likely being selectively bred to obtain bluer fish, in the process the barred pattern has apparently been affected. The DNA studies by Bagley et al. (2016) used some populations in the given distribution area (from both Rio Papaloteca and Rio Patuca), proving that this form is no different from A. nigrofasciata.

Yes. This.
Being completely involved in the industry includes me having a relationship with the scientific community, and the collectors. which far supersedes my time as being a vendor. These relationships help keep me on top of the 'what's going on' stuff that many of the large retailers are not involved in or do not have access to the contacts. I mean who else here as personal access to people like Jeff Rapps(Aquatic Biologist by education) Juan Miguel, as well as others, who are all a text message away from me? I am able to stay somewhat on top of what's going on because of this. I listed my wild Rio Magdalena Kronoheros umbriferus as Kronohers cf. umbriferus 'Rio Magdalena' a few weeks ago and similar questions where asked as to why I was the only vendor calling them as so. The answer was because I was the only vendor that knew they are going to be redescribed and named. The umbie from Panama will likely remain the K. umbriferus while the most popular umbie of all the blue rio mag. Colombian counterpart and the others will be renamed. I know this because I have a close relationship with those doing the field work.

So back to the hrp. First, in all of Honduras and even parts of Nicaragua ALL convict type fish are called 'red points'. that is a common local name.
As far as how I named them on my stock list. The link Duanes provided pretty much is the answer. DNA says they are the same. They have not formally been named that yet so the use of cf. was used. You will also find that siquia is no longer. A. siquia is also now nigrofasciata. DNA says they do not have enough difference to separate them. So I have to go with the science. I have kept and maintained the original group of hrp sent to me by Jeff Rapps that were being distributed in the mid 90s from Rusty Wessels original group(that he still maintains!). If you were to ask me and I didn't know the work being done I would tell you myself without a doubt that no way are they the same fish, they have so many differences. but, I would be wrong.
Rio Danli population... There is no Rio Danli. The use of 'Rio' Danli is incorrect. The real Honduran red point as we know it is from the Rio Los Amadros population that runs next to the city of Danli. The Rio Mongo fish that some have also called the red point is also genetically the same fish and in Honduras is called 'red point ' as well. However, even I agree it looks different. but science..
All of that said I would still not recommend mixing same fish from different locations.

20+ years ago no body cared about exact specific locations. A convict was a convict, a red devil was a red devil, etc., etc., and some were just cooler looking than others. As we got smarter about mixing similar 'looking' fish and science got better the need to know exact locations became more common. Even to this day I am one of the very few vendors that lists fish with an attached exact locale. Some give a general location like Peru, or Colombia but not many commercial vendors give an exact locale. Heck some have fish listed from locales they donmt even exist in.. Likely because the exporters may not know or the fisherman providing the export co. does not want to give up his fishing spot. TUIC has had 26 years of personal communication with the local fisherman and the export companies so I have a very good relationship and they know I will not complete an import without the known location. Often I (and Jeff before me) request collections from very specific regions. I send fish to multiple people in private labs and to multiple universities that do scientific research on them so knowing exact information is important for the work they do. I list fish with a filial number up to F3. Anything after that I list just as 'CB' for captive bred even if I have a proven original collection locale to use. I wont be that guy that says f6 lol. Anything with a unknown provenance or even if from fish caught in from non-native location I use CB. Calling a fish F1(or whatever gen.) from a non-native population is misleading at best. I mean I could go to Florida and catch 'wild' central & south Americans or got to Mexico and catch wild African fish all day..
I do my best to stay on top of the science part of the industry so that I can provide my clients with the most up-to-date and most accurate information available. I don't use common (US) names, heck I don't even know half of them that are used these days. I hate the use of 'grades'. I know that at least one vendor refers to his wild fish in grades. Likely because they do not know the location or worse cannot ID the species correctly. You guys will NEVER, EVER get that from me. So, just because I am the only one using a name in a specific way certainly does not mean I am wrong. maybe its because I am giving you all the most up to date information.
For anyone looking for the most up to date info I HIGHLY recommend getting the paid subscription to The Cichlidroom Companion. I know Juan Miguel well and we've had a relationship for a number of decades and we communicate regularly(actually recently spoke about these fish in question!). He works his a** off to provide the best information. He is in regular contact with all of the best of the best. The subscription is beyond well worth its price.

 

[Kevin@TUIC]

Here are two pics. Same exact fish. This is the hrp from original stock from the mid 90s. I took these photos sometime in 97/1998 I still maintain this fish bred from this original stock (albeit, many, many generations later) in a home aquarium in my sons bedroom. They still breed true to this color. Many of you that have received them from me can verify that this is what they will look like. I see many hrp that are dark in color, have little blue, no red, incredibly strong bar patterns, or the opposite and are increbibly blue from line breeding or etc., I would be suspect to those. Jus' sayin'... but what do I know..

 

[Hybridfish7]

Hey all. good stuff in here. Glad I was pointed to the topic. Happy to address a few comments in the topic.
so, before i get to the hrp topic ill point out to Toiletcar:

I list as Vieja melanura as Vieja melanura 'var. synspila' only to indicate these are the redheaded colored fish versus the mostly yellow fish but, never, ever, have I listed them as solely Vieja syspila. wrong vendor ... I personally wouldn't even use 'var. synspila' at all if it weren't for that fact that I receive half a dozen emails a day asking if they are the redheaded fish or the yellow fish EVERY DAY because other vendors still call them Vieja synspilum.


Yes. This.
Being completely involved in the industry includes me having a relationship with the scientific community, and the collectors. which far supersedes my time as being a vendor. These relationships help keep me on top of the 'what's going on' stuff that many of the large retailers are not involved in or do not have access to the contacts. I mean who else here as personal access to people like Jeff Rapps(Aquatic Biologist by education) Juan Miguel, as well as others, who are all a text message away from me? I am able to stay somewhat on top of what's going on because of this. I listed my wild Rio Magdalena Kronoheros umbriferus as Kronohers cf. umbriferus 'Rio Magdalena' a few weeks ago and similar questions where asked as to why I was the only vendor calling them as so. The answer was because I was the only vendor that knew they are going to be redescribed and named. The umbie from Panama will likely remain the K. umbriferus while the most popular umbie of all the blue rio mag. Colombian counterpart and the others will be renamed. I know this because I have a close relationship with those doing the field work.

So back to the hrp. First, in all of Honduras and even parts of Nicaragua ALL convict type fish are called 'red points'. that is a common local name.
As far as how I named them on my stock list. The link Duanes provided pretty much is the answer. DNA says they are the same. They have not formally been named that yet so the use of cf. was used. You will also find that siquia is no longer. A. siquia is also now nigrofasciata. DNA says they do not have enough difference to separate them. So I have to go with the science. I have kept and maintained the original group of hrp sent to me by Jeff Rapps that were being distributed in the mid 90s from Rusty Wessels original group(that he still maintains!). If you were to ask me and I didn't know the work being done I would tell you myself without a doubt that no way are they the same fish, they have so many differences. but, I would be wrong.
Rio Danli population... There is no Rio Danli. The use of 'Rio' Danli is incorrect. The real Honduran red point as we know it is from the Rio Los Amadros population that runs next to the city of Danli. The Rio Mongo fish that some have also called the red point is also genetically the same fish and in Honduras is called 'red point ' as well. However, even I agree it looks different. but science..
All of that said I would still not recommend mixing same fish from different locations.

20+ years ago no body cared about exact specific locations. A convict was a convict, a red devil was a red devil, etc., etc., and some were just cooler looking than others. As we got smarter about mixing similar 'looking' fish and science got better the need to know exact locations became more common. Even to this day I am one of the very few vendors that lists fish with an attached exact locale. Some give a general location like Peru, or Colombia but not many commercial vendors give an exact locale. Heck some have fish listed from locales they donmt even exist in.. Likely because the exporters may not know or the fisherman providing the export co. does not want to give up his fishing spot. TUIC has had 26 years of personal communication with the local fisherman and the export companies so I have a very good relationship and they know I will not complete an import without the known location. Often I (and Jeff before me) request collections from very specific regions. I send fish to multiple people in private labs and to multiple universities that do scientific research on them so knowing exact information is important for the work they do. I list fish with a filial number up to F3. Anything after that I list just as 'CB' for captive bred even if I have a proven original collection locale to use. I wont be that guy that says f6 lol. Anything with a unknown provenance or even if from fish caught in from non-native location I use CB. Calling a fish F1(or whatever gen.) from a non-native population is misleading at best. I mean I could go to Florida and catch 'wild' central & south Americans or got to Mexico and catch wild African fish all day..
I do my best to stay on top of the science part of the industry so that I can provide my clients with the most up-to-date and most accurate information available. I don't use common (US) names, heck I don't even know half of them that are used these days. I hate the use of 'grades'. I know that at least one vendor refers to his wild fish in grades. Likely because they do not know the location or worse cannot ID the species correctly. You guys will NEVER, EVER get that from me. So, just because I am the only one using a name in a specific way certainly does not mean I am wrong. maybe its because I am giving you all the most up to date information.
For anyone looking for the most up to date info I HIGHLY recommend getting the paid subscription to The Cichlidroom Companion. I know Juan Miguel well and we've had a relationship for a number of decades and we communicate regularly(actually recently spoke about these fish in question!). He works his a** off to provide the best information. He is in regular contact with all of the best of the best. The subscription is beyond well worth its price.

thank you for clearing this up, main thing I get from this is now I'm 2 species away from owning and breeding every amatitlania
Is a.kanna also going to be synonymized with nigrofasciata?
also while you're here I will ask on the subject of you sending fish into labs for testing, have we confirmed anything on the cichlasoma sp. "esmeraldas gold" yet?
also will rio mag umbees/san rafaels become their own species in that case (on the subject of the umbee part)?