The last thing I would want to do is to convey any mis-information and now feel the need to correct something I said on the aforementioned PC thread. It's regarding what I said about having a Colombian batrochoglanis transmontanus, that was an assumption based on what data about the species I could find at the time. My research revealed at the time that the only batrochoglanis species that was endemic to Colombia was b. transmontanus. Current information now includes that b. villosus is also a native species there too. The fish I received then (from the same source as koltsixx's) I assumed to be transmontanus just because they came from Colombia but after more research and finding the source of their collection, The Rio Ariari in Colombia, a tributary of the Orinoco, in the northeast region of Colombia, so it seems that the fish in question were b. villosus after all. They are endemic to the Orinoco River basin as well as many other places in South America. B. transmontanus are only endemic to coastal river basins in Colombia. Just based on the geography involved, the coastal rivers found there are separated from the Orinoco basin rivers by what's called the Andes Mountain Range I believe, so there shouldn't be any confusion about fish found there if you can find where they were sourced. Reading my posts there, they seem dated as back then since we were still calling fish in the genus Cephalosilurus are now Lophiosilurus. Now they, lophiosilurus and batrochoglanis are now classified as the group or sub clade of the family pseudopimelodidae , now designated as Batrochoglaninae. Some might say "Dude, your information from then is like so 2021!" Well I do try to keep up...
