Fish Index Question
- Thread starter xingumike
- Start date
- Status
If you post it here then we can see what you think is wrong 
Ok!
1) Hara jerdoni is in the wrong family of catfish should be Erethistidae rather than Sisoridae (i did pm a mod about this yesterday so not so pressing i would guess, CFC i think it was)
2) The picture on the Rubbernose pleco profile is not Chaetostoma milesi more than likely is Chaetostoma cf. thomsoni.
3) Most important things when keeping this pleco are heavy current, highly oxygenated water and cooler temps (20-23(68-74)) oppsoed to the higher temps quoted there (some mention is made later on in profile, but original info is incorrect)
4) Sexing these fish is done by comparing the pelvic fins rather than the dorsal fin as quoted (males have larger compared to female)
5) Clown Plecos are regularly bred in captivity, and in terms of sexing them 'Like all members of the genus, males grow elongated interopercular odontodes during the breeding season. Males develop noticeable odontodes along the dorsum as well.' (source www.planetcatfish.com) certainly not impossible to distinguish, as anyone who has seen dorsal odontodes on panaquolos sp. will tell you.
6) Ancistrus dolichopterus is still being quoted as the scientific name for Britlenose, yet the photo displays Ancistrus sp.3 (regarded as 'common bristlenose' in pet trade)
i was going to add these to the individual threads/profiles but i notice that we are asked not to do that which is why i guess things like the sci. name for Bn's hasn't been changed on the back of Lisa's post.
hth
Mike
ps il update this as necessary if i find anymore!!
To verify all above info www.planetcatfish.com/catelog if needs be.
1) Hara jerdoni is in the wrong family of catfish should be Erethistidae rather than Sisoridae (i did pm a mod about this yesterday so not so pressing i would guess, CFC i think it was)
2) The picture on the Rubbernose pleco profile is not Chaetostoma milesi more than likely is Chaetostoma cf. thomsoni.
3) Most important things when keeping this pleco are heavy current, highly oxygenated water and cooler temps (20-23(68-74)) oppsoed to the higher temps quoted there (some mention is made later on in profile, but original info is incorrect)
4) Sexing these fish is done by comparing the pelvic fins rather than the dorsal fin as quoted (males have larger compared to female)
5) Clown Plecos are regularly bred in captivity, and in terms of sexing them 'Like all members of the genus, males grow elongated interopercular odontodes during the breeding season. Males develop noticeable odontodes along the dorsum as well.' (source www.planetcatfish.com) certainly not impossible to distinguish, as anyone who has seen dorsal odontodes on panaquolos sp. will tell you.
6) Ancistrus dolichopterus is still being quoted as the scientific name for Britlenose, yet the photo displays Ancistrus sp.3 (regarded as 'common bristlenose' in pet trade)
i was going to add these to the individual threads/profiles but i notice that we are asked not to do that which is why i guess things like the sci. name for Bn's hasn't been changed on the back of Lisa's post.
hth
Mike
ps il update this as necessary if i find anymore!!
To verify all above info www.planetcatfish.com/catelog if needs be.
andywg
Bored into leaving
It is perhaps worth noting that planet catfish has been known to be wrong on information. I seem to recall that CFC has tried to correct them based on literature and they have ignored requests to update their information.
Fishbase (while providing less information) is a better source of information, though even it is prone to errors.
Fishbase (while providing less information) is a better source of information, though even it is prone to errors.
Fair comment, although imo the things pointed out above are not just cut and pastes (apart from the sexing L104, but this is generally regarded as the way to sex smaller panaque sp.) from planetcatfish but are based on my personal exp. with keeping those fish and information from other sources (other keepers, Datz etc)
Surely if the fishindex is and i quote 'Our aim is to create one of the largest and most comprehensive fish indexes available on the internet' we should ensure that the information on the profiles is at least correct? The only one that can possibly be argued with is the family of Hara jerdoni and i have just looked on fishbase and they quote Erethistidae as well.
http
/www.fishbase.org/Summary/SpeciesSummary.php?id=62198
I am just conscious that whilst there are a quite a number of diff sp. in the fish index (great idea btw) the only section that i have looked in (catfish) contains the above glaring errors. Rather than admitting that PC and fishbase are incorrect why don't we make sure that ours is right?
Surely if the fishindex is and i quote 'Our aim is to create one of the largest and most comprehensive fish indexes available on the internet' we should ensure that the information on the profiles is at least correct? The only one that can possibly be argued with is the family of Hara jerdoni and i have just looked on fishbase and they quote Erethistidae as well.
http
/www.fishbase.org/Summary/SpeciesSummary.php?id=62198I am just conscious that whilst there are a quite a number of diff sp. in the fish index (great idea btw) the only section that i have looked in (catfish) contains the above glaring errors. Rather than admitting that PC and fishbase are incorrect why don't we make sure that ours is right?
andywg
Bored into leaving
It is not about 'admitting' that PC or fishbase is wrong, I was merely pointing out that online sources are not always perfect and can contain inaccuracies.
Here being a prime example.
Perhaps i should pm the individuals who created each profile as they can surely edit them. If they are wrong then they should be changed for all our benefit imo, otherwise you may as well not have the index at all
pica_nuttalli
don't be a twit
however, i'd like to point out that these are (relatively) minor details in an otherwise helpful section of the forum. this is not to say that it isn't important to maintain correct information! but let's not get into a fight over it. 
however, i'd like to point out that these are (relatively) minor details in an otherwise helpful section of the forum. this is not to say that it isn't important to maintain correct information! but let's not get into a fight over it.
I agree, which is why i would have rather just got an answer to who to inform rather than listing them all here!
The fish base is a fantastic idea and section, i just want it to be right. Sure, how to sex a Panaque maccus is a minor detail, however the care requirements for the bulldog pleco are a major one as these fish are commonly available and this profile indicates you could just drop it into a tropical tank which is incorrect ime.
I wasn't looking to cause an argument (and i don't see any of these replies as argumentative
) i just want the resource to be as good as possible, if its worth doing, its worth doing well!
Additional information that you believe to be important can be added to the profile by adding a new post to it, a mod will review the new post and if the information is good then will set it visable to the public.
OohFeeshy
It's only forever; not long at all...
Although, TBH, classification of Chaetostoma is pants- you get a whole mixed bag of species turning up at LFS's and IDing is a pain at the best of times
If it is a correction of information the original post will be edited, if it is extra additional information then it will just be left as an added post on the profile.
But it seems that even this information is causing a bit of controversy.
If you want to add your info to the threads in question then this can be locked.
If you want to add your info to the threads in question then this can be locked.
- Status
Similar threads
Most reactions
-
548 -
299 -
258 -
252 -
222 -
217 -
184 -
157 -
147 -
132 -
111 -
93 -
76 -
74 -
73