• Hello guest! Are you an Apistogramma enthusiast? If so we invite you to join our community and see what it has to offer. Our site is specifically designed for you and it's a great place for Apisto enthusiasts to meet online. Once you join you'll be able to post messages, upload pictures of your fish and tanks and have a great time with other Apisto enthusiasts. Sign up today!

Nannacara or Ivanacara adoketa

Mike Wise

Moderator
Staff member
5 Year Member
Messages
11,202
Location
Denver, Colorado, U.S.A.
Taxonomic names change with time. Presently there are 2 species of Ivanacara and at least 9 species of Nannacara that are know to occur. Until recently the Ivanacara species were considered part of the genus Nannacara. They were separated from Nannacara based on physical, breeding, and distribution differences.
 

tjudy

Moderator
Staff member
5 Year Member
Messages
2,822
Location
Stoughton, WI
OK... when I have question about fish nomenclature I look in two places. The California Academy of Sciences (http://research.calacademy.org/redi.../research/Ichthyology/catalog/fishcatmain.asp) and www.fishbase.org.

The CAS catalog of fishes considers the genus Ivanacara (Romer and Hahn, 2007) to be a valid genus. Fishbase.org does not... if you search for the genus 'ivanacara' you will get the two species (adoketa and bimaculata), but the database states that Nannacara is the valid genus.

Neither database is perfect, and there are other resources out there. I use these two because they are both easily accessible online and are regularly updated. But the formula the use for determining what is and is not valid is different. Fishbase has some very noticeable inconsistencies (especially in Lake Malawi and Lake Victoria cichlids), but for the most part I stick with Fishbase.

In this case, I would go with Ivanacara because that is what is being use most often in the hobby when referring to I. adoketa.
 

Mike Wise

Moderator
Staff member
5 Year Member
Messages
11,202
Location
Denver, Colorado, U.S.A.
Römer & Hahn's erection of Ivanacara conforms to the Code. The only problem is that it was published in 2 publications at 2 different times (first the German Cichliden Atlas 2 and then the English Cichlid Atlas 2). This creates a minor problem, but not really insurmountable. My feeling is that its not used in Fishbase more for personal/political reasons not worth getting into here.

My mistake; only 7, possibly 8 species of Nannacara and half are not scientifically described:

'N. anomala' (aquarium species) (includes N. sp. Mabaruma)
N. aureocephalus (includes N. sp. Approuage, N. sp.Sourourou & N. sp. Mana)
N. quadrispinnae
N. taenia
N. sp. Essequibo (probably the true N. anomala since it occurs at the type locality, but the aquarium 'N. anomala' does not)
N. sp. Marapanim (possibly the same as N. taenia)
N. sp. Marbaruma
N. sp. Yiyi
 

Mike Wise

Moderator
Staff member
5 Year Member
Messages
11,202
Location
Denver, Colorado, U.S.A.
Guyana, Suriname, and French Guiana :). Seriously, these fish are almost never collected commercially, although some people on the French apisto forum have collected some of them.
 

Apistomaster

Active Member
5 Year Member
Messages
703
Location
Clarkston, WA
Nannacara anomala or maybe they were Nannacara sp. Essequibo used to be commonly imported into the USA along with many other indigenous fishes from the Guyanas about 40 years ago.

Somewhere along the way I believe diplomatic and trade issues arose due to nationalized industries and other socialism /cold war related issues and Guyanese fishes stopped coming in regularly. In many cases there were identical or such similar species available from the Amazon Basin countries and the OTF trade dried up to the USA.
If you have been around as long as me in the hobby you notice shifting sources. Many Eurozone countries still receive Guyanese imports.
Just to cite one example, if you want some of the rare and gorgeous Rivulus xiphidius from Crique Boulangere, you have to find friend into killifish in France or Belgium and buy some eggs from them. All the stock in the USA that I am aware of entered the USA this way. We can easily mail dozens of Killiefish eggs in a small letter size envelope and get a start. Here is a photo that is from a Google Images search:
http://www.sekweb.org/images/diapos_portada/xiphidius_crique_ma_saiz.jpg
 

FIL

Member
5 Year Member

tjudy

Moderator
Staff member
5 Year Member
Messages
2,822
Location
Stoughton, WI
The 1999 book by Linke and Staeck is not a scientific paper, and at the time of its writing the correct genus for the species was Nannacara. Romer & Hahn erected the genus Ivanacara in 2006, after the publication of the book. The 2006 reference is the most recent classification of the species, so it should be the valid name.
 

FIL

Member
5 Year Member
The 1999 book by Linke and Staeck is not a scientific paper, and at the time of its writing the correct genus for the species was Nannacara. Romer & Hahn erected the genus Ivanacara in 2006, after the publication of the book. The 2006 reference is the most recent classification of the species, so it should be the valid name.


ok, but it is said in the french article that the genus has changed in 2009 to become Nannacara!
Where can we find the scientific paper that gives this new classification?
 

tjudy

Moderator
Staff member
5 Year Member
Messages
2,822
Location
Stoughton, WI
THere is no reference to a 2009 revision of the genus on Fishbase.org or the California Academy of Sciences. If the French article references a 2009 paper, it should have included the name of the author. Tell us that and we shoudl be able to find the paper searching "author name - pudlication date - Nannacara"
 

Mike Wise

Moderator
Staff member
5 Year Member
Messages
11,202
Location
Denver, Colorado, U.S.A.
I agree with Ted. Fishbase is a good start, but some of it is only the opinions of some highly respected cichlid taxonomists. Their personal opinions carry considerable weight, but in some cases are just that - personal opinion. I don't put myself in the same status as these professionals, and I am sure that they would strongly disagree with some of my statements. Still, I wouldn't be surprised if some of the disagreements are more emotional than strictly scientific. As I said earlier, "My feeling is that its not used in Fishbase more for personal/political reasons not worth getting into here."
 

MD_

New Member
Messages
1
Location
France
Hello,

I am the author of the French article quoted above,
this article has no purpose biologist but only a presentation for beginners with this species

for the bibliography i used a 2008 (and on not 2009 that I have wrote), the reference :
Musilová, Z. , O. Rícan, K. Junko and J. Nocák 2008 [ref. 29518] Molecular phylogeny and biogeography of the Neotropical cichlid fish tribe Cichlasomatini (Teleostei: Cichlidae: Cichlasomatinae). Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution v. 46: 659-672.

Here is the link for read an abstract:
http://www.mendeley.com/research/mo...somatini-teleostei-cichlidae-cichlasomatinae/

bye
 

Mike Wise

Moderator
Staff member
5 Year Member
Messages
11,202
Location
Denver, Colorado, U.S.A.
MD_, thank you for the reference. Since I have not read the paper, I cannot know if the authors consider Ivanacara a valid genus or not. Is it possible that most of the work by the authors was made prior to the erection of Ivanacara? If so, their data would lump Nannacara and Ivanacara together.

Whether or not Ivanacara is considered a valid genus really depends on the taxonomist who works with the fish. Only if the name becomes a problem, will the ICZN decide - which is unlikely.
 

Members online

Forum statistics

Threads
17,915
Messages
116,201
Members
13,027
Latest member
tonc61

Latest profile posts

Josh wrote on anewbie's profile.
Testing
EDO
Longtime fish enthusiast for over 70years......keen on Apistos now. How do I post videos?
Looking for some help with fighting electric blue rams :(
Partial updated Peruvian list have more than this. Please PM FOR ANY QUESTIONS so hard to post with all the ads poping up every 2 seconds….
Top