Does anyone know the identification of my agassizii

[Sageorb]

 

[yukondog]

The one I had looked like yours except it was a double red, it was labeled as blue form double red, maybe blue form?

 

[dw1305]

Hi all,
Smart fish. I had a very similar one, the male fry also had the same colour and pattern, so I think it is a line bred colour variant. If they hadn't been line bred I would have expected some other colours to appear, because A. agassizii is polychromatic.

Apologies for the quality of the video, all the males were practically identical.

If it is any help I bought mine fairly cheaply in a normal shop in the UK, and the shop owner said that they were Czech bred.

cheers Darrel

 

[CRD]

From the "net" like pattern I see, I'd cast a vote for A. cf. agassizii "netz". What location, we'll probably never know.

 

[Sageorb]

From the "net" like pattern I see, I'd cast a vote for A. cf. agassizii "netz". What location, we'll probably never know.

I have heard people say this before that the net pattern likely means cf. agassizii , will he have an issues breeding with an sp. agassizii

 

[CRD]

I have heard people say this before that the net pattern likely means cf. agassizii , will he have an issues breeding with an sp. agassizii

No issues "breeding"....the issues come from the deformities in the fry.

 

[Mike Wise]

Your fish appears to be a domestic cross already. There is nothing wrong with that if you like it. I definitely would NOT use the name A. cf. agassizii (Net/Netz)! This is very misleading and unethical.

 

[CRD]

Your fish appears to be a domestic cross already. There is nothing wrong with that if you like it. I definitely would NOT use the name A. cf. agassizii (Net/Netz)! This is very misleading and unethical.

This seems super interesting to me. I don't see any deformed scale rows in the OP's picture, what criteria are you using to determine it is a cross? Expand my mind.

 

[HookedOnFish_MI]

I have heard people say this before that the net pattern likely means cf. agassizii , will he have an issues breeding with an sp. agassizii

What does the “cf” and “sp” mean/stand for?

 

[MacZ]

"sp." or "spp." or "spec." stands for species. Usually used when the status of the specimen is not clarified (unknown or scientifically undescribed yet) and only the Genus is certain. So "Apistogramma sp." means unknown species of Apistogramma, while "Apistogramma sp. "River Name"" means unknown species from Location X.

"cf." stands for "confer", meaning "compare", when a specimen looks to be part of a species group or cluster but is still distinct so the "Apistogramma cf. agassizii "Netz"" means "Apistogramma agassizii-like fish called "Netz"". Basically the same conditions as with "sp." but the next of kin-species is already known.

The Names in "" can be either Locations like "Pebas" or descriptive like "Netz". Technically some domestic hybrid-strains with strain names would have to be called "A. sp. "Strain name"".

All of these names are either based on mutual agreement in the scientific (You use the nomenclature as proposed you technically agree) and aquarist communities and sometimes start out as tradenames. They are normally revised as soon as the species or subgroup is officially described.

 

[HookedOnFish_MI]

"sp." or "spp." or "spec." stands for species. Usually used when the status of the specimen is not clarified (unknown or scientifically undescribed yet) and only the Genus is certain. So "Apistogramma sp." means unknown species of Apistogramma, while "Apistogramma sp. "River Name"" means unknown species from Location X.

"cf." stands for "confer", meaning "compare", when a specimen looks to be part of a species group or cluster but is still distinct so the "Apistogramma cf. agassizii "Netz"" means "Apistogramma agassizii-like fish called "Netz"". Basically the same conditions as with "sp." but the next of kin-species is already known.

The Names in "" can be either Locations like "Pebas" or descriptive like "Netz". Technically some domestic hybrid-strains with strain names would have to be called "A. sp. "Strain name"".

All of these names are either based on mutual agreement in the scientific (You use the nomenclature as proposed you technically agree) and aquarist communities and sometimes start out as tradenames. They are normally revised as soon as the species or subgroup is officially described.

Thank you very much for this detailed information. So when “cf” is used, is it fair to say you are making a guess as to the type of apistogramma, or type of agassizii?

 

[yukondog]

Thank you MacZ, that helps a lot to have someone explain, this is how we learn from the more experienced.

 

[MacZ]

Thank you very much for this detailed information. So when “cf” is used, is it fair to say you are making a guess as to the type of apistogramma, or type of agassizii?

cf. is used when the species/speciesgroup (agassizii, borellii, ortegai... whatever) is more or less certain, but scientifically yet unproven or uncategorized.

[By the way: The term "type" is defined biologically for things like "holotype" (the original specimen used to describe a species) or "typespecies" (original species described of a genus.), so it's a bit problematic to use it to describe a species or variation in general. I would not use the term, simply as it refers to something most people don't mean by it. As we have some actual biologists here on the forum it seems to me the official nomenclature has taken foot here. (Just my observation reading threads and articles.)]

Type (biology) - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

A little taxonomy (exemplified with Apistogramma):

Family is the group of several tribes or genera. Cichlidae (Cichlids) is a family, Cichlinae (American cichlids) a subfamily.
Tribe is the next step: Geophagini is a tribe.
Now the part interesting for aquarists:
Genus is the first part of a binomial name. Examples: Apistogramma, Microgeophagus, Dicrossus
Species is the second part. Examples: A. borellii, A. elizabethae, A. panduro
At this point the sp. and cf. conventions come into play for more detailed definitions like subspecies, colour variations or localities. Those all only apply until the official scientific description.

(FYI: I originally wanted to study zoology, in the end I became a historian and teacher. Well... at least I can explain all the biology stuff in layman's terms. )

 

[HookedOnFish_MI]

cf. is used when the species/speciesgroup (agassizii, borellii, ortegai... whatever) is more or less certain, but scientifically yet unproven or uncategorized.

[By the way: The term "type" is defined biologically for things like "holotype" (the original specimen used to describe a species) or "typespecies" (original species described of a genus.), so it's a bit problematic to use it to describe a species or variation in general. I would not use the term, simply as it refers to something most people don't mean by it. As we have some actual biologists here on the forum it seems to me the official nomenclature has taken foot here. (Just my observation reading threads and articles.)]

Type (biology) - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

A little taxonomy (exemplified with Apistogramma):

Family is the group of several tribes or genera. Cichlidae (Cichlids) is a family, Cichlinae (American cichlids) a subfamily.
Tribe is the next step: Geophagini is a tribe.
Now the part interesting for aquarists:
Genus is the first part of a binomial name. Examples: Apistogramma, Microgeophagus, Dicrossus
Species is the second part. Examples: A. borellii, A. elizabethae, A. panduro
At this point the sp. and cf. conventions come into play for more detailed definitions like subspecies, colour variations or localities. Those all only apply until the official scientific description.

(FYI: I originally wanted to study zoology, in the end I became a historian and teacher. Well... at least I can explain all the biology stuff in layman's terms. )

Thanks a ton for this information, as it is very helpful. Is there a scientific term to describe something one step further than species? I understand these names tend to be created by the breeders, but “orange flash” for example (which I am assuming is like “netz”)...is that considered a subspecies? Or is there a more appropriate term, perhaps like variation?

 

[MacZ]

Subspecies are scientifically recognised, like for example "Gorilla beringei beringei" and "Gorilla beringei graueri" are two subspecies of the same species. I don't know any recognised subspecies of dwarf cichlids, so this one is rather useless here.

For tankbred strains (like "orange flash") [Genus species "trade/strain name"] is the standard, for natural variants (like "Netz") [Genus sp./cf. (species) "characteristic/location"] would be the correct naming. For the latter the species name is optional.

Genera are always written upper case in the front, species are written in lower case.

 

[Mike Wise]

This seems super interesting to me. I don't see any deformed scale rows in the OP's picture, what criteria are you using to determine it is a cross? Expand my mind.

You will note that I wrote, "Your fish appears to be a domestic cross already." I have seen many many photos of Netz forms but never one like this beauty. Could it be a population of Netz? Sure, it could be, but I would expect it to be sold as a Netz form, if for no other reason than that it would sell at a higher price than a nice looking domestic strain of aggie.

Scale deformity in apistos is not an absolutely necessary feature for a hybrid specimen to have, especially if produced from closely related species within a super-species. We do not see such deformities in domestic color strains produced by crossing different species of hongsloi-like species nor in cacatuoides varieties. We have been producing many of these hybrids for decades by mixing, intentionally or unintentionally, different agassizii, bitaeniata, and cacatuoides specimens from different shipments. For those who are skeptical, I suggest you read the following recent scientific article:

Estivals, Guillain, et al. 2020. The Amazonian dwarf cichlid Apistogramma agassizii (Steindachner, 1875) is a geographic mosaic of potentially tens of species: Conservation implications. Aquatic Conserv: Mar Freshw Ecosyst. 2020;1–19.

The species the authors identified as genetically distinct have been isolated from each other for 1-2 million years, yet if crossed show no hybrid abnormalities. We have been doing this unknowingly for years. It is enough to make a species 'purist' shudder in horror and only want to keep species that they themselves collected.

 

[Mike Wise]

Thanks a ton for this information, as it is very helpful. Is there a scientific term to describe something one step further than species? I understand these names tend to be created by the breeders, but “orange flash” for example (which I am assuming is like “netz”)...is that considered a subspecies? Or is there a more appropriate term, perhaps like variation?

The idea of subspecies among ichthyologists for some reason is rarely used and has not used for apistos in recent works. Instead they will at best use "population". As for different color forms, "color morph" or (my preference) "color variant" is used for wild populations and "color strain" for domestic produced color forms. None of these are scientifically set terms.

 

[HookedOnFish_MI]

The idea of subspecies among ichthyologists for some reason is rarely used and has not used for apistos in recent works. Instead they will at best use "population". As for different color forms, "color morph" or (my preference) "color variant" is used for wild populations and "color strain" for domestic produced color forms. None of these are scientifically set terms.

Thank you Mike. That answered what would have been my follow up question, the difference between variant and strain.