Pleco in National Geographic

Chrysichthys · Post by **Chrysichthys** » 09 Apr 2003, 16:16

I can't find it now, but within the last 2 years there was an article in National Geographic about collecting catfish in Guyana, and a photo of what looked to be a very large pleco. Has anyone else seen this, and can I.D. it?

Post by **Silurus** » 09 Apr 2003, 16:19

It was the May 2002 issue of National Geographic.
More details here.

Chrysichthys · Post by **Chrysichthys** » 09 Apr 2003, 17:03

Thanks, I've found the print version. The photo is on pages 68-69. Very much clearer than the one on their website. My best guess is Glyptoperichthys lituratus. Can't find that one in the Cat-eLog, though, and don't remember its L number.

Post by **Silurus** » 09 Apr 2003, 17:40

I have a list of the catfishes collected on that expedition, and <i>Glyptoperichthys lituratus</i> isn't one of the species collected.
My guess is one of the four <i>Hypostomus</i> species they obtained.

mokmu · Post by **mokmu** » 27 Apr 2003, 13:28

We had an older thread regarding this in the earlier Planet Catfish forum. Yann, had the answer and knew one of the people during that expedition. If Yann can see this then please post. I shall also PM Yann regarding the answer for you.

mokmu · Post by **mokmu** » 03 May 2003, 14:07

Yann has answered

:

"Hi Mike!

Sorry for taking that long to answer you:
The Loricariidae in the first page is Hypostomus hemiurus
Cheers
Yann"

mokmu · Post by **mokmu** » 03 May 2003, 14:14

Why isn't this fish in the cat-eLog? Any other catfish that have or has been seen recently that should be in the cat-eLog? Thanks.

Post by **Silurus** » 03 May 2003, 14:29

You have to realize Jools has to get permission of the owner of the picture to put the pic in the Cat-eLog for free (and this is not always given).
Since the pic belongs to the NGS, I'd say they are most probably not willing to do it unless you pay them royalties.
Besides, getting the permission can be a very time-consuming process...

mokmu · Post by **mokmu** » 04 May 2003, 00:39

Relax. I wasn't rushing. Just questions as to why? Don't they have any L-number or are these fish identified already so they don't have an L-number? Isn't it that popular that nobody else except NGS has pics of it? You know, stuff like that. I would just like to know more.

Post by **Silurus** » 04 May 2003, 01:13

If the fishes are already described, there is no need of the L number. As with other catfish, there are tons of undescribed loricariids that no one has ever seen, let alone take pictures.
I have seen hundreds of species of catfishes both live and dead, but don't have photographs (at least those decent enough to put up here) of more than a handful.