Panaque nocturnus is valid as Panaqolus nocturnus according to FB & CoF.
[Mod edit: remove clog-tags to avoid getting bombarded with e-mails about the "image missing" for P. nocturnus --Mats]
Panaque nocturnus
-
Marc van Arc
- Expert
- Posts: 5038
- Joined: 19 Dec 2004, 14:38
- My articles: 20
- My images: 61
- My catfish: 9
- Spotted: 35
- Location 2: Eindhoven, The Netherlands
-
Suckermouth
- Posts: 1609
- Joined: 28 Nov 2003, 14:29
- My images: 17
- My cats species list: 22 (i:0, k:0)
- My aquaria list: 2 (i:0)
- My BLogs: 6 (i:0, p:237)
- Spotted: 14
- Location 1: USA
- Location 2: Washington, DC
Re: Panaque nocturnus
It looks like this is the case with the rest of the Panaqolus as well.
- Milton Tan
Research Scientist @ Illinois Natural History Survey
Research Scientist @ Illinois Natural History Survey
-
Jools
- Expert
- Posts: 16018
- Joined: 30 Dec 2002, 15:25
- My articles: 198
- My images: 948
- My catfish: 237
- My cats species list: 87 (i:13, k:1)
- My BLogs: 7 (i:8, p:202)
- My Wishlist: 23
- Spotted: 450
- Location 1: Middle Earth,
- Location 2: Scotland
- Interests: All things aquatic, Sci-Fi, photography and travel. Oh, and beer.
- Contact:
Re: Panaque nocturnus
Yeah, it's on my list of changes to make actually. It is not a small amount of work as I would then need to move all the l-numbers too.
Jools
Jools
Owner, AquaticRepublic.com, PlanetCatfish.com & ZebraPleco.com. Please consider donating towards this site's running costs.
-
matthewfaulkner
- Posts: 371
- Joined: 07 Oct 2009, 19:28
- I've donated: $61.00!
- My images: 42
- My cats species list: 14 (i:0, k:0)
- My aquaria list: 2 (i:0)
- Spotted: 26
- Location 1: Wales
- Location 2: UK
- Interests: Panaque
- Contact:
-
Suckermouth
- Posts: 1609
- Joined: 28 Nov 2003, 14:29
- My images: 17
- My cats species list: 22 (i:0, k:0)
- My aquaria list: 2 (i:0)
- My BLogs: 6 (i:0, p:237)
- Spotted: 14
- Location 1: USA
- Location 2: Washington, DC
Re: Panaque nocturnus
There hasn't been any taxonomic reinstatement yet, just a listing of Panaqolus in Ferraris. Catalog of Fishes is only going off of Ferraris 2007, which I think doesn't follow Armbruster 2004 at all due to Armbruster's paper being published after a lot of the work on Ferraris 2007 had already been done.matthewfaulkner wrote:Does this mean that Panaqolus is valid as a genera now?
- Milton Tan
Research Scientist @ Illinois Natural History Survey
Research Scientist @ Illinois Natural History Survey