Longitude for type locality of Pseudacanthicus leopardus.

Incorrect ID? New info to be added, taxonomic revisions and any kind of changes to the data we currently hold in here please!
Post Reply
User avatar
bekateen
Posts: 5523
Joined: Tue Sep 09, 2014 5:50 pm
I've donated: $40.00!
My articles: 3
My images: 52
My cats species list: 104 (i:78, k:47)
My aquaria list: 30 (i:14)
My BLogs: 29 (i:100, p:1503)
My Wishlist: 33
Spotted: 121
Location 1: USA, California, Stockton
Location 2: USA, California, Stockton
Contact:

Longitude for type locality of Pseudacanthicus leopardus.

Post by bekateen » Tue Oct 25, 2016 9:59 pm

Hi Jools,

Sorry for the bother - this is a low priority database error: I noticed today that the type locality of Pseudacanthicus leopardus is placed in the Atlantic Ocean, offshore of Northern Brazil.

In the text of the CLOG page, the type locality is specified as "Rupununi R., Guyana, {for map 2.5°N, 50°20'W} 2°-3°N, 50°20'W."

These coordinates are consistent with the original description, which states,
In 1914, Fowler wrote:In the fall of 1912 the Academy received a collection of freshwater fishes from the Rupununi River, in the highlands of British Guiana. The specimens were purchased from Mr. J. Ogilvie, who collected them during the same year and in 1911. Mr. Ogilvie informs me, in lieu of the name of any settlement or town, they were approximately secured in North Latitude 2° to 3°, and West Longitude 50° 20'.
The only problem with the original information is the way it maps - the Rio Rupununi is located at approximately 59°W rather than 50°W Longitude.

I'm not sure how you would want to resolve this, if at all, since we can't know the intent of the author. But we do know where the Rupununi river is: Perhaps instead of a specific coordinate (50°20'W), the original data should have been stated by Fowler as a range (50°- 60°W), which is how the latitude data was provided in the original paper (2°- 3°). It seems strange that the author would provide a range of latitudes, but a single precise longitude.

If that is an uncomfortable call, alternatively, perhaps it should be interpreted as a single value, for example, as 59°20'W or 60°20'W instead of 50°20'W as printed in the original paper.

I'll leave that for you to decide. I imagine that if it is left unresolved, it is trivial, and in fact if left as is, at least it does match the text of the original publication even if it is inaccurate.

Cheers, Eric
"So many catfishes, so little time... and space... and money." - I said this after visiting Pier Aquatics.
Image
http://youtube.com/user/Bekateen1
Would you like to buy my fish? Click HERE for prices.

User avatar
Jools
Expert
Posts: 14526
Joined: Mon Dec 30, 2002 3:25 pm
My articles: 189
My images: 904
My catfish: 244
My cats species list: 88 (i:0, k:5)
My aquaria list: 2 (i:2)
My BLogs: 7 (i:5, p:194)
My Wishlist: 14
Spotted: 929
Location 1: M8
Location 2: Scotland
Interests: All things aquatic, Sci-Fi, photography and travel. Oh, and beer.
Contact:

Re: Longitude for type locality of Pseudacanthicus leopardus.

Post by Jools » Wed Oct 26, 2016 5:23 pm

Good spot.

Feels like this is a typo in the original manuscript (it would have been typed) and the 9 became a 0. Easy to do if your handwriting is as bad as mine. Would suggest correcting the type locality and making a note similar to yours in the general field to ensure future travellers along this path can see the info. / working on how we got to where we are?

Cheers,

Jools

User avatar
bekateen
Posts: 5523
Joined: Tue Sep 09, 2014 5:50 pm
I've donated: $40.00!
My articles: 3
My images: 52
My cats species list: 104 (i:78, k:47)
My aquaria list: 30 (i:14)
My BLogs: 29 (i:100, p:1503)
My Wishlist: 33
Spotted: 121
Location 1: USA, California, Stockton
Location 2: USA, California, Stockton
Contact:

Re: Longitude for type locality of Pseudacanthicus leopardus.

Post by bekateen » Sat May 13, 2017 12:12 am

I see the same problem which we found for Pseudacanthicus leopardus also applies to Henonemus taxistigmus (and probably every other fish described in Fowler's 1914 paper... so I read through the whole paper (Siluriformes section only) and sought out any new species Fowler attributed to this locality).

As requested, I've submitted CLOG edits for both species (plus several more new species from the same paper) to provide commentary General Remarks data fields. Once these edits are accepted into the CLOGs, I think this thread can go to All Resolved Issues.

Cheers, Eric
"So many catfishes, so little time... and space... and money." - I said this after visiting Pier Aquatics.
Image
http://youtube.com/user/Bekateen1
Would you like to buy my fish? Click HERE for prices.

Post Reply