New Centromochlus species

[Marc van Arc]

According to FB, COF and Checklist (Ferraris, 2007) Centromochlus altae is a valid species and should therefore have its own data sheet imo. This also implicates that the drawing below must be removed from the Tatia perugiae data sheet.

http://planetcatfish.com/catelog/image. ... ge_id=3960

[Suckermouth]

That same paper lists T. perugiae under Centromochlus. What do we do about that?

[Jools]

I've moved it into Tatia altae for now. Happy to change it once we have clarity on position.

Jools

[Marc van Arc]

I've moved it into Tatia altae for now. Happy to change it once we have clarity on position.

Tatia altae is not valid. It's a synonym. Valid name for this species is Centromochlus altae.

And indeed, Ferraris lists Centromochlus perugiae with a remark that is was wrongly listed previously as Tatia perugiae (COC, p. 73)

If we are to follow his Checklist, both species should be changed......

[Marc van Arc]

Noticed that

Centromochlus altae

is now almost correct. Imo the image caption has too be changed too.

And what are we going to do with C./T. perugiae?

[Jools]

I have changed the image caption on C. altae, however changing T. perugia to C. perugia is a big job as it requires the editing of both a CotM and Shane's World article. It'll take me some time to do that as I need to sit down for about an hour to do this in one sitting. Actually changing the catelog will only take 5 minutes - it's correcting the articles that is time consuming.

Jools

[Marc van Arc]

Anything I can do?

[Marc van Arc]

Btw: I've always thought that T. perugiae had a variable pattern, but could it be that the small blotched specimens are perugiae and the large blotched are altae?

[Marc van Arc]

Could this one

Tatia big spot.JPG (10.96 KiB) Viewed 2419 times

for example be C. altae?

Photo credit: Pier Aquatics, Wigan.
The caption comes with the picture and can't be removed - at least not by me

[Jools]

Anything I can do?

I have now changed the Shane's World article (there wasn't a cotm for this species - at least not outside of my imagination) and also deleted the synonym record for the species. What would be helpful if you could add the new synonym and also check the catelog and shane's world pages for any errors (all I've done is a mechanical "find and replace" and a little tweak of the taxonomic detail at the top of the article).

Jools

[Jools]

Could this one

Tatia big spot.JPG

for example be C. altae?

Photo credit: Pier Aquatics, Wigan.
The caption comes with the picture and can't be removed - at least not by me

It should also have colouration onto the caudal fin, no?

Jools

[Marc van Arc]

It should also have colouration onto the caudal fin, no?

The word should is the major issue. According to Fowler's drawing it's a yes, but in Mees' book both species are shown with almost transparent caudals, with the exception that C. altae has a darkish V-shape in the tail, starting from the tail base.
Mees distinguishes the two species by colour pattern: "in every respect this form (altae) agrees with perugiae, but its colour pattern is different although clearly related".

Anyway, the Tatia big spot could thus not be altae (nor perugiae imo) based on colour pattern. It's probably another closely related, yet undescribed species.

[Jools]

Marc,

Can I move this into "resolved" or do you think there's still the outstanding issue?

Jools

[Marc van Arc]

Afaiac yes, for the time being. In about two years the lot will probably be moved again to Tatia