Something I've been thinking about..

[DJ-don]

Lately i've had an Albino shark.
it had 2 barbel shaped tentacles coming out from its mouth and it seems to use the barbels search for food in my java moss and even though its not a catfish, I think it should be known as a catfish same with their known cousins the rainbow shark.
I'm not really sure why it isn't a catfish but I'm only 14.
please reply

[racoll]

Hi DJ-don. Welcome to Planet Catfish.

In actual fact many different types of fishes have barbels, not just catfishes. Many loaches, and members of the carp family (e.g. danios and barbs) have them too.

Your sharks are more closely related to goldfish than catfish!

[Bas Pels]

I'm not really sure why it isn't a catfish but I'm only 14.
please reply

If you are interested in biology, you may have heard about the systematics which is used to sort every living thing out. I found this out when I was 13 or 14 myself

your fish looks like an albino Labeo frenatus. Here frenatus is the species, and Labeo is the genus. A genus is a group of quite closely related species. The next level would be family - although genus groups, sub-families are also found. Family names are not used when referring to a species, and most end with -idae.

The next level up (ignoring sub- or super-) is order - such as catfish (Siluriformes). Most of them are named after the first family described, here Siluridae (first described catfish is Siluris glanis, the common european catfish) . Obviously, the ending -formes states that this name is an order.

If you go further up, the next level will be class - Osteichthyes, bony fishes.

Catfish is in a different order than carps, although the orders are in the same superorder, as they share a few bones on their swimbladder, the weber organ, thought to assist in hearing, amongst others.

A nice way to recognize catfish is they don't have any scales, as almost all other fishes do. Most catfish have a naked skin, but some have bony plates, such as Corydoras do

Your Labeo has very small scales, which require a magnifying glass, though, as do loaches

[Mod edit: Fixed some typos - mostly minor things like a missing or additional letter here or there. The only thing that I found technically wrong was order "Pisces" which I've changed to Order "Osteichthyes" - I'm sure that's what you meant to write. --Mats]

[DJ-don]

So Baspels, to really identify a catfish is if its has no scales and have brabels too???

[MatsP]

Yes, pretty much "No scales and barbels" is a good simple way to determine if it's a catfish or not. However, not all catfiish's barbels look like barbels. I can't come up with a good photo right now, but some of the Loricariidae (plecos) have sucker-mouths and very limited or no barbels.

There is a WHOLE LOT more here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catfish

--
Mats

[Birger]

(first described catfish is Siluris glanis, the common european catfish)

Small detail...I am quite sure Siluris asotus was the first to be mentioned by Linaaeus in his work "Systema Naturae"

http://www.planetcatfish.com/cotm/cotm. ... cle_id=278

Birger

[Carp37]

(first described catfish is Siluris glanis, the common european catfish)

Small detail...I am quite sure Siluris asotus was the first to be mentioned by Linaaeus in his work "Systema Naturae"

http://www.planetcatfish.com/cotm/cotm. ... cle_id=278

Birger

Is this correct? I'd always assumed that as the type species, glanis must by definition be first, although if they're presented alphabeticallly asotus would beat it that way (?). Am I correct in thinking that the 1758 edition of Systema Naturae (the tenth?) is the first one we recognise for classification, or were any of the older editions also "valid"? I don't think I've ever seen any species described given a year to the authority prior to 1758.

[MatsP]

Carp37, I think you are right that the species from Europe was probably described first, but the year of publication for BOTH these fishes are 1758, so they are both officially described at the same time.

--
Mats

[Silurus]

Both S. asotus and S. glanis were described in the same publication, and the designation of S. glanis as the type species was subsequently performed by Pieter Bleeker in 1862.

[Mod edit: fix missing tag --Mats]