Ageneiosus sp(1)

Post by **Marc van Arc** » 26 Feb 2009, 23:06

; the stamp has the name "Palmito".
That name is the local name for , so you might consider adding the stamp to that species (leaving the sp(1) empty for the time being).

Post by **Marc van Arc** » 11 Oct 2009, 13:29

See A. sp Llanos; the same goes for this entry

Post by **Marc van Arc** » 31 Mar 2010, 16:54

Marc van Arc wrote:
Ageneiosus sp(1)
; the stamp has the name "Palmito".
That name is the local name for
Ageneiosus inermis
, so you might consider adding the stamp to that species (leaving the sp(1) empty for the time being).

Jools, could you have a look at this pls? Thanks.

MatsP · Post by **MatsP** » 31 Mar 2010, 18:32

I can do this... However, I'm not sure what should be done with the sp. llanos...

--
Mats

Post by **Marc van Arc** » 31 Mar 2010, 20:34

MatsP wrote:I can do this... However, I'm not sure what should be done with the sp. llanos...

The sp. Llanos has already been dealt with; it's now sitting in A. magoi.

My request is only for A. sp (1)

YouTube · Post by **Jools** » 31 Mar 2010, 22:16

Seems OK.

Once moved, I will find a new name/home for sp(1). Maybe we should turn it into a (pictureless?) entry for that new species of ?

Jools

MatsP · Post by **MatsP** » 31 Mar 2010, 23:11

Jools wrote:Seems OK.

Once moved, I will find a new name/home for sp(1). Maybe we should turn it into a (pictureless?) entry for that new species of
Tetranematichthys
?

Jools

Sounds like a plan, but something only you (Jools) can do at the moment.

--
Mats

Post by **Marc van Arc** » 01 Apr 2010, 06:57

Jools wrote:Seems OK.

Once moved, I will find a new name/home for sp(1). Maybe we should turn it into a (pictureless?) entry for that new species of
Tetranematichthys
?

I've been reading that article and based on colouration and looks my specimens seem to match the description of that new species. When looking at the pictures in you can see dark and lighter specimens (the latter ones are mine). A key feature of T. barthemi is the fact that they are - and remain - lighter than the other two known species. I've been comparing the pictures in the article with some of mine in the Clog, using other article keys and information as well. I think they match.

MatsP · Post by **MatsP** » 01 Apr 2010, 08:58

Have you asked the author for an opinion? Most scientists are "approachable" in this sense.

--
Mats

YouTube · Post by **Jools** » 01 Apr 2010, 09:11

Changes made as suggested.

Jools

Post by **Marc van Arc** » 01 Apr 2010, 16:13

MatsP wrote:Have you asked the author for an opinion? Most scientists are "approachable" in this sense.

Good suggestion. Will do.

Ageneiosus sp(1)

Ageneiosus sp(1)

Re: Ageneiosus sp(1)

Re: Ageneiosus sp(1)

Re: Ageneiosus sp(1)

Re: Ageneiosus sp(1)

Re: Ageneiosus sp(1)

Re: Ageneiosus sp(1)

Re: Ageneiosus sp(1)

Re: Ageneiosus sp(1)

Re: Ageneiosus sp(1)

Re: Ageneiosus sp(1)