Jump to content

Cryptoheros


YeW

Recommended Posts

Hi Brett -

Just a quick for your interest (and others interested).

I just checked OVID's & ISI current contents which searchs for articles in most biological journals up to this week in 2004.

I find 19 journal articles with Archocentrus

and 0 with Cryptoheros.

I'm not saying here that Cryptoheros isn't a valid genus name (I honestly dont know if it is) - but the name change doesnt seem to have been published in a reputable biological journal recently (ie: in the last 10 years).

There was a number of articles this year - all using Archocentrus.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also:

Just searched BIOSYS and Zoological Abstracts. 0 articles for Biosys, however, Zoo Abstracts shows a few articles (about 8) using Cryptoheros. While some of these are hobbyist journals eg: Practical fishkeeping/TFH etc.. There are a few in L'An Cichlide: One in particular by Allgayer, Robert (2001) Description d'un genre nouveau, Cryptoheros g.n, d'Amérique centrale et d'une espèce nouvelle du Panama (Percoidei: Cichlidae).

Had a look at L'An Cichlide's website - from what I can gather it isnt a peer reviewed journal (I might be wrong here, my french is rubbish LOL!). That regulates it to a ACA-type publication albeit one with "sciency" articles.

As such while Allgayer might be right with regard to Cryptoheros - the name hasnt been subject to much (or any) scientific scrutiny smile.gif.

Anyway - gels to run, must get back to work smile.gif

Enjoy!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Yew,

I believe word of mouth is traveling faster than the scientific writing. There are not many people writing books or articles ATM. I think it is going to be a slow process.

Even the taxonomy people are slow to either upgrade their stuff on the net or they are still busy with other work/projects.

There has been alot of discussions with all these name changes problems getting people to the conferences at the right time.

There will be alot of diffrent stuff coming out and you will see changes in diffrent articles starting to appear in the near future.

I have a new diversity book from Lake Malawi it is by Joe Snook even he is using the new Genus in some fish.

I have been interested in all this stuff for ages and things are starting to happen.

Im thinking do I start a new species list for Oz or do I just wait until things get decided either way people are just going to form there own opinion about there fish.

Either way Im just mellowing out enjoying my hobby.

Thanks for the info.

HTH

Brett woot.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Brett -

With all due respect that doesn't gel with me:

I believe word of mouth is traveling faster than the scientific writing. There are not many people writing books or articles ATM. I think it is going to be a slow process.

Not many scientists would release their findings and not publish it in a peer reviewed journal. By not publishing in these kind of journals it suggests something weird is going on. There are a few possible reasons you (as a scientist) might do this (none of which are pleasant):

1. the work is flawed or imcomplete

2. laziness (or commercial interest)

3. the work has been rejected by a peer reviewed journal

4. Ego?

5. a mixture of any of the above.

It is also counter to your career as a scientist (we are essentially judged by the number of peer reviewed journal articles we publish). There isn't a scientist I know who'd pass his/her results on verbally with no evidence to back them up.

If, as you yourself say, there is only word of mouth to go on - why should we as hobbyists change anything? After all I can get a book published where I change the names of any fish I choose - would you accept (or propose the hobby accepts) name changes simply because they are in print?

There has been alot of discussions with all these name changes problems getting people to the conferences at the right time.

Where is this information? Most reputable conferences have a book of abstracts, proceedings etc? What conferences are we talking about?

I have a new diversity book from Lake Malawi it is by Joe Snook even he is using the new Genus in some fish.

Are we talking about Cryptoheros? blink.gif. Who publishes the book?

Im thinking do I start a new species list for Oz or do I just wait until things get decided either way people are just going to form there own opinion about there fish.

There is no point in the hobby adopting names on the "say-so" of a few authors. With all due respect to the authors in question, taxonomy is a job for taxonomists wink.gif. It is a science - show me the evidence and I'll back you 100%! I agree with you, names are important - however, I think it is better for the hobbyist not to get involved with this process. As such I think it is easiest to simply use the inverted commas (see my example below) to show that an issue is in the process of being resolved etc. In saying that though, a listing of these synoma would be most useful.

eg: "Pseudotropheus" lombardoi is as informative as Maylandia (or Metriaclima) lombardoi - and without the risk of needing to be changed back. How is more information available to the hobbyist by changing?

My interests are in easing the burden on hobbyist, particularly those new to the hobby. There is no point learning a whole suite of names deemed "worthy" by a group of authors only to find in two years there is little scientific validity to any of it and having to re-learn new names.

David.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...