• Hello guest! Are you an Apistogramma enthusiast? If so we invite you to join our community and see what it has to offer. Our site is specifically designed for you and it's a great place for Apisto enthusiasts to meet online. Once you join you'll be able to post messages, upload pictures of your fish and tanks and have a great time with other Apisto enthusiasts. Sign up today!

Mike Wise's amazing 2017-revised list of more than 400 species / forms of Apistogramma

TCMontium

Active Member
5 Year Member
Messages
179
Location
Germany, Kassel
There are many "species" listed that do look very simalar and live relatively close to eachother (like the seperately listed "agassizi", "pebas", "hongsloi" etc. species). Even though they might be different species, I highly doubt it (of course, my knowledge of Apistogramma spp. is very little, which means my opinion doesn't have much strength behind it and might change as I learn more, or it might stay the same even as I learn more).

Is there no possible sub-species in Apistogramma genus? I think it would be logical to have some if many specimens are similar to eachother in many way but have different details that are specific to their populations.

And something simple that I wonder, which is mentioned even less than "rarely": Can the supposed "closely related species" of Apistogramma spp. breed with eachother and than the offspring still reproduce with 1- their siblings, 2- their parent of one pure "species" and 3- their other parent which belongs to another pure "species"?
If they can reproduce without problems, then does it mean this definition is not valid for Apistogramma spp.? : "A species is often defined as the largest group of organisms in which two individuals can produce fertile offspring, typically by sexual reproduction."
Or does it mean that the parents are not real species, but just different local populations of a species OR sub-species (Sub-species can reproduce fertile offspring mostly, but not always, without problems as far as I know.)
 

Mike Wise

Moderator
Staff member
5 Year Member
Messages
11,202
Location
Denver, Colorado, U.S.A.
There are many "species" listed that do look very simalar and live relatively close to eachother (like the seperately listed "agassizi", "pebas", "hongsloi" etc. species). Even though they might be different species, I highly doubt it (of course, my knowledge of Apistogramma spp. is very little, which means my opinion doesn't have much strength behind it and might change as I learn more, or it might stay the same even as I learn more).

Well, 'species' as a concept is totally artificial. Man needs to organize things in neatly confined boxes, but Nature does not. So what is and is not a species actually depends on who defines it.

Is there no possible sub-species in Apistogramma genus? I think it would be logical to have some if many specimens are similar to eachother in many way but have different details that are specific to their populations.

Subspecies in cichlid taxonomy disappeared in the 1960s for some reason. Now it has been replaced by 'populations'. I use the term 'forms' to avoid confusing my speculations that are not completely scientifically tested from those that have.

And something simple that I wonder, which is mentioned even less than "rarely": Can the supposed "closely related species" of Apistogramma spp. breed with eachother and than the offspring still reproduce with 1- their siblings, 2- their parent of one pure "species" and 3- their other parent which belongs to another pure "species"?
If they can reproduce without problems, then does it mean this definition is not valid for Apistogramma spp.? : "A species is often defined as the largest group of organisms in which two individuals can produce fertile offspring, typically by sexual reproduction."
Or does it mean that the parents are not real species, but just different local populations of a species OR sub-species (Sub-species can reproduce fertile offspring mostly, but not always, without problems as far as I know.)

Your idea is stuck in the 19th century concept species. Look at table 1 in: https://academic.oup.com/sysbio/article/56/6/879/1653163/Species-Concepts-and-Species-Delimitation. You see there a many definitions of what is a species - an artificial concept to begin with!;)
 

TCMontium

Active Member
5 Year Member
Messages
179
Location
Germany, Kassel
I do know that there are many aspects to define a species, what I meant was not "If they breed, they are a species.". :D I mean to say that breeding also helps identifying a species, so it would help to identify species more correctly if "hybritisation" experiments were made between species that are colesly related morphologicaly and geologicaly.

Of course if we do not have a set of criterias for species, subspecies and "form" arrangement and the arrangements are personal interpretations, then there is not much benefit to talk about the arrangement differences and concepts to begin with anyway.
Or maybe my english is just not good enough to understand exactly what you (and the article you linked) meant.
 

dw1305

Well-Known Member
5 Year Member
Messages
2,755
Location
Wiltshire UK
Hi all,
Even though they might be different species, I highly doubt it (of course, my knowledge of Apistogramma spp. is very little, which means my opinion doesn't have much strength behind it and might change as I learn more, or it might stay the same even as I learn more).

Is there no possible sub-species in Apistogramma genus? I think it would be logical to have some if many specimens are similar to eachother in many way but have different details that are specific to their populations.

And something simple that I wonder, which is mentioned even less than "rarely": Can the supposed "closely related species" of Apistogramma spp. breed with eachother and than the offspring still reproduce with 1- their siblings, 2- their parent of one pure "species" and 3- their other parent which belongs to another pure "species"?
I think the issue is partially that the Apistogramma spp. are part of the <"Geophagine cichlid adaptive radiation">, where active speciation is still occurring.

Like Mike says you would have to leave the exact point where one species becomes two to the <"taxonomists">.

cheers Darrel
 

Bart Hazes

Active Member
Messages
228
Well, 'species' as a concept is totally artificial. Man needs to organize things in neatly confined boxes, but Nature does not.

Off all taxonomic levels (genus, family, etc) the species concept, independently evolving lineages, is the only one that is IMO not totally artificial although defining what constitutes independent evolution is at least open to different interpretations. The old-school approach "they are different species if they can't mate and yield fertile offspring" is an extreme choice but I expect all definitions will agree that this establishes separate species status (although the diagnosability camp may be an outlier). However it is impractical, can't be applied to asexually reproducing organisms and performing mating experiments is fraught with difficulty. More importantly, many populations are evolving independently even if they can still mate if forced to do so. Here is where species boundaries become artificial because the duration and extent of separation between populations is a continuum and there is no clean definition on where to draw the line.
 

Mike Wise

Moderator
Staff member
5 Year Member
Messages
11,202
Location
Denver, Colorado, U.S.A.
TomC received an email from a Colombian collector in 2012, while we were collecting in Peru. Tom allowed me to copy the photo attached to the email. It is the only known photo of this fish. Sadly Tom lost the email and sender's address when he lost his phone, so now we only have the photo and no other information. I think A. sp. Ouaou looks like a cross between A. alacrina and, colorwise, Nandopsis salvini. Here is a very small photo. I don't own the photo rights, so I will not attach anything large enough to be publishable:

upload_2017-11-7_9-30-37.png
 

rr16

Active Member
5 Year Member
Messages
536
I had A. panduro/nijsseni hybrid fry as I was sold a pair of wild A. panduro and the male turned out to ne A. nijsseni. There are posts and images on here somewhere. I never had succesful spawning between the offspring, however, there were many instances of typical pre and post spawning behaviour. Whether any eggs were layed, I don't know, but I never got any offspring.
 

Members online

Forum statistics

Threads
17,916
Messages
116,204
Members
13,028
Latest member
JaconieMalonie

Latest profile posts

Josh wrote on anewbie's profile.
Testing
EDO
Longtime fish enthusiast for over 70years......keen on Apistos now. How do I post videos?
Looking for some help with fighting electric blue rams :(
Partial updated Peruvian list have more than this. Please PM FOR ANY QUESTIONS so hard to post with all the ads poping up every 2 seconds….
Top