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!
I agree with Mac, this female can be a form of A. (cf.) ortegai, given the name "purple" likely A. cf. ortegai (Morado):
Looking at the pictures of the fish shop's tank, the other species you got is a form of A. cf. cacatuoides.
Splits in the posterior bars occasionally occur in specimens of the cruzi- and ortegai-subcomplex too. It's just that in these subcomplexes they are exceptions whereas in the eunotus-subcomplex they are the rule.
Your fish isn't A. eremnopyge but rather an agassizii-group species, imo A. gephyra. Btw names like "A. sp. eremnopyge" are self-contradictory because A. eremnopyge is a scientifically desribed species whereas "sp." means that it is not.
I found a typo in my post that might lead to confusion. Instead of "pectoral" it must read "ventral" here: "whereas in megastoma females merely the area between the ventral fins is black".
It can in fact be very difficult to distinguish A. barlowi and A. megastoma. Usually barlowi males show a pattern of rows of dots only in the upper half of the caudal fin with the lower half being yellow/orange. In megastoma males the completle caudal fin shows rows of dots and merely the tips...
I wonder how you distinguish females of A. eunotus from those of A. sp. Yasuni? A. sp. Yasuni is an eunotus-subcomplex species and thus closely related to A. eunotus. Females of such closely related species are usually very hard to distinguish - if possible at all. I would suggest to look at the...
Black markings, shape of body and fins and coloration can indicate the sex. However, as I said, in case of the small fish, it's more a gut feeling.
As for the species, it can any of the ones in the red box:
They all look the same (at least to me) so I'm not able to distinguish them other than...
These are A. cf. sp. Abacaxis (Marimari). It's most likely a different species than A. sp. Abacaxis, so better not keeping them together with A. sp. Abacaxis females.
Both are common names and as such equally "correct". However, since many people omit the "sp." (which indicates that it's not a scientific name) the resulting A. Wilhelmi or worse A. wilhelmi looks like a proper latinized scientific name. Therefore, I prefer "Abacaxis" over "Wilhelmi".
I'm now sure that it's a cruzi-subcomplex species. Which one I can't tell for sure without more information/pictures. E.g. if they are from Peru and the male shows yellow pectoral fins it's A. sp. Nanay.
Since the female doesn'r show an extended or double caudal blotch it's not an ortegai-subcomplex species. It's most likely a cruzi-subcomplex species or less likely a cruzi/ortegai-subcomplex bridge species. Has the store any information on the catch location (other than Peru)?
Unfortunately the ID-guide in Cichlid Atlas doesn‘t work properly (at least in the cases I have tried it). Imo the best source for this is this article by Mike: https://www.tomc.no/page.aspx?PageID=116
... but it might also just be an A. uaupesi specimen. The abdominal bars are not pronounced enough to be sure that it's iniridae or Blutkehl. The latter two species would not fit into this Rio Negro mix very well.