That change was revised in 2014. It's P. taeniatus and P. kribensis separately again. But I can imagine the confusion this still causes in labelling.When you say “kribs” do you mean P. pulcher?
Changing of P. taeniatus to P. kribensis is an annoyance to hobbyists like me.
They were sold as Pelvicachromis kribensis but who knows what they are these days.When you say “kribs” do you mean P. pulcher?
Changing of P. taeniatus to P. kribensis is an annoyance to hobbyists like me.
Kribs (the common name) will always be P. pulcher to me.They were sold as Pelvicachromis kribensis but who knows what they are these days.
I suspect it extend past that in common context of usage for most people but my suspicious nature might be proven wrong.Kribs (the common name) will always be P. pulcher to me.
Apologies, here’s my next stupid question.As I said above, yes P. taeniatus is a proper species, as is P. kribensis.
I could be mistaken but i believe p. taeniatus was moved to p. kribensis and then moved back to p. taeniatus after further analysis.Apologies, here’s my next stupid question.
What varieties that were previously known as P.taeniatus were moved to P.kribensis?
Thanks
P. taeniatus had many forms (locations) in the “old days”.I could be mistaken but i believe p. taeniatus was moved to p. kribensis and then moved back to p. taeniatus after further analysis.
What are some of the observable morphological differences between Pv. kribensis and Pv. taeniatus? I read taeniatus are smaller. Is that true?According to Dr. Lamboj specimens listed as Kienke and Nange were collected at the same location as the type specimen of Pv. kribensis.