Pel taeniatus project... need your help

[tjudy]

Randall and I need your help. We have discussed a little research project that everyone keeping Pel. teaniatus forms can provide some data for.

Pel. taeniatus is most likely (in the opinions of several people brighter than me) a complex of three distinct forms: P. kribensis (Boulenger 1911) from southern Camaroon (which includes the 'lobe' types), P. taeniatus Boulenger 1901) from the Niger river delta in Nigeria (which includes the nigeria red, green and yellow forms), and P. calliptera (Pellegrin 1929). Today we identify all of these fish as Pel. taeniatus and tack on a location name to describe where they were found (lobe, dehane, nyete, moliwe, etc.)

There is an ongoing debate about the valiidity of all three types being the same species.

My interest is an evolutionary biology question. It is possible that all three types, and the many subsequent local forms, represent a clinal relationship. A 'cline' is a sequence of variations that appear in different geographic forms over a long distance. Two forms that are in adjacent areas, and thus might have some occasional genetic drift between them, will have features that share a lot in common. The farther apart two forms are, the less likely it is that their gene pools will overlap, so there are fewer features that they share.

I am collecting data to see if a cline can be seen in the number of caudal and dorsal ocelli this specis has. The nigerian forms are very spotted, while many of the southern Camaroon types are not heavily spotted at all.

Here is what I would like to get started on this site. If you have any of the Pel. taeniatus forms, please post as much of the folowing information as you can. Only post for fish that are at a reproductive age. We really do not need data for a captive spawn of a bunch of fry. If you do not own the fish, but have permission from the person who does to give me the data, please include the name of the person so that I can avoid double counting fish.

Here is what I need. I am including examples of responses for clarity:

Type: Pel. taen. 'lobe'
Generation: wild, F1, F2, etc.
Origin: importer, LFS, hobbyist, club trade/auction
Sex: male or female
Dorsal ocelli: the number of spots in the soft dorsal fin rays
Caudal ocelli: the number of spots in the caudal fin

Count 1/2 ocelli as whole ocelli...

My goal is to create a map of the geographic range of the P. taeniatus types and see if there is a clinal pattern between the northern Nigerian populations and the southern Camaroon populations.

Thanks!!!!

 

[Neil]

Ted,
Sounds like a very interesting and worthwhile project. I will participate. As soon as I get a free moment or 2 to post about the 3 species that I currently have, I will. Good luck with this. Hopefully many others will join in. The larger body of evidence would be instructive.
Neil

 

[Cichlids1]

Type: Pelv. taen. 'Nyete'
Generation: wild
Origin: Importer (Toyin)
Sex: Both
Dorsal: Male-0 Female-1
Caudal: Male-0 Female-0

My 'Mahone' are still of questionable origin, but here are the stats:

Type: Pelv. taen. 'Mahone'
Generation: F1
Origin: Imported from Czech
Sex: Both
Dorsal: Male-0 Female-0
Caudal: Male-3 Female-0

Type: Pelv. taen. 'Lokjundi'
Generation: F1
Origin: Importer (Toyin)
Sex: Male
Dorsal: 1
Caudal: 3

The Dehane are still too small, and I couldn't get the Kienke to come out for a roll call. More to follow.

 

[Sam]

Here ya go

Type: Pelv. taen. 'Lobe'
Generation: Wild
Origin: LSF
Sex: Male
Dorsal: 0
Caudal: 0

Type: Pelv. taen. 'Lobe'
Generation: Wild
Origin: LSF
Sex: Female
Dorsal: 1
Caudal: 0

 

[_BaDgUy_]

Type : Pelvicachromis taeniatus "Dehane"
Generation : F1
Origin : Hobbyist
Sex : Male
Dorsal : 0
Caudal : 1

Type : Pelvicachromis taeniatus "Dehane"
Generation : F1
Origin : Hobbyist
Sex : Female
Dorsal : 1
Caudal : 0

 

[Neil]

Type: Pelv. taen. 'Bipindi'
Generation: F1
Origin: Tank raised from Oliver Lucanus import
Sex: Both
Dorsal: Male-0 Female-1
Caudal: Male-1 Female-0


Type: Pelv. taen. 'Lobe'
Generation: Wild
Origin: Toyin
Sex: Both
Dorsal: Male-0 Female-0
Caudal: Male-0 Female-0


Type: Pelv. taen. 'Wouri'
Generation: Wild
Origin: Toyin
Sex: Both
Dorsal: Male-0 Female-0
Caudal: Male-0 Female-1

 

[coenga]

PV project: datas and comments.

Type: Pelv. taen. 'dehane'
Generation: F1
Origin: hobbyist
Sex: Both
Dorsal: Male-0 Female-2
Caudal: Male-11 Female-1

pics available there :
http://zapzap.zwf.net/gallery/album_de_coenga?&page=3
comments in french, sorry...

May you permiss me a few comments and forgive my "old continental" english.

I love the title of this thread, really. "Pv taeniatus project" sounds in my ears like a
great movie title with great actors and actress with brillant and exotic names as kienke,
lobe, dehane, moliwe and so on.

I love the idea of Pv taeniatus genus organization, it reminds me my own questionning,
threads with M Wise on the AML, a previous thread I posted here on the subject and a pm
conversation with Randall.

I also love the idea of multicentric research supported by internet tools meetings. This is
a method that I dream to be able to use some day in my professionnal area.

By the way, Ted, I do not want to be read as a "rabat-joie", but I would like to explain you
a few comments about this hobbyist research project, enlighted by my modest scientific
knowledge and experience.

Goal of study:
no problem, I love it. Seeking for phenotypes which may leads to the findings of
genetical differences between Pv color morphs is obvioulsy an interesting project for the Pv
fan that I am.

Material:
fishes of DCF contributors. As you underligned, provenance of fishes is
important, and for a scientific research one should use only wild fishes. But we are not
scientifists and not engaged in the foolish "publish or perish" race, so it seems a good an
easily available material for us.

Caudal and dorsal ocelli on male and female fishes for research item. I'm not
sure that this target is so good. I thought about that earlier, and I discarded this item in
my mind because I witnessed (and may be you did it too) that it was a labile phenotype, with
parents and children having different numbers of ocelli. This was witnessed in captivity,
but I think that it might be true in the wild too. Cozilis witnessed wild kienke morphs
having lobe morphs fry (RFC), and difference between lobe and kienke is based on presence of
ocelli.

May I suggest to find more accurate targets to seek on the fishes. I think that
the ocelli in the upper caudal on males may be interesting, not in terms of number , but in
terms of surrounding. Dots may be black on a yellow surrounding, some are black with a white
margin. The margin of the upper caudal of males is sometime of a different color than the
inner color.
Staying on the males, some morphs, especially 'dehane', have a red mark on the
cheek under the eye. this is a key for 'dehane' but it might be found on other morphs.

About females, the color of the nuptial belly is interesting but might be
difficult to describe with accuracy, I found it difficult to get on pictures. On the dorsal,
there is a black margin beginning in proximal part of the fin. I'm not sure that this margin
runs along the whole fin in all morphs. The length of this margin might be a key to work on.

I think one could find other possible determination keys, as these used by
Loiselle and others.

Method:
Strongly built method is the prerequisite to obtention of a valid scientific
research. Hard science is not the goal here, but one can prove a fact only if the method is
unquestionnable even if he is not a scientific.

You choosed to find a relationship between to variables datas; location of the
color morph and number of ocelli. This is easy to understand and statitics tools are simple
for this.
But statistics are no more percentages only. Statistic is meant to establish an
acceptable possibility of difference between two or more classes of datas. Example: there is
more than 95% chance that any A fish has more than 2 ocelli and that any B fish has 2 or
less ocelli. Then you can say that a fish with 3 ocelli is A, a fish with 2 ocelli is B with
less than 5% of risk to be wrong (this is the acceptable risk currently used). One can also
prove this difference with a 99,99% chance, which is a better because there is a lesser
error risk.
To be able to prove something you need preferably an easily discriminated data,
the easier being a boolean data (presence or absence of a phenotype, positive or negative).
Number of ocelli is not boolean, presence or absence is.
The data to separate is the location were the fish was found, I listed 23 of
these and this is far from boolean.
To be able to prove a difference or absence of difference for a phenotype you
need a sufficent number of cases, the n number. Higher it is, higher you can have chance to
prove something because higher goes the "power" of the test used, the probability to be able
to prove a difference if there is a difference.

All this to say that you need the contribution of a massive number of cases to
to have a good chance to discriminate a so large number of color morphs, even if you only
try to segregate them in the 3 sub-species proposed by Loiselle: taeniatus, callipterus and
kribensis.

Let's try your idea. But I think that we should try to use more keys, boolean
if possible that we will also note for our fishes, this may help to go farther in the "quest
of the Pv taeniatus cline".
The evidence of silmultaneous phenotypes in some fishes and absence in others
will strengthen the chance of discriminating two types of fishes. I let the experienced Pv
breeders give us possible keyes to look for.


I hope that my explainations are understandable, feel free to ask me more.

Another point, Ted, what do you plan to do with dead fishes ?

best regards,

Colin

 

[tjudy]

Thank you for your comments Colin. You are absolutely correct that this project is not set up to optimally conclusive. The only way to do that would be to take a trip, collect a lot of wild fish in definitively known locations and take a lot more data points than just ocelli.

I chose the ocelli phenotype that is variable and not boolean. The search is for a cline, which needs a variable that has a gradient range. I could use a color intensity, but that would be hard to get consistant data for. I could use a fin length, but I do not think that hobbyists are going to pull their fish out of tanks and measure them precisely.

I understand that the amount of spotting is variable within a specific locality type. However, the range of amount of spotting should not run from the species maximum to the species minimum in a single population. I have seen 'lobe' with one spot or no spots, but not with the 10+ spots of the Nigerian types.

I am not overly concerned with the statistical analysis of this data at this point. It is yet to be determined if we can get enough data to make any sort of statistical analysis applicable.

Let's call this a 'fishing expedition' and see what we come up with. We might get lucky. We might collect a few hundred data points that cover the full range of the species and see an obvious trend in number of ocelli from north to south. If that is the case, then maybe someone with greater resources will get more support go out and do it right.

What do I need the dead fish for? I would not mind having a collection of preserved specimens to compare to each other. No other reason than that.

Let's keep those data points coming! I appreciate all the keepers who have sent the data in already. Interestingly, we have not gotten any data on the Nigerian forms yet...

I hope to post a bit of the data collected in a couple weeks.

THANKS!!!

 

[dhm325]

Type: Pelv. taen. 'Dehane'
Generation: Aquarium Strain
Origin: Hobbyist
Sex: Both
Dorsal: Male-0 Female-3
Caudal: Male-10 Female-1

Type: Pelv. taen. 'Moliwe'
Generation: wild
Origin: Importer (Cichlid Exchange)
Sex: Both
Dorsal: Male-0 Female-2
Caudal: Male-11 Female-1

Type: Pelv. taen. 'Lokoundje'
Generation: F1
Origin: Importer (Cichlid Exchange)
Sex: Both
Dorsal: Male-0 Female-0
Caudal: Male-3 Female-0

Type: Pelv. taen. 'Kienke'
Generation: wild
Origin: Importer (Toyin)
Sex: Both
Dorsal: Male-0 Female-0
Caudal: Male-0 Female-0

Type: Pelv. taen. 'Kienke'
Generation: Aquarium Strain
Origin: LFS
Sex: Both
Dorsal: Male-0 Female-1
Caudal: Male-3 Female-0

Type: Pelv. taen. 'Ndonga'
Generation: wild
Origin: Importer (Toyin)
Sex: Both
Dorsal: Male-0 Female-1
Caudal: Male-0 Female-0

Type: Pelv. taen. 'Wouri'
Generation: wild
Origin: Importer (Toyin)
Sex: Both
Dorsal: Male-0 Female-0
Caudal: Male-1 Female-0

Type: Pelv. taen. 'Nigeria Red'
Generation: Aquarium Strain
Origin: LFS
Sex: Female
Dorsal: Female-2
Caudal: Female-1

 

[tjudy]

This project stalled a while back. We did not collect enough data to be able to produce anything. I appreciate everyone participating. I am going to unsticky the thread and let it slip away.