The
PAROSPHROMENUS PROJECT

The
PAROSPHROMENUS
PROJECT

bintan/phoenicurus?

#7079
Peter Finke
Participant

To “ourmanflint”:

Ourmanflint, indeed you should refer to your Paros as coming from Jambi/Sumatra. But even in 2005 we in Germany distinguished Jambi I and Jambi II already, and in the years since one man alone, Horst Linke, travelled three or four times in Jambi specialized in finding Parosphromenus habitats, and he found six or seven different forms. “P. spec. Jambi” is far too general and non-distinctive in order to be acceptable as a proper name for a hitherto undescribed form. You should use an exact as possible name of the importer to make these fish recognizable among the many forms from Jambi (since you do not know the exact location; Jambi is not very small, but the locations of the different forms which we know from there are relatively small). For instance, we called a distinctive form “spec. Mimbon 98”, later on one other “spec. Mimbon 2008”, since it had been imported via this whole-saler. If you have a look on the “Other forms”-chapter that you will find on this homepage in the main menue (left!) within the chapter “The fish” then you will see a long list of provisional but well-introduced names that have been used in order to make different undescribed Paros discernible. The list is not complete, but you will find Jambi I and Jambi II, for instance. It is highly unlikely that the now-called P. phoenicurus (former P. spec. Langgam) is identical we the fish you speak of since it was hitherto found and imported (and later on described) only once privately by Linke.

To “deepin’ peat”:

The fish shown in the photos is definitely not phoenicurus. No phoenicurus shows these bright blue-green bands in the unpaired fins. Nearly all those parts are brightly red in phoenicurus. I am sometimes not sure whether phoenicurus might be perhaps a synonym only for the formerly described P. tweediei. The locations of both forms are not far distinct, and the sealevel in between was far lower in former times; that means: the habitats were connected by a land-bridge and completely different rivers, swamps and creeks. The form of the tail, the extension of the red parts and the white lines in between which were taken to be species-distinctive by the describers Schindler and Linke (2012) disappeared rather completely in the many offspring that we raised from the imported specimens. Compare the original photo by Linke with the photos of direct offspring males by Fischer (for instance at the Wikipedia-page on “Prachtguramis”, which was written bei Martin Fischer.

The fish on your photos is very near to the from which was in the beginning of the Sumatra-boom traded as “spec. Blue Line” (a name given by the traders), very nice, very beautiful, brilliantly coulored fish. They were caught and exported (and cared for to death by “normal” aquarists looking for something nice and new for their “normal” flakes-fed and tap-water-filled community tanks) to Europe in many thousands for at least four or five years. Later on they mixed them with other forms from Sumatra obviously from other locations by far not as brilliantly looking as the original “blue line”-Paros. Your fish resemble (as far as I can see) these fish, but they are definitely not phoenicurus.