Peter, these are not the P. spec. Parengean / spec. Palangan obtained by the importer in Florida. These are the more recent import via The Cichlid Exchange which share, as you say, many characteristics similar to P. tweediei.
At times I have wondered if they could be more P. alfredi? They do not have whitish-blue pelvic fins mentioned in the account for that species, but instead the blue-green/black pelvic fins of tweediei.
Or P. rubrimontis? They do not have the elongated, pointed dorsal fin tip as mentioned in the account for that species, but a rather the less extended dorsal fin tip characteristic of P. tweediei.
Or P. opallios? They do not have the blue-colored, spotted ventrals [pelvic fins] (similar to P. nagyi) with light blue filaments mentioned in the account for that species, but the pelvic fins colored as for P. tweediei, as already mentioned.
Or P. phoenicurus? They do not show the classic rhombic caudal fin shape and coloration of the wild-caught P. phoenicurus, but show shape and coloration more closely similar to P. tweediei.
I could make no conclusive judgements based on the unpaired fin spine/ray counts mentioned in the species accounts, as the counts mostly overlap in their variations. From what I could count from the photographs these fish could be any of the four species (possibly), but are not excluded as P. tweediei, based on those counts.
So based on:
- Male fin color and shape.
- Fin spine/ray counts.
- Female body and fin coloration.
- The fact that TCE also had imported P. nagyi from Malaysia at the same time this fish was imported and P. tweediei also come from Malaysia (empirical, not conclusive, evidence).
- The fact that P. tweediei is still to be found in the wild (as of Dec. 2014), even in the much altered (but more easily accessible) habitats of the palm plantations.
- That fairly recent imports in the trade (Helene’s fishes that also share many if not all of the characteristics of P. tweediei) could also be P. tweediei and indicate their ongoing accessibility to exporters. (versus P. phoenicurus – only one known commercial import from only one known collection location. P. opallios, on the other hand, has had more frequent exportations in the trade i.e. TCE 2013 and possibly again this year, listed by the same vendor, but unverified).
We have some body of facts pointing to these fish being more likely P. tweediei (or some close variant) than any of the other closely related forms.
In all of this, I think your observations in comments #4039 and #4047 of Helen’s thread “help with id ? alfredi ? tweediei ? rubrimontis?” should be well considered, as they place our questions and potential answers within the proper biological/ecological situation when it comes to the taxonomy of this genus.
I want to know what “species” this fish is and give it a biological name. However, given the limited nature of the binomial naming system seeking to be imposed, as Peter says, upon the fluid and ever-changing flow of biological life, and all of the vast uncertainty of the phylogenetic relationships of the relatively sparsely collected and documented forms of the genus, I am realizing any name we give this fish is likely to be temporary, subject to ongoing change and serves only as a reference point from which to talk about the actual fish. Add to this the changes that come into play once the fish is removed from the natural environment and begun to be propagated within the wholly different “habitat” of the aquariums of the fishkeepers, including the possibility of hybridization, genetic bottleneck (inbreeding) and completely different nutritional inputs – we can already see changes in color and body shape of captive-bred populations compared to the original wild forms. Lastly, in most of the species accounts on this website, there are the recurring provisos to the descriptions of each species of this closely related group, that there is quite a lot of color variations, among the wild collected fish and in their captive offspring. So the best we can do, in the absence of clear, known characteristics, known collection locations or especially the more certain genetic studies, is to make close observations of as many of the characteristics of the fish we have based on the available knowledge and to try to compare as many known facts as we can to seek some greater clarity about the forms we have. That is why this forum, with everyone’s contributions is so valuable in that regard, and this is exactly what is taking place in the comments and observations that have been made by everyone to best degree.