110 replies to this topic

[Cicolid]

A point regarding the colouration of the head & cheeks seem to be a big factor in the ID of different species.

We all know how much different light spectrum's can produce different effects with photos.

Should we take into consideration what lighting is used on the tanks where the photos are taken & also if a flash is used on the photos ?

I am talking in particular about the comparison of "Grow-lux" tubes and " Sylvania Aquastar 10,000K tubes.
A photo of the same fish under the above lighting look completely different.
Does this just complicate matters, or is it not worth taking into consideration ?

Col

[LC60]

A point regarding the colouration of the head & cheeks seem to be a big factor in the ID of different species.

We all know how much different light spectrum's can produce different effects with photos.

Should we take into consideration what lighting is used on the tanks where the photos are taken & also if a flash is used on the photos ?

I am talking in particular about the comparison of "Grow-lux" tubes and " Sylvania Aquastar 10,000K tubes.
A photo of the same fish under the above lighting look completely different.
Does this just complicate matters, or is it not worth taking into consideration ?

Col

Hi Col,

I don't think this complicates matters, it is a relevant point. On his website, ozarowana has stated whether individual pics were taken with flash or without a flash to try to address this variable. Thanks for bringing this up Col, it has me thinking that maybe we need to take some comparative pictures of the same fish under different lighting using those two different tubes that you mentioned for example.

Cheers
Larry

[LC60]

Post #75 (Albering's Araguaia account translation) updated and ongoing .

Cheers
Laz

[Heiko Bleher]

Post #75 (Albering's Araguaia account translation) updated and ongoing .

Cheers
Laz

Hi guys,

this thread is extremely long and it is impossible for me to read all, but before I take off again in a few hours to Canada (is anyone coming to my lectures about Geophagines in London, Ontario, on May 15-17thy - this weekend? - and just came back yeasterday from Poalnd and lectures every weekend the past four and the upcoming four, and one also with all of you guys in Western Australia...), just a few words to answer mainly Larry:

Larry first of all: Thanks for your nice comments. Below now some answers to your questions:

Q:
the fish on the left in Pic #1, in Post #1, at the start of this thread, could correctly be identified as G. sp. "Tapajos" "Orange/Red Head";

the fish on the right in pic #1 and in pic#2 could correctly be identified as G. sp. "Arapiuns" "Orange Head;
A:
YES, ALTHOUGH PLEASE NOTE THAT THE HEAD FORMATION CAN ALTER (GROW) - SPECIALLY WITH THE AGE - IN MANY OF THE CICHLIDS 8AND SPECIALLY IN MALES)

Q:
1. Another point of confusion here is the yellow/orange operculum that can be seen on the fish on the right in pic#1, Post#1. Does the orange head variant that you collected from the Tapajos ever show an orange or yellow operculum?...... or is it only specific to the Arapiuns variant.
A:
THIS YELLOW ON THE OPERCULUM IS NOT SPECIFIC, SOME HAVE IT SOME NOT AND IT IS ALSO A COLORATION I DO NOT THINK IT IS SPECIFIC TO THE ARAPIUNS VARIANT, AS I HAVE COLLECTED MANY IN THE ARAPIUNS WHICH DO NOT HAVE IT.

Q:
2. Which variant do you believe is featured in the pics accompanying Jorg Albering's 1999 account: Ein neuer (?) Erdfresser Geophagus spec. "orange head"aus dem Rio Araguaia,? http://www.aquanet.d...g/bericht1.html . Albering identified these fish as G. sp. "Araguaia" "Orange Head" (which you have explained is incorrect), the thing that has confused me about these pics is that both the male and female have the orange operculum that I thought was specific with the fish you have identified as the Arapiuns variant.
A:
AS MENTIONED ABOVE, I DO NOT THINK THIS COLORATION IS RESTRICTED TO ONLY THE ARAPIUNS VARIANT. BUT PLEASE UNDERTSND WHAT I BEEN SAYING FOR A LONG TIME: THE ARAPIUNS VARIANT IS DEFINITLY THE MORE COLOURFUL ONE OF THE THE G. "PROXIMUS" FROM THAT DRAINAGE (WHICH IS FREQUENTLY CALLED "ARAGUAIA", WHERE NO ONE COLLECTED COMMERCIALLY (in the Araguaia), NOR ARE FISHES EXPORTED FROM - TO FAR AWAY - NO ACCESS (EXCPET BY ROAD VIA BRASILIA) AND NOR COMMERCIAL FLIGHTS (NO LANDING STRIP).

Q:
3. Do you believe the Arapiuns and Tapajos variants of "orange Head" to be the same species? .....and if so, does this also include the xingu variant, or is the xingu variant likely to be the same species as the ovophilous Tapajos variant (without any orange or red head colouration, Tapajos II in some of the literature), or a different species altogether?
A:
YES, I BELIEVE IT IS THE SAME SPECIES, JUST TWO VARIANTS. AND THERE IS ALSO NO SUCH FISH IN THE XINGU - EVER FOUND. THE ORANGE HEAD GEOPHAGUS ARE RESTRICTED TO THE TAPAJOS DRAINAGE, AND NOT FOUND ANYWHERE ELSE.

Q:
4. Many of the geos that have been imported into this country have been mislabeled. I have noticed that in europe and the US that G. sp. "Tapajos' (AKA Tapajos II) has started turning up in aquarist's tanks. I was wondering if these fish have been imported specifically into Germany or if it might be the case that these fish have just turned up accidentally in shipments of G. sp. "Tapajos" 'Orange Head'?
A:
FREQUENTLY (OR BETTER NORMALLY) THE LOCATIONS OF THE FISHES ARE GIVEN WRONGLY 8THAT IS ALSO WHY I WROTE BY LARGE DISCUS BOOK, TO HAVE ONCE AND FOR ALL TIMES THE CORRECT LOCATION OF EACH VARIANT/SPECIES, HAS IT HAD ALWAYS BEEN MISLABELED, MOSTLY BY PURPOSE) AND THERE ARE SEVERAL REASONS FOR IT: 1. BECAUSE THE FISHERMAN DOES NOT WANT ANYONE TO KNOW HIS COLLECTING SITE; 2. BECAUSE THE TRANSPORTER DOES NOT KNOW THE EXACT LOCATION, AS HE ONLY TRANSPORTS THE FISH TO THE EXPORTER AND OFTEN JUST GIVES A NAME, WHEN THE EXPORTERS ASKS OF HIS DEPARTURE CITY/LOCATION; NOT A SINGLE EXPORTER KNOWS WHERE HIS FISHES COME FROM 8NO EXPORTER EVER COLLECTS), ONLY THE FISHERMAN'S NAME OR THE CITY OF DEPARTURE (IE NOVA OLIND AN THE MADEIRA). AND IN ADDITION THERE ARE THOSE WHO MIS-LABEL IT BY PURPOSE. AND THE IMPORTER WILL NEVER KNOW IT THE NAME HE RECEIVED IS CORRECT OR NOT...

HOPE TO SEE YOU ALL ON JUNE 2ND, IN PERTH,

ALL THE VERY BEST

ALWAYS

HEIKO

[LC60]

Hi guys,

this thread is extremely long and it is impossible for me to read all, but before I take off again in a few hours to Canada (is anyone coming to my lectures about Geophagines in London, Ontario, on May 15-17thy - this weekend? - and just came back yesterday from Poland and lectures every weekend the past four and the upcoming four, and one also with all of you guys in Western Australia...), just a few words to answer mainly Larry:

Hi Heiko,

Thank you for replying, for answering my questions and for the information and the clarification you have provided regarding the correct locality and identification of the 2 orange head variants, or as you describe them two "Proximus" variants. At last we have an explanation that makes sense!!! . You have solved for us, what has been a ten year puzzle, and which is the first goal of this thread. I appreciate you taking the time to answer my questions and share this information with us while on such a busy schedule. And yes you are right, this thread is very long , it also contains a lot of excellent information on id for these fish. So I'm thinking of limiting this thread to id issues and clarification and start new threads for ongoing projects. There are quite a few people that i know of as well as myself who will be attending your upcoming lecture in Perth , I have no doubt that it will be well attended. We're all looking forward to it .

This has led me to the next issue with this topic: I will talk about the "Origin of the Orange Head Confusion" more in my next post.

Larry first of all: Thanks for your nice comments. Below now some answers to your questions:

I apologise for asking more questions, but ........ it is a rare opportunity to communicate with someone of your knowledge and experience, so please forgive my persistence:

Q1.1 With regard to their relationship with G. proximus, do you consider the two orange head variants, from the Rios Arapiuns and Tapajos to be actual variants of G. proximus or more as a part of the 'Proximus Group"? If the latter, do you consider a more appropriate name/id for these two variants to be for example G. sp. proximus "Arapiuns" and G. sp. proximus "Tapajos"? ....or G. cf. proximus "Arapiuns" and G. cf. proximus "Tapajos"?

Q1.2 For the purpose of clarity within this thread, could I please have your permission Heiko to post a photo scan of page 269 of your book, which is extremely relevant to this section of the thread and to further discussion that I have planned? Or could i be so bold as to invite you to post the page in question.

Q.3 Your answer to question 3. has surprised me almost as much as the info. on the two orange head variants!

Q.3....
A:
........... AND THERE IS ALSO NO SUCH FISH IN THE XINGU - EVER FOUND. THE ORANGE HEAD GEOPHAGUS ARE RESTRICTED TO THE TAPAJOS DRAINAGE, AND NOT FOUND ANYWHERE ELSE.

I would like to give some more time to consider the information you have provided.

Best Regards (And looking forward to seeing you here in Perth).

Larry

Q:
the fish on the left in Pic #1, in Post #1, at the start of this thread, could correctly be identified as G. sp. "Tapajos" "Orange/Red Head";

the fish on the right in pic #1 and in pic#2 could correctly be identified as G. sp. "Arapiuns" "Orange Head;
A:
YES, ALTHOUGH PLEASE NOTE THAT THE HEAD FORMATION CAN ALTER (GROW) - SPECIALLY WITH THE AGE - IN MANY OF THE CICHLIDS 8AND SPECIALLY IN MALES)

Q:
1. Another point of confusion here is the yellow/orange operculum that can be seen on the fish on the right in pic#1, Post#1. Does the orange head variant that you collected from the Tapajos ever show an orange or yellow operculum?...... or is it only specific to the Arapiuns variant.
A:
THIS YELLOW ON THE OPERCULUM IS NOT SPECIFIC, SOME HAVE IT SOME NOT AND IT IS ALSO A COLORATION I DO NOT THINK IT IS SPECIFIC TO THE ARAPIUNS VARIANT, AS I HAVE COLLECTED MANY IN THE ARAPIUNS WHICH DO NOT HAVE IT.

Q:
2. Which variant do you believe is featured in the pics accompanying Jorg Albering's 1999 account: Ein neuer (?) Erdfresser Geophagus spec. "orange head"aus dem Rio Araguaia,? http://www.aquanet.d...g/bericht1.html . Albering identified these fish as G. sp. "Araguaia" "Orange Head" (which you have explained is incorrect), the thing that has confused me about these pics is that both the male and female have the orange operculum that I thought was specific with the fish you have identified as the Arapiuns variant.
A:
AS MENTIONED ABOVE, I DO NOT THINK THIS COLORATION IS RESTRICTED TO ONLY THE ARAPIUNS VARIANT. BUT PLEASE UNDERTSND WHAT I BEEN SAYING FOR A LONG TIME: THE ARAPIUNS VARIANT IS DEFINITLY THE MORE COLOURFUL ONE OF THE THE G. "PROXIMUS" FROM THAT DRAINAGE (WHICH IS FREQUENTLY CALLED "ARAGUAIA", WHERE NO ONE COLLECTED COMMERCIALLY (in the Araguaia), NOR ARE FISHES EXPORTED FROM - TO FAR AWAY - NO ACCESS (EXCPET BY ROAD VIA BRASILIA) AND NOR COMMERCIAL FLIGHTS (NO LANDING STRIP).

Q:
3. Do you believe the Arapiuns and Tapajos variants of "orange Head" to be the same species? .....and if so, does this also include the xingu variant, or is the xingu variant likely to be the same species as the ovophilous Tapajos variant (without any orange or red head colouration, Tapajos II in some of the literature), or a different species altogether?
A:
YES, I BELIEVE IT IS THE SAME SPECIES, JUST TWO VARIANTS. AND THERE IS ALSO NO SUCH FISH IN THE XINGU - EVER FOUND. THE ORANGE HEAD GEOPHAGUS ARE RESTRICTED TO THE TAPAJOS DRAINAGE, AND NOT FOUND ANYWHERE ELSE.

Q:
4. Many of the geos that have been imported into this country have been mislabeled. I have noticed that in europe and the US that G. sp. "Tapajos' (AKA Tapajos II) has started turning up in aquarist's tanks. I was wondering if these fish have been imported specifically into Germany or if it might be the case that these fish have just turned up accidentally in shipments of G. sp. "Tapajos" 'Orange Head'?
A:
FREQUENTLY (OR BETTER NORMALLY) THE LOCATIONS OF THE FISHES ARE GIVEN WRONGLY 8THAT IS ALSO WHY I WROTE BY LARGE DISCUS BOOK, TO HAVE ONCE AND FOR ALL TIMES THE CORRECT LOCATION OF EACH VARIANT/SPECIES, HAS IT HAD ALWAYS BEEN MISLABELED, MOSTLY BY PURPOSE) AND THERE ARE SEVERAL REASONS FOR IT: 1. BECAUSE THE FISHERMAN DOES NOT WANT ANYONE TO KNOW HIS COLLECTING SITE; 2. BECAUSE THE TRANSPORTER DOES NOT KNOW THE EXACT LOCATION, AS HE ONLY TRANSPORTS THE FISH TO THE EXPORTER AND OFTEN JUST GIVES A NAME, WHEN THE EXPORTERS ASKS OF HIS DEPARTURE CITY/LOCATION; NOT A SINGLE EXPORTER KNOWS WHERE HIS FISHES COME FROM 8NO EXPORTER EVER COLLECTS), ONLY THE FISHERMAN'S NAME OR THE CITY OF DEPARTURE (IE NOVA OLIND AN THE MADEIRA). AND IN ADDITION THERE ARE THOSE WHO MIS-LABEL IT BY PURPOSE. AND THE IMPORTER WILL NEVER KNOW IT THE NAME HE RECEIVED IS CORRECT OR NOT...

HOPE TO SEE YOU ALL ON JUNE 2ND, IN PERTH,

ALL THE VERY BEST

ALWAYS

HEIKO

[LC60]

Point 1:

Geophagus sp. 'Tapajos Orange Head'..... Vs..... Geophagus sp. 'Araguaia Orange Head'...... =

G. sp. 'Tapajos Orange/Red Head'................+....................G. sp. 'Arapiuns Orange Head'..........or more correctly:

G. cf. proximus "Tapajos"............................+....................G. cf. proximus "Arapiuns".

According to Heiko Bleher (Post #84 ), the two orange/red head variants in the picture below (Pic A) are to be correctly identified as: the Red Head Type 1 variant is Geophagus sp. 'Tapajos Orange/Red Head;
and the Orange Head Type 2 variant is Geophagus sp. 'Arapiuns Orange Head'.

Or more correctly:

(Heiko Post # 90) I could consider them (those mentioned) to belong to a G.-proximus-group, yes, and for the time being the name should (or better must) be:
G. cf. proximus "Arapiuns" and G. cf. proximus "Tapajos"

However the most astonishing news that Heiko has given us here is that there is NO orange/red head variant in the Rio Araguaia (Post #55).

Also of note is the fact that this information has been provided to us by the man who first introduced this Type of Geo to the hobby, and who has been on numerous expeditions collecting fish for the hobby to the Amazon and it's tributaries, including the Rio Tapajos, Rio Arapiuns and Rio Araguaia, dating back to 1965.

So this means that the fish that until now in this country was believed to be G. sp. 'Araguaia Orange Head' is in fact G. sp. 'Tapajos Orange Head' or more correctly G. cf. proximus "Tapajos"and the fish that many of us believed were G. sp. 'Tapajos Orange Head' is in fact G. sp. 'Arapiuns Orange Head', or G. cf. proximus "Arapiuns".

Pic A
....G. cf. proximus "Tapajos".....................................................................G. cf. proximus "Arapiuns"
..G. sp. "Tapajos Orange Head"......................................................................G. sp. "Arapiuns Orange Head"
...Orange/Red Head Type 1............................................................................... Orange Head Type 2...


Point 2:

(Japes raised an important point here- Post # 61) “To try and be as least critical as possible, even though the Araguaia variant hasn't been officially described, how this species has been published in literature etc. without ever having proof of its true distribution - and why, if this species doesn't exist in the Rio Araguaia, is there not more commonly available information regarding this incorrect 'classification' is puzzling to say the least.” ...

Heiko has provided a great explanation as to how and why this could occur, see below:

(Post #84 ) FREQUENTLY (OR BETTER NORMALLY) THE LOCATIONS OF THE FISHES ARE GIVEN WRONGLY 8THAT IS ALSO WHY I WROTE BY LARGE DISCUS BOOK, TO HAVE ONCE AND FOR ALL TIMES THE CORRECT LOCATION OF EACH VARIANT/SPECIES, HAS IT HAD ALWAYS BEEN MISLABELED, MOSTLY BY PURPOSE) AND THERE ARE SEVERAL REASONS FOR IT: 1. BECAUSE THE FISHERMAN DOES NOT WANT ANYONE TO KNOW HIS COLLECTING SITE; 2. BECAUSE THE TRANSPORTER DOES NOT KNOW THE EXACT LOCATION, AS HE ONLY TRANSPORTS THE FISH TO THE EXPORTER AND OFTEN JUST GIVES A NAME, WHEN THE EXPORTERS ASKS OF HIS DEPARTURE CITY/LOCATION; NOT A SINGLE EXPORTER KNOWS WHERE HIS FISHES COME FROM 8NO EXPORTER EVER COLLECTS), ONLY THE FISHERMAN'S NAME OR THE CITY OF DEPARTURE (IE NOVA OLIND AN THE MADEIRA). AND IN ADDITION THERE ARE THOSE WHO MIS-LABEL IT BY PURPOSE. AND THE IMPORTER WILL NEVER KNOW IT THE NAME HE RECEIVED IS CORRECT OR NOT...

“(Post # 75) The first reference I have found to 'Araguaia Orange Head's” is Alberings personal account of the first spawning of Geophagus sp. "Araguaia" 'Orange Head": http://www.aquanet.d...g/bericht1.html and looking at these pics has had me confused as well (note the orange operculum and orange head colouration): http://www.aquanet.d...orange-head.htm
This is the account that Weidner refers to in the chapter on Orange Head "Araguaia" in the Eartheater Book (p. 168-170) and is the basis for much of his report. Albering’s Account can be read in Post # 75, I have about 25% left to complete translating) long and has a lot of detailed information. Albering states in the article that he is unsure of the exact collection point of these fish, all he knows is that the fish came from Thomas Weidner to a friend with an aquarium shop and then to Albering, the only information regarding their origin was that they were from the Rio Araguaia, but Albering is unsure and asks if any one recognises these fish and is aware of the collection point or if they even know who the importer was, that he would be very appreciative of any information.See below: "....”

(J. Albering Post #75)“As to the exact discovery site of this Geophagus spec. “Orange Head", unfortunately I can make no statement. The only way left to a citizen of Berlin is to retrace through aquarists, of which Thomas Weidner indicated that he received these fish out of the Rio Araguaia; they were then passed on to the colleague from Wels (like nearly always: from lack of space); then again sold to Markus R. from Graz and they arrived after some weeks (and after long and tough negotiations!) finally to me. If someone among the readers recognizes these fish (or if the original owner could announce themself) and provide me with references as to the exact discovery site, or at least inform me of the importer, I would be very grateful. Until then I can go no further than to designate them as G. spec. " orange head Rio Araguaia"....”

(LC60 Post # )“So I'm wondering: could this have been where the 'Araguaia" mislabelling originated? from this article into the eartheater book , the bible for many geo keepers in this country and around the world. Could it have been as simple as an error where Araguaia was accidently (or purposely) substituted for "Arapiuns"? And that error carried on into the Eartheater Book? Does anyone know of any earlier references to 'Araguaia OrangeHeads'?..

“

: (Thomas Weidner, 2000, South American Eartheaters, pp. 164-170)
Geophagus sp. “Tapaos Orange Head” also known as G. Sp. “Tapajos Red Cheek”
“Characters of the species: The most characteristic feature of this species is without doubt the orange forehead, although an eartheater from the Rio Araguaia has a similar colouration. But these two cichlids can be differentiated by the form and position of the lateral spot and the basic flank pattern. G. Sp. “Tapajos Orange Head” has a roundish lateral spot which lies below the upper lateral line and ends at the level of the fish’s horizontal axis. Moreover this species does not have any up to 1cm wide horizontal band running along the lateral line. G. Sp. “Tapajos Orange Head” has a fine pattern of vertical bands on the flanks, very close to one another and running down from the back to the belly, sometimes splitting at the level of the lateral line to form an inverted V. The Tapajos variant appears rather more deep bodied. The fins are reddish with iridescent bluish horizontal stripes. The body base colour is yellow but when the light strikes the fish at the right angle, a green-bluish shimmer may be seen. (Thomas Weidner 2000, p. 166)”
“Geophagus sp. ‘Araguaia Orange Head’
Distribution: Exact details are unknown, as the species has been imported only via the trade and more exact data have not been made available.
Characters of the species: The closest species to G. Sp. “Araguaia Orange Head” is G. Sp. “Tapajos Orange Head” (see above) but there are a number of distinct characteristics by which G. sp. “Araguaia Orange Head” can easily be distinguished. Thus this species has a somewhat longer lateral spot which again lies below the upper lateral line but a scale-width above the lower lateral line. This form is rather slimmer than it’s close cousin from the Tapajos. The upper head profile is more rounded and the orange area above the eyes is nothing like as bold. Like it’s relative from the Tapajos, G. sp. “Araguaia Orange Head” has a pattern of fine stripes on the flanks. The tail has a pattern of bluish streaks on a yellow background. The lower half of the head and the base colour of the flanks are also yellowish.(Thomas Weidner, 2000, p. 168)”
“Remarks: G. sp. “Araguaia Orange Head” is in my opinion, identical with G. sp. “Tapajos Orange Head” (sibling population of one and the same species. (Thomas Weidner, 2000, p. 170)”

(A new Eartheater: Geophagus spec. "orange head" from the Rio Araguaia. Jörg Albering 1999, Post # 75)
“My first impression upon seeing Geophagus spec. " orange head" from the Rio Araguaia for the first was: "Unbelievable! That is one of the most beautiful Geophagus that I have ever seen. A true orgy in orange and turquoise!"

"With some good fortune and the art of persuasion, I was able to obtain four of these fish from Thomas Weidner via an aquarium friend Wels and Markus Russegger, - also with these geophagen for the first time spawning of four fish of this type, they provided me with a 500 l aquarium with the base dimensions 200 x 50 CM, which included a wooden root arrangement along with some flat pebbles and slate. For the substrate, for geophagen aquariums my preference is to use a 2:1 mixture of fine river sand and gravel of 1-2 mm granulation. In this environment the newcomers felt well enough after an acclimatizing time of some days to show their whole colorful splendour."

"Probably the most striking characteristic of this eartheater is the intensive orange head coloring, which extends from the beginning of the dorsal over the eye down to the mouth angle. During brood care the color strengthens in the region beneath the eye to the mouth angle and up to the preopercular marks visible usually only in excitation exhibits then clearly yellow-orange colours. The turquoise strip, which extends from the mouth angle to the preopercular mark, forms a beautiful contrast in addition. The lips show the same shade. Under the eyes is a short turquoise line or oblong point which is more bluish in some individuals."

"The basic colour of the body is a bright beige, below the lateral line extends rows of more yolk-yellow and blue green iridescent points from the beginning of the pectoral fins onto the caudal peduncle. Above the lateral line the body reflects, depending upon the light source, bright green to turquoise iridescent green dots. In the middle of the body lies a relatively large black lateral spot which appears to colour all the more intensively, the more excited the fish is. Also remarkable are the four sets of vertical double bars, which likewise stand out more or less intensively depending on the mood of the fish. A further slightly more recognisable, single vertical bar passes from the beginning of the pectoral fins to the beginning of the dorsal. The pattern of the ventral, caudal and anal fins consists of alternating red and blue and/or turquoise stripes. A further very remarkable characteristic is the intensively orange colouring of the ends of the hard rays in the dorsal. This pattern begins with the fifth hard ray and continues into the soft rayed part of the dorsal, there however it is substantially narrower. The orange of this fin edge appears almost unreal in intensity, as if it were painted on. The body form of these Geophagus “orange head” is rather high backed and short snouted. Above all the males develop a regular “fat hump”, similar to Geophagus proximus or Geophagus sp. “Rio Negro”. The overall length of my fish are approximately 14-16cm, it seems however, that they are not yet fully grown.”

Check out the Link to the Pics of the fish Here which are the subject of Albering's study and description, note the full orange head colouration and the orange operculum, it appears that in this example back in 1999 or earlier, when he obtained these fish) misinformation had already been applied regarding the true collection point with the result that the Rio Araguaia had already been substituted for the correct location of the Rio Arapiuns.

These fish passed through the hands of the original collector/fisherman, then the transporter, the exporter, the importer in Germany, then to Thomas Weidner, followed by Albering's Aquarist friend in Wels and then to Markus Russeger, and finally to Jorg Albering who reported back to Thomas Weidner (J.Albering, 1999).

Thomas Weider then based much of the information in his chapter on 'Araguaia Orange Head' (p.168-170 of the Eartheater Book, 2000) on Albering's account. Therefore the evidence indicates that: the fish that Albering describes and shows pics of; the Orange Heads that Thomas Weidner describes on page 164-168 of the Eartheater book under the heading Geophagus sp. 'Tapajos Orange Head', the fish in pic 3 p. 267 of Heiko’s book (see below) are in fact the same type; which is the G. sp. “Arapiuns Orange Head”variant and the type that Thomas Weidner describes on page 270 as G. sp. “Araguaia Orange Head” is in fact the G. sp. “Tapajos Orange/Red Head variant.” It appears that Thomas Weidner had these two fish mixed up in his descriptions and identifying characteristics along with the collection point locations. And so this appears to be where all the confusion over Orange Head identification and collection point location originated.

This being the case, I think we need to review the id information that we already have available with a fresh view, taking into consideration the information provided here as to the reliability of Collection Point Location information.

Cheers
Larry




(Evidence/discussion here)


Pic B :Page 269 from Heiko Bleher's Discus Book, used here with the kind permission of Heiko.


Pic C. W/C Male - This pic used with the kind permission of the owner.


Female, offspring of the W/C male in Pic C above.


The following pics are all of fish in my tanks. Lighting is with 4 ft grolux tubes, pics taken with a flash. Note the differences in colour.
All of the orange heads in the following pic are unrelated to the W/C male in Pic C above, these fish have come from 3 different sources.
One of my males.


Dom's Male



Female in foreground, unsure of the sex of the OH behind.







More to come.

Cheers
Larry

[Ronny]

Signs of progress

This thread has just exploded, I find myself having to read it over and over to remember whats goin on lol.

Great work Laz, keep it up.

[LC60]

Signs of progress

This thread has just exploded, I find myself having to read it over and over to remember whats goin on lol.

Great work Laz, keep it up.

Cheers Ronny , I'm working on a summary of where we are up to now, to bring all the info together so it's easier for everyone to follow (Post#86).

Cheers
Larry

[Heiko Bleher]

Cheers Ronny , I'm working on a summary of where we are up to now, to bring all the info together so it's easier for everyone to follow (Post#86).

Cheers
Larry

Hi LC60 and all the others,

I just came back last night from Canada and therefore can only answer now. Bleow some fast answers, as I must leave again i a couple of days and than soon will see you all:
Now Ref. your questions:
Q:
1.1 With regard to their relationship with G. proximus, do you consider the two orange head variants, from the Rios Arapiuns and Tapajos to be actual variants of G. proximus or more as a part of the 'Proximus Group"? If the latter, do you consider a more appropriate name/id for these two variants to be for example G. sp. proximus "Arapiuns" and G. sp. proximus "Tapajos"? ....or G. cf. proximus "Arapiuns" and G. cf. proximus "Tapajos"?

A: I just gave an long talk on the Geophagine cichlids in London, Ontario, with nearly 500 photos and showing the types of G. proximus (Ucayali, Peru) and the different form I found throughout the Amazon basin down to Bolivia. If one compares those with the type, than the Arapiuns fish, the Tapajos and even the Xingú one (which as I explained never has a OH) have little or nothing to do with the-proximus type. (If you want I can include just the genus Geophagus in my talk - so far 19 species described).
I could consider them (those mentioned) to belong to a G.-proximus-group, yes, and for the time being the name should (or better must) be:
G. cf. proximus "Arapiuns" and G. cf. proximus "Tapajos"


Q:
1.2 For the purpose of clarity within this thread, could I please have your permission Heiko to post a photo scan of page 269 of your book, which is extremely relevant to this section of the thread and to further discussion that I have planned? Or could i be so bold as to invite you to post the page in question.

A:
Yes you have my permission - but I must tell you that I have better photos still. But go ahead.

Q:
3 Your answer to question 3. has surprised me almost as much as the info. on the two orange head variants!

A:
I wonder, because I know so many species (around the world) and found so many cichlids, which I am sure they are only colour morphs or geographic variants (in the old days in such cases they made subspecies out of it, but most ichthyologists do not accept the subspecies id anymore). I am quite sure they are the same species (like we have it in so many other cichlids, look at the discus...), but separated (mainly) by water parameters and geographic isolation, but surely not long enough to be considered two different species.

Best regards

Heiko Bleher
www.aquapress-bleher.com

[LC60]

Hi LC60 and all the others,
I just came back last night from Canada ......... I just gave a long talk on the Geophagine cichlids in London, Ontario, with nearly 500 photos and showing the types of G. proximus (Ucayali, Peru) and the different form I found throughout the Amazon basin down to Bolivia. If one compares those with the type, than the Arapiuns fish, the Tapajos and even the Xingú one (which as I explained never has a OH) have little or nothing to do with the-proximus type.

(If you want I can include just the genus Geophagus in my talk - so far 19 species described).

I could consider them (those mentioned) to belong to a G.-proximus-group, yes, and for the time being the name should (or better must) be:
G. cf. proximus "Arapiuns" and G. cf. proximus "Tapajos"


Q:1.2 For the purpose of clarity within this thread, could I please have your permission Heiko to post a photo scan of page 269 of your book, which is extremely relevant to this section of the thread and to further discussion that I have planned?
A:Yes you have my permission - but I must tell you that I have better photos still. But go ahead.
Q:3 Your answer to question 3. has surprised me almost as much as the info. on the two orange head variants!
A:I wonder, because I know so many species (around the world) and found so many cichlids, which I am sure they are only colour morphs or geographic variants (in the old days in such cases they made subspecies out of it, but most ichthyologists do not accept the subspecies id anymore). I am quite sure they are the same species (like we have it in so many other cichlids, look at the discus...), but separated (mainly) by water parameters and geographic isolation, but surely not long enough to be considered two different species.
Best regards
Heiko Bleher
www.aquapress-bleher.com

Hi Heiko,

Thanks for permitting the use of page 269 of your book, and for the answers you provided. I have added more to the discussion/summary in Post #86. With regard to your coming presentation, it would be great if you could include some pics and discussion on Geophagines. i know that there are quite a few people around perth that keep both discus and Geos, also there is growing interest on the forums here in Wild caught discus, I am also looking forward to your talk on discus as I have only recently begun keeping them, but have long admired them.

Best Regards
Larry

[LC60]

Hi All,

Here are the pics and details for the OH ID competition, open to anyone in Australia.

There has been a huge volume of information on Geophagus sp. Orange/Red Heads presented in this thread, some of it controversial, including correct collection locality, ie Rio Arapiuns as opposed to Rio Araguaia as well as variation in body and head shape and colouration. So how about if we use the information provided in this thread as well as any other that may be available, to identify the locality variant in each of the following pics. So let's see who's good at identifying orange heads and the prize is 5 OH juvies, the parents are shown in the 4 pics below. Anyone who is interested please just put up a post replying to this one and give your answers, you can edit your post up until midnight 14-06-09.

The following 4 pics are of the parents of the 3.5-4cm juveniles that are the prize:
The Dad


The Pair




I have posted some pics below of Orange/Red Heads representing some examples of both locality variants as well as possible examples of some colour morphs.

Cheers
Larry


The following pics are the ones that need to be identified for the competition:
Pic I.


Pic II.


Pic III.


Pic IV.


Pic V.


Pic VI.


Pic VII. (I'll try to get a better pic of this fish tonight)


Pic VIII.


Pic IX.

[LC60]

The last pic has been put up for the OH comp. and what an awesome fish he is, This is Dom's F1 male, he is stunning.

Here are the final details of the OH ID Comp:

I would like to give away 5 of my orange head fry. All you have to do is identify the variant of each of the Orange/Red Heads in the pics in Post # , and state why you believe this to be so. This is open to anyone in Australia and I encourage young cichlid keepers to have a go. I will judge the winner based on my own criteria. Entries will close at midnight on 14-06-09at which time I will post my solution. To enter simply reply to Post # , give the variant type for each fish and your reasons for your choice. Good luck

Cheers
Larry

[ozarowana]

I'm not sure why Heiko thinks they are the same as the proximus species???? G. proximus are immediate ovophilous.

[LC60]

I'm not sure why Heiko thinks they are the same as the proximus species???? G. proximus are immediate ovophilous.

Hey Chuongy,

Good to hear from you mate. Not the same, G. cf. proximus, so similar to but not the same species, rather, part of the Proximus Group. G. sp. 'Tapajos II is also ovophilous. It would be good to discus this further.

Cheers
Larry

[LC60]

[Ronny]

Mate you're gonna have orange heads coming out of your ears soon lol

[ozarowana]

Not the same, G. cf. proximus, so similar to but not the same species, rather, part of the Proximus Group. G. sp. 'Tapajos II is also ovophilous. It would be good to discus this further.

I know there are groups or complexes such as "surinamensis", "brasiliensis" and "crassilabrus", but I've never heard of a "proximus complex". I've always thought G. proximus and G. sp. "Tapajos" to be part of the surinamensis group.

cf. means like or similar to.... which I presume would include brooding behaviour.

[LC60]

cf. means like or similar to.... which I presume would include brooding behaviour.

Hey chuongy ,

Sorry I took so long to respond, I've had other things going on and haven't been online for a few weeks.

Yes, I understand your point, I have seen G. proximus included in the Surinamensis Group in numerous sources, however I have read reference to the Proximus group before as well (I'll try to dig up the article). Also, if G. sp. "Tapajos" and "Arapiuns/Araguaia" are part of the proximus group then I would expect both the G. sp. "Xingu" variant which as I understand is also larvophilous and the "Tapajos II" variant which is apparently ovophilous to all be in the same group, even though the G. sp. "Tapajos II" variant is ovophilous and not larvophilous like the other three. Therefore if G. proximus is taxonomically similar to the orange head variants then I can't see any reason that this would not be so. Also I would expect S. jurupari and S. leucosticta to be classed in the same group (and as similar) even though they are ovophilous and larvophilous mouthbrooders respectively. According to Heiko, it is Sven Kullander who classified the OH's into the proximus group. The thing that puzzles me a bit though is their inclusion within the proximus group even though they lack a preopercal mark (apart from that one oh in that picture by Weidner that does have a preopercal mark), I'm still having trouble getting my head around that one, have you come across any other pics of orange/red heads with such a mark?

Cheers
Larry

(Edit: In this article the authour refers to G. abalios as being in the Proximus Group, http://www.practical...?article_id=526 :
Quote from article:
"Notes: I covered the description of this species in the news in April 2004. The Geophagus genus includes more than a dozen species, many of which, including abalios, are in the proximus group. These are very tricky to identify and are frequently mislabeled as G. surinamensis in the shops. There are also several Geophagus in this group awaiting description.
Identification: Unlike some other proximus-group geophagines, abalios has six vertical bars on the flanks. Only the rare G. brokopondo from Suriname shares this feature. In abalios the sixth bar is restricted to the top half of the body, while in brokopondo covers the entire caudal peduncle." )

I have another article somewhere as well that refers to the Proximus Group, I'll keep looking

Cheers
Larry

[Ronny]

Gees, it seems the more info we get about these fish, the more complicated it gets lol.

I asked Chuongy the same question abouth that OH with the preopercal mark and he said he hadnt seen any other like it?


By the way, a lil off topic, but do you know anywhere I can get a copy of that book?

[LC60]

Gees, it seems the more info we get about these fish, the more complicated it gets lol.

I asked Chuongy the same question abouth that OH with the preopercal mark and he said he hadnt seen any other like it?


By the way, a lil off topic, but do you know anywhere I can get a copy of that book?

Hey Ronny

I got my book from the Age of Aquariums, but if you put up a wtb ad on all the forums you should be able to pic up a copy.

Cheers
Larry