I recommend the reading of this article:
Search found 1322 matches
- Sat Sep 23, 2017 1:55 am
- Forum: Membership
- Topic: Question on joining the ACA and content availability
- Replies: 1
- Views: 203
I didn't see this question until now, since it is posted in the ACA forum. Yes the Cichlid Room Companion has that information for every species with published profiles, now over a thousand, if that is what you need then a subscription to the CRC is what you want. https://www.cichlidae.com/membershi...
- Thu Aug 31, 2017 8:32 pm
- Forum: Photo Contest
- Topic: The ACA July 2017 Photo Contest is LIVE! Enter here!!!
- Replies: 9
- Views: 405
It is terrible for me to have to write his name here, but Felipe has just passed away a few hours ago, he was a person with an intense love for life and nature who worked very hard to support his family and in favor of the protection of the fauna of his country, Uruguay. It is a very sad day for the...
- Mon Aug 14, 2017 12:34 pm
- Forum: Technical Issues and Problems
- Topic: Trivia option to trade species
- Replies: 1
- Views: 126
It would be nice if there were an option to add a species to the buy/sell list from the trivia screen for each species. That would make searching for species much easier than the single dropdown menu with all fish on the buy/sell portal. Thanks just recently the trading system has pick up in use. Y...
- Tue Jul 25, 2017 1:08 pm
- Forum: Central American Cichlids
- Topic: exCichlasoma beani - Well That Didn't Take Long
- Replies: 13
- Views: 1781
Apparently those fish were collected in Rio Panuco near Mazatlan by Rusty Wessel in 2009. Rio Panuco is a tributary of Rio Presidio.Gmfishnut wrote:I had a group back in 2009. I managed to get some of the adults Jeff Rapps
The decision that the fish you have described is indeed the same species as the one earlier described is a taxonomic decision. The Code doesn't deal with those decisions. I understand, but the code establish the subjective synonymy of the species and for this to happen somebody has to declare it, i...
So, if I give a name to a fish previously described (complying with the code rules), the synonymy is not regulated by the ICZN?Willem Heijns wrote:I have to object here. Synonymity is about the validity of names and as such a taxonomic issue not regulated by the ICZN.
In fact,it was a code regulated act and the declaration met the regulationsMark Smith wrote:If that is the case, why are you accepting Ad's opinion on the status of L. melagris/L.stappersi? After all, he just gave his opinion on the matter, right? It certainly was not a code regulated act.
Aren't you splitting hairs? How can he have an argument and opinion that rejects the validity of these two new Labeotropheus species, that at the same time does not imply/declare the two species in synonymy with the existing Labeotropheus species. It really does not follow logically. Declaration of...
I see, thanks Juan. Didn't Konings write a piece in Cichlidae.com entitled Splitting out of Context about these two Labeotropheus species Wouldn't that constitute a declaration of sorts? Mark, Ad explains the problem, exposes the arguments and his opinions, but he falls short of declaring the two n...
It seems like this is a clear inconsistency Juan. You are treating both the two new Labeotropheus species as valid on this site, even though Konings does not acknowledge them as valid. Is Cichlidae.com, following Konings' synonymizing of various cichlid species faithfully/consistently, or not? No M...
The record for L. meleagris is instated as I assume you know, just in synonymy, there is no inconsistency at all.Mark Smith wrote:"The two species are listed as they have been officially and validly described..." In order to be consistent, oughtn't the entry for L. meleagris be reinstated?
That was a mistake, the pictures have been removed, all we intended was to show the species from the type locality. The two species are listed as they have been officially and validly described but in no way that means we at the CRC endorse them. Most opinions from specialists point to their junior ...
On the ACA Face Book Page there was a discussion about payment for the BB. It was pretty heated and one individual called out the Board about the proper procedure for payment. My Understanding was the "Chair Of the BOT" told the administrator to deleted all these posts for they should not be on her...
Sorry, that could not have happened in the ACA facebook page, I am one of the two administrators there and never saw it. Probably the ACA facebook group? I am not sure what could mean "paying for BB" as BB is freely distributed to all ACA members in PDF format.