"Cichlasoma" gephyrum?

[Mark Smith]

I noticed a photo on Tangled Up In Cichlids website http://www.tangledupincichlids.com/ that shows what Mr. Rapps is referring to as an 8 inch female "Cichlasoma" ornatum. This specimen has several vertical bars along the body, showing similar vertical barring in one of the original? line drawings of "Cichlasoma" gephyrum in Stawikowski and Werner's book Die Buntbarsche Amerikas Band 1 (1998 publication date), on page 312.

It seems hard to see how it could actually be a female "C". ornatum, with its completely differing color pattern and deeper body. Any thoughts or corrections??

[Alex Odesit]

I see what you saying Mark. I never came across C.Gephrum pictures but this particular photo remind me young male Festae at most.

[Mark Smith]

That's what I thought at first too.

[Nuchal Man]

He lists them as 'C'. cf. ornatum "Rio San Juan". It's possible they could be gephyrum as Kullander lists them in the 2003 checklist as occurring in that river. Really, just an unknown group of fish as far as research but one that would be very interesting in my opinion.

[fevelasco]

I believe you may be right in that the specimen labeled as an 8" female may be a different fish from the others depicted: http://www.tangledupincichlids.com/images/ornat83.jpg

I did acquire several juveniles of exCichlasoma cf. ornatum "Rio San Juan" from Jeff Rapps. Here is a video of the fish at about 2.5": http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PY5cYY-C9YI&hd=1

Also, what are your thoughts about the 16" male "ornatus" on his website?
http://www.tangledupincichlids.com/images/ornat19.jpg

[Mark Smith]

Hard to say if it actually was 16 inches. There is no reference in the photo to guage its size. It does look like a very large individual, though.

[fevelasco]

I agree that it's difficult to assess the size without a frame of reference.

My question is do you think this fish is ornatum, gephyrum, or something else?

[Mark Smith]

It doesn't appear to be a female C. ornatus, in light of what the other ones look like. However, I don't have much experience with this species either, so it is possible.

According to the original line drawings, the striped female looks more like C. gephyrum, while the others look like C. ornatum. Just an anticdotal observation, though.

[Norcal_Cichlid]

Very interesting thread, any new info? I have a male and 2 females from Rapps around 3.5".

[Mark Smith]

I can only give my opinion, that it may be prudent to referred to it as Cichlasoma cf gephyrum, due to it being collected in the same river system (at least from what we are told from the collectors in Columbia) where C. gephyrum is found.

[Norcal_Cichlid]

They look like Ornatum to me but I am far from an expert on this particular fish.

[Mark Smith]

Norcal

What makes you say they are C. ornatum?

[Mark Smith]

Hi Norcal

Just following up to find out if you have come across any new information that might othewise indicate that the "Cichlasoma" coming into the trade from Columbia is ornatum?

[fevelasco]

See my comments in the related thread "Heros" ornatus: viewtopic.php?f=5&t=7890&p=62397#p62397

[DRE]

I've been trying to find info on what the difference really is between the two species.

This is what I've found:
C. ornatum:
Can be found in río Santiago (including typical area río Durango, San Xavier de Cachabi) and río Mataje in Ecuador, as well as río Mira and lower parts of río Pátia in Colombia.
Junenile ornatum has a pointy head with no dots in the face area
Adults; The lateral bars are connected from top to bottom
Best way to differentiate juveniles is by counting spines on the dorsal fin
Usually 16 spines on the dorsal fin.

C. gephyrum:
located further north in colombia, río San Juan and río Dagua.
Adults; The lateral bars are broken below the upper part of the fish and then continues furter down
Usually 16 spines on the dorsal fin.

I have counted on my fish on a number od photos and I can only count to 16 spines. See attachment, i have marked the spines with black lines. did I miss anyone? However he says usually. The one on the picture is a bout 4 in or 10cm

What do you think guys?

[Mark Smith]

If one is to believe the recent article by Lucanus entitled, Cichlids of the Colombian Andes, in the July 2011 issue of Cichlid News Magazine, pages 6 through 10, then this species being exported is being collected from the Rio Atrato, the same river system that C. atromaculatum is from, making i neither C. gephyrum or C. ornatum.

[DRE]

Yes I heard that and I'd love to read his article.

[Mark Smith]

The article is rather vague unfortunately. But then again, this area of Colombia is not well known, and it seems as though there will be several similar looking species acknowledged once all the dust settles.

[Florent]

The black spot a the end of the anal fin reminds atromaculatum. It is cleary visible on small fish (DRE) but if you look closely to Jeff Rapps's picture you can also see this spot.


Remember Willem post on ornatum tread. viewtopic.php?p=58223#p58223

Willem add this picture of gephyrum original description :
The upper fish is 78 mm, the lower (holotype) 240 mm.


Someting else : http://aquarium-dakar.info/?new-fish-fr ... omaculatum

http://www.fishchannel.com/freshwater-a ... mines.aspx

[Florent]

If one is to believe the recent article by Lucanus entitled, Cichlids of the Colombian Andes, in the July 2011 issue of Cichlid News Magazine, pages 6 through 10, then this species being exported is being collected from the Rio Atrato, the same river system that C. atromaculatum is from, making i neither C. gephyrum or C. ornatum.

Mark it seems that the fish from Rio Atrato is this fish (Edit two species are from Rio Atrato)

Here is atromaculatum


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=orLGt92stc4

and the other one is the mystery fish !