Symphysodon tarzoo

[Juan Artigas]

Would you have the complete reference? I will try to get the paper. Thanks!

[taeniopareius]

Quick comparision between the two papers would be greatly appriciated

[michi tobler]

Hi all,

does anyone have a pdf of that work?

Cheers, m

[cichla]

Dear all,

Bleher, Stölting, Salzburger and Meyer (2007): Revision of the genus Symphysodon Heckel, 1840 (Teleostei: Perciformes: Cichlidae) based on molecular and morphological characters. Aqua 12(4): 133-174.

1. Tarzoo is a nomen nudum
2. Tarzoo (red dots on anal-fin bas) in Ready et al. (2006) is aequifasciatus in Bleher et al. (2007)
3. aequifasciatus in Ready et al. (2006) is heraldi in Bleher et al. (2007)

IS

[Lisachromis]

Hi all,

does anyone have a pdf of that work?

Cheers, m

I'd be interested as well.

[mattc]

See: Discus genus revised http://www.practicalfishkeeping.co.uk/pfk/pages/item.php?news=1330

[Ken Boorman]

This is what Sven says towards the bottom of the page mattc cited:

.... gives the impression that there would be some difficulties in reconciling the results of Bleher et al and those of Ready et al., which could cause confusion in the hobby. Bleher et al. also gives much space to difference of opinion/result where there is practically none. The following may clarify why there is actually no reason to worry.

It was very flattering that Bleher et al spend two full pages objecting to Ready et al., but of course the former is mainly a popular paper and not one you are likely to read in the normal scientific press. Heiko has spent a fortune and considerable engagement in mapping the distribution of Symphysodon and his book, Bleher's discus (2006) is a valuable record of the aquarium fish business in South American over the last Century. Recommended reading.

I would like to stress that the molecular results of Ready et al and Bleher et al. point in the same direction. The same species are distinguished, with the same diagnostics, and there is absolutely nothing dramatically different about the analysis. We also both agree, that additional genes and more localities will further deepen the understanding of the group.

The only thing that is different are the names selected. Ready et al. refer to the green discus as S. tarzoo, and Bleher et al. call it S. aequifasciatus. The blue and brown discus (i.e., the most well known ones) are S. aequifasciatus in Ready et al., and S. haraldi in Bleher et al. Exit S. a. axelrodi.

Bleher et al. claim that Géry and Bleher in a publication in 2004 selected a lectotype for S. aequifasciatus that comes from Tefé (=green discus). We are unable to verify the existence of such publication, but if it exists, then the names should be reconsidered accordingly.

Ready et al. 2006 selected a lectotype from Santarém (=brown discus). There were several reasons for doing so. Among them, a wish to preserve aequifasciatus with the best known brown/blue form, and the problems (explained by Heiko) of authenticity of origin with material studied by Schultz.

In conclusion: There is no conflict, everything is still the way it was, but if the 2004 publication by Géry and Bleher can be produced, names may shift."

Posted by: Sven Kullander

Ken

Taken from

[Ken Boorman]

If anyone wants to get hold of Heiko's paper, you can buy it here:

http://www.aquapress-bleher.com/index.php?page=shop.product_details&flypage=shop.flypage&product_id=102&category_id=3&manufacturer_id=0&option=com_virtuemart&Itemid=45

Ken

[michi tobler]

Hi all,

does anyone have a clue what this enigmatic Gery & Bleher paper is?

Cheers, m

[cichla]

Dear all,
Dear Michi,
in the list list of references in Bleher et al. (2007) is only one Gery & Bleher 2004 source mentioned. It is: ''Kommentar zur Taxonomie I. Anmerkungen zu den Typuslokalitäten der Arten und Unterarten der Gattung Symphysodon Heckel in Bleher's Discus 2006 . Aquapress Publishers, Italy, pp. 135-136.''
Does anyone know why there is the differnce between 2004 and 2006
Greetings, IS

[Grange]

Heiko Bleher, Kai N. Stölting, Walter Salzburger, and Axel Meyer: Revision of the Genus Symphysodon Heckel, 1840 (Teleostei: Perciformes: Cichlidae) based on molecular and morphological characters, pp. 133-174



Abstract
Systematics of the cichlid genus Symphysodon has been investigated and three species are recognised: S. discus Heckel, 1840 (synonym: S. discus willischwartzi Burgess, 1981); S. aequifasciatus Pellegrin, 1904 (synonyms: S. discus var. aequifasciata Pellegrin, 1904; S. aequifasciata aequifasciata sensu Schultz, 1960; S. Discus Tarzoo – sic – Lyons, 1960); and S. haraldi, Schultz, 1960 (synonyms: S. aequifasciata haraldi Schultz, 1960; S. aequifasciata axelrodi Schultz, 1960). The present revision is based on DNA sequences of partial mitochondrial control regions of 48 specimens of Symphysodon from 20 different locations in the central and lower Amazon basin, which revealed three genetically distinct clades of Symphysodon. One of these genetic clusters is composed of specimens that morphologically are S. discus, but also of S. haraldi and natural hybrids of S. discus x S. haraldi. This indicates that either the “discus” clade is composed, at least partially, of hybrids or, alternatively, that a “haraldi” phenotype evolved (or was retained) independently in this clade. The other two clades consist of S. aequifasciatus and S. haraldi. The definition of the three species is supported by extensive field studies over the last 40 years, investigating distributional patterns and documenting adaptation of each species to a distinct type of water, characterised by unique chemical parameters. In addition, S. discus and S. aequifasciatus display distinct colorations and colour patterns, with nine vertical bars on each flank. In S. discus the first, and particularly the fifth and ninth bars are prominent and/or wider, while all bars are typically of equal width in S. aequifasciatus. The latter species is also recognised by its rust-brown or red dots on the body, ranging from a few spots to a dense cover all over, rarely forming red spotted lines or being present in the anal fin region only. Symphysodon haraldi displays a wide range of colours, colour patterns and a larger number of vertical bars (8 up to 16), which may differ substantially in shape. Except for hybrids of S. discus x S. haraldi, S. haraldi does not resemble the other two species. A study of geographic distribution patterns of the three species was carried out throughout the central and lower Amazon basin: in the western Amazon in almost every tributary of the Solimões and the Marañon Rivers to Iquitos, and in the eastern part in most tributaries of the Amazon River down to its mouth. The valid names of the three species are: S. discus – the Heckel discus; S. aequifasciatus – the green discus; and S. haraldi – the blue discus. The “brown” or “common” discus of the aquarium trade is the same as the “blue” discus.
In S. aequifasciatus a congruence of genetic and morphological (colour) characters has been found, whereas some specimens that would phenotypically be assigned to S. haraldi, genetically group also with the S. discus clade. Only future studies using nuclear DNA markers will allow untangling the evolutionary history of the phenotypcially heterogeneous S. “discus” clade.

[Philippe Burnel]

Gery's publication is in Bleher's discus book, so 2006 and not 2004.
I have asked to Patrick de Rham to send to me a copy, he can't do it now but he sent a few comments.
The most important is that in Pellegrin's description of aequifasciatus, the 2 first types where collected in Tefe so the name aequifasciatus should be applied to the West population and has priority over S. tazoo in Ready's publication.

Philippe

[cichla]

Dear all,
Dear Philippe,

there are two complexes involved: 1) phylogeopgraphy and 2) nomenclature.
1) Ready et al (2006) used the cytochrome b which seems less suitable for Perciformes than the d-loop (used by Bleher et al. 2007). But the next paper (more specimens, more sequences) on the phylogeography of Symphysodon is already on the way…
2a) The only important information for the lectotype selection is which article published first: Ready et al. (2006) or Gery & Bleher (2004 2006) and not what Pellegrin wrote.
2b) If Tarzoo is unavailable and Ready et al. has priority over Gery & Bleher than one of the western Populations would be without a valid scientific name.

This is why it is importand to know, if an article Gery & Bleher 2004 is available published.

IS

[Heiko Bleher]

Dear all,

I only today have seen all your comments on the revision of the genus Symphysodon by Bleher et al. and I think best to add here the comments I made to answer Sven O. Kullander's comments in a recent discussion which appeared in PFK's Forum:

"Dear all, and dear Sven,

I only can comment today, as I was collecting in the Pamirs until yesterday and I can see that there are a few points which have been overlooked in the above comments and I also want to contribue and clarify some points:

Firstly, I want to thank Sven for given some good comments on the scientific papers and also on my book.

Secondly, I must admit that in the our revision under Reference there were parts of the References missing, which have been corrected under ERRATA and will appear in aqua 13(1).

Thirdly, the revision represents the latest (newest) understanding/knowledge of the genus Symphysodon and is valid until further (additional) discoveries have been made. This is common in science, as science can NEVER give the final answer to all and every question, species classification, etc. But it is the most recent knowledge on the taxonomy (of the family/genus/species etc.). This is the way it was and will always be in science.

With other words: this classification (Bleher et al. 2007) is the latest accepted publication in the scientific community (therefore several reviewers worked/corrected and suggested its changes to lead to this finbal paper). It is the newest/latest understanding of the genus Symphysodon and its species.

Fourthly, to whom it might be of interest and also for Sven's information: the publication Géry & Bleher was only published in the German edition of Blehers Discus Band 1, in 2005 and delivered. (Although it is written in the front page of the book: 2006). In the Internet some dates are given as 9.05.2006, as to the general public it was shown at the INTERZOO 2006 in Nuernberg. In any case all these dates proceed the paper of Ready et al.

Besides: since Harald Schultz's definition of the green discus and his detailed description in 1958 (Schultz, 1959 – proceeding Lyons popular article), it was accepted and followed by L. P. Schultz's in his 1960 review of the genus Symphysodon aequifasciatus, the green discus, the red spotted green from Tefé (which Ready et al. in December of 2006 named tarzoo without an official description as a new species, nor having seen Géry & Bleher 2004 - published as above mentioned in 2005, but with the correct date 2004). The name S. aequifasciatus has been connected since Schultz (1958) to the green discus and NEVER to the brown or blue discus, and much less to the fantasy – unofficial – name tarzoo.
I have also written and classified it as such since my early publications in the 1970s and 1980s, as well as many other authors worldwide in tenth' of languages.

I hope this clarifies some of the comments made here. And before I go: thank you also Rupert Collins for your nice comments.

Heiko Bleher "
Posted by: Heiko Bleher - 3 days, 18 hours ago
Date: Friday August 24th, 2007, 9:13 pmReport post