"Heros" ornatus

[Norcal_Cichlid]

I have 20 plus books on central/south american cichlids including the aqualogs, 2 editions of the out of print original Conkel books, the Ad Konings book, Staeck's book, Loiselle's, Robert Rush Miller, cichlid year books, Buntbarsche Bulletins, Cichlid News Magazines, pretty much everything I can get in print or even download and I've had them for YEARS. I've been keeping and breeding rare cichlids for over 25 years.

If there's a scientific study done showing these fish as C. Gephyrum that's great (really, it is!) but you really should not scold people for referring to there fish as cf. Ornatum the way you are doing in the meantime. It's a plenty apt title till proven otherwise.

[Mark Smith]

Do you have The Checklist of the Freshwater Fishes of Central And South America, Reis, Kullander & Ferraris, published in 2003? This easily available book gives the locality information for both ornatum and gephyrum. And, since the fish coming into the hobby is from the same river system as gephyrum (if we are to believe the Columbian collectors), and not ornatum, it stands to reason that this fish is likely gephyrum and not ornatum. Do you not see the reasonable logic in this? Have I not said this before?

Giving an opinion as to why I think that others should refer to this cichlid as gephyrum and not ornatum is by no means scolding others. It is an informed opinion that is likely more close to the truth as to what this cichlid actually is. You, along with certain other contributors to this thread, have not given any tangible evidence to the contrary.

Not sure how your 25 years of spawning rare cichlids makes your opinion hold any water, especially since you have not given any substantive proof to validate the use of the name ornatum for this cichlid.

[DRE]

Just to better understand. I tried to point out locations of Gephyrum and Ornatum on a map.

Were does it say that the collectors have collected from The areas were Gephyrum is located, typically Rio San Juan?

If Ornatum is more expensive and can be sold at a higher price why would they not collect from those river systems? Is it really that problematic with drug lords? Or guerilla?

There has been a set of fishes imported to Sweden from colombia labelled as Umbrifera that some experts that have bred umbriferas claim are not that but rather ornatum or possibly gephyrum. However Umries are caught quite far apart from the other two. Are we even sure the wild caught are wild caught and not bred in som basins?
A link to a youtube clip with the possible gephyrum/ornatum:
http://www.youtube.com/v/6nU9QXMQr08

What do you guys make of this little fish?

I marked Ornatum areas in red, gephyrum in blue and Umbrifera in green.

Am I making any sense at all?

[Mark Smith]

Hi DRE

Yes, indeed you are making sense, and thank you for the map pointing out the locations of both ornatum and gephyrum. It helps to see what has been said in words in this thread. Thanks again for your helpful contribution!

[DRE]

Do we have any clear info that the fish sold by Jeff Rapps indeed are from Rio San Juan? If so I'd sat absolutely Gephyrum if we are to believe that this is the locations for the fishes.

Also anyone with a comment regarding the wild caught fish sold as Umbrifera visible on the movie link above?

[Nuchal Man]

When he first got them in they were listed as 'Cichlasoma' cf. ornatum "Rio San Juan". I just checked his list and I see he doesn't have them listed with a location at this moment. I did see he had some Atromaculatum from the Rio Atrato. If the fish being sold by him as 'Cichlasoma' cf. ornatum are being collected from the Rio Atrato, then they would still correspond to gephyrum as that is in the Northern part of the country. Either way, the pics Rapps has of whatever this fish is stunning. It's great to have a fish like this, whatever species it winds up being, in the hobby.

As far as the video link, that is not a C. umbrifera, but rather a young 'Cichlasoma' ornatum or gephyrum.

I've heard a rumor that there may be some 'Cichlasoma' cf. ornatum coming in from Ecuador. Let's hope so, it's great when new fish become available.

[DRE]

I just got my hands on 4 Caqetaia Umbrifera wild caught (from Colombia) and they are the same as on the video above. They are small about 1,8"

Will be interesting to see i fthey grow up to be beautiful. I suspect also these are Gephyrum, but I'm still puzzeled how they can be sold as Umbrifera.

Pictures are when they still are in the plastic bag about to be introduced in the tank.Artbilder

[Nuchal Man]

That's concerning that the umbies are being sold as wild caught fish from Bolivia as they don't occur in that country. Umbie range from Southern Panama into Colombia. Also interesting is that if these video fish aren't really umbrifera, they are either an ornatum and gephyrum type, but these two species definitely don;t occur in Bolivia. I'd guess importers and exporters can be blamed for the various names and misidentification.

[DRE]

Sorry I ment Colombia. Doing too much stuff at the same time. Forget Bolivia. I'll update my post accordingly.

[Mark Smith]

You are definitely correct Nuchal Man, in saying that this cichlid, whatever species it is, is a very attractive animal. It will also be of interest to see what comes out of northern Equador in order to make comparisons/contrasts with the C. gephyrum (assuming they were collected in the Rio San Juan) in the trade presently.

[Alden]

A link to a youtube clip with the possible gephyrum/ornatum:
http://www.youtube.com/v/6nU9QXMQr08

My cf ornatus/gephyrum, looks like this only a bigger version. I'll post more updated pics later.

[DRE]

Looking forward to that.

[Alden]

Here's a video. It was difficult to get a still shot.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RbgmzTNspu8

[DRE]

Beautiful fish. Loos very similar to pictures I've seen on Ornatums, but I feel it is hard to know what is on those pictures without clear guidelines to markers for each species. Does anyone have that? I.e. x number of vertical lines or spots here and there?

[DRE]

Any new ideas on how to identify these two species? What is the difference really?

Anyone with updated pics?

[fevelasco]

In the July issue of Cichlid News (http://www.cichlidnews.com/issues/jul11.html), there is an article by Oliver Lucanus titled "Cichlids of the Colombian Andes." Oliver refers to the Rio Atrato as the site were the Andean cichlids he profiles were collected. After examining preserved specimens of 'C.' gephyrum, he concludes that the fish previously sold as 'C.' ornatum (see http://belowwaterfish.blogspot.com/2010/03/cichla-orinocensis-and-cichlasoma.html) is "certainly closer to ['C.' gephyrum], but most likely is a new, as yet undescribed species."

Perhaps those of you attending the ACA convention later this week can ask him for more details.

[DRE]

Aha, very interesting news.

[Mark Smith]

Unfortunately, that article was too vague to say anything meaningful about this species.

[Mark Smith]

To follow up on Lucanus's article, he says, "After comparing the fish to preserved 'C'. gephyrum it became obvious that it is certainly closer to that species, but most likely is a new, as yet undescribed species." Since 'C'. gephyrum is not known to inhabit the Atrato River, it makes sense that what has been imported herein as 'C'. ornatum, 'C'. cf. ornatum, 'C'. gephyrum, and 'C'. cf. gephyrum (all refering to the same species) would indeed be a distinct species. It would be good to hear from Lucanus on what he saw that differentiated this species from 'C'. gephyrum.

Also, the name Geophagus sp. 'high body' is mentioned only once, and in the very last sentence of the article. It would have also been beneficial to have elaborated on this purported new species, as well as including a photo. Perhaps Lucanus would be willing to jump in on this thread with further info on these cichlids?

[Vincentcnbres]

I would love to be disappointed by ornatus I raised myself