Mugwump's Fish World
THE POND-THE FRESHWATER PLACE => Danios and Devarios => Topic started by: Ron Sower on January 14, 2018, 09:46:23 AM
...I picked up 3 of these last night at the ARK auction...They're a little lost in the 125!..
...I see the taxonomists have been at their nitpicking ways again...When I last had them they were Danio Choprae and now they are Celestichthys choprae...! When did that change Dennis?..
It happened a few years ago.
There is a disagreement between taxonomists about this (surprise).
The Celestichthys genus you found is from a splitter, who also remade the Brachydanio genus along side the Danio genus from a single larger Danio group.
There is also a lumper wants them all grouped together.
Based who published most recently (that I know of) the splitter is winning.
Personally, I like the split up taxonomy since it accentuates the differences among the different fish. Otherwise the Danio group would be rather large for a genus (probably more than 40 species, more keep getting discovered/described).
On the other hand, it is nice to have a stable naming system and not have to keep coming back and learn new names.
Quote from: BillT on January 14, 2018, 12:45:50 PM
It happened a few years ago.
There is a disagreement between taxonomists about this (surprise).
The Celestichthys genus you found is from a splitter, who also remade the Brachydanio genus along side the Danio genus from a single larger Danio group.
There is also a lumper wants them all grouped together.
Based who published most recently (that I know of) the splitter is winning.
Personally, I like the split up taxonomy since it accentuates the differences among the different fish. Otherwise the Danio group would be rather large for a genus (probably more than 40 species, more keep getting discovered/described).
On the other hand, it is nice to have a stable naming system and not have to keep coming back and learn new names.
|^|
Quote from: BillT on January 14, 2018, 12:45:50 PM
It happened a few years ago.
There is a disagreement between taxonomists about this (surprise).
The Celestichthys genus you found is from a splitter, who also remade the Brachydanio genus along side the Danio genus from a single larger Danio group.
There is also a lumper wants them all grouped together.
Based who published most recently (that I know of) the splitter is winning.
Personally, I like the split up taxonomy since it accentuates the differences among the different fish. Otherwise the Danio group would be rather large for a genus (probably more than 40 species, more keep getting discovered/described).
On the other hand, it is nice to have a stable naming system and not have to keep coming back and learn new names.
...I guess this still applies: " Change is the only constant! "
Quote from: Ron Sower on January 14, 2018, 04:53:47 PM
Quote from: BillT on January 14, 2018, 12:45:50 PM
It happened a few years ago.
There is a disagreement between taxonomists about this (surprise).
The Celestichthys genus you found is from a splitter, who also remade the Brachydanio genus along side the Danio genus from a single larger Danio group.
There is also a lumper wants them all grouped together.
Based who published most recently (that I know of) the splitter is winning.
Personally, I like the split up taxonomy since it accentuates the differences among the different fish. Otherwise the Danio group would be rather large for a genus (probably more than 40 species, more keep getting discovered/described).
On the other hand, it is nice to have a stable naming system and not have to keep coming back and learn new names.
...I guess this still applies: " Change is the only constant! "
..it seems so sometimes, huh?
Quote from: Mugwump on January 14, 2018, 05:04:14 PM
Quote from: Ron Sower on January 14, 2018, 04:53:47 PM
Quote from: BillT on January 14, 2018, 12:45:50 PM
It happened a few years ago.
There is a disagreement between taxonomists about this (surprise).
The Celestichthys genus you found is from a splitter, who also remade the Brachydanio genus along side the Danio genus from a single larger Danio group.
There is also a lumper wants them all grouped together.
Based who published most recently (that I know of) the splitter is winning.
Personally, I like the split up taxonomy since it accentuates the differences among the different fish. Otherwise the Danio group would be rather large for a genus (probably more than 40 species, more keep getting discovered/described).
On the other hand, it is nice to have a stable naming system and not have to keep coming back and learn new names.
...I guess this still applies: " Change is the only constant! "
..it seems so sometimes, huh?
...What can you think of that doesn't change...I've been trying to come up with something...