![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
|
Is this correct fish?
-- Traveler100 ( talk) 13:08, 10 April 2010 (UTC)
Someone removed information from the page, because it talked about caring for this fish, however a lot of aquariume fish articles contain care information. If no one objects I will restore the info.-- HighFlyingFish ( talk) 18:38, 21 March 2010 (UTC)
@ Vermont: removed the image File:Colossoma-brachypomus.jpg from this article saying it was the wrong fish. Why do you say that? I see nothing on commons indicating that's not the right fish. Also going to ping @ Stevenj: as he is the author of the image. -- HighFlyingFish ( talk) 18:40, 16 February 2018 (UTC)
_______________________________________
Here is a discussion between me and @
Vermont: that explains some of the rationale behind the deletion of the image:
Please reply on the talk page regarding the rationale for the File:Colossoma-brachypomus.jpg you removed being a depiction of the wrong fish. I see nothing on Commons indicating its not Piaractus brachypomus. -- HighFlyingFish ( talk) 18:43, 16 February 2018 (UTC)
_________________________________________
--
HighFlyingFish (
talk)
22:27, 21 February 2018 (UTC)
I'm quite certain the lead image on Tambaqui is actually the red-bellied pacu, but I'm not quite sure about the image in question here… Color is not the most reliable way to identify fish species because it can vary genetically but can also be manipulated in many species. P. brachypomus definitely loses its red coloration as it matures so the name "red-bellied pacu" means basically nothing, and the top image could be a good candidate. I did start with color though and this site, though not the most inherently reliable, points out that P. brachypomus is typically light blue-gray/steely gray dorsally and darker gray/brownish gray ventrally while Colossoma macropomum is golden/olive green dorsally and purple/black ventrally.
The golden/olive green ended up making it easy to quickly see the difference using FishBase images. This one is of P. brachypomus (from here) and this one is of C. macropomum (from here). The coloration is clearly different, and this source used in the article points out a few morphological differences between the two species, of which we can see the operculum and adipose fin; the operculum is shaped like a half moon in C. macropomum and smaller in P. brachypomus, and the adipose fin is a little more significant in C. macropomum and has rays that are lacking in P. brachypomus.
So File:Schwarzer Pacu Colossoma macropomum Tierpark Hellabrunn-1.jpg at Tambaqui has all of the (available) characteristics of P. brachypomus. With the image in question here, the coloration is iffy, the operculum seems to definitely indicate C. macropomum, and the adipose fin seems to indicate P. brachypomus but isn't very visible. Coloration could easily be that of C. macropomum and I'd say the operculum is a more reliable indicator than the fin, so C. macropomum? All three fish in the image above in #photo request, File:TambaquiVeracrz.JPG, must be C. macropomum. Rhinopias ( talk) 23:54, 24 February 2018 (UTC)
What it sounds like so far is that there's currently no consensus about File:Schwarzer Pacu Colossoma macropomum Tierpark Hellabrunn-1.jpg, though it might be this fish, but there is an emerging consensus that File:Colossoma-brachypomus.jpg is in fact C. macropomum. In light of this, I have reverted myself and restored the version without the contested image. -- HighFlyingFish ( talk) 22:20, 25 February 2018 (UTC)
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
|
Is this correct fish?
-- Traveler100 ( talk) 13:08, 10 April 2010 (UTC)
Someone removed information from the page, because it talked about caring for this fish, however a lot of aquariume fish articles contain care information. If no one objects I will restore the info.-- HighFlyingFish ( talk) 18:38, 21 March 2010 (UTC)
@ Vermont: removed the image File:Colossoma-brachypomus.jpg from this article saying it was the wrong fish. Why do you say that? I see nothing on commons indicating that's not the right fish. Also going to ping @ Stevenj: as he is the author of the image. -- HighFlyingFish ( talk) 18:40, 16 February 2018 (UTC)
_______________________________________
Here is a discussion between me and @
Vermont: that explains some of the rationale behind the deletion of the image:
Please reply on the talk page regarding the rationale for the File:Colossoma-brachypomus.jpg you removed being a depiction of the wrong fish. I see nothing on Commons indicating its not Piaractus brachypomus. -- HighFlyingFish ( talk) 18:43, 16 February 2018 (UTC)
_________________________________________
--
HighFlyingFish (
talk)
22:27, 21 February 2018 (UTC)
I'm quite certain the lead image on Tambaqui is actually the red-bellied pacu, but I'm not quite sure about the image in question here… Color is not the most reliable way to identify fish species because it can vary genetically but can also be manipulated in many species. P. brachypomus definitely loses its red coloration as it matures so the name "red-bellied pacu" means basically nothing, and the top image could be a good candidate. I did start with color though and this site, though not the most inherently reliable, points out that P. brachypomus is typically light blue-gray/steely gray dorsally and darker gray/brownish gray ventrally while Colossoma macropomum is golden/olive green dorsally and purple/black ventrally.
The golden/olive green ended up making it easy to quickly see the difference using FishBase images. This one is of P. brachypomus (from here) and this one is of C. macropomum (from here). The coloration is clearly different, and this source used in the article points out a few morphological differences between the two species, of which we can see the operculum and adipose fin; the operculum is shaped like a half moon in C. macropomum and smaller in P. brachypomus, and the adipose fin is a little more significant in C. macropomum and has rays that are lacking in P. brachypomus.
So File:Schwarzer Pacu Colossoma macropomum Tierpark Hellabrunn-1.jpg at Tambaqui has all of the (available) characteristics of P. brachypomus. With the image in question here, the coloration is iffy, the operculum seems to definitely indicate C. macropomum, and the adipose fin seems to indicate P. brachypomus but isn't very visible. Coloration could easily be that of C. macropomum and I'd say the operculum is a more reliable indicator than the fin, so C. macropomum? All three fish in the image above in #photo request, File:TambaquiVeracrz.JPG, must be C. macropomum. Rhinopias ( talk) 23:54, 24 February 2018 (UTC)
What it sounds like so far is that there's currently no consensus about File:Schwarzer Pacu Colossoma macropomum Tierpark Hellabrunn-1.jpg, though it might be this fish, but there is an emerging consensus that File:Colossoma-brachypomus.jpg is in fact C. macropomum. In light of this, I have reverted myself and restored the version without the contested image. -- HighFlyingFish ( talk) 22:20, 25 February 2018 (UTC)