Moderator: LoachForumModerators
Not surprising that the name is incorrect. I guess that if it looks like something familiar, that's what they'll call it.Jim Powers wrote:Frank;
Protomyzon sinensis is now called Erromyzon sinensis. It is definately not the same fish as the one in mikev's pic. I had three of these fish awhile back that came in as, of all things, Borneo suckers.
http://forums.loaches.com/viewtopic.php?t=2795
Frank,Frank M. Greco wrote:Mike, the fish were under lighting all day today, and they are still pale. Not as pale as before, but not exactly well-marked, either.mikev wrote:One comment on Frank's schisturas (I saw them personally a week ago): I cannot even guess on the ID, but my feeling was that the paleness had something to do with low-light conditions the fish may be accustomed to. of course I can be dead wrong on this, but this felt interesting.
Yes, I have had cave Schistura at work. Not a marking on them. The ones I have are darker than that, but not as dark as a normal Schistura.sorry, this is not what I meant. I was referring to the possibility that this fish naturally lives in low-light conditions. The "cave" species of schistura and other hillstreams have no markings at all, you fish has low-intensity markings. Only a guess here.
At least they still have hte pic, and know that I am looking for this fish.Big darn about sinensis: it is a totally wrong identification. sinensis is a very interesting fish too, but it has almost nothing in common with the fish you asked about. It looks very similar to Cheni, not to any kind of Lizards.
