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
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.
Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 203 guests