Loaches Online Forum

These beauties came in directly from India about 10 days ago under the "Cinnamon Loach - Pangio pangia" nametag. Would be interested to hear whether people think this ID is correct, or whether they are P. oblonga listed incorrectly. I think they look different to P. oblonga I've had in before:



























For comparison, here is a picture that Graeme showed to me the other day from Rendahl (1948), Pangio pangia :

They are approx 3" TL, are more black-looking in 'real life', and are extremely active. Obtaining pics was not very easy!

Emma

Hi Emma (and Steve), Thanks for the photos, I love the close-up of the face and barbels. Just one more reason to emigrate to England - I keep asking my wife but she just wont be in it but she said we could "visit" so we might turn up at one of your English LOL meetings one day soon.
Cheers Graeme.
PS: What Camera/lense combo are you using.

Wonderful pics Emma , nice chunky ones , i have some that are a reddish brown in colour , but otherwise similar in appearance , in fact i think Graeme may still have them also , might be worthy of a comparison ?

Superb pictures Emma!

I think these are different from Pangio oblonga. There's also something about the Caudal Peduncle on these Pangio's that makes me think that they could well be Pangio pangia. I think The Dark One has loads of books with pictures of many Pangio's. We might need him!!

I have a picture of one of my Pangio mariarum which Andy supplied me with, along with some Pangio oblonga. I remember The Dark One saying that he thinks that this Pangio below is the Pangio mariarum (longer nasal nares and different caudal peduncle). We should move this picture below from the Pangio oblonga profile to the Pangio mariarum profile.

Thanks chaps.

Graeme Robson wrote:I think The Dark One has loads of books with pictures of many Pangio's. We might need him!!

We must summon him!

Graeme McK - I'm still using my Nikon Coolpix 8700. I can't pretend to really know what I am doing - I found some settings I liked ages ago, and haven't bothered changing them since then. It's a great camera, apart from the fact that the built in flash is poor and the batteries don't last long (I have several that I can rotate on charge). You'd be welcome to come and visit any time too - just let us know and I'll rally up the troops!

Emma

I am summoned!

Do we know where in India they were caught? The reason I ask is that P. pangia was described from 'north eastern parts of Bengal' which based on other species information possibly means it came from the Brahmaputra rather than the Ganges.

Most works since have been based on specimens from Manipur and usually from waters that are connected to the river systems of Myanmar rather than the Brahmaputra and Ganges of India. The Rendahl figure is from Mandalay which makes it from the Irrawaddy, and the specimens in the recent revision of Myanmarian Pangios were also from the Irrawaddy. Britz and Maclaine identified them as P. pangia but said that comparisons with Indian (not Manipur IMO) specimens were needed to confirm their identity. The original description of P. pangia did not include the drawing, but this drawing was reproduced in a later work. The drawing of the original P. pangia does not show the body as deep (although it could have been a male) but it does not seem to show the flattened areas of skin on the back and ventral ridge of the fish that are conjoined to caudal fin (see the drawing) which is present in some of the fish of Emma's and in Rendahl and Britz and Maclaine.

So, at the moment they can be identified as P. pangia but with some reservation until we know where in India they were from, and how they compare to Brahmaputran or Gangetic Pangio.

I've been doing a bit of the old 'spade work' and was kindly provided with this info from my supplier:

"Those Pangio pangia are found in North Bengal, roughly 600 Kms north east of Calcutta, in the vicinity of the town of Cooch Behar. They inhabit small rivers."

Hope this helps,

Emma

That would probably make them from the Teesta River drainage, which is part of the Brahmaputra basin. Teesta Botias are sometimes different to upper Brahmaputra Botias so we have to be careful bearing in mind what I said earlier but I think this does give more evidence that they are P. pangia. Nice find and photo's Emma.

I will get in contact with James Maclaine who did the Pangio of Myanmar revision and see what he thinks.

Thanks very much, TDO. Looking forward to hearing what James Maclaine thinks too.

Emma

Sounds good!!

I've been in contact with James (who is not only a professional but is also very down to earth and helpful) and he has had a look at the thread.

Without x-rays he couldnt be 100% certain but he does agree that the most likely candidate is P. pangia.

To this end I wonder if it would be possible to send a/some preserved specimen(s) to him at the Natural History Museum? I will of course understand it if you don't want to 'sacrifice' one/some.

New profile it is then!

Thanks TDO (and James). You've probably guessed already that I would not be willing to sacrifice any for x-rays (sorry). You both seem fairly confident anyway, so that is good enough for a new LOL profile.

Emma

(P.S. to the other mods, if anyone wants to go ahead and create a new profile, feel free. I'm rather busy with work right now, so if left to me, it might take a while).