# green terrors or ??



## trdtaco401 (Sep 19, 2011)

any advice on the specifics?? i bought it them under the green terror name but assuming they are not.. any help would be awesome


----------



## neutrino (May 4, 2007)

Common name is green terror, there is a variant with white edged fins and a variant with orange edged fins that you have there, once called gold silver saum and gold saum. However, work has been done to officially describe these two (closely related) fish as the PFK article linked below explains. If you read the article carefully, the pictured fish (same as yours) is now Andinoacara rivulatus (green terror) and the fish with white edge fins (former silver saum) is now A. stalsbergi. Also:


> As fishkeepers have known for the past 40 years, it differs from the Green terror, Andinoacara rivulatus, in having a silvery white rather than an orange edge to the fins.


In other words, according to the article, what you have is a green terror.

PFK article: http://www.practicalfishkeeping.co.uk/content.php?sid=2523


----------



## neutrino (May 4, 2007)

As far as care, etc. I've had a number of them (both types actually). My experience is tank raised individuals do not often live up to their reputation or name, wild ones do. I've kept tank raised with a variety of fish, including severums with no problems. Wilds I've had were a challenge to keep with other fish.

Feeding: not especially fussy, do well on any good pellet ime, including the wilds I had.

Water, not especially fussy, I typically keep them in ph 7 or above, temps mid 70s to low 80s. Their temperature range may go higher, that's just how I've kept them.


----------



## bernie comeau (Feb 19, 2007)

neutrino said:


> > As fishkeepers have known for the past 40 years, it differs from the Green terror, Andinoacara rivulatus, in having a silvery white rather than an orange edge to the fins.


This statement is NOT really true. While it is correct that A. stalsbergi in not known to pocess anything but a white fin trim, A. rivulatus as well, often has a white fin trim. The 2 species are easily distinguished because A. stalsbergi pocesses a reverse scale pattern.

The green terrors common in the hobby with a white fin trim are NOT A. stalsbergi, but rather the very same fish as the 'gold saum'. A. rivulatus with a white fin trim.

Read this about A. rivulatus:http://www.cichlidae.com/gallery/species.php?id=4
"Although populations with exclusively white and orange margins, respectively, have also been observed, this is often a polymorphic character. Specimens with white, yellow, or orange-red occur in the same habitat (ie. Werner and Stawikowski 1985). Additionally such variation is also known from other Andinoacara."

Anyways, i agree, the fish in question is A. rivulatus. Commonly known as a green terror or 'gold saum'.


----------



## neutrino (May 4, 2007)

For the sake of simplicity regarding a subject where even the experts have differing opinions, just like they do with certain other fish, I selected the PFK article, which is an easy read and is based on the published study, but doesn't really address the continuing (and confusing) discussion of resolving the not-stalsbergi fish, including which are really rivulatus or whether the gold saum should really be aequinoctalis, etc. etc. etc.

To go much farther is confusing because it seems to be a matter of opinion among the experts, themselves, and it depends who's commenting or writing the article what view you get. If you google Andinoacara aequinoctalis, you can find discussion of this among some of the experts. And, as you can see in the article linked below, despite the opinion (especially Alf Stalsberg) they are the same fish (and the opinion of others they are not) the status of the orange edged and white edged green terrors is not really settled yet.

http://cichlidnews.com/issues/2011jan/andinoacara.html ...In other words, according to some experts, the white edged non stalsbergi fish is _not _A. rivulatus. And, despite the published paper saying it is, some keep insisting the gold edged fish is not rivulatus. But until something further is officially published saying it's not, I think it's still safe to say your fish is a green terror, as the PFK article states.


----------



## Chromedome52 (Jul 25, 2009)

First, as a person who was around when they were first imported in 1972, let me say that the original Green Terrors that came to the US had white trim on the fins, and I'm reasonably certain that they were the fish now named _Andinoacara stalsbergi_. These fish were called Silver Saum in Europe. The Gold Saum was a later importation, and was quickly recognized as being a different species from Silver Saum. Both fish are considered "Green Terrors", as that common name is applied to a small complex of two to possibly four species.

Second, "White Saum" refers to fish that are the same species as "Gold Saum", but have a white edging. It is a genetic variation. The Leibel article that you pointed to actually has a photo near the end with a caption that says "The color in the tailÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s margin of the Ã¢â‚¬Å"GoldsaumÃ¢â‚¬Â


----------



## neutrino (May 4, 2007)

No article came back to bite me, thank-you very much and if you read the article carefully it does mention more than once that certain of Stalsberg's contentions have not been conclusively proven or agreed upon yet. I primarily referenced the Wayne Leibel article as one of the discussions of the subject, and one which makes the point that there is still aspects of these fish that haven't been conclusively settled yet. As to the other points I mentioned regarding gold saum vs. white saum green terrors that are not stalsbergi, as I said already you can read some interesting discussions between some respected people in the field who disagree on whether they are the same fish or not, just as I stated-- it's a pretty quick google to find them.

I'm not on either side of the discussion, personally, and have no particular opinion on the relationship or classification of similar Andinoacara from different locations. All I did was point to some information on the subject and suggest a way to find further discussions between experts with differing viewpoints, some of which I have read personally. As to being in the hobby in the early days of some of these fish, so was I, which proves nothing. I wouldn't attempt to classify fish I saw in the hobby many years ago that did not come to your local fish store with precise collection information and which I did not personally study as to their detailed morphology-- are you claiming that you did? Furthermore, I'm not one of the biologists who have the credentials to make these determinations-- are you claiming that you are?

As to discussion of the relative merits of the study that says A. stalsbergi is a separate fish, or which expert agrees or disagrees with that study, I have no opinion on that either. All I did was provide a source that comments on the conclusions of the study.

So far, I've provided a couple of articles on the subject, suggested an easy way to find more information and made some fairly brief comments that the subject can be confusing because different researchers have different opinions. Move along, nothing much to see (or argue over) here.

What I do know and am qualified to have an opinion on, due to a lot of study and writing on the subject, is that until the genetic study is done on whatever fish are in question, their classifications are subject to change.


----------



## Chromedome52 (Jul 25, 2009)

We've already had this discussion on this forum, but I can't find the thread.

What you are is confused. The white edged form of Gold saum, called White Saum in the hobby, has been showing up in spawns of F0 Gold saum for decades, and breeders of the fish know this, as do ichthyologists like Wayne Leibel and old timers like myself and bernie. The only debate is whether this species should be called _rivulatus _or _aequinoctialis_.

For a long time this color form was confused with _stalsbergi _due to the white trim. However, the difference in the two species is in the scale color pattern, not the trim color. The fish that Stalsberg collected from Rio Esmerelda also has white trim, but has other features that look different from the Gold saum fish. But that population is NOT in the hobby at this time.

The PFK article was not a well researched article, but a news report on the description of _A. stalsbergi_, and it has incorrect information in the photo caption, referring to Silversaum and Whitesaum as the same fish. They are NOT the same. _Andinoacara stalsbergi _was the original Green Terror, and as I stated before, it is the European Silbersaum, or Silver Saum. What you lack, and what bernie and I have, is the real life experience to be able to tell which information is properly researched, and which is not. I know, and trust the knowledge of, Wayne Leibel. I've sent him some odd "Aequidens" in the past for identification, because this group of fish are favorites of his, and he has studied them extensively. For me, his writings carry more weight than some staff reporter at PFK who can't get his facts straight.

OP's fish is a common Gold Saum Green Terror. I know this because I've seen thousands of these fish in the last 40 years, not because I've read about it. I've been involved in the discussion of these fish on the more scientifically based forum for Cichlidae, where opinions were coming from a group of ichthyologists and highly experienced aquarists. Reading to gain knowledge is good, but needs to be tempered with experience. There is far too much BS on the internet, and you will find a lot of conflicting "facts". Experience is needed to develop a BS filter.


----------



## neutrino (May 4, 2007)

What you are doing is insisting on fabricating, perpetuating and, apparently, attempting to win an argument that has nothing to do with what I'm saying. As I've clearly repeated, now, I have no personal opinion on the relationships or classification of these fish coming from different particular locations-- or on other points the experts will no doubt eventually resolve, which I'm quite confident they will be able to do without any help from you or I. If my earlier comments confused you about my position on this, perhaps this clears it up for you.

What I have done is reference two articles on the subject from reputable sources and point out something that probably anyone who's read what I've read on the subject would also understand. It's exactly the same point the Wayne Leibel article states at it's outset when it's first words are "This article concerns the partial resolution of the confusion surrounding that group of South American cichlids known to aquarists as the 'green terrors'". In other words, the subject is _not _closed but more work needs to be done to work out the proper classification and relationships of these fish. Meanwhile, experts have differing opinions and at least one instance of this is also pointed out in the article.

While giving credit to Alf Stalsberg for his work the same article points out more than once that certain of Alf's suggestions or opinions are yet to be confirmed. The article also mentions a specific instance of exactly what I said in a previous post, which is that experts disagree on the subject and not everyone agrees with some of Alf's conclusions (see the reference in the article to the German Cichlid Association journal). And, specifically regarding whether as "Alf believes, the orange- and white-edged fish are simply coloration morphs of the same species" or are different fish, Leibel says: "A final decision on the relationship of these two awaits further collection and analysis which Alf hopes to realize in the near future."

Whatever that final decision turns out to be has nothing to do with what I've said here: I don't have an opinion one way or another about the correct classification of these fish, but I've read enough to conclude that the experts have differing opinions. Is this becoming clear yet?

So, beyond providing two reputable references for more information, I've stated exactly what the Wayne Leibel article says, something you can also learn by doing other reading on the subject, which is that experts have differing opinions and the work (including genetic testing) hasn't been sufficiently done yet to conclusively settle the matter. If you have an argument with that I suggest you write to Wayne Leibel. If you think that position is confused, again I suggest you take that up with Wayne Leibel... or with some of the other researchers, including those referenced in the Wayne Leibel article, who are collecting and/or studying these fish but do not yet agree whether the white edged or orange edged strains are the same fish. If you have an argument with the PFK article, I suggest you write the PFK editor. Otherwise it's pointless to try and perpetuate an argument with me over the fact that I've alluded to exactly what the article itself states and what I've read elsewhere as well. And if you are unable to understand this, it's pointless for me to engage in any further debate with you.

As for the thread on this forum you mentioned, I've read it and several more like it.


----------



## neutrino (May 4, 2007)

...And just to clarify these last points. As far as personal experience, I too have many years in the hobby and have kept a number of green terrors, gold and white, wild and domestic. I have no idea know how many I've seen over the years, probably hundreds to your thousands-- excuse me if you believe that puts me at a disadvantage, though I doubt there's any relevance in it to how biologists will ultimately classify these fish, unless you happen to be one of those biologists.

And, yes, I understood from the start that stalsbergi is not the same white edged fish that is still under discussion regarding rivulatus, aequinoctialis, etc. If you thought otherwise you misunderstood.

Finally, as I've already stated in an earlier post, I initially referenced the PFK article primarily because it was an easy read and a source many recognize, understanding quite well that it is a news item and not an in depth science article. Anyone serious enough to do so can check the reference in the article to the original study for themselves or any other literature on A. stalsbergi, rivulatus or the other names for these fish-- some, such as aequinoctialis, attached by earlier researchers many years ago and not currently listed as valid on the official taxonomic lists that I often check in my (other) research, though, of course, that is subject to change if future work justifies the classifications.

If for the benefit of the original poster or anyone else chancing upon this thread you'd like to present further opinions, information, or references regarding the PFK article or white or orange edged green terrors, please do so without injecting your theories about my experience in the hobby or experience with green terrors or your hypotheses regarding what I know or don't know or understand or don't understand or have read or have not read, etc. etc. etc.

If you insist on making further personal comments toward me I'd consider entertaining them via pm, not in this thread.


----------



## Chromedome52 (Jul 25, 2009)

I found the old thread, for those who may not have seen it. http://www.cichlid-forum.com/phpBB/viewtopic.php?t=205134&postdays=0&postorder=asc&&start=0

I will post no further in this thread, as it does not serve the purpose of answering the OP. I do not appreciate being called a liar; I fabricated nothing. Anything else I might want to say would only inflame things further.


----------



## simo1973 (Jul 22, 2007)

trdtaco401 what have you sterted here 
looks like a pair of nice lookin GT`s. hope you get some fry one day. good luck


----------

