# Jewel Cichlid ID please



## aicardi

I have been wanting a pair of Jewels for my 40g breeder. I found these at a local LFS in a tank labeled "Assorted Peacocks". Go figure. I bought the 5 they had. These are approx 1-1.5". It looks like they are two different kinds but I am not sure. Can anyone help with ID's?
Hemichromis lifalili
Hemichromis sp. affin. paynei
Anomalochromis thomasi 
Or Just hybrid.

I have two of these and they are the largest:



















And three of these:



















Thank you for any help.


----------



## Fogelhund

Typically tank strain Jewels are hybrids. I see nothing in your fish to indicate otherwise.


----------



## aicardi

Thanks for the reply. I had a feeling this was the case. If two pair off I will keep them and enjoy. Will just let nature take care of the rest.


----------



## 24Tropheus

Prob not got Anomalochromis thomasi in em but be more line bred and/or mixed up Hemichromis sp. (guttatus etc)
I read you can tell em apart, lifalili and guttatus by the coloured down dark patchs location on the flanks but I realy do not know if this is true or can be relied upon with hobby stuff.

Hobby Red Jewel cichlid is prob about as far as I can safely go.

Nice enough fish though.

All the best James


----------



## oldwheat

The pictures show what is sold in the trade as a brilliant' or 'neon' jewel cichlid & in fact, are all variations shown the same strain. The jury is out as to whether it is a legitimate race (species) or not. From my personal experience & others, I have found that hemichromis are loath to cross species boundaries & hybrids are at best few & far between. I attempted crossing anomalochromis X hemichromis on a number of occasions with no interested being shown by either party ( & yes, any possible fry would have been feeders). At the present time, placing a species appellation on most hemichromis is an exercise in futility for the most part but the jewels can obviously tell the difference :roll: .


----------



## aicardi

Thanks oldwheat. I've been doing a lot of reading on them and learning more and more. As stated I have (5) small ones in a 40g breeder. If two pair up I will donate the other (3). The fry, if any, will be feeders. Other than that I will simply enjoy them.


----------



## oldwheat

If you have takers, there would be no reason for not selling or giving away some fry. As I stated, the possibility of them being hybrids is remote @ best. However, it can be difficult to dispose of all of the fry that a pair of jewels can produce. BTW: I will stick my neck out a tad & say that your pics seem to show females in the top two shots & males in the bottom two..


----------



## 24Tropheus

oldwheat said:


> At the present time, placing a species appellation on most hemichromis is an exercise in futility for the most part but the jewels can obviously tell the difference :roll: .


Kind of agree on the first bit.
Erm can you show evidence of the second. From my reading any Red Jewel be they Hemichromis bimaculatus, Hemichromis cristatus, Hemichromis guttatus, Hemichromis letourneuxi, Hemichromis lifalili, Hemichromis sp. 'ankasa' or Hemichromis sp. 'gabon', will breed with any other in aquriums if not given a free choice (Prof breeders tend not to give em much choice but select).
Hobby as well as commertialy produced stuff for sure confuses me. No real way of telling what they are now, kind of so far from any wild stuff its going to take DNA research to figure out thier ancestry?
Not that your average Red Jewel keeper iether knows or cares about this. Think they are more interested in good colour, vigourous not too aggressive and good breeders. Supplied quite well by the best of the commertial stuff whatever they realy are.

All the best James


----------



## Chromedome52

First, all the commercial hobby fish being labeled bimaculatus, letourneauxi, and lifalili, as well as the ones labeled paynei, are all populations of guttatus - at this time (not that these species don't exist). Loiselle told us in his 1979 revision that the common hobby bimaculatus was actually guttatus, and Lamboj made corrections on the rest in 2004 when The Cichlid Fishes of Western Africa was published. He is currently working on another major revision of Hemichromis, which is what oldwheat meant by his statement. It's also pretty certain at the moment that the Hemichromis sp. "Moanda/Muanda" is the real lifalili. I've never heard of anyone getting cristatus, sp. "Ankasa", or either of the sp. "Guinea" to cross with another species, and few of these are in the normal commercial channels in the US. There are also a lot of guttatus mislabeled as stellifer, though there are real stellifer in the US. The sp. "Neon" is still a mystery, as there are suggestions that it is a hybrid, while others simply think it is a very colorful population of the current guttatus. The only verifiable hybrids I've seen are between Neon and one of the standard guttatus populations, which still leaves us wondering.

The fish in the photos are very nice specimens of sp. "Neon", and are a well known commercial strain. No reason whatsoever to not distribute young.


----------



## oldwheat

In my 50+ years of working with cichlids, I don't ever recall seeing what I would call an extra specific hybrid. Chromedome is probably correct that most common hobby fish labeled otherwise are most likely local races of Guttatus ,species 'Moanda' & a few others obviously excepted.


----------



## 24Tropheus

I guess it depends on where you put the burden of proof. I put it with the breeders and assume hybrid (variant or species) if a fish no longer looks like a wild individual. Fully agree no reason to keep the young to yourself. Whatever, they are they are a type common in the hobby/shops. Giving sp. "Neon" (not even a term I have heard before) a firm species (guttatus) would depend on where the geological variant(s) came from (and was it one or many) and which species they are eventualy assigned to.
Hybrid does not only include species hybrids.
" The third type of hybrid consists of crosses between populations, breeds or cultivars within a single species."
Where do sp."Neon" come from in the wild?

All the best James


----------



## BC in SK

24Tropheus said:


> Where do sp."Neon" come from in the wild?


No one seems to know where the species/strain originates, nor whether it even originates from the wild. "Sp. neon" is a trade name; turqoise jewel is another common name.

It may be an undescribed species (hence the name sp.'neon') with unknown origins.....therefore will never be described until it is actually found in it's natural habitat. It might be a regional variant of an already described species (guttatus?). Or, as many people beleive, a line bred aquarium strain of guttatus with unknown origins (Far east?)......or developed by hybirdizing Hemichromis species (guttatus X another Hemichromis?).

Obviously somebody might know where the fish originates ......but it's not common knowledge in N.A.


----------



## BC in SK

oldwheat said:


> your pics seem to show females in the top two shots & males in the bottom two..


I agree.


----------



## 24Tropheus

For sure agree on the sexes but you realy can not tell for sure untill they breed unless you vent them. For sure not a hard fish to get going.
Thanks "BC in SK" for explaining. We get em in the UK LFSs as Neon Red Jewels. Kind of a name I prefer to the pseudo scientific/ pos missleading name of Hemichromis sp."neon".

All the best James


----------



## 24Tropheus

Any idea who first made up this name?


----------



## Chromedome52

First place I ever saw it was in Lamboj's book, in a photo caption. His statement was that "No concrete (only confusing) information has been relayed about this species. It is sometimes viewed in the trade as a species imported from the Congo (or sometimes from Nigeria) and at other times as a hybrid - but if so, of which species?"
So apparently the fish has been a mystery from the beginning.


----------



## 24Tropheus

Thanks Chromedome52.
As its from Lamboj, I guess it has stuck, no matter how missleading it might be to give them a scientific name.
If anyone finds em in the wild (except swimming about as contaninants in Florida etc), will I be shocked. :wink:

All the best James


----------



## BC in SK

24Tropheus said:


> its from Lamboj


I supose for many of us the name comes from Lamboj because we read it in his book......but of course he didn't invent the name himself but rather is simply calling it, what it was known as, in the trade. Quite clear in "The Cichlid Fishes of Western Africa" that Hemichromis sp. "neon" is a trade name. Origins a mystery and IF, in fact, it is a potentially undescribed species, it's collection point is unknown.

There are quite a few cichlids that are sold with a pseudo-scientific trade name. Another example: Australoheros sp. "oblongum". Definately has a few traits going for it: colorful, smaller and less aggressive then other chanchittos. But it's origins are a mystery. Line bred?, hybrid?, regional variant of a decribed species?, or undescribed species with an unknown collection point? My own 'gut' feeling is that it is probably the latter......but when it comes to a very common aquarium strain, like a jewel cichlid, I think it most likely to be a line bred variant. Of course, just speculation on my part, as the origins of these fish are still a mystery.


----------



## Chromedome52

The name sp. "Neon" is not a scientific name, or even a scientific designation. The designation sp. simply means unidentified, not undescribed, and the fish is, currently, unidentified. The way in which it breeds true suggests that it is a single species, whether line bred or not. But sp. "Neon" has no more scientific meaning than Turquoise Jewel.

Aicardi, I hope we aren't scaring you with this discussion!


----------



## oldwheat

Just to further add to the confusion. I also have seen this fish sold as a 'brilliant' jewel. I'm with SK, the lack of significant variation in appearance through many generations says 'not a hybrid' to me. A line bred sport; perhaps, but I'm still leaning toward a naturally occurring species.


----------



## aicardi

Chromedome52 said:


> Aicardi, I hope we aren't scaring you with this discussion!


Not at all! I am learning a great deal from this. Please continue!


----------



## 24Tropheus

Thanks again all,

"Sp. neon" is a trade name. sp. "Neon" is not a scientific name, or even a scientific designation.

Yet so similar to names like

Hemichromis sp. 'ankasa'
Hemichromis sp. 'gabon'
Hemichromis sp. 'guinea 1'
Hemichromis sp. 'guinea 2'

The confusion is prob not mine alone? Esp as so few sellers are careful about capitals and ' or " marks.
Confusing as some seem to be claiming (neon) is prob a aquarium version of a pure variant/species of Hemichromis guttatus.

All the best James


----------



## BC in SK

24Tropheus said:


> sp. "Neon" is not a scientific name, or even a scientific designation.
> 
> Yet so similar to names like
> 
> Hemichromis sp. 'ankasa'
> Hemichromis sp. 'gabon'
> Hemichromis sp. 'guinea 1'
> Hemichromis sp. 'guinea 2'


Chromedome is right about sp. simply meaning unidentified. Not a real scientific name.

But there is a distinction. Genus plus the word sp. and letter, number or word in quotation is an informal way to refer to an undescribed or potentially undescribed species. Scientists got to call the organism something until it gets properly named. An undescribed species is still a taxon even though it is not properly named yet. There is the expectation when a fish is called by this type of name that it comes from the wild with a known collection point and is generally thought to be a potentially undescribed species........because that is the kind of name scientists use to refer to this. A line bred or hybrid aquarium population does not get this designation by scientists, even if it's origins are a mystery.

While all these Hemichromis are unidentified, only "sp. neon" has unknown origins. The others are all known to come from the wild with a known collection point. There is the expectation when a name like this is used that the origins of the fish are known, not something that is potentially a man made variant.


----------



## Chromedome52

The fact is, none of those names come from scientists; they are marketing designations given by collectors and importers because the fish didn't fit anything they were familiar with. The fact that science is using these temporary designations does not give them any scientific validity. And again, they are considered unidentified, not necessarily undescribed (though it is considered likely on some). There are many species described that we have not seen alive, and any of those could belong to a species that was described in the late 19th or early 20th century. Back then, scientists did not collect living specimens, they looked at dead, preserved fish. And it's not like all this information is nicely organized in one database that can be searched. Granted, these designations are better than a false scientific sounding name, like Kenyi, or Acei. However, importers have learned (something that I did not think they were capable of) that putting a location name on a fish, even if it is likely to be an already described species, increases the marketability. The good news is that, in many instances, this at least allows us the option of keeping different populations separate.


----------



## Chromedome52

Tried to edit, but took too long. Concerning the expectation of a known collection site attached to such names, there are many described species where the type location doesn't really exist. An acquaintance tried to collect some fish in Peru from their supposed type locations. Several did not have the species that was supposedly collected there; one didn't even have any water! Back in the 30s and 40s, collectors often gave false information about where fish were collected to prevent other collectors from poaching. And on occasion they simply made up names because they didn't really have a name, and this was before GPS existed. So the fact is there are well known species that do not have a known collection point.

As I stated before, however, the importers have learned that putting location names on fish increases their marketability. I gave the good news, but the bad news is that, on occasion, the importer doesn't get this information from the collectors, so they simply make things up.


----------



## 24Tropheus

8) and thanks.

All the best James


----------



## aicardi

Well an update on these guys. I have been waiting for two of these to pair off. This morning I noticed fry. The two that are really guarding the fry are the top two in the pictures at the beginning of this thread. They are getting eaten by one of the smaller green Jewels also pictured. Which is fine.


----------



## Arndy-B-O-A-

hi Leute,
was ist es denn nun für eine Art der Gattung Hemichromis?
MFG


----------



## 24Tropheus

I recently heard some news on sp. Neon. Seems some DNA work is been done (yet to be published) and seems it is pure but line bred Hemichromis guttatus.
Well you could have knocked me down with a feather!
Not been so shocked in ages.
Guess I was wrong again.  

All the best James


----------



## Niikii

Hemichromis bimaculatus









Hemichromis lifalili









I think that the fish are Hemichromis lifalili. See black spot behind the head.


----------



## Mr Chromedome

Sorry,Nikii, but both those photos are populations of _Hemichromis guttatus_. The real _H. bimaculatus_ is not currently in the hobby, and the real _H. lifalili_ has recently been imported from the Congo, and is a yellow and red fish in breeding colors. The incorrect names are perpetuated by people who simply repeat information from books that were written decades ago.


----------



## Arndy-B-O-A-

Hi Leute,
aufgrund des spitz zulaufenden Mauls glaube ich daß die Basis des Fisches der ersten beiden Bilder ein Hemichromis bimaculatus war. Es wurden die Iridophoren herausgezüchtet.
Es sind aber wirklich wundervolle Tiere, die es auf jeden Fall Wert sind, weitergezüchtet zu werden.
Vieleicht legst du deinen eigenen Standart fest und züchtest attraktive Formen dieses Buntbarsches. Eine Bezeichnung für die Tiere wirst du kaum finden. Sei froh dass du sie hast.
Bis später,
Arndy


----------

