# Aulonocara nyassae "Red"?



## pengtsin

I was told by the dealer that these are Aulonocara nyassae "Red":

  

[The first photo is a female, the other two are male.]

Then I read in Cichlidae.com that "_Aulonocara nyassae_" have not been exported (http://www.cichlidae.com/gallery/species.php?s=413). And Koning's book says: "The name _Aulonocara nyassae_ has been incorrectly applied to many different species..."

So, the question is what are these good-looking guys?

Thanks in advance.


----------



## Fogelhund

German Red Peacocks/Ruby Reds, or a mix of the two. Both are man made strains, of unknown origins, though there are some unsubstantiated theories that one was line bred from Aulonocara baenschi and the other from an Auloncara "stuargranti Maleri". As is, I think both types have been mixed together now anyway.


----------



## noki

Aulonocara nyassae is an old trade name that has been used for all Stuargranti type Peacocks, so the name is pretty meaningless in the hobby. This seller is just using this old trade name.


----------



## NetStalker

Wow, that 3rd picture is just stunning...


----------



## firenzena

Pretty fish.

Lake Malawi was lake Nyassa up until Malawi's independence(1958?), so Aulonocara Nyassae could in theory describe any peacock from the Lake, and ironically your fish isn't from it.


----------



## Fogelhund

firenzena said:


> Pretty fish.
> 
> Lake Malawi was lake Nyassa up until Malawi's independence(1958?), so Aulonocara Nyassae could in theory describe any peacock from the Lake, and ironically your fish isn't from it.


Actually, no Aulonocara nyassae wouldn't accurately describe any peacock from the lake currently. Aulonocara nyassae is a specific, scientifically described fish.


----------



## 24Tropheus

Hes right you know Aulonocara nyassae Regan, 1922 is still a current accurate name just a different fish, its just I think the stuartgranti types were imported under this name for years, years ago (Ad is prob right he usually is, that others came in by this name too but I did not see em). This fish has some stuartgranti in em so not a silly name years ago, just meaningless these days.


----------



## firenzena

What I meant by "could in theory' was based on Regans 1922 fish that was the first Aulonocara species described and I understood many regard it as as 'Holotype', and I understood as a blue peacock
A.sp Nyaaase I understand is a nominated species but isn't prevalent in the hobby if infact it has been exported from the lake at all, and I've read nowhere that that is the fish originally described by Regan.
I note that while not used by the trade here in NZ anymore many peacocks were still until recently categorized under the umbrella of Nyassae as well as other countries. That may still be the case for Singapore also despite the erroneous nature of the description.


----------



## noki

Early scientific exploration in the Lake basically just put down a net mostly in the sandy areas, and then they described what they caught. They didn't really understand how many species they were dealing with. A. nyassae was a described species back then.

Years later they started catching colorful rock dwelling Aulonocara for the hobby. They didn't know what they were (since they were undescribed) but somebody thought that the only described species close to the Peacocks was A. nyassae, so they used A. nyassae for the stuartgranti group, for lack of anything better. Tropical Fish Hobbyist books used the name Nyassae and claimed that they had the best known information, so people believed them. People went by the Tropical Fish Hobbyist books and the name Nyassae became a common trade name. Many people continued to use the trade name Nyassae even if it was confusing, and even still do now.

Also back in the early days of the hobby, they didn't understand all the different species and races but thought they were "morphs" of the same species.


----------



## 24Tropheus

I was getting my info on Aulonocara nyassae Regan, 1922 partly from the link below and partly from what I remember. Noki's explanation matches what I suspected. Yep never seen a real one imported.
Hope it is accurate?
http://www.cichlidae.com/gallery/species.php?s=413
Though for all I know Regan never described the fish just a general Aulonocara type that was later put down as being described by him. It all gets rather confusing. :wink:


----------



## firenzena

Then would a straight translation to Modern terminology for Pengstin's fish be:

Aulonocara stuartgranti "red"?- Probably as fogelhund describes?

I ask only as we sorted hijacked his thread. Sorry Pengstin.


----------



## 24Tropheus

No worries I think everyone has kind of different ideas and its fine to share em.
That is the problem. I think we just can not say for sure if it is a stuartgranti line bred guy or a mix of species then line bred. Prob the latter I think but no way I know of telling for sure now.

Dunno if we should take a leaf out of other fields and call em Aulonocara familiaris ?hybrid "red" or stick with just common names like Sunshine Peacock, German Red etc.
Using any real name or having it as part of the name seems miss leading to me.


----------



## Fogelhund

What went into creating the German Reds, or Ruby or Rubecens peacocks is not fully known, though there are some theories out there. I think it would be most accurate to call them by their common names, and drop any pretense of a Scientific name with what is obviously not a natural fish, and possibly even a hybrid of some degree.


----------



## 24Tropheus

Just to add it is quite an orange/yellow example of a German Red. The ones that I have seen coming out of Germany look more like this.








But you can get many shades and who is to say which is most desirable?

I am messing with albino fire fish and other fire fish, when I have em better coloured (and consistent) maybe they will be released from my tanks.

I prefer natural fish myself but the market seems to be in these guys.


----------

