# Need a couple positive IDs



## JD7.62 (Apr 7, 2005)

The first fish was sold to me as a purple Spilo and I am pretty sure it is but just making sure. The next fish was sold to me as a Rhom. I am starting to think he is a S. Sanchezi. What do you all think?


----------



## rchan11 (May 6, 2004)

Top is Mac and bottom sanchezi.


----------



## JD7.62 (Apr 7, 2005)

Wow you really think the top one is a Rhom?! What makes you think that? I thought it would be either a Mac or Spilo...

Also in case it helps... The top fish is 7"-8" long and the bottom about 4" long.


----------



## rchan11 (May 6, 2004)

Top should be a Mac...I've one at home and should know..


----------



## JD7.62 (Apr 7, 2005)

I swear you said top was a Rhom! lol


----------



## William's (Aug 23, 2004)

top one is a Mac (have one myself) second is a Sanchezi IMO

greetz


----------



## Fomoris (Mar 13, 2005)

The first fish is a S. maculatus for sure and the second might be a S. sanchezi


----------



## rchan11 (May 6, 2004)

JD7.62 said:


> I swear you said top was a Rhom! lol
> [snapback]1095810[/snapback]​


Love that "edit" button.


----------



## b_ack51 (Feb 11, 2003)

Spilo/mac on top and looks to be Sanchezi on bottom.


----------



## JD7.62 (Apr 7, 2005)

Ok cool so it looks like I have an S. Sanchezi for sure. But, I am confused about the spilo/mac debate. Ive been looking through here and trying to make sense of it all. Are they the same fish just from different areas or a total differnt species. Ant size, temperment, or care differences? Any and all help sure would be appreciated!


----------



## hastatus (Jan 16, 2003)

> JD7.62 Posted Today, 09:56 AM
> Ok cool so it looks like I have an S. Sanchezi for sure. But, I am confused about the spilo/mac debate. *Ive been looking through here and trying to make sense of it all. Are they the same fish just from different areas or a total differnt species. *Ant size, temperment, or care differences? Any and all help sure would be appreciated!


The question is not fully resolved via DNA and available data. But I suspect it will prove out to be a singular species with a variation of color and slight morphogical differences. Pretty much the same way S. rhombeus is variable. But until it is resolved there will continue to be questions on its validity as either an S. maculatus or S. spilopleura. In this case, locality is everything.


----------



## EZmoney (May 13, 2004)

hastatus said:


> > JD7.62 Posted Today, 09:56 AM
> > Ok cool so it looks like I have an S. Sanchezi for sure. But, I am confused about the spilo/mac debate. *Ive been looking through here and trying to make sense of it all. Are they the same fish just from different areas or a total differnt species. *Ant size, temperment, or care differences? Any and all help sure would be appreciated!
> 
> 
> ...


So spilo, mac, and sanchezi classifications are still debateable and sortof interchangeable?


----------



## hastatus (Jan 16, 2003)

S. sanchezi has NOTHING to do with S. spilopleura or S. maculatus. The question lies with those two species, not S. sanchezi which is a distinct species in its own right.


----------

