# S. maculatus or spilo?



## deadhead (Dec 29, 2003)

I have heard different opionions on what exactly I have
Just curious


----------



## deadhead (Dec 29, 2003)

another picture


----------



## hastatus (Jan 16, 2003)

Looks like a young S. maculatus where the mid-band of the tail has not covered the edge yet.


----------



## deadhead (Dec 29, 2003)

Thanks!
Anyother suggestions?


----------



## serrasalmus_collector (Mar 9, 2003)

No apparerent band in the vertral fins.. I side with Frank. S.Macualtus.

Just me opinion.

I will be getting some true golds from a different area, and post pics of both fish. It should be interesting.


----------



## deadhead (Dec 29, 2003)

Well I bought it as an "Argentina Gold Spilo"
It is an awsome fish anyway!


----------



## hastatus (Jan 16, 2003)

> deadhead Posted on Mar 5 2004, 01:50 PM
> *Well I bought it as an "Argentina Gold Spilo"*
> It is an awsome fish anyway!


Interesting, S. maculatus is described from Guapore basin. Most authors treated it as a synonym of S. spilopleura, a well known species from Parana-Paraguay and Amazon Basin. I would wait until the fish is a bit bigger and see if the mid-line band becomes terminal. If so then certainly you have S. maculatus, if not, then the fish in question is S. spilopleura. I know it sounds complex (it is), but the morphology of S. maculatus and S. spilopleura is very close. They tend to separate at about 2.5 to 3 inches TL with maculatus having a near terminal band at that size, sometimes having just a slight clear edge.


----------



## deadhead (Dec 29, 2003)

Im not sure if I understand but my fish is almost 7 inches TL.


----------



## deadhead (Dec 29, 2003)

another picture


----------



## deadhead (Dec 29, 2003)

more


----------



## Mr. Hannibal (Feb 21, 2003)

Since i don´t see any humeral blotch or black ventral fins tips i agree it´s S. Maculatus :nod: !


----------



## serrasalmus_collector (Mar 9, 2003)

deadhead said:


> Im not sure if I understand but my fish is almost 7 inches TL.


 I am in no way shape or form an expert at identifying piranhas. But if you fish is close to 7 inches, I would change my guess to Gold Spilopleura. All my S.Maculatus had a black terminating boarder since 5 inches. But could be my water conditions and feeding.

I have 11 and they are all less than 7 inches. No clear hyaline boarder what so ever. Perhaps the humeral spot on Spilopleura may come and go. Perhaps photograph may not be capturing the spot.


----------



## deadhead (Dec 29, 2003)

Here are more pics just click on this link
These are about a week old
http://www.piranha-fury.com/forum/pfury/in...showtopic=31347


----------



## hastatus (Jan 16, 2003)

> Mr. Hannibal Posted on Mar 5 2004, 07:19 PM
> 
> Since i don´t see any humeral blotch or black ventral fins tips i agree it´s S. Maculatus


The humeral spot on S. maculatus is only fixed in formalin. Water conditions may make the humeral spot more visible other times, you won't see it. Largely depends on the fishes mood and lighting.


----------



## deadhead (Dec 29, 2003)

If anyone has taken a look at some of the other pictures i posted with the link, let me know if anyone has a more convincing answer..


----------



## Noe (Aug 22, 2003)

hastatus said:


> > deadhead Posted on Mar 5 2004, 01:50 PM
> > *Well I bought it as an "Argentina Gold Spilo"*
> > It is an awsome fish anyway!
> 
> ...


 You'r doughting Frank's post..........


----------



## hastatus (Jan 16, 2003)

> Noe Posted on Mar 10 2004, 07:37 PM
> QUOTE (hastatus @ Mar 5 2004, 02:52 PM)
> QUOTE
> deadhead Posted on Mar 5 2004, 01:50 PM
> ...


That's ok. Everyone is entitled to learn, find information and present valid arguments.







I'm not infallible.









PS: You may want to look at his link: S. maculatus OPEFE


----------



## deadhead (Dec 29, 2003)

here is a new picture i took tonight


----------



## Caseman (Jan 7, 2004)

How big is yours? 
From what i was told mine is a mac. but he does not look anything like yours

almost 3in


----------



## Dr. Giggles (Oct 18, 2003)

A. Maculatus. Very sweet fish btw. I am by no means an expert but after reading Frank's comments and looking at the OPEFE link I concurr.


----------



## deadhead (Dec 29, 2003)

Ok I am convinced its a mac. since it has a black band on the tail and then a clear band behing that. I guess that is the telling feature. 
Anyone have any clue as if I could house someother type of fish in my tank along with him to help keep the tank clean?
Or will he just kill the other fish. He seems to be very aggresive always going nuts when the cat walks by....
He aslo tears up the food I feed him.


----------



## abihsot911 (Jan 5, 2004)

i have a gold spilo and a mac(most likely) i put them together today..and nothin good happend..i tried to make them shoal but didnt happen..ended up spilo taking a chunk of its fins off...

i have one question..what is really different between the two?..


----------



## hastatus (Jan 16, 2003)

> abihsot911 Posted on Mar 23 2004, 06:26 AM
> i have a gold spilo and a mac(most likely) i put them together today..and nothin good happend..i tried to make them shoal but didnt happen..ended up spilo taking a chunk of its fins off...
> 
> i have one question..*what is really different between the two?.. *


Externally, both fishes are very close in appearance except some minor differences and their locality. Internally, features not visible to the naked eye except through radiograph or dissection does it appear apparant as distinctive.

For more on this read: S. maculatus vs S. spilopleura.


----------



## SharkAquarium (May 16, 2003)

Frank, Does not the fish in the first picture have a very clearly defined CLEAR hyline border which would imply (dictate) spilopleura?

(This fish is a solid 6")


----------



## hastatus (Jan 16, 2003)

> SharkAquarium Posted on Mar 23 2004, 07:55 PM
> Frank, *Does not the fish in the first picture have a very clearly defined CLEAR hyline border which would imply (dictate) spilopleura?*
> 
> (This fish is a solid 6")


According to Jegu, et. al., no. Jegu; _Two thirds at the base of caudal fin are dark and the last third hyaline in S. spilopleura whereas S. maculatus shows a final or subterminal black bar in the caudal fin, *depending on the size of the specimens and the sampling area*._

Jegu gives no references to what size this becomes visible.

According to the original author Kner; _Serrasalmus maculatus and S. spilopleura were described from the rio Guaporé by Kner (1858:166), followed up by Natterer, then presented with more details in the work of Kner (1860) on the Characidae. *Kner (1858) indicates that the edge of the anal and tail fin of S. maculatus is black and that the flanks carry spots while S. spilopleura the edge of the tail is clear and the flanks carry a humeral black spot.*_

In my discussions with Michel, he indicated to me that S. maculatus the humeral may be occasionally present on that species (mostly breeding adults). He (in his abstract) further says; _The specimens from the Guapore basin show a morphotype very close to that of S. spilopleura but they differ from this species by a grey to black terminal band on the caudal fin._

This photo of a live S. maculatus shows an adult though a bit larger than the photo above. Note the tail fin.

The fish in the link is 18.0 cm TL (or about 7 1/8 in. TL) from locality: Brazil, Miranda River, Mato Grosso do Sul.


----------



## SharkAquarium (May 16, 2003)

> According to Jegu, et. al., no. Jegu; Two thirds at the base of caudal fin are dark and the last third hyaline in S. spilopleura
> whereas S. maculatus shows a final or subterminal black bar in the caudal fin, depending on the size of the specimens and the sampling area.


I believe the last time this was being discussed, someone mentioned that 'size' was approx 3". The fish in the link, and the first pic here are clearly more than 3", both closer to 6". Both fish clearly demonstrate a clear 'hyaline border'. Why are they not spilopleura?

I have a 10 version of the fish first pictured, and he still shows the clear hyaline border of the caudal.

Has not the 'clear hyaline border' in adults always been the marker for spilopleura?

(To my eye, the only significant difference in the two pics is the amount of pigment in the first 1/3 to 1/2 of the caudal.)


----------



## hastatus (Jan 16, 2003)

> SharkAquarium Posted on Mar 24 2004, 12:10 PM
> QUOTE
> According to Jegu, et. al., no. Jegu; Two thirds at the base of caudal fin are dark and the last third hyaline in S. spilopleura
> whereas S. maculatus shows a final or subterminal black bar in the caudal fin, depending on the size of the specimens and the sampling area.
> ...


----------



## hastatus (Jan 16, 2003)

Here are some lectotypes from Jegu & Dos Santos, Cymbium 2001 which shows the external differences of S. spilopleura (A) and S. maculatus (B). If you note, they are very similar fishes except for some diferences in body, belly scutes, markings on fins.


----------



## erikcooper (Feb 18, 2004)

The maculatus looks to have bigger belly scutes, the black lines on fins (which is obvious), a more oval shaped eye, and a more elongated body shape.


----------



## hastatus (Jan 16, 2003)

And here it gets more technical regarding tooth structure:


----------



## asian_redtail_catfish (Sep 25, 2003)

Geroge knows. He is an expert on fishes and he goes to South America to catch them all the time.


----------



## hastatus (Jan 16, 2003)

> asian_redtail_catfish Posted on Mar 25 2004, 07:48 AM
> Geroge knows. He is an expert on fishes and he goes to South America to catch them all the time.


While I appreciate your vote of confidence on George, lets not derail the nice discussion we are all having. I believe this is the second time you have made a similar comment without offering any valuable input to this discussion.

Thanks.


----------



## SharkAquarium (May 16, 2003)

:laugh: George doesn't know...... he is still learning, and questioning. My only advantage is that I see a lot of sh*t, and am trying to make sense of it.

Frank, as usual, thanks for the additional input. So I guess what you're saying in general (and as Dr. Fink as also commented), is that most (if not all) of the fish we see in the industry/hobby is maculatus, and not spilopleura. AND that the real spilopleura might be that fish I stumbled on in Southern Brasil a few years ago that I 'named' the Ruby Red Spilo.

Is that a good summary?


----------



## hastatus (Jan 16, 2003)

> SharkAquarium Posted on Mar 25 2004, 05:02 PM
> George doesn't know...... he is still learning, and questioning. My only advantage is that I see a lot of sh*t, and am trying to make sense of it.
> 
> Frank, as usual, thanks for the additional input. So I guess what you're saying in general (and as Dr. Fink as also commented), is that most (if not all) of the fish we see in the industry/hobby is maculatus, and not spilopleura. AND that the real spilopleura might be that fish I stumbled on in Southern Brasil a few years ago that I 'named' the Ruby Red Spilo.
> ...


Yes, it appears you hit the nail on the head about the ruby red spilo. The preserved specimens of spilopleura shown to me at OSU certainly look nothing like the common maculatus we see day to day. I looked at FISH BASE to see if Michel has a photo of the true spilopleura, but unfortunately the photo in use is so poor, (looks like the fish is bent over) you can't really see any features at all. I've had to relable my bottles here on the many examples of what I thought were spilopleura to S. maculatus. In formulin, the black tail band (as seen in the Jegu photo above) is very prominent. One other thing that helps in ID (though not recommended on live fish) is trying to see the number of palatine teeth on the roof of the mouth. S. maculatus generally run 6 teeth while spilopleura averages 3.

Next time you manage to get the ruby red or if you have any in your freezer, check out the palatine teeth. You also have the drawing of the tooth structure that will help narrow down your collection.

Regarding Fink (and Machado) Jegu made mention in his rehabilitation of the species that those two authors made no mention of the Venezuelan S. spilopleura in Los Peces Caribes de Venezuela. So that fish was not reviewed. I suspect the fish may also be S. maculatus according to one photo I have seen "in a piranha book" by Schulte if the locality data is correct.

Below are some photos of Paralectotypes of S. spilopleura. Most them have phoney eyes (don't ask LOL).


----------



## erikcooper (Feb 18, 2004)

Only problem with the tooth diagram is that I can not see it being to hard for a maculatus's teeth to be ground down and then it would look extremely similiar, unless they shed their teeth too often for that to happen? Wow, this is getting interesting. It seems as if the "gold spilos" have become s. maculatus, the ruby reds have stayed spilos, and the "spilo cfs" have become s. altispinis. Correct me if I am jumping before the bridge is finished but it seems like this...


----------



## hastatus (Jan 16, 2003)

> erikcooper Posted on Mar 25 2004, 08:59 PM
> Only problem with the tooth diagram is that I can not see it being to hard for a maculatus's teeth to be ground down and then it would look extremely similiar, unless they shed their teeth too often for that to happen?
> 
> *Nope, they are not worn down only lost and then they are replaced. The only thing that would wear down is the palatine teeth and that is why young specimens are checked not adults for accuracy of count.*
> ...


----------



## erikcooper (Feb 18, 2004)

> Things can change overnight as science advances its knowledge.


This will always be, but there has to be facts sometime. So at this point in time it seems like this would be the most accurate it gets huh?


----------



## hastatus (Jan 16, 2003)

> erikcooper Posted on Mar 26 2004, 06:12 AM
> QUOTE
> Things can change overnight as science advances its knowledge.
> 
> This will always be, but there has to be facts sometime. So at this point in time it seems like this would be the most accurate it gets huh?


You got it.


----------



## deadhead (Dec 29, 2003)

Wow, I didnt think this thread would spark up such a conversation.
I came to the conclusion that my fish is a maculatus.
Here is the last picture I will post in this thread.


----------



## serrasalmus_collector (Mar 9, 2003)

Hey Frank, I been busy and haven't been on P-fury. But I have another question about the Maculatus. I posted some new pics of my colony as of 3-30-2004.

My fish appear to look so unusual. Can my water conditions actually be making the fish coloration different from the average S.Maculatus? I know for a fact where my baby Macs came from. But honestly they look nothing like their parents? The fish appearance as always baffled me, and now I'm baffled again. I posted the pics in another thread. Here is the link.

Thanks for any reasons you can give me.

If my water conditions are doing this, that may have some insite into Teretzi???

My 2 year old Maculatus


----------



## hastatus (Jan 16, 2003)

> serrasalmus_collector Posted on Mar 30 2004, 06:00 PM
> Hey Frank, I been busy and haven't been on P-fury. But I have another question about the Maculatus. I posted some new pics of my colony as of 3-30-2004.
> 
> My fish appear to look so unusual. Can my water conditions actually be making the fish coloration different from the average S.Maculatus?
> ...


----------



## serrasalmus_collector (Mar 9, 2003)

Thanks for the insite. You are always helpful


----------



## serrasalmus_collector (Mar 9, 2003)

Hope you like the pics at the end of the tread. I got a new digital cam. Still can't edit post so I don't post much @ all... I will post more pics if you are curious to how they look.

As for the health, they are wonderful. They started the annual spawning again. To me breeding fish are extremely well kept fish.









But just another one of my personal opinions


----------



## hastatus (Jan 16, 2003)

No Problem, glad to hear your fishies are doing well.


----------



## abihsot911 (Jan 5, 2004)

deadhead...
damn..that is a really nice looking fish..

you said it was a mac?..
i still think its a spilo..because of his tail..the end of his tail is clear after a line of black coloring..
which makes it a spilo..and mac's tail is totally black..looks nothing like
a spilo's tail..that is one way to tell..
but..of course..i could be wrong..

i have one mac..and one spilo..take a look..


----------



## abihsot911 (Jan 5, 2004)

my spilo..


----------



## abihsot911 (Jan 5, 2004)

here is a picture of my mac..
picture is not that clear..but you can tell that the tail of the mac. is 
slightly different from the spilo..

you can see that the mac's tail is kinda bitten..because i tried shoaling those two..
didnt work..


----------



## erikcooper (Feb 18, 2004)

abihsot911 please read further back in this thread. We have come to the conclusion that all the Gold varient Spilos are actually S. Macualatus where the band in the tail has just yet to reach the end...


----------



## Rigor_mortiZ_Rhom (Dec 21, 2003)

Sorry to derail deadhead, but you should enter that last pic in POTM, its nice and clear!


----------



## hastatus (Jan 16, 2003)

> erikcooper Posted on Mar 31 2004, 06:03 AM
> abihsot911 please read further back in this thread. We have come to the conclusion that all the Gold varient Spilos are actually S. Macualatus where the band in the tail has just yet to reach the end...


I just finished reading your remarks on another thread at a different forum about spilo vs mac. I think your going to run into trouble with this ID because hobbyists are just looking at primarily one feature (the midline band on the tail). Also the size of the fish can create a false positive on the ID just like in the other thread where George Fear and I discussed the morphological differences between spilo vs mac. It comes down to this spilo and mac share similar external features until they reach a certain size (over 3 inches) and then they show changes. Mac shows the black margin on the anal fin, the midline band of the tail begins to extend out, nearly always covering the terminal end though some show a slight hyline edge. As Mac further matures, they darken up and the tail at that point becomes more black and prominent. One of the things that Mac has the helps ID it besides the tal is the gold color and red eye. I have yet to see S. spilopleura in "gold" coloration. All are reported to be red bellied. The "purple" coloration also appears more fixed on maculatus than spilopleura, so that too may help in ID.

All in all, your going to have a difficult time convincing some people what they have in their tanks is not spilopleura because that is the name longest in use, but has been wrong for a number of years. It took me (since it was first released in 2000) to accept these changes because I was looking at "old" descriptions by the historical authors and found inconsistencies in what Jegu was writing and what previous authors reported. Now given time and the donations of several "mac's" I can come to the agreement that Jegu was right on "mac" being different from "spilo". It just takes time for people to accept this concept. Just keep plugging away.









BTW, I've taken the OPEFE link to S. spilopleura OFF LINE and I'm going to be updating the page. Might as well try and clarify this ID better for this species.


----------



## deadhead (Dec 29, 2003)

Hey frank if you feel like adding pictures for your site you have my permision to use my picture above...
Just a thought.


----------



## hastatus (Jan 16, 2003)

> deadhead Posted on Mar 31 2004, 09:09 PM
> Hey frank if you feel like adding pictures for your site you have my permision to use my picture above...
> Just a thought.


I sincerely appreciate that, but that isn't the problem. Its knowing for certain what the fish is and then photographing it. I have access to many photos both hobbyists and scientific. For example the below one is from FISHBASE and shows a true example of S. maculatus (Ivan Sazima, field researcher). Compare this to your fish and those being stated as being 'spilopleura'. Please note the clear edge, humeral (often there, often not depending on condition of fish).


----------



## deadhead (Dec 29, 2003)

Just putting the offer out there.
So I take it my Mac is in great health because of the clearly defined clear boarder on its tail fin?
Also the dark band is really clear, over all I guess he is a healthy LOOKING fish.
Once again thanks for all the info for I am just a beginner in this hobby.

Eric


----------



## erikcooper (Feb 18, 2004)

I know, people are not going to believe me, but hey if no one is ever told then no one will ever know...


----------

