# Correct Lango



## Piranha_man (Jan 29, 2005)

I've thought about starting a thread like this for a long time, I'm finally saying "Screw it" and starting it.
The thing that's held me back was that I didn't want to come across like a "know it all" or "overly picky," it's just that I think it would be cool if we all had some of the basics down.

Piranha-fury has so many members at this point... each at a slightly (and vastly) different experience level from the rest.
I'm convinced that this site is THE source for piranha information... literally the best in the world.

I have yet to read a book or see a TV show about piranha that isn't full of misinformation.

So.... I thought it would be cool if we all were kinda speaking the same language... and correctly.
We are, afterall... the "experts" that many people turn to.

I'm going to just start with a few things, hopefully others will add/correct over time.

____________________________________

When referring to a fish by it's scientific name, we're calling it by it's "genus" and "species."
The genus is always capitalized, and the species always starts with a small case letter.

For exammple: "Pygocentrus nattereri" is the scientific name... the genus is Pygocentrus, the species is nattereri.
Another example is "Serrasalmus altuvei."

____________________________________

When referring to the acid/alkaline level of water it's measured in pH.

Not PH, Ph or ph... it's pH.

____________________________________

"Pygocentrus cariba" ends with an "a" not an "e."

____________________________________

There are several other things that are escaping me at the moment... I'll think of them later and hopefully others will chime in.


----------



## BRUNER247 (Jun 2, 2010)

Maybe mods could start by cleaning up the headlines in the pinned threads.noobs or people that don't know any better, see this n think that's how it is.example in breeding section very 1st pinned thread breeding caribes.


----------



## Piranha_man (Jan 29, 2005)

Yeah, I dunno... that's why I really had to think about even saying anything... I didn't want to sound like a wannabe English teacher...

There were, are and always will be some misspellings and such... and that's fine... I just thought it would be beneficial to have a thread that can be referenced to.


----------



## Grosse Gurke (Jan 3, 2003)

I think people take offence when they are belittled. Just pointing out something shouldn't be taken as a negative. We all started somewhere.

Anyways...interesting idea for a thread....I am curious to see what gets posted. My biggest would be the over application of common names. I dont mind including the location...ie...Peruvian rhombeus. What I get tired of seeing is pretty much any description that goes beyond that. Its like if someone always referred to their Accord as "My midnight blue Honda Accord" instead of "My Accord". "So I was looking out the window at my midnight blue Honda Accord and noticed I had parked too far away from the curb." I dont know...I just find it kind of goofy.


----------



## Piranha_man (Jan 29, 2005)

^^ Your example totally made me laugh.


----------



## BRUNER247 (Jun 2, 2010)

Hell I spell it wrong then right then wrong again lol I could really careless bout spelling n such. As long as its halfway right so everyone can figure it out.I actually think its funny when some members get all technical n scientific.


----------



## Piranha_man (Jan 29, 2005)

BRUNER247 said:


> Hell I spell it wrong then right then wrong again lol I could really careless bout spelling n such. As long as its halfway right so everyone can figure it out.*I actually think its funny when some members get all technical n scientific.*


Then prepare to laugh your ass off, as "getting all technical and scientific" is exactly my intentions with this thread.


----------



## Piranha Guru (Nov 24, 2005)

If you want to get really technical, then the scientific name should always be in italics when typed (assuming the rest of the text isn't) or underlined when hand written (_Serrasalmus geryi_ or Serrasalmus geryi). Also, the second word technically isn't the "species"...it's the specific name or epithet that when combined with the genus = the indicated species. A third descriptor is often used to designate a subspecies (_Canis lupus baileyi_). You may also see abbreviations used as in _Serrasalmus_ sp. for a single, unspecified or unknown _Serrasalmus_ species or _Serrasalmus_ spp. when referring to two or more _Serrasalmus_ species. There are other abbreviations used as well, such as "ssp." (singular) or "sspp." (plural) when referring to an unidentified subspecies as well as "cf" when referring to an unconfirmed identification. The latter is the main one we encounter here. Note that the abbreviations are not italicized. There are some more encountered abbreviations and rules (Botany has some variations), but these are probably the most encountered with this hobby.


----------



## Soul Assassin (Nov 21, 2006)

Piranha TeAcH said:


> If you want to get really technical, then the scientific name should always be in italics when typed (assuming the rest of the text isn't) or underlined when hand written (_Serrasalmus geryi_ or Serrasalmus geryi). Also, the second word technically isn't the "species"...it's the specific name or epithet that when combined with the genus = the indicated species. A third descriptor is often used to designate a subspecies (_Canis lupus baileyi_). You may also see abbreviations used as in _Serrasalmus_ sp. for a single, unspecified or unknown _Serrasalmus_ species or _Serrasalmus_ spp. when referring to two or more _Serrasalmus_ species. There are other abbreviations used as well, such as "ssp." (singular) or "sspp." (plural) when referring to an unidentified subspecies as well as "cf" when referring to an unconfirmed identification. The latter is the main one we encounter here. Note that the abbreviations are not italicized. There are some more encountered abbreviations and rules (Botany has some variations), but these are probably the most encountered with this hobby.


I think someone has to do a little more "scientific research". Eh, _P Man_.


----------



## TheWayThingsR (Jan 4, 2007)

Yeah, I think this thread would be "above" a lot of members if done correctly.


----------



## CLUSTER ONE (Aug 2, 2006)

Another thing was the words shoal and school and how they apply to piranha. I remember Frank responding on this though i never really bothered in calling a group of p's anythign otehr then a shoal


----------



## memento (Jun 3, 2009)

Piranha_man said:


> I have yet to read a book or see a TV show about piranha that isn't full of misinformation.


You haven't read Schleser's book on piranhas yet ? Get it









If this was about snakes or spiders, I would agree 100% with you. On piranhas however, you must realise that common names have taken such a great part in the hobby and even in the science, that even scientists like Machado-Allyson himself came to give an opinion on it.

If applied as correct as possible, you should even mention the name "piranha" as a wrong naming...


----------



## Piranha_man (Jan 29, 2005)

CLUSTER ONE said:


> Another thing was the words shoal and school and how they apply to piranha. I remember Frank responding on this though i never really bothered in calling a group of p's anythign otehr then a shoal


Good point.
People are always referring to their groups of Pygos as a "shoal."
A few years ago I had a rather lengthy discussion with Frank regarding this... and he insisted that piranha are never referred to as a school or shoal.

Again, the reason I'm bringing all this up is so that we can be kinda on the same page, especially when giving advice to beginners.
If it weren't for that, I'd say "Who gives a f*ck."

It's just that when a newbie is told stuff like: _"Make sure the Ph in the tank with your caribe shoal is consistent"_ it looks kinda goobed out...


----------



## Sacrifice (Sep 24, 2006)

To some extent I do agree. We really do need to get at least a base vocabulary down, but also need to draw a line somewhere. I certainly don't think that this is a "know-it-all" thread, but instead some needed advice.

Does anyone care to elaborate on the topic of shoaling and schooling?


----------



## CLUSTER ONE (Aug 2, 2006)

CombiChrist said:


> I have yet to read a book or see a TV show about piranha that isn't full of misinformation.


You haven't read Schleser's book on piranhas yet ? Get it









If this was about snakes or spiders, I would agree 100% with you. On piranhas however, you must realise that common names have taken such a great part in the hobby and even in the science, that even scientists like Machado-Allyson himself came to give an opinion on it.

If applied as correct as possible, you should even mention the name "piranha" as a wrong naming...
[/quote]

Being a person that keeps tarantulas I will say common names mess everything up. Many t's are bred in captivity and alot of hybrids are formed when similar species are bred under common names like rosea, pink toes, red knee... For piranhas breeding is less of an issue, but i would still prefer a scientific name over some name thats mainly a sales pitch.

Posted by Frank on schooling/shoaling
He has longer explanations, but i didnt continue to look for them. If you want more it i did an advanced seach with Frank as the author and schooling as the topic

"The difference is numbers. With piranas they never "school" or "shoal" at least not in the usual sense. Scientists have defined those two terms primarily for prey fish that travel in huge numbers (over 100 or more up to several thousands). What piranas actual do (proper term) is group.

PFURY members loosely use the term shoal which is acceptable for hobbyists but inaccurate in proper terminology."


----------



## memento (Jun 3, 2009)

CLUSTER ONE said:


> Being a person that keeps tarantulas I will say common names mess everything up. Many t's are bred in captivity and alot of hybrids are formed when similar species are bred under common names like rosea, pink toes, red knee... For piranhas breeding is less of an issue, but i would still prefer a scientific name over some name thats mainly a sales pitch.


The spiders in your signature belong to the Theraphosidae.
Tarantula is a name originally given to Lycosa tarantula, but now given to any hairy spider.

So I agree the use of common names is creating a big mess...
(just started with spiders so started with reading about those common names...)


----------



## Grosse Gurke (Jan 3, 2003)

CombiChrist said:


> If this was about snakes or spiders, I would agree 100% with you. On piranhas however, you must realise that common names have taken such a great part in the hobby and even in the science, that even scientists like Machado-Allyson himself came to give an opinion on it.


To the extent common names used and applied today....it is ridiculous. You want to use a common name to describe your fish when you go to sell him...fine. You want to use a common name when you are posting a picture...whatever....but it seems rather desperate when you use a common name every time you refer to your fish. As far as common names playing a roll in the hobby...they didnt a 6 or 7 years ago. It was pretty much only the sellers that used them to describe variations in the species. That was when "jet black" and "highbacked" rhoms were the rage. Then came the "diamond" rhom...then black diamond...then blue diamond....then gold diamond...then purple diamond....I am waiting for the fuchsia diamond rhom myself. You wont see many of the old school guys using common names&#8230;it is a relatively young hobbyists deal.

Anyways...it is just my pet peeve about this hobby.


----------



## Soul Assassin (Nov 21, 2006)

I completely understand where you guys are coming from in trying to bring forth the proper terminology but I refer to my _Serrasalmus Sanchezi_ as sanch b/c everyone (almost) knows what it is and this is a quicker way of doing it. I believe it would become a little taxing to type the long form of every name hundreds of times when helping noobs. Just my two cents. Although I will definetely implement some of the correct language in my future comments like group opposed to shoal.


----------



## CLUSTER ONE (Aug 2, 2006)

Soul Assassin said:


> I completely understand where you guys are coming from in trying to bring forth the proper terminology but I refer to my _Serrasalmus Sanchezi_ as sanch b/c everyone (almost) knows what it is and this is a quicker way of doing it. I believe it would become a little taxing to type the long form of every name hundreds of times when helping noobs. Just my two cents. Although I will definetely implement some of the correct language in my future comments like group opposed to shoal.


 I dont think anybody is reffering to names like rhoms and sanchezis as common names. Its the common names like diamond rhom, snake skin piranha, super reds, strawberry spilo... IMO the worst ones are the ones liek the diamond rhoms and super/snakeskin reds as there is no clear definition of what makes a fish one of these. Originally alot of fish had common names based on specific collection points (containing fish with specific traits), but now diamond and such are more or less made up by a buyer based on a slight glitter.


----------



## Piranha_man (Jan 29, 2005)

^^ In casual reference, I think it's awesome to refer to it as a "sanch," or "sanchezi," or whatever the heck you feel like.

In fact, "sanchezi" isn't even so much a common name, as it is the scientific name for the species.
I think what GG was getting at was that he thinks it's pretty clownlike to refer to your fish over and over as a "Peruvian blue diamond rhom" or whatnot.

As stated earlier, I don't give a rat's ass what we call what, or how we say it in our casual interactions with each other... it's just when we're educating beginners or the general public that we would come across as much more informed if we use proper terms.

Here is an example of a bonehead answer that is going to leave the public thinking we're a bunch of yayoos:

"My caribe and red bellie suffered from shock because of the sudden rise in Ph when I put the crushed coral in their tank."

Here's an intelligent way to say the same thing:

"My _P. cariba_ and _P. nattereri_ suffered from shock because of the sudden rise in pH when I put the crushed coral in their tank."

I mean, if we can sound intelligent in our interactions with beginners and the general public... why not do so?
It can only lead to a more positive reputation for our hobby.


----------



## AKSkirmish (Jun 24, 2005)

This would drive soooo many people away from here.....Not a good idea....Although myself can see why this has been brought up.....


----------



## CLUSTER ONE (Aug 2, 2006)

Id rather focus on what the words mean rather then how they look


----------



## AKSkirmish (Jun 24, 2005)

CLUSTER ONE said:


> Id rather focus on what the words mean rather then how they look


guidlines are nice and mostly needed-but there is also no need to overcomplicate something as well...

I could understand if it were something like Opefe or similar.....But this is just on a hobbyist level.......


----------



## Piranha_man (Jan 29, 2005)

I'm not talking about enforcing anything... just a reference thread so that people who wanted to come across intelligently could have a place to quickly reference this stuff.


----------



## Criley (Jun 2, 2010)




----------



## memento (Jun 3, 2009)

AKSkirmish said:


> This would drive soooo many people away from here.....Not a good idea....Although myself can see why this has been brought up.....


Why ? Most spider, snake and scorpion fora have this written in their rules, just because the amount of species is way higher then with piranhas.
It's just to clear things up, especially a good think to newbies. 
Using scientific names makes things more understandable, more clear.


----------



## Soul Assassin (Nov 21, 2006)

CombiChrist said:


> This would drive soooo many people away from here.....Not a good idea....Although myself can see why this has been brought up.....


Why ? Most spider, snake and scorpion fora have this written in their rules, just because the amount of species is way higher then with piranhas.
It's just to clear things up, especially a good think to newbies. 
Using scientific names makes things more understandable, more clear.
[/quote]

You're right Combi, but to a noob a _P. nattereri_ would be more confusing than a red belly or RBP bc that is what stores post them as, not to mention it's common lingo. Something for them to ger used to, I guess.

Thanks for clearing that up P Man, now I get what you guys are after.


----------



## primetime3wise (Sep 28, 2003)

it might be a decent idea, unless it results in the regulars constantly correcting new members for what is a minor error. it may annoy some. i think dispending valid information as far as care is much more important. too bad though, most credibility will be lost once a new member goes to "the lounge"







j/k


----------



## primetime3wise (Sep 28, 2003)

thinking of other fish, if i had an "oscar" and i always referred to it as "A.ocellatus" that would be just weird. most of us will use common names for fish outside of piranhas


----------



## AKSkirmish (Jun 24, 2005)

CombiChrist said:


> This would drive soooo many people away from here.....Not a good idea....Although myself can see why this has been brought up.....


Why ? Most spider, snake and scorpion fora have this written in their rules, just because the amount of species is way higher then with piranhas.
It's just to clear things up, especially a good think to newbies. 
Using scientific names makes things more understandable, more clear.
[/quote]

Most people lack the dedication to go as far as learning everything proper and correct....That goes for terms used,general care,maintance,etc,etc.....Just part of it and the way it goes for most.

Going that route I FEEL will drive the members that are not willing to go that far or even the newbies trying to learn and understand away from here.

Once again it's only my opinion....And of course it could be made into a big arguement.....But I'm not down for getting into one of them...so I'm just useing a simple way of saying things here..


----------



## Piranha_man (Jan 29, 2005)

Okay well... my mistake for thinking some people might want to be accurate in their references.









Lets just get back too talkin about pihranas.
Who cares about rite wording and stuff...

So hay man... hows the hunt goen for them jerries? Any luck finding eny at a desent price?

And how bout those S. Caribes... how are they shoaling with the roms you put in their with 'em?


----------



## sick of chiclids (May 25, 2010)

I'm a noob myself, and to a point I agree. I want to sound like a dumbass as little as possible. (though I have many a time). But common names do have thier place. For instance… if I were going to order a rhom (as I hope to do one day), I personally would like a blue one. So if all they had listed was S. Rhom, and the rest was luck of the draw… one may wind up spending a good sum of money on a fish they didn't want or are unhappy with. Just IMHO.


----------



## Piranha_man (Jan 29, 2005)

Well, it seems as though most people have missed my point on this thread.









I never said to not use common names, I merely suggested that we create a thread where members post little tidbits on the topic of correct wording for things so we could have a reference.

Ah well... another _"Thread Fail."_









Let's go ahead and 'lock er up' mods...


----------



## memento (Jun 3, 2009)

sick of chiclids said:


> I'm a noob myself, and to a point I agree. I want to sound like a dumbass as little as possible. (though I have many a time). But common names do have thier place. For instance&#8230; if I were going to order a rhom (as I hope to do one day), I personally would like a blue one. So if all they had listed was S. Rhom, and the rest was luck of the draw&#8230; one may wind up spending a good sum of money on a fish they didn't want or are unhappy with. Just IMHO.


You're not talking about buying a car mate.
This is exactly why I dislike the common names attributed to them.


----------

