# Test



## hastatus (Jan 16, 2003)

Here is a fish nice and dead I have kept for a couple of years. I know what it is do you?


----------



## Netmancer (Mar 10, 2003)

My fairly uneducated guess would be Spilo


----------



## Fishman (Mar 1, 2003)

yeah I would say a Spilo also!


----------



## Neoplasia (Feb 16, 2003)

Possibly S. spilo CF, but my spider sense is tingling and telling me that's too obvious a choice. Perhaps S. compressus? Looks very much like some photos of S. compressus I am looking at right now.


----------



## hastatus (Jan 16, 2003)

You guys......look at the fish closely. Look at the snout and the body shape, then other attributes.


----------



## SERRAPYGO (Feb 4, 2003)

I'm going strictly by body shape here with no fins to speak of. Irritans?


----------



## RhomZilla (Feb 12, 2003)

Hmm.. I say a Serra Manueli or a Serra Aureus.


----------



## hastatus (Jan 16, 2003)

> Serrapygo Posted on Apr 10 2003, 03:16 AM
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> I'm going strictly by body shape here with no fins to speak of. Irritans?


 Fins are there except for the badly chewed caudal fin. The hypural margin should give you a small clue and S. irritans is close in finnage. Now keep going.


----------



## SERRAPYGO (Feb 4, 2003)

This isn't easy for the average aqaurium slob.

Marginatus.


----------



## Poseidon X (Jan 31, 2003)

The snout sort of looks like an altuvei, the anal fin also looks black and the dorsal fin is angeled backwards.


----------



## hastatus (Jan 16, 2003)

Your getting cold again :







:


----------



## Mr. Hannibal (Feb 21, 2003)

Any other clue?


----------



## hastatus (Jan 16, 2003)

> Mr. Hannibal Posted on Apr 10 2003, 05:22 PM
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> Any other clue?


 Yes, its a pirana.....just kidding. It's usually sold under various scientific names. And the clue is, they are never right because of the ontogeny.


----------



## Neoplasia (Feb 16, 2003)

Catoprion mento?


----------



## hastatus (Jan 16, 2003)

:biggrin: Sorry Neo, nearly fell over laughing. But nice try







. Come on people, think.


----------



## Judazzz (Jan 13, 2003)

I'd say rhom, not based on my immense knowledge and id-skills, but because of the tips given and the fact that is hasn't been mentioned before...
Very scientific, eh









I wonder what size it is....


----------



## hastatus (Jan 16, 2003)

> Judazzz Posted on Apr 10 2003, 06:42 PM
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> I'd say rhom, not based on my immense knowledge and id-skills, but because of the tips given and the fact that is hasn't been mentioned before...
> Very scientific, eh
> ...


 Not S. rhombeus....size: 56.5 mm SL


----------



## hastatus (Jan 16, 2003)

Here is specimen # 2.....What is it?


----------



## Bola (Feb 24, 2003)

First one is S. Brandtii.


----------



## Grosse Gurke (Jan 3, 2003)

Well, I am going with Serrasalmus medinai, although I am not sure why.


----------



## Bola (Feb 24, 2003)

OK not brandtii. How about marginatus?


----------



## LouiCypher (Mar 10, 2003)

Could it be a Striolatus?


----------



## hastatus (Jan 16, 2003)

> Bola Posted on Apr 10 2003, 08:16 PM
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> First one is S. Brandtii.
> 
> ...


No



> Well, I am going with Serrasalmus medinai, although I am not sure why.


No



> Bola Posted on Apr 10 2003, 08:22 PM
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> OK not brandtii. How about marginatus?


 Very close.



> Cypher Posted on Apr 10 2003, 08:25 PM
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Could it be a Striolatus?


No to all the rest.


----------



## Bola (Feb 24, 2003)

This is officially my last try. S. hollandi.


----------



## hastatus (Jan 16, 2003)

> Bola Posted on Apr 10 2003, 08:55 PM
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> This is officially my last try. S. hollandi.


 No. Hollandi is valid in name only. Thanks for trying though. You did alright considering the difficulty.


----------



## LouiCypher (Mar 10, 2003)

Serrulatus?


----------



## hastatus (Jan 16, 2003)

> Cypher Posted on Apr 10 2003, 09:00 PM
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Serrulatus?


 which one?


----------



## LouiCypher (Mar 10, 2003)

S. Serrulatus.


----------



## hastatus (Jan 16, 2003)

Which one? as in which of the two fish do you think is S. serrulatus?


----------



## LouiCypher (Mar 10, 2003)

Oh, sorry... the second one.


----------



## hastatus (Jan 16, 2003)

I'm going to end this test......because #1 you are partially right and #2 I will accept the S. serrulatus as the name because the actual species shown is S. eigenmanni both top and bottom which resembles S. serrulatus and this name is often used for this species. So in default, you are correct.

Note the changes between juvenile and adult and why historians who first described this species had difficulty with it.


----------



## Grosse Gurke (Jan 3, 2003)

#1 S. humeralis Juvenile


----------



## hastatus (Jan 16, 2003)

> grosse gurke Posted on Apr 10 2003, 09:40 PM
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> #1 S. humeralis Juvenile


 Test is over, thanks for trying, both are S. eigenmanni (also known as S. serrulatus).


----------



## InSinUAsian (Jan 3, 2003)

Frank, are these the types of exams you have to pass in school in order to become a piranha scientist? I can see it now, midterms and finals with nothing but preserved P's, with students stressed and tired from pulling all night cram sessions.

HaHaHa, just kidding with you. You definately have to have a keen eye to be able to tell these guys apart. Espeacially these preseved specimens.

~Dj


----------



## hastatus (Jan 16, 2003)

> You have to have a pretty keen eye to be able to tell these guys apart. Espeacially these preseved ones.


 Yes you do, and while I know its not exactly fair not having a clear enough photo to see spotting, the general body shape is there and other characteristics that people take for granted looking at live fish.


----------



## Neoplasia (Feb 16, 2003)

hastatus said:


> :biggrin: Sorry Neo, nearly fell over laughing. But nice try
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 Yeah well I thought I'd try a different route.







Not easy to tell when the pictures aren't correctly focused, hell we know how hard it is when they ARE. :smile:


----------



## hastatus (Jan 16, 2003)

> Neoplasia Posted on Apr 11 2003, 06:53 PM
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> QUOTE (hastatus @ Apr 10 2003, 01:43 PM)
> Sorry Neo, nearly fell over laughing. But nice try . Come on people, think.
> ...


----------

