Javascript Disabled Detected

You currently have javascript disabled. Several functions may not work. Please re-enable javascript to access full functionality.

Ironcolor, dusky, or highfin?

Started by mattknepley , Sep 25 2013 09:01 PM

Prev

This topic is locked

56 replies to this topic

#41 Guest_Dustin_*

Guests

Posted 30 September 2013 - 12:15 PM

This is what typical coastal look like around here. They do have somewhat of a band but is is not nearly as uniform or intense as that of the dusky, ironcolor and highfin. They look very silvery out of the water, much like a burrhead.

Attached Files

Coastal shiner.jpg 14.01KB 1 downloads

Back to top

#42 Guest_Rainbowrunner_*

Guests

Posted 30 September 2013 - 12:21 PM

Dustin you are starting to crack me up too! You just admitted that fish may have different coloration stressed & out of the water, and therefore an unreliable factor in identification, yet you continue to use this sole criteria as your basis for elimination.

Attached Files

ScreenHunter_37 Sep. 30 13.24.jpg 29.1KB 0 downloads

Edited by Rainbowrunner, 30 September 2013 - 12:29 PM.

Back to top

#43 Guest_Rainbowrunner_*

Guests

Posted 30 September 2013 - 12:32 PM

Oh...and you also acknowledge geographic variability!

Attached Files

ScreenHunter_37 Sep. 30 13.24.jpg 28.8KB 0 downloads

Edited by Rainbowrunner, 30 September 2013 - 12:38 PM.

Back to top

#44 Guest_Dustin_*

Guests

Posted 30 September 2013 - 12:34 PM

I was not disqualifying my previous description of having a less uniform band with less intensity of the other species. I was addressing the photos you posted, at least two of which were definitely taken out of water. I also want tpoint out a very obvious ID charactersitic of the coastal shiner which is the somewhat triangular caudal spot. This is not easily discerned in the photos that you posted but obvious in mine and obviously missing in matt's unknown photos.

Back to top

#45 Guest_Dustin_*

Guests

Posted 30 September 2013 - 12:36 PM

Oh...and you also admitted geographic variability!

If I'm not mistaken, Matt's unknowns came from "around here".

Back to top

#46 Guest_Rainbowrunner_*

Guests

Posted 30 September 2013 - 12:42 PM

Opacity of the horizontal stripe is not a reliable identification factor. You subconsciously admitted it yourself by acknowledgement of geographic variability and stress induced variables.

Back to top

#47 Guest_Rainbowrunner_*

Guests

Posted 30 September 2013 - 12:43 PM

I was not disqualifying my previous description of having a less uniform band with less intensity of the other species. I was addressing the photos you posted, at least two of which were definitely taken out of water. I also want tpoint out a very obvious ID charactersitic of the coastal shiner which is the somewhat triangular caudal spot. This is not easily discerned in the photos that you posted but obvious in mine and obviously missing in matt's unknown photos.

Ok now we're getting somewhere.

Back to top

#48 Guest_Rainbowrunner_*

Guests

Posted 30 September 2013 - 12:48 PM

If I'm not mistaken, Matt's unknowns came from "around here".

Exact same body of water???

Back to top

#49 Guest_Rainbowrunner_*

Guests

Posted 30 September 2013 - 01:04 PM

I was not disqualifying my previous description of having a less uniform band with less intensity of the other species. I was addressing the photos you posted, at least two of which were definitely taken out of water. I also want tpoint out a very obvious ID charactersitic of the coastal shiner which is the somewhat triangular caudal spot. This is not easily discerned in the photos that you posted but obvious in mine and obviously missing in matt's unknown photos.

YAY! I looked at the caudal markings looking for the differences you mentioned, instead of differences, I found similarities. Like a nook in the same exact spot on both tails. thanks for pointing me in the right direction.

Attached Files

post-6-0-81729000-1380561377b.jpg 14.68KB 0 downloads

Back to top

#50 Guest_Rainbowrunner_*

Guests

Posted 30 September 2013 - 01:14 PM

Oh look, not only do they have the same caudal pigment nook in the same exact place and anal ray count, but dorsal ray count as well! Who woulda thunk it?!?

Attached Files

Coastal shiner 7.JPG 32.63KB 0 downloads

Edited by Rainbowrunner, 30 September 2013 - 01:17 PM.

Back to top

#51 Guest_Rainbowrunner_*

Guests

Posted 30 September 2013 - 02:12 PM

Dustin, i see the triangle on the top coastal shiner but not yours. Maybe the mystery fish is still a mystery. Not a Dusky. Not a Burrhead. Not a Coastal. Too small for an ironcolor. I will keep looking for an answer that is beyond reproach.. What strikes me is the amount of black on the lips of the mystery fish, that may be the key or at least a starting point to discovering it's true identity..

Attached Files

post-2672-0-62772000-1344015730b.JPG 46.3KB 1 downloads

Edited by Rainbowrunner, 30 September 2013 - 02:35 PM.

Back to top

#52 Guest_Dustin_*

Guests

Posted 30 September 2013 - 02:31 PM

I give man. We are just going to have to agree to disagree. The caudal spot you circled in my coastal photo is indeed triangular. Matt's fish in question is a dusky, with a minor chance of being a highfin. These are my opinions based on sorting through these fish for years. I understand your need for specific ray counts and other identifying marks, but these take specimens in hand and with a dissecting scope to be certain of and this is still variable. I learned to ID fish from someone who when asked how you know the difference between a swallowtail and bridle would simply answer, "They just look different." Sometimes you simply have to look at the nuances that separate species. It helps to be the one that catches it so you know the habitat it came from and the exact location.

Dave or Fritz may come on here later and tell me that I am completely wrong. If so, I will go with it. Otherwise, this is what I'm sticking with.

Back to top

#53 Guest_fundulus_*

Guests

Posted 30 September 2013 - 02:48 PM

Rainbow, have you ever actually seen a coastal shiner? That counts for a lot, beyond too much time to post on the ol' interholes.

Back to top

#54 Guest_Rainbowrunner_*

Guests

Posted 30 September 2013 - 03:50 PM

Dustin's Conclusion: Dusky.

My Conclusion: Unsolved.

I wish i could find a pic of a dusky with those big black lips, then i would consider it.

Edited by Rainbowrunner, 30 September 2013 - 04:11 PM.

Back to top

#55 Guest_Skipjack_*

Guests

Posted 30 September 2013 - 04:08 PM

Often these photo ID's remain unsolved mysteries. Sometimes we get them with no shadow of a doubt, but not always.

Back to top

#56 Guest_blakemarkwell_*

Guests

Posted 30 September 2013 - 04:10 PM

If I was Matt, I'd go with Dustin's unrivaled experience with South Carolina's ichthyofauna (unless Fritz chimes in). I will agree that looking at those photos, something about the gestalt is wrong for Notropis chalybaeus, but I can't qualify it.

I was simply chiming in on my perception of the characters that typically separate N. chalybaeus from N. cummingsae, which I thought pointed more towards N. chalybaeus. With that being said, if Dustin doesn't see N. chalybaeus in that habitat/location described within South Carolina, then it's most likely N. cummingsae. Local, first-hand experience is going to trump weak and variable dichotomous characters between two morphologically similar species that are young/odd looking, and being identified through photos to boot. Most everything else posted has been a complete derail, including but not limited to the suggestion of species that don't even inhabit the state.

Back to top

#57 Guest_Skipjack_*

Guests

Posted 30 September 2013 - 05:10 PM

I hate to alter a persons post, but I did do some moderation here. I am sorry for removing your last sentence Blake, but there is no reason to stir the pot. This topic has gotten way out of hand. Hopefully things will resolve themselves.