Jump to content

Scientific name neocaridina davidi or not?


BlueBolts

Recommended Posts

Just been directed to the change of the scientific name of Neocaridina Heteropoda. its reverted back to Neocaridina davidi. (neocaridia davidi bouvier, 1904) This includes varieties such as Cherry Shrimp, Yellow Fire, Rili, Sunkist etc etc

b6e8cfb962abbb9969dee72dc036fa35.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Where's the link mate, and why the change? Scientific name changes have a pretty intense process and a lot of research behind them, what made so for this one?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not a great deal of info ATM...another extract from the net ....

"Neocaridina heteropoda has been reclassified as Neocaridina davidi. This encompasses all the rilis, sakuras, painted fire red, orange, black, and cherry shrimp. Snowball and blue pearl, which were formally called cf. zhangiajiensis, are reclassified as Neocaridina palmata. While this information is not currently available in English, Werner Klotz and Andreas Karge published it in the new (3rd) edition of “Süßwassergarnelen aus aller Weltâ€, Dähne Verlag, ISBN 978-3935175-90-6. In the next few months, a new book will be coming out by Chris Lukhaup, as well, that will outline many of these changes and will be available in English."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Very interesting indeed, wouldn't mind getting my hands on a copy of that book when it comes out. Thanks for bringing it to our attention BB :victorious:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well until we can see what and why I will stick with the old classification, but still interesting to see why the change!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Any changes or reclassification for any species has to be peer review and

can not just be accepted, see this a lot with orchids in particular but has to

be a lot of work done to achieve it.

Got to do more reading to locate the reasons and translate the info. Happy

to switch names as seen the confusion in past when people haven't, real

mess it becomes

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Peer review is such a P in the B, you have to rewrite and rewrite and if they don't like it they Can it and you are back to square 1. Serkan would know that one??

Bob

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wasn't suggesting a change to the library at all.

But do some research regarding orchid species reclassification over the years and you will see what I mean. I used to be an orchid judge and redefining species was annoying and can cause major upsets, don't want to see the same happen here.

Often we found the best was to accept the change, discuss if you could contribute something useful otherwise move on. There has to be some good reason for it and a lot of research done to influence and must be pretty solid support for it. But a good side effect is there isn't being research done into our hobby, this should be good for us and something to be embraced I feel.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'll just stick to calling them Cherry Shrimp and leave the scientific name to the people with bigger brains than me. :anonymous:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Peer review is such a P in the B' date=' you have to rewrite and rewrite and if they don't like it they Can it and you are back to square 1. Serkan would know that one??

Bob[/quote']

Hehe, yes I do :) The importance of a peer reviewed journal is many fold:

*The submitted paper goes through a review panel before publication to ensure the scientific calculations and method used is OK, hypothesis clear, language is understandable by the target audience (other scientists) and most importantly others can duplicate the study to test the accuracy of the findings.

*Most if not all peer reviewed journal are accessible for the whole scientific community worldwide. A description of a new species in an obscure Russian hobby publication in Russia written in Russian is not going to get read by many around the world. That's why there is actually an unofficial ranking system for Peer Reviewed Journals worldwide. Getting published in some is much more prestigious due to the vigorous review and selection process, as well as the journals worldwide coverage.

*Peer reviewed journals do give opportunities for other scientists to publish 'notes' about the original paper in subsequent volumes, pointing out areas where their own research support the papers assertions and on occasion pointing out areas where their own research contradicts the original papers findings etc.

*Usually a researcher that publishes in a small non-peer reviewed publication usually does not have the resources and access to all available material for their subject of study. For example looking at all the collected material of the organism in question (and related material) that is housed in dozens of scientific institutions around the world.

I have generalized above. On the otherhand, there have been instances where a paper published in a small publication decades before have changed the name of a species once it was discovered and found to have followed solid scientific principals for its findings. Publishing date is important.

KiwibigD, it is funny that you mention orchids :) Have I got stories to tell you about Orchid classification :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Serkan, thats exactly why we've got to catch up sometime, stories. Orchids, shrimps and Killifish, its a small small world

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 11 months later...

So I've noticed some people are starting to use neocaridina davidi as the scientific name for the cherries. Has this been confirmed that the name officially changed? Can someone post a link.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • HOF Member

Pretty sure Chris Lukhaup announced it on here last year but I can't find the link. Wikipedia has them as Davidi now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks, I'll merge this into that thread as there still wasn't confirmation post the discussions around peer-reviews.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

The book that suggested the name change was published in approx. May 2013. Its not a paper in a scientific journal however it appears to have reviewed the scientific literature regarding small freshwater shrimp and found a paper by Bouvier in 1904 describing the cherry shrimp as Neocaridina davidi, which is older than the paper describing Neocaridina davidi (formerly known as heterpoda), hence 'davidi' is the correct name as in taxonomy, the oldest name is valid.

The question is then, should we follow suit and change the name from davidi (formerly known as heterpoda) to davidi?

I looked at the recent use of the scientific name for cherry shrimp in recent aquarium literature (including what I regard to be the best publications, Practical Fishkeeping and Amazonas) and every one seems to have switched to davidi at around the time the book came out.

My view therefore is we should use davidi.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

SKF has shown to be anything but at the forefront of all things to do with this hobby.

 

If we are voting, I'd pick Neocaridina davidi as well.

 

However, maybe we express the name as such Neocaridina davidi (Cherry shrimp), so as to not confuse people who are used to the old scientific name, and at the same time educate everyone that the Cherry Shrimp's scientific name has been changed. 

Edited by jayc
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Done. I've also configured a rule to automatically change the old name to new if someone uses it. The library articles should be updated too. Let me know if I missed any.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Very cool research Ben! I have to agree with jayc, when referring to Neocaridina Davidi we should have (cherry shrimp) after it to make it easier & less confusing. :thumbsu:

Nice touch NoGi, well done! :D

Edited by Squiggle
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Join Our Community!

    Register today, ask questions and share your shrimp and fish tank experiences with us!

  • Must Read SKF Articles

  • Posts

    • ngoomie
      Alright, I've done a bit more research on gentian violet's cancer-causing potential but I haven't yet done research on malachite green's to compare. But from reading the California propositon 65 document about GV (North Americans incl. some Canadians will recognize this as the law that causes some products they buy to be labelled with "known to the state of California to cause cancer", including the exact product I bought) it seems that the risk of cancer is related to internal use, either injection or ingestion. Speaking of ingestion, I think GV bans mainly relate to its use in treating fish/shrimp/etc. which are intended for human consumption, because of the above. And in countries where GV isn't banned for this purpose, it does seem to get used on various species of shrimp without causing any issue for the shrimp themselves (at least enough so for shrimp farming purposes). See the following: In February, the FDA Began Rejecting Imported Shrimp for Gentian Violet and Chloramphenicol (2022 article by Southern Shrimp Alliance) FDA Starts New Calendar Year by Refusing Antibiotic-Contaminated Shrimp from Three BAP-Certified Indian Processors and Adding a BAP-Certified Vietnamese Processor to Import Alert (2024 article by Southern Shrimp Alliance) Southern Shrimp Alliance and some other organizations have tons of other articles in this vein, but I'd be here for a while and would end up writing an absolutely massive post if I were to link every instance I found of articles mentioning shrimp shipments with gentian violet and/or leucogentian violet registering as contaminants. That being said, I know shrimp farmed for consumption and dwarf shrimp are often somewhat distantly related (in fact, the one time a shrimp's species name is listed that I can see, it's the prawn sp. Macrobrachium rosenbergii, who at best occupies the same infraorder as Neocaridina davidi but nothing nearer), but this at least gives a slightly better way of guessing whether it will be safe for aquarium dwarf shrimp or not than my bladder snail anecdote from the OP.
    • sdlTBfanUK
      I would hazard a guess that perhaps those eggs were unfertilized and thereby unviable? Did the eggs change colour, usually yellow to grey as the yolks used up, or any eyes in the eggs. Is your water ok, using RO remineralised and the parameters in range, as I have heard others say that if the water isn't good it can 'force' a molt? How is it going overall, do you have a good size colony in the tank, you may have reached 'maximum occupancy' as a tank can only support so many occupants.
    • beanbag
      Hello folks,  The current problem I am having is that my Taiwan bee shrimp are molting before all their eggs have hatched.  Often the shrimp keep the eggs for 40+ days.  During that time, they lose about half or so, either due to dropping or duds or whatever.  Shortly before molting they look to have about a dozen left, and then they molt with about half a dozen eggs still on the shell.  Then the other shirmp will come and eat the shell.  These last few times, I have been getting around 0-3 surviving babies per batch.  I figure I can make the eggs hatch faster by raising the water temperature more (currently around 68F, which is already a few degrees higher than I used to keep it) or make the shrimp grow slower by feeding them less (protein).  Currently I feed Shrimp King complete every other day, and also a small dab of Shrimp Fit alternating days.  Maybe I can start alternating with more vegetable food like mulberry?  or just decrease the amount of food?
    • ngoomie
      Yeah, cancer risk was a thing I'd seen mentioned a lot when looking into gentian violet briefly. I kinda just figured it might only be as bad as the cancer risk of malachite green as well, but maybe I should look into it more. I've been doing a pretty good job of not getting it on my skin and also avoiding dunking my unprotected hands into the tank water while treating my fish at least, though. Maybe I'll just not use it once I'm done this course of medication anyways, because I know a store I can sometimes get to that's pretty distant carries both malachite green and methylene blue, and in pretty large quantities.
    • jayc
      Can't help you with Gentian Violet, sorry. It is banned in Australia violet for potential toxicity, and even possible cancer risks. I thought it was banned in Canada as well. At least, you now know why there isn't much info on gentian violet medication and it's use. But keep an eye on the snails after a week. If it affects the snails, it might not kill them immediately. So keep checking for up to a week. Much safer options out there. No point risking your own life over unsafe products.
×
×
  • Create New...