Neolamprologus or Lamprologus

[art]

Has anyone come across any literature differentiating these 2 genus ?

Seems a lot of references use the 2 almost interchangeably.

[Stuporman]

Is it mentioned in here?

Takahashi, T, 2004. Systematics of Tanganyikan cichlid fishes (Teleostei: Perciformes). Ichthyological Research, 50: 367-382.

Thought I gave you a pdf for that.

[art]

I scanned through that but no differentiating of these 2 was highlighted in there I believe.

[Stuporman]

I think maybe this one should help (if you can find it):

Colombé, J & R Allgayer, 1985. Description de Variabilchromis, Neolamprologus et Paleolamprologus genres nouveaux du Lac Tanganyika, avec redescription des genres Lamprologus Schilthuis, 1891 et Lepidiolamprologus Pellegrin, 1904. Revue Francaise des Cichlidophiles, 49: 9-28.

[art]

OK this is what I have after asking some cichlid folks over at Cichlid-forum:


Lamprologus should be retricted to riverine species of Congo bassin.
Neolamprologus is valid for Tanganyika basin fishes.
Some spp are not true Neolamprologus in Tanganyika so they are called by some "Lamprologus" (with " " as they are not true Lamprologus) : N. leleupi, N. caudopunctatus, N. speciosus, N. meleagris, N. similis, N. callipterus, N. ocellatus, N. stappersii, N. hecqui, N. brevis, N. calliurus, N. multifasciatus.



The genus Lamprologus is restricted to the riverine sp from lower Congo bassin.

Tanganyikan sp are included in some genus like Neolamprologus, Lepidiolamprologus, Alto, Variabilichromis and Paleolamprologus.

In 1997 Stiassny published à "A phylogeneitic overview of the lamprologine cichlids of Africa" in wich she speaks about ossified and no ossified group.
The ossified (sesamoid bone in the lower jaw) group includes Altolamprologus, Lepidiolamprologus and some Neolamprologus (N. leleupi et N. caudopunctatus, N. speciosus, N. meleagris, N. similis, N. callipterus, N. ocellatus, N. stappersii, N. hecqui, N. brevis, N. calliurus, N. multifasciatus.)
These latest sp do not belong (in her point of view) to Neolamprologus but to an other, undescribed, genus.
So she said that the better is to use the 1st name used so Lamprologus but has this genus is restricted to the lower congo sp, the best is to use "Lamprologus" and not Lamprologus.



Lamprologus used to be the name used to describe all "Lamprologines", including (but no limited to), those fish presently in Neolamprologus, Lepidiolamprologus, Lamprologus...... and so on.
Some sources use Lamprologus, as they haven't updated their information.

Lamprologus in current terms is used for Riverine "Lamprologines" only.

Neolamprologus is for Lake Tanganyikan basin cichlids, that fit the genus description.

Some fish were placed unded Neolamprologus, but since then, it is believed that they should not be in the genus. As a result they have to proper genus, and have been temporarily been assigned to "Lamprologus" with the quotes. It basically denotes a Lamprologine of currently undescribed genus.

While you will never get complete agreement around the world from Icthyologists, this is the "Lamprologus" list as I understand it;

"Lamprologus"

brevis, callipterus, calliurus caudopunctatus, sp. "caudopunctatus",
finalimus, leloupi, multifasciatus, ocellatus, ornatipinnis, sp. "ornatipinnis",
similis, speciosus, stappersii, wauthioni


Hope that helps anyone pondering about this as well.

[art]

http://diglib1.amnh.org/novitates/i0003-0082-3451-01-0001.pdf
Good reading for this topic.