Talk:Channichthys

Merge discussion

@Johnnyconnorabc, Ambrosiawater, and Ambiederman: This is currently five stub articles and five readlinks that could be one article for the genus with a decent, sortable wikitable allowing a reader to compare the species. Is it at all likely that any of the species articles are going to become long enough to absolutely need an aritcle of their own? --Paul ❬talk❭ 10:22, 25 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose: You'll generally find strong consensus among taxon article editors that species maintain standalone articles, even if they are only ever going to be quite short. That doesn't mean you couldn't add a useful table to the genus though! —Hyperik ⌜talk⌟ 15:23, 25 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@PaulCarpenter I agree with @Hyperik. However I think the gill raker count should be included because that's also a way to distinguish the Channichthys species. Johnnyconnorabc (talk) 00:29, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Given the uncontested, objections, closed with consensus not to merge. Klbrain (talk) 22:48, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Maximum length of Channichthys rugosus

@Quetzal1964: A maximum adult length of 3 cm is unlikely; the FishBase entry was probably describing larval size. The Russian Wikipedia article states the maximum length as 31.1 cm. This reference (http://www-zoology.univer.kharkov.ua/Personal/gennadiy/New-3-Channichthys-species-Shandikov-1995b.pdf) is a permanent dead link while two others (Andriyashev A.P. (1986). General overview of the bottom fish fauna of the Antarctic. In: Morphology and distribution of fishes of the Southern Ocean. Proceedings of Zool. Institute of the Academy of Sciences of the USSR, vol. 153, pp. 9-44 .) and (Andriyashev A.P., Neelov A.V. (1986): Zoogeographic zoning of the Antarctic region (by bottom fish). Atlas of Antarctica. T. 1. Map .) are unavailable online. You should be familiar with finding references; can you help? Johnnyconnorabc (talk) 01:46, 22 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Johnnyconnorabc I found this https://www.zin.ru/journals/trudyzin/eng/publication.html?id=415 it may help but I do not understand Russian.Quetzal1964 (talk) 10:27, 22 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Quetzal1964 Thanks! FishBase doesn't recognize the synonymization though. That or the database hasn't been updated. Either way, data on Channichthys species is really lacking. Johnnyconnorabc (talk) 10:32, 22 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Johnnyconnorabc I looked at Regan’s original description in The Antarctic fishes of the Scottish National Antarctic Expedition and he gave the length of the type as being “400mm”. As Catalog of Fishes does not recognise the synonymy then neither will Fishbase. Quetzal1964 (talk) 10:47, 22 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

why does this fish look so goofy?

I need an actual scientific answer Jamalerista (talk) 13:37, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]