https://reefbuilders.com/2016/02/22...rritus-p-paineorum-p-alfiani-flasher-wrasses/
The middle one is P. alfiani. OMG!!!
The middle one is P. alfiani. OMG!!!
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Me too. Here's another site that talks of the same article that includes a link to the article “Review of the Indo-Pacific Flasher Wrasses of the genus Paracheilinus”. Some of the best pics of all flashers I've ever seen.
Ahh so your the gentleman who beat me to it lol. Congrats on the fish. I picked up a yellow flasher last night from DD. I didn't feel like waiting around for another filamented as that was the first one I saw.Couldn't resist this one from DD. This is the second Paracheilinus xanthocirritus DD has had in the last few weeks. They're calling it a Yellow Filamented Flasher.
![]()
Yep, I got it. DD did have another one a couple weeks ago but it looked a little beat up. I resisted that one. Still amazes me how DD came up with a newly described species. Must have been mixed in with a bunch of known flashers and the timing of the article let LA identify them.
Are you saying that DD were mistaken in naming it Paracheilinus xanthocirritus? Or that the scientists who authored that paper were mistaken in calling it a new species?Hybrids of flavianalis x filamentosus are rather common.
Rather that.Or that the scientists who authored that paper were mistaken in calling it a new species?
Agreed, they have been a little overzealous with what is being described as a new species, especially since they come mixed in with filamentosus and flavianalis, just not in as great of numbers and showing shared traits of both species.Rather that.
Classification is messy when sequences offer little (if any) differences.
Not to say that they are "wrong" necessarily, but I have my suspicions if some are actually unique species.
They do have a pretty good discussion of hybrids and mitochondrial DNA in the article and still conclude they are new species so I don't think they are blindly proclaiming three new species. And the authors are respected experts in their field. I suppose time will tell. In any case this is a beautiful fish.Agreed, they have been a little overzealous with what is being described as a new species, especially since they come mixed in with filamentosus and flavianalis, just not in as great of numbers and showing shared traits of both species.


Very respected in their field, but this is akin to what they did with Cirrhilabrus condei/marinda, which on further examination of specimens from each 'species' doesn't really stand up to scrutiny.They do have a pretty good discussion of hybrids and mitochondrial DNA in the article and still conclude they are new species so I don't think they are blindly proclaiming three new species. And the authors are respected experts in their field. I suppose time will tell. In any case this is a beautiful fish.![]()

