Distinguishable from KUZ by the lack of a green band in the caudal peduncle.
Red dots on the body, usually in evenly spread rows
BAT was described in 1911 by Boulenger from fish Bates collected.
Scheel (1968) showed a black and white photo to a badly preserved specimen of SPL and mentioned males were "gorgeous compared to BAT"
KUZ was described in 1975 in the British Killifish Association journal and differs from SPL by being yet more colorful than SPL having as much if not more bright emerald green with red/carmine reticulation in large irregular marking as opposed to rows of small dots. KUZ is by far the most colorful of the genus and since it wasn't described until after Scheel wrote what he did it's unclear if we was looking at SPL or KUZ. Either one are more colorful than most BAT in either case.
Not only was the fish rare even photos of the fish were rare - photos of BAT in hobby publications in the 1980s and by 1990 a Scheel published a photo of not only BAT but of KUZ which he considered invalid being just a junior synonym of BAT. in ROTOW (P 413) Scheel mentions BAT and SPL differ only in Meristics and not color patterns but this was only true because of the presumed limited number of species Scheel examined. As more populations are examined it's clear a pattern emerges.
