Aphyosemion : Raddaella

Found in water of only trace hardness: 0.1 - 1.0 degrees of German hardness and a pH of 4.2 - 6.8, probably softer in the rainy season. (Scheel 1968)

BAT
Akonlinga Awae Ayos
Bifindi Djenasoume Djouyaya Ebolowa Mbankjok Nkpwang Sangmelina
BAT

Aphyosemion (Raddaella) batseii Boulenger 1911


  • Robust body
  • upper and lower yellow fin margins in caudal
  • minimal patterning in the rest of the caudal, usually limited to carmine spots
  • yellow/carmine margin in anal fin typical of the GAR
  • Found in the north

KUZ
Djoum BDBG_04-10 BLLMC_05-15 CGE_91-11
Ekombitie GBH_01-15 GBL_85-15 GBL_85-18 GEBLJ_03-07 GEMCH_06-05 GEMGV_12-05 GEMLCE_04-06 GEM_06-02 GRMCH_06-06 K99 Mak Makokou Ngueayong
KUZ

Aphyosemion (Raddaella) kunzi Radda 1975


KUZ differs from BAT being a slender bodied more colorfully patterned fish.

  • Slender body
  • Yellow lower margin to the caudal fin. Upper margin, if present, significantly narrower.
  • Caudal often flag like.
  • Anal fish usually lacks margins, very faint in some populations, red/carmine small round dots present
  • Anal fine elongated in the posterior rays, fin filaments often present.

SPL
HZ_86-09
drc
SPL

Aphyosemion (Raddaella) splendidus Pellagrin 1930


  • 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.