A numbers

[hotrowe]

:? :?: :!: Hi,
I'm just wondering if anybody has any thoughts on the A numbers mooted in the DATZ book? I've got reservations, but you guys may be able to help me overcome these. Look forward to your comments.
Apisto Power (or will that become A Power)? :ug
G.

[parkap]

Yeah I was thinking about the merits of that as well after scanning through my newly acquired Datz book.

My only real thought on it is will it really help to properly identify / label apistogrammas beyond the current naming conventions? There's already so much mixing of names and geographic territories due to the many many uncategorised varieties, would changing names to numbers really help?

p.



:? :?: :!: Hi,
I'm just wondering if anybody has any thoughts on the A numbers mooted in the DATZ book? I've got reservations, but you guys may be able to help me overcome these. Look forward to your comments.
Apisto Power (or will that become A Power)? :ug
G.

[fishgeek]

easier to pronounce!

doesnt leave room for new discovery's

is set up so similar fish are numbered closely which in the datz books makes picture comparison convienent


i dont personally have any strong view on the numbering

andrew

[hotrowe]

:roll: Hi,
I agree that they are easier to pronounce but are they any easier to identify?
I also agree that new discoveries are going to be difficult, if not impossible to place in the correct spot using the methodology that was used to set up the numbering system.
I will still be ordering calling and claiming in the BAA using names...maybe adding the number in parentheses. Time will tell.
fishgeekparkap