JOURNAL OF THE AUSTRALIA NEW GUINEA FISHES ASSOCIATION · 9/3/2017 · looked. In his seminal work...

Fishes of Sahul September 2017 1142

VOLUME THIRTY ONENUMBER THREE

September 2017

JOURNAL OF THE AUSTRALIA NEW GUINEA FISHES ASSOCIATIONIncorporated Registration No. A0027788J. ISSN: 0813-3778 (print) ISSN: 2205-9342 (online)

In this issue:

The lost Rainbowfish – Melanotaenia corona (Melanotaeniidae)Derek P. S. Tustin 1143

Translocated Rainbowfishes (Melanotaeniidae) and Blue-eyes (Pseudomugilidae) in the Queensland Wet TropicsKeith C. Martin 1162

Fish in Focus: Peacock Gudgeon Tateurndina ocellicauda John Lenagan et al 1175

Wild caught male Peacock Gudgeon from Safia, eastern Papua New Guinea. Photo: Gerald Allen


The lost Rainbowfish – Melanotaenia corona (Melanotaeniidae)

Derek P.S. TustinOntario, Canada, [email protected]

“When is a legend legend? Why is a myth a myth? How old and disused must a fact be for itto be relegated to the category ‘Fairy-tale’?” 1

In the waning days of April 1911, a Dutch born doctorand officer in the Royal Netherlands East Indies Armystood in a stream in the hinterland of northeasternDutch East Indies and dipped a net into the waterswirling around his legs. When the net was pulled, itcontained one, possibly two, specimens of what has cometo be described as “the rarest and most poorly known ofall rainbowfish species” (Allen 1995). In fact, in the 106years since that day no other specimens have ever know-ingly been captured.

Anyone who develops an interest in rainbowfish – a seri-ous interest – inevitably becomes enraptured with themyriad species that are known to exist. Some, likeMelanotaenia boesemani, M. lacustris, and M. trifascia-ta, have become ubiquitous in the global aquariumhobby. Others, like Chilatherina alleni, Glossolepiswanamensis, or M. parva, are well known, occasionallyavailable, and sought after by rainbowfish enthusiasts.Some species, like M. garylangei, M. picta and M.rubrivittata, have recently been introduced and showsigns of becoming popular within both the rainbowfishenthusiast community and the aquarium hobby at large.And then there are species like C. pricei, M. maylandiand M. sneideri, where information, including photo-graphs of live specimens and detailed locale data isavailable, but which – except by a fortunate few individ-uals near the native habitats – have never been kept incaptivity.

But only one species – the elusive Melanotaenia corona –remains virtually unknown.

The species was described on the basis of two specimens(both male) by Dr Gerald R. Allen in Melanotaenia coro-na, a new species of rainbowfish from Northern NewGuinea (Pisces, Atheriniformes, Melanotaeniidae), pub-lished in 1982. In that description, which contains ablack and white photograph of the preserved paratype,Allen relates that the species was collected from theSermowai River in 1911 by an individual identified as K.Gjellerup. He further informs that Gjellerup’s collectionof fish specimens was provided to Professor Max C.W.Weber at the University of Amsterdam, who describedsome of the specimens in the 1913 publicationSüsswasserfische aus Niederländisch süd und nord-Neu-Guinea (Freshwater fish from Dutch south and northNew Guinea), along with some material collected byLieven Ferdinand de Beaufort, Captain A.J. Gooszen, DrWillem van Heurn, Dr Pieter Nicolaas van Kampen, DrJ.W.R. Koch and Dr Hendrik Lorentz.

While some of the fish from Gjellerup’s collection weredescribed, others, including the two extant specimens ofwhat came to be described as M. corona, were over-looked. In his seminal work of 1995, Rainbowfishes: Innature and in the aquarium, Allen expounded, informingthat he had located the two specimens “in an uncata-logued jar at the Zoological Museum in Amsterdam”

A recreation of Melanotaenia corona, paying careful attention to fin ray and scale counts. Drawing: Ken McKeighen


The preserved halotype of Melanotaenia corona. Photo: Johannes Graf

(Allen 1995), and it was this discovery that resulted inthe aforementioned paper of 1982.

But between Allen’s description of 1982 and his book of1995, there was very little additional information aboutwhere M. corona originates. Under the “Material exam-ined” section of his paper, he records that M. corona was“collected at Sermowai River, near Walckenaer Bay,northern New Guinea (approximately 2°47’S, 140°00’E)by K. Gjellerup, 29 April 1911.”

Later in the same paper, under “Sympatric occurrence”,he writes; “(f)our other species of rainbowfish were col-lected by Gjellerup from the Sermowai River:Chilatherina crassispinosa (Weber), C. fasciata (Weber),C. lorentzi2 (Weber), and Melanotaenia affinis.However, it is not known if they share the same habitatwith Melanotaenia corona.”

Finally, under the “Status” section of the Melanotaeniacorona entry of his book, Allen informs that “(a)ccordingto GJELLERUP’s narrative report he went up the LowerSermowai river by boat for 3 days until a large waterfallwas encountered. They climbed 400 metres to get above

the falls and then spent 3 days in the Upper SermowaiValley, where the specimens of M. corona were collect-ed.” Also in that entry is a colour drawing of M. coronaby Roger Swainston.3

And that is the extent of published information on M.corona. There are other mentions (for example the entryat Adrian R. Tappin’s Home of the rainbowfish), but theyare essentially a re-presentation of the information ini-tially gathered by Allen.

Dorsal fin detail of the preserved halotype of Melanotaenia corona. Photo: Johannes Graf

Figure 1. Example of Knud Gjellerup's handwriting.


With such a dearth of information, it is easy to under-stand how M. corona has achieved an almost legendarystatus within the rainbowfish community. And, as befitsa legend, several individuals have undertaken attemptsto verify the legend, to collect live specimens.

Allen relates that he tried to find the fish in 1991, butwas prevented from doing so due to flooding (Allen1995). I have been informed that during an expedition in1991 that saw a successful collection of C. sentaniensis,Charles Nishihira also made an unsuccessful attempt tofind M. corona (Graf, personal communication, February18th, 2013). As recently as 2009 Heiko Bleher intimatedthat he was looking for it, posting in a forum; “M. coronaI am quite sure where to find it now, but need lots ofmoney to reach the area... I am going back later thisyear, as every year since 1974 (sometimes twice in ayear). maybe (sic) by the end of this year I have somenews for you...” (Bleher 2009). But despite this hopefulpost, and several earlier attempts, Bleher hasn’t beenable to find this elusive fish. David Price informs that hehas spent a considerable amount of time unsuccessfullylooking for it (Price, personal communication, January28th, 2017). Gary Lange and Johannes Graf also under-took expeditions in 2008, 2010 and 2012 where attempts

were made to find M. corona (Graf, personal communica-tion, February 18th, 2013), with Lange informing in anonline post that he had also searched in 2005 (Lange2010).

Multiple individuals, including the most experiencedRainbowfish discoverers of the last 25 years have failedto find this legendary fish. Obviously something is miss-ing. Perhaps M. corona is extinct, but the common con-sensus seems to be that they are in a location that justhas not been rediscovered.

So… if M. corona still exists, but has not been re-discov-ered despite the extensive knowledge, experience, skillsand instinct possessed by those who have gone looking,perhaps it is best to go back to the very beginning andlook at it all again. And it all starts with the individualidentified only as “K. Gjellerup”.

Knud Gjellerup was born November 26th, 1876, in Sorø,Zealand, Denmark (Leif Sepstrups genealogy and familyhistory 2016). One of seven children born to PoulFrederik Jacob Gjellerup and Rosa Conradine Dorotheavon der Recke, Gjellerup was apparently strongly influ-enced by his family heritage.

So, to summarise what was known about M. corona:

1. Two specimens exist, both male, and both collected on April 29th, 1911 by Gjellerup.2. Reportedly collected during three days spent in the Upper Sungai Sermowai Valley.3. Approximate collection coordinates were 2°47’S, 140°00’E.4. Specimens were provided to Weber at the University of Amsterdam.5. Specimens were overlooked during Weber’s work in preparing Süsswasserfische aus Niederländisch süd und nord- Neu-Guinea.

6. Specimens were re-discovered in 1981 by Allen in an uncatalogued jar at the Zoological Museum in Amsterdam.

7. The species was formally described in Allen (1982).8. Only one black and white photograph of the preserved paratype has been published.9. One colour drawing by Swainston has been published.


His mother was a von der Recke, a Westphalian noblefamily with not only a history of extensive military serv-ice, but also a history of exploration. His maternalgrandfather, Johan Adolph von der Recke, had been aLieutenant Commander in the Royal Danish Navy, hisgreat-grandfather was Colonel Johan Zepelin von derRecke, his great-great-grandfather Ernst David von derRecke, was a Captain of the Cavalry and his great-great-great-grandfather, Colonel Diedrich Adolph von derRecke, had been a famous surveyor in the history ofDenmark (Wikipedia 2016b).

He was also strongly influenced by his paternal family.His father, Poul Frederik Jacob Gjellerup, was a physi-

cian, and his uncle was Karl Adolph Gjellerup, a famousDanish author who would later share the 1917 NobelPrize in Literature (Wikipedia 2016a).

What was the scion of a military family and the son of adoctor to do? Of course he studied medicine, became adoctor, and enrolled in the military. But he did not enrolin the Royal Netherlands Army (Koninklijke Landmachtor KL), but for some unknown reason in the RoyalNetherlands East Indies Army (Koninklijk NederlandsIndisch Leger or KNIL) – the military force created bythe Netherlands government exclusively for service inthe Dutch colony of Netherlands East Indies.

Knud Gjellerup, circa 1910 at the Hollandia bivouac.


So, in 1904 and at the age of 28, Gjellerup arrived in theNetherlands East Indies, and was assigned to WestSumatra, just in time for the conclusion of the Aceh War.The following five years saw him posted to NorthSumatra, Java and Celebes (National HerbariumNederland 2016).

Around this time the Netherlands East Indies were con-sidered “pacified”, and the attention of the KNIL turnedto policing and exploration duties. Some indigenous pop-ulations had experienced brutality and exploitation withvillages being raided and slave-taking known, all whilethe Netherlands East Indies colonial government’sattention was on attempting to consolidate their claim tothe territory. Now, with the territory considered to beunder peaceful rule, the colonial government wanted toknow more about these populations, many of which hadbeen overlooked or ignored, and wanted to know moreabout the geography and resources available forexploitation. So they tasked the KNIL with undertakingan anthropological survey to learn about populationspoorly known and those unknown, to map unmappedareas, and to discover… well, to discover whatever elsewas undiscovered.

In response, the KNIL created four Military ExplorationDetachments to undertake this work. The first, WestNew Guinea, became active in late 1906 under the initial

Hollandia detachment. Left to Right - Back Row: 2nd Lt. A.F.H. Dalhuisen, likely 1st Lt. F.L. Rambonnet, Captain of the Hr Ms Edi. FrontRow: Public Health Officer, 2nd Class Knud Gjellerup, Captain Commander F.J.P. Sachse, 1st Lt. G.A. Scheffer, and geologist Dr P.F.Hubrecht. Image circa 1911

command of 1st Lieutenant R. Vogel, followed by SouthNew Guinea in July 1907 (Captain A.J. Gooszen com-manding), Northern New Guinea in September 1907(Captain Frans Jonathan Pieter Sachse commanding),and finally Mamberamo Area in November 1913(Captain J.V.L. Oppermann commanding). The com-bined work of these four detachments has been called“one of the greatest organized exploring efforts of a ter-ritory ever” (Marshall & Beehler 2007).

In late 1909 Gjellerup was reassigned from Celebes tothe Northern New Guinea Military ExplorationDetachment bivouacked4 in Hollandia5 – a port on thenorth coast of New Guinea – as the detachment’s doctorand filling the position of Public Health Officer. He hadnot originally been assigned to the detachment but wassent as a substitute when the original doctor, P.M.Baldings, fell ill with beriberi and was evacuated. DrBaldings perished from the disease soon thereafter, driv-ing home the dangers of serving in a MilitaryExploration Detachment (Papua Heritage Foundation2016). Almost immediately upon his arrival in the finalweek of 1909, Gjellerup began participating in explo-ration expeditions.

In 1910 Gjellerup participated in the Humboldt BayExpedition (Upper and Lower Sungai Tami, HumboldtBay and Sungai Eti), the Dutch-German Boundary


Sermowai Falls. Photo: Gerald Allen


Delimitation Expedition (Sungai Mosso, Sungai Bewaniand Sungai Begowi), and spent time exploring theSungai Sepik, Humboldt Bay once again, and Jotefa Bay(National Herbarium Nederland 2016).

Then, in 1911, Gjellerup participated in the SermowaiExpedition, where M. corona was discovered, and whereour interest lies.6

Now, the information from Gjellerup’s narrative reportas relayed by Allen, specifically, “he went up the LowerSermowai river by boat for 3 days until a large waterfall7was encountered. They climbed 400 metres to get abovethe falls and then spent 3 days in the Upper SermowaiValley”, gives the impression that the SermowaiExpedition was relatively short. Three days to get up theriver, three days in the Upper Sungai Sermowai RiverValley, three days to get back to the starting point…heck, add a day to climb the waterfall, and another dayto descend, and you get only 11 days. Not a lot of groundcan be covered in only 11 days, especially when a portionof that time is spent on the return trip. But that meansthat there is not a lot of area to examine in an attemptto re-discover M. corona.

But once again, if M. corona has not been found in whatcan be considered to be a relatively restricted geographicregion, well… perhaps it is best to go back, to search andconsolidate the information directly relating and periph-

eral to Gjellerup and the operations of the MilitaryExploration Detachments to see what else may belearned.

The activities of Royal Netherlands East Indies Armyand those of the Military Exploration Detachments is apart of history which is not well documented. But, whilethere isn’t much information, that doesn’t mean thereisn’t any. One of the easiest documents to locate is thebook Verslag van de militaire exploratie van neder-land-sch-Nieuw-Guinee 1907–1915 (Report of the militaryexploration of lower land New Guinea 1907–1915), a for-mal report issued in 1920 by the War Department in theDutch East Indies. However, it, like most of the docu-ments relating to those entities and associated events,was written in Dutch. Still, with the use of translationsoftware and websites, translations were obtained.

In Verslag van de militaire exploratie van neder-land-sch-Nieuw-Guinee 1907–1915, it is revealed thatGjellerup’s Sermowai Expedition… was not. That is, itwas not Gjellerup’s, but rather under the command ofthe Northern New Guinea Military ExplorationDetachment’s second-in-command, 1st Lieutenant G.A.Scheffer (Departement van Oorlog in Nederlandsch-Indië 1920). In addition to he and Gjellerup, Lieutenant,2nd Class, A.W. Staverman accompanied the expedition,along with an unknown number of guides and Dajakporters.

Chilatherina fasciata from upper Sungai Sermowai. Photo: Gerald Allen


Further, the report informs that Scheffer’s expeditionbegan on March 19th, 1911 and concluded on May 19th,1911 for a total of 63 days – significantly longer than the11 days indirectly inferred from Gjellerup’s journal.

The extended length of the expedition was not the onlyinformation uncovered. I was surprised to learn thatalmost concurrent with the Scheffer Expedition wasanother expedition, one that was undertaking an anthro-pological exploration of the areas around the Sermowaiwatershed. This one, under the direct command of theNorthern New Guinea Military ExplorationDetachment’s commanding officer Captain F.J.P.Sachse, also included the detachment’s geologist Dr PaulFrancoise Hubrecht and the other Lieutenant, 2ndClass, A.F.H. Dalhuisen. This expedition was in the fieldfrom March 23rd, 1911 until May 19th, 1911, or 59 days(Departement van Oorlog in Nederlandsch-Indië 1920).

An excerpt from another book, De exploratie van Nieuw-Guinea (Exploration of New Guinea) by J.J. Staal, pro-vides some information on where each expedition trav-elled, as does De Saweh-stam der Papoea’s in noordNieuw-Guinea (The Saweh tribe of Papuans in northernNew Guinea), a paper written by Gjellerup based on hisand Sachse’s experiences with the local populations dur-ing their respective expeditions.

Using these sources (and cross-referencing with others),it is possible to determine that the following villages andlocalities were visited in the following approximate orderby each of the two concurrent expeditions;

Scheffer’s (Gjellerup’s) Expedition•Demta•Sungai Sermowai 8,9•Sungai Sokoata 10•Dajak bivouac•Sermowai Falls•Sungai Rewo 11•Unurum 12•Dutassin 13•Sungai Boarim 14

The Hr Ms Pelikaan, the Royal Netherlands Navy screw steamshipthat transported both the Sachse Expedition and the SchefferExpedition from and to the Hollandia bivouac. Image circa 1911

Lower Sungai Sermowai. Photo: Gerald Allen

However, with the exception of beginning and endinglocations, there are only three instances where approxi-mate dates can be correlated to specific geographic loca-tions based on these narrative reports.

Another example of a specific geographic location beingcorrelated to specific date is actually Allen’s descriptionof M. corona itself. If somewhat detailed collection infor-mation was provided for that species, was detailed col-lection information available for other specimens gath-ered by Gjellerup during Scheffer’s expedition? A shortsearch found an additional eight documents that listspecimens attributed as being gathered by Gjellerupbetween March 19th and May 19th, 1911.

Sachse’s Expedition•Tarfia•Sungai Moaif 15•Benyom 16•Sermowai Falls•Grigisa 17•Loatam 18•Aibase 19•Sungai Biar•Sungai Sokoata•Sawe 20•Sungai Toarim 21•Sungai Pirowai 22•Kaptiau 23•Tarawasi 24•Armopa•Toronta 25•Ansudu 26•Sungai Biri


Those publications are;

1. Contributions to Indo-Australian herpetology – Dr L.B. Brongersma – 19342. A review of the new genus Anischnogaster in the Papua region (Hymenoptera, Vespidae) – J. Van Der Vecht – 1972

3. The freshwater therapontidae of New Guinea – G.F. Mees and P.J. Kailola – 19774. The taxonomy and biogeography of the Loriae group of the genus Baeturia, Stal (Homoptera, Tibicinidae)– A.J. de Boer – 1994

5. On a collection of land, freshwater and marine mollusca from northern New Guinea – M.M. Schepman –1918

6. Reptilien aus nord-Neuguinea (Reptiles from northern New Guinea) – Dr N. de Rooij – 19157. Süsswasserfische aus Niederländisch süd und nord-Neu-Guinea (Freshwater fish of Dutch south and north New Guinea) – Prof Max Weber – 1913

8. Neue beiträge zur kenntnis der conopiden (New contributions to the knowledge of the conopiden) – Dr J.C.H. De Meijere – 1913

Cross referencing the specimens listed in these docu-ments as being gathered by Gjellerup and the associatedcollection dates, it is possible to construct a rough time-

line of the Scheffer Expedition (rainbowfish species inbold).

Species Collected As Current Name Animal Location Date Source

Dendrophis calligaster Dendrophis calligaster snake Upper Sermowai March 23, 1911 6Pseudelaps muelleri Aspidomorphus muelleri snake Upper Sermowai March 25, 1911 1Ultrocalamus preussi Toxicocalamus preussi snake Upper Sermowai March 25, 1911 6Lygosoma cyanogaster Emoia cyanogaster reptile Upper Sermowai March 27, 1911 6Lygosoma fuseum Lygosoma fuseum reptile Lower Sermowai March 29, 1911 6Lygosoma iridescens Emoia kordoana reptile Upper Sermowai March 29, 1911 6Lygosoma minutum Sphenomorphus minutus reptile Upper Sermowai March 29, 1911 6Lygosoma mivarti Emoia mivarti reptile Upper Sermowai March 29, 1911 6Lygosoma pulchrum Lipinia pulchra reptile Upper Sermowai March 29, 1911 6Gonyocephalus nigrigularis Hypsilurus nigrigularis reptile Lower Sermowai March 30, 1911 6Gonocephalus dilophus Hypsilurus dilophus reptile Lower Sermowai March 30, 1911 6Eleotris heterodon Oxyeleotris heterodon fish Lake Sentani April 1, 1911 7Anischnogaster iridipennis Anischnogaster iridipennis insect Upper Sermowai April 1, 1911 2Papuina kubaryi Papuina kubaryi crustacean Upper Sermowai April 1, 1911 5Planispira musgravei Planispira musgravei mollusc Upper Sermowai April 1, 1911 5Sitala crenocarinata Sitala crenocarinata mollusc Upper Sermowai April 1, 1911 5Gjellerupia neoguinensis Gjellerupia neoguinensis arachnid Upper Sermowai April 3, 1911 8Narberia biroi Narberia biroi insect Upper Sermowai April 3, 1911 8Gonyocephalus modestus Gonocephalus modestus reptile Upper Sermowai April 4, 1911 6Lygosoma pulchrum Lipinia pulchra reptile Upper Sermowai April 4, 1911 6Melania kampeni Melania kampeni mollusc Upper Sermowai April 4, 1911 5Tribolonotus gracilis Tribolonotus gracilis reptile Upper Sermowai April 4, 1911 6Typhlops multilineatus Ramphotyphlops multilineatus reptile Upper Sermowai April 4, 1911 6Eleotris urophthalmoides Oxyeleotris urophthalmoides fish Lower Sermowai April 5, 1911 7Rhombatractus crassispinosa Chilatherina crassispinosa fish Lower Sermowai April 5, 1911 7Tribolonotus gracilis Tribolonotus gracilis reptile Upper Sermowai April 5, 1911 6Apogon wickmanni Glossamia wickmanni fish Lower Sermowai April 6, 1911 7Lygosoma miotis Lipina noctua reptile Lower Sermowai April 6, 1911 6Tribolonotus gracilis Tribolonotus gracilis reptile Lower Sermowai April 6, 1911 6Lygosoma smaragdinum Lygosoma smaragdina reptile Lower Sermowai April 8, 1911 6Ultrocalamus preussi Toxicocalamus preussi snake Lower Sermowai April 8, 1911 6Baeturia bemmeleni Baeturia bemmeleni insect Lower Sermowai April 8, 1911 4Ultrocalamus preussi Toxicocalamus preussi snake Lower Sermowai April 9, 1911 6Lygosoma jobiense Sphenomorphus jobiensis reptile Upper Sermowai April 9, 1911 6Lygosoma longiceps Lipinia longiceps reptile Upper Sermowai April 9, 1911 6Lygosoma variegatum Sphenomorphus variegatus reptile Upper Sermowai April 9, 1911 6Diemenia psammophis Demansia psammophis snake Upper Sermowai April 24, 1911 6Eleotris urophthalmus Eleotris urophthalmus fish Upper Sermowai April 25, 1911 7Rhombatractus affinis Melanotaenia affinis fish Upper Sermowai April 25, 1911 7Rhombatractus crassispinosa Chilatherina crassispinosa fish Upper Sermowai April 25, 1911 7Rhombatractus crassispinosa Chilatherina crassispinosa fish Buarin April 26, 1911 7Rhombatractus fasciatus Chilatherina fasciata fish Buarin April 26, 1911 7


Rhombatractus lorentzi Chilatherina lorentzi fish Upper Sermowai April 26, 1911 7Therapon argenteus Mesopristes argenteus fish Upper Sermowai April 26, 1911 3Dipsadomorphus irregularis Boiga irregularis snake Upper Sermowai April 28, 1911 6Melanotaenia corona Melanotaenia corona fish Upper Sermowai April 29, 1911Varanus indicus Varanus indicus reptile Buarim April 29, 1911 6Terapon jarbua Terapon jarbua fish Seka May 1, 1911 7Gymnodactylus sermowaiensis Cyrtodactylus sermowaiensis reptile Upper Sermowai May 1, 1911 6Rhombatractus lorentzi Chilatherina lorentzi fish Upper Sermowai May 5, 1911 7Therapon argenteus Mesopristes argenteus fish Boearim May 9, 1911 3Therapon argenteus Mesopristes argenteus fish Upper Sermowai May 9, 1911 7Lygosoma longiceps Lipinia longiceps reptile Upper Sermowai May 12, 1911 6Lygosoma pulchrum Lipinia pulchra reptile Upper Sermowai May 12, 1911 6Lygosoma schultzei Sphenomorphus schultzei reptile Upper Sermowai May 12, 1911 6Rhombatractus lorentzi Chilatherina lorentzi fish Buarin May 15, 1911 7Mugil dussumieri Mugil dussumieri fish Sermowai Estuary May 15, 1911 7Rhombatractus fasciatus Chilatherina fasciata fish Sermowai Estuary May 15, 1911 7Apogon wickmanni Glossamia wickmanni fish Upper Sermowai May 15, 1911 7Ambassis interrupta Ambassis interrupta fish Sermowai Estuary May 16, 1911 7

In using this information, a couple of things must beacknowledged. The first is that this is by no means acomprehensive list of specimens gathered either byGjellerup or the Scheffer Expedition. In fact, while thelist contains mention of snakes, reptiles, insects, arach-nids, crustaceans, molluscs and fishes, I was unable tofind a listing of any botanical specimens, Gjellerup’s spe-cific area of expertise (National Herbarium Nederland2016).

Second, the list contains multiple substantial and obvi-ous errors. For example, the first species listed as beingcollected, Dendrophis calligaster, is listed as being col-lected on March 23rd from the Upper Sungai Sermowaidespite the expedition known to have not left the mouthof Sungai Sermowai until March 29th. Eleotris heterodon(=Oxyeleotris heterodon) is shown as being collected onApril 1st from Lake Sentani and Terapon jarbua fromSungai Seka on May 1st. However, neither location isnear to or was visited by either expedition. Additionally,there are instances of collections simultaneously beingmade in geographically diverse locations. For instance,on May 15th, it is recorded that Rhombatractus lorentzi(=Chilatherina lorentzi) was collected from Sungai

Buarin and Apogon wickmanni (=Glossamia wickmanni)was collected from the Upper Sungai Sermowai (both inthe Upper Sungai Sermowai watershed), whileRhombatractus fasciatus (=Chilatherina fasciata) andMugil dussumieri were both collected from theSermowai estuary at the mouth of the Lower SungaiSermowai, or a minimum of 40 km distant from theUpper Sungai Sermowai.

The nature of these errors strongly indicates that, a) thespecific date and collection location cannot be relied onas a definitive fact, and/or b) it is highly likely that mul-tiple individuals were gathering specimens and provid-ing them to Gjellerup who in turn submitted them underhis own name.

Even acknowledging these difficulties, the informationgathered can be combined with that obtained from theearlier sources to provide a timeline of the expeditions’travels. Admittedly, it relies heavily on guesswork forspeed of travel and time spent at specific locations, butdoes result in all locations being visited, and thoseknown to be visited on a certain date actually visited onthat date.

Upper Sungai Sermowai. Photo: Gerald Allen


Sachse Expedition

Date Location NoteBeginning of Expedition23-Mar Tarfia Arrive at Tarfia via Hr. Ms. Pelikaan from Hollandia bivouac24-Mar Tarfia Depart Tarfia for Sungai Moaif24-Mar Mouth of Sungai Moaif Arrive at the mouth of Sungai Moaif25-Mar Mouth of Sungai Moaif Start Expedition up Sungai Moaif30-Mar Sungai Moaif Arrive at trail to Benyom30-Mar Sungai Moaif Travel overland via trail to Benyom01-Apr Benyom Arrive at Benyom05-Apr Benyom Depart Benyom via trail to Sermowai Falls08-Apr Sermowai Falls Arrive at Sermowai Falls09-Apr Sermowai Falls Depart Sermowai Falls via trail to Grigisa11-Apr Grigisa Arrive at Grigisa14-Apr Grigisa Depart Grigisa via trail to Loatam14-Apr Loatam Arrive at Loatam17-Apr Loatam Depart Loatam via trail to Aibase17-Apr Aibase Arrive at Aibase20-Apr Aibase Depart Aibase via trail to Sungai Biar20-Apr Sungai Biar Arrive Sungai Biar 20-Apr Sungai Biar Travel downstream to confluence with Sungai Sokoata23-Apr Sungai Sokoata Arrive Sungai Sokoata26-Apr Sungai Sokoata Travel downstream to trail to Sawe27-Apr Sungai Sokoata Depart Sungai Sokoata at trail to Sawe27-Apr Sungai Sokoata Travel overland via trail to Sawe29-Apr Sawe Arrive at Sawe30-Apr Sawe Depart Sawe via trail to Sungai Toarim30-Apr Sungai Toarim Arrive at Sungai Toarim01-May Sungai Toarim Travel downstream to mouth of Sungai Toarim03-May Sungai Toarim Arrive at mouth of Sungai Toarim04-May Sungai Toarim Depart mouth of Sungai Toarim via trail to Sungai Pirowai04-May Sungai Pirowai Arrive at mouth of Sungai Pirowai 05-May Sungai Pirowai Depart mouth of Sungai Pirowai via trail to Kaptiau05-May Kaptiau Arrive at Kaptiau07-May Kaptiau Depart Kaptiau for Tarawasi / Armopa07-May Tarawasi / Armopa Arrive at Tarawasi / Armopa09-May Tarawasi / Armopa Depart Tarawasi / Armopa for Toronta09-May Toronta Arrive at Toronta11-May Toronta Depart Toronta for Ansudu11-May Ansudu Arrive at Ansudu14-May Ansudu Depart Ansudu to travel up Sungai Biri16-May Sungai Biri Reach point 10 km upstream of Sungai Biri17-May Sungai Biri Depart point 10 km upstream of Sungai Biri for Ansudu19-May Ansudu Arrive at AnsuduEnd of Expedition

Chilatherina lorentzi from upper Sungai Sermowai. Photo: Gerald Allen


Scheffer (Gjellerup) Expedition

Date Location NoteBeginning of Expedition19-Mar Demta Bay Arrive at Demta Bay via Hr Ms Pelikaan from Hollandia bivouac.20-Mar Demta Bay Depart Demta Bay25-Mar Mouth of Sungai Sermowai Arrive at mouth of Sungai Sermowai29-Mar Mouth of Sungai Sermowai Start expedition up Sungai Sermowai01-Apr Sungai Sermowai / Sokoata Arrive confluence of Sungai Sermowai and Sungai Sokoata02-Apr Sungai Sermowai / Sokoata Depart confluence of Sungai Sermowai and Sungai Sokoata06-Apr Dajak bivouac Arrive and establish Dajak bivouac08-Apr Dajak bivouac Depart Dajak bivouac10-Apr Sermowai Falls Arrive Sermowai Falls11-Apr Sermowai Falls Ascend Sermowai Falls12-Apr Upper Sungai Sermowai Arrive Upper Sungai Sermowai floodplain15-Apr Upper Sungai Sermowai Depart Upper Sungai Sermowai floodplain via trail to Sungai Rewo17-Apr Unurum / Dutassin Arrive Unurum / Dutassin25-Apr Unurum / Dutassin Depart Unurum / Dutassin25-Apr Sungai Boarim Arrive Sungai Boarim26-Apr Sungai Boarim Sample Sungai Boarim27-Apr Sungai Boarim Depart Sungai Boarim 03-May Sungai Sermowai Furthest extent of exploration reached04-May Sungai Sermowai Begin return trip to Sermowai Falls09-May Sungai Boarim Pass Sungai Boarim on return trip11-May Sermowai Falls Arrive at Sermowai Falls12-May Sermowai Falls Descend Sermowai Falls19-May Mouth of Sungai Sermowai Arrive at mouth of Sungai SermowaiEnd of Expedition

Lower Sungai Sermowai. Photo: Gerald Allen

So, does mapping the two expeditions, no matter howpresumptive some of the assumptions are, provide infor-mation on where M. corona can be found? Well, it doesnot give a definitive location, but it does provide clues to

make some educated guesses on some likely locations.Given the information I examined, I present three theo-ries on where M. corona may be found.


Reconstructed possible routes of the Sachse Expedition and the Scheffer Expedition. Map: Derek Tustin

The Sachse Expedition TheoryThe Sachse Expedition appears to have been intended asthe anthropological component of the concurrent expedi-tions. Even though De Saweh-stam der Papoea’s innoord Nieuw-Guinea was written by Gjellerup, only twoof the villages listed as among the 18 belonging to theSaweh (or Sawe) tribe, specifically Unurum andDutassin (Gjellerup 1912), were visited by Gjellerup andthe Scheffer Expedition. Conversely, the SachseExpedition visited or passed through eight of the listedvillages. (The other eight villages appear to have beenvisited by earlier and later expeditions to which neitherSachse or Gjellerup participated.) It appears that Sachseprovided notes and input to Gjellerup who in turn wrotethe report.

Further, while Sachse did utilize some rivers in travel-ling from one location to another, it appears that conven-ience was the driving factor, with scientific explorationand associated collecting of those waterways being ancil-lary.

However, we do know that the Sachse Expedition didundertake some exploration and collection during theirtime in the field. In Verslag van de militaire exploratievan neder-landsch-Nieuw-Guinee 1907–1915, it isspecifically noted that Sachse “travelled along the coast

to the Biri River, which was explored and sampled bycanoe for about 10 kilometers” (Departement van Oorlogin Nederlandsch-Indië 1920).

While no other specific examples are given of the SachseExpedition undertaking sampling and collection, we doknow that the expedition also included the geologistHubrecht, one of only two trained scientists assigned toany of the four exploration detachments. It is highlyunlikely that his focus during the expedition would havebeen anthropological study as opposed to geological sam-pling.

Finally, the Sachse Expedition travelled in or alongSungai Moaif, Sungai Biar, Sungai Sokoata, SungaiToarim, Sungai Pirowai, and Sungai Biri, and crossedthe Sungai Grime at least twice during their visit toBenyom. In short, they spent significant time in or nearwaterways, however despite this there is not a singlespecimen recorded as being collected from these water-ways during the timeframe of the Sachse Expedition.With the exceptions of Sungai Sokoata (which has beenextensively studied and explored by Graf and Lange), abrief sampling of Sungai Toarim (where Graf and Langefound C. lorentzi), and one location in Sungai Moaif (abridge on the road from Benyom where Graf and Langefound C. crassispinosa), (Graf, personal communication,


September 21st, 2016), none of the rivers visited by theSachse Expedition have been the focus of a search forrainbowfishes, nor have any species of rainbowfish everbeen recorded from those rivers.

If we accept that specimens were gathered by others andthen provided to Gjellerup who submitted them underhis own name, then it is possible the Sachse Expeditiondid collect specimens, possibly including M. corona, pro-vided them to Gjellerup, and an error was made inrecording when and where the specimen originated.

I think the possibility of this having occurred is remoteas it appears Gjellerup was precise in recording wherespecimens originated even if he did not provide who orig-inally gathered the sample. However, since several of therivers visited by the Sachse Expedition, most notablySungai Toarim27 and Sungai Moaif28, have never beencomprehensively sampled for rainbowfishes, excursionsto those rivers might just find some.

The Sungai Rewo TheoryOne of the most frustrating pieces of information relayedby Allen about M. corona is that it was found at “approx-imately 2°47’S, 140°00’E”. What is “approximately”? Adeviation of one degree? One minute? Or just one sec-ond?

When the coordinates provided are entered into Google

Maps, it returns a location a minimum of 5 km from anywaterway, and neither of those rivers connect withSungai Sermowai29. Obviously “approximate” coordi-nates are not sufficient to locate M. corona.

One of the interesting things in researching an individ-ual is the personal minutia that is discovered along theway. I have already informed that Gjellerup was relatedto a great number of commissioned soldiers through hismaternal ancestors, that his uncle went on to share inthe 1917 Nobel Prize in Literature, and that he followedin the footsteps of his father and became a physician.But another interesting artifact that I stumbled acrosswas an exemplar of Gjellerup’s handwriting (NationalHerbarium Nederland 2016).

As can be seen (Figure 1, page 1145), the serif inGjellerup’s handwritten “1” (at least in this example) isextended, almost resembling the number “7”. Is it possi-ble that Gjellerup’s narrative report did not read 2°47’Sbut rather 2°41’S? In an attempt to confirm or refute thishypothesis I contacted the Naturalis Biodiversity Centerin Leiden, the Netherlands, where Gjellerup’s journalsare held. Unfortunately, the Center is undergoing majorrenovations which commenced in September 2016 andare not expected to be complete until early 2019. Duringthis period, the collections of the Center are completelyinaccessible, meaning Gjellerup’s journals cannot beexamined in the immediate future.

Aerial view of lower Sungai Sermowai. Photo: Gerald Allen


Entering the alternative coordinates 2°41’S, 140°00’E onGoogle Maps returns a location on Sungai Rewo, close tothe villages Unurum and Dutassin, locations alreadyestablished as being visited by Gjellerup, and an areawhere he spent approximately one week30. Is it beyondthe possibility that Gjellerup sampled the Sungai Rewoand gathered M. corona while in that vicinity?

Sungai Rewo is a river about 10 km in length, and itflows into Sungai Boarim, which in turn is a side chan-nel of Sungai Sermowai, approximately 5 km in length.

However, even if we accept that Gjellerup’s handwritingwas borderline indecipherable and lead to confusionbetween “1” and “7”, we are still left with the discrepancyin the collection date as relayed by Dr Allen.

Upper Sungai Sermowai immediately above Sermowai Falls, where four species of rainbowfish were collected. This is proximate to SungaiRewo, a possible habitat of Melanotaenia corona. Map: Derek Tustin


As you will recall, the date listed for the collection of M.corona is “29 April 1911”. My presumptive recreation ofthe Scheffer Expedition places Gjellerup in the region ofUnurum and Dutassin from approximately April 17thuntil April 25th, 1911. So, if the location is correct, theneither the recorded date is wrong, or I have made anerror in my recreation of the Scheffer Expedition.

I think there is a good possibility that M. corona could befound in Sungai Rewo, but considering the discrepancywith the collection date, there is another theory thatmay also be valid.

The Furthest Extent Theory“On 3rd May further exploration was halted. From a hillwas observed that the river valley continued some 5 to 6km in southeasterly direction and, although it rained,low mountain ranges could be discerned in south-south-easterly and southwesterly directions” (Staal, 1914).

This is one of the very few instances in which a specificgeographic location can be tied to a specific date whenexamining the Scheffer Expedition. In examining themap of the furthest reaches of Sungai Sermowai, we canlocate a position approximately 5 to 6 km from the head-waters, and from which low mountains are visible in asouth-southeasterly and southwesterly direction. And

this location was reached on May 3rd, 1911, only fourdays after the noted collection date of M. corona, so weknow that Gjellerup was in that general geographicregion around that time.

Additionally, it is possible to determine geographic coor-dinates in this region as well. At coordinates 2°47’S,140°15’E, we find a portion of Sungai Sermowai, approx-imately 10 km from the headwater31.

So if we accept that Gjellerup actually did write “7” andsearch along the corresponding degree of longitude, thenwe have 2°47’S, 140°15’E, which is 15 minutes, or 25% ofa degree, or 27.737 km distant from the coordinates asrelayed by Dr. Allen.

Again, is 15 minutes or 27.737 km a small enough devi-ation to be considered “approximate”?

Given that M. corona is recorded as being collected onApril 29th, given that Gjellerup was in the upper reachesaround that time, and given that 2°47’S, 140°15’E couldbe considered as “approximately 2°47’S, 140°00’E” it isstrongly possible that M. corona could be found in theupper reaches of Sungai Sermowai.

"From a hill was observed that the river valley continued some 5 to 6 km in southeasterly direction and, although it rained, low mountainranges could be discerned in south-southeasterly and southwesterly directions." Map: Derek Tustin


The advantages of technology and the information con-tained within and accessible via the internet permits anoverview of the Royal Netherlands East Indies Army,the Military Exploration Detachments, the North NewGuinea detachment, the Sachse Expedition, the SchefferExpedition and many of the scientific discoveries thatresulted. By understanding the connections between allthe information contained in this overview, I hope that Ihave provided clues that may lead to the rediscovery ofM. corona.

I believe that my Sungai Rewo Theory and the FurthestExtent Theory are possible, but there is no way to defin-itively say if either is correct without undertaking aphysical expedition. As I do not have the resources toundertake an expedition myself, I have chosen to sharethis information in the hope that it may prove beneficialto someone who does have those resources. The onlything I ask is if someone does find Melanotaenia coronaas a result of this information, please make sure I get acouple of fish for myself!

AcknowledgementsResearching the history and discovery of Melanotaeniacorona was extremely interesting, but would have beenfutile without the extensive assistance of several individ-uals. Dr Gerald Allen was extraordinarily generous insharing his experiences and photographs relating toboth M. corona and Sungai Sermowai, and providedinvaluable review and feedback of this article. DavidPrice, Gary Lange, Johannes Graf, Dan Dority andHenni Ohee provided in-depth personal accounts of theirexperiences in various expeditions that have sought M.corona, and suggested investigation of several aspectsthat I had initially overlooked. Johannes Graf also pro-vided images of the M. corona holotype and provided an

introduction to staff at the Naturalis Biodiversity Centerin Leiden, the Netherlands. Adrian Tappin once againreviewed my work to ensure accuracy with known infor-mation, and Dr Peter Unmack provided several obscuredocuments, without which several key factors wouldhave remained unknown. Roger Swainston providedclarification on the origins of the first imaging of M. coro-na, and Ronald de Ruiter of the Naturalis BiodiversityCenter in Leiden, the Netherlands, went above andbeyond in his attempts to locate Knud Gjellerup’s origi-nal journal. Acting as a nexus for information from theseknowledgeable, talented and dedicated individuals waseducational and both an honour and a pleasure.

Finally, it should be noted that I attempted to provideHeiko Bleher and Charles Nishihira with the opportuni-ty to give clarification, commentary, or feedback relatingto their attempts to locate M. corona, and to review adraft of this article. An online dialogue was had withBleher on November 22nd, 2016 in response to a com-ment he made to a post of a third party individual onFacebook (Iwamoto 2016). This culminated in a link to adraft of this article being e-mailed to an address bothprovided by Bleher and independently confirmed asbeing correct. E-mails were sent to Charles Nishihira atone address in February and April 2013 and to anotheraddress in October 2016. Neither individual respondedor accepted the invitation to provide input into theirattempts to find M. corona.

ReferencesAllen, G.R. 1982. Melanotaenia corona, a new species of rain-

bowfish from northern New Guinea (Pisces,Atheriniformes, Melanotaeniidae). Bulletin ZoologischMuseum, 8, 173–176.

Allen, G.R. 1995. Rainbowfishes: In nature and in the aquari-um. Tetra, Melle, Germany.


conopiden (New contributions to the knowledge of theconopiden). Tijdschrift Voor Entomologie (Journal ofEntemology), 55(3), 184–207.

National Herbarium Nederland. 2016. Gjellerup Knud.Retrieved October 30th, 2016: http://www.nationaalherbar-ium.nl/FMCollectors/G/GjellerupK.htm.

Papua Heritage Foundation. 2016. Beknopt verslag met foto'smet betrekking tot de verrichtingen van het militaire explo-ratie detachement noord-Nieuw-Guinea 1909–1910.Retrieved October 30th 2016:http://www.papuaerfgoed.org/nl/DO/332/2.

Rooij, N. de. 1915. Reptilien aus nord-Neuguinea gesammeltvon Dr. P. van Kampen und Dr. K. Gjellerup in den Jaren1910 und 1911 (Reptiles from northern New Guinea collect-ed by Dr. P. van Kampen and Dr. K. Gjellerup in 1910 and1911). Bijdragen tot de Dierkunde (Contributions toZoology), 21, 81–95.

Schepman, M.M. 1918. On a collection of land, freshwater andmarine mollusca from northern New Guinea. ZoologischeMededelingen (Zoological Communications), 4(1), 1–21.

Staal, J. J. 1915. De exploratie van Nieuw-Guinea (Explorationof New Guinea). Tijdschrift van het KoninklijkNederlandsch Aardrijkskundig Genootschap (Journal ofthe Royal Dutch Geographical Society), 32, 71–80.

Tappin, A. 2013 (February 20). Melanotaenia corona. ANGFAforums. Retrieved October 30th, 2016.

Van Der Vecht, J. 1972. A review of the new genusAnischnogaster in the Papua region (Hymenoptera,Vespidae). Zoologische Mededelingen (ZoologicalCommunications), 47, 240–256.

Leif Sepstrups genealogy and family history. 2016. Viser gravepå Svaneke Kirkegård - dki-01.dk. Retrieved October 30th,2016:https://www.dki01.dk/svaneke/svaneke_svar_soeg.php.

Weber, M. 1913. Süsswasserfische aus Niederländisch süd-und nord-Neu-Guinea (Freshwater fish of Dutch south andnorth New Guinea). In Nova Guinea. Résultats de l’expédi-tion scientifique néerlandaise à la Nouvelle-Guinée en 1907et 1909. Zoologie, Leiden 9.

Wikipedia. 2016a. Karl Gjellerup. Retrieved October 30th,2016: https://da.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karl_Gjellerup.

Wikipedia. 2016b. Recke. Retrieved October 30th, 2016:https://da.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recke.


Bleher, H. 2009 (June 10). Glossolepis wanamensis (Ekk WillWanamensis). Rainbowfish forums. Retrieved October30th, 2016: http://rainbow-fish.org/forums/viewtopic.php?p=2981&sid=1ca26427ec0087fcbcb22e2a05e1d6c3.

Boer, A.J. de. 1994. The taxonomy and biogeography of theLoriae group of the genus Baeturia, Stal (Homoptera,Tibicinidae). Tijdschrift Voor Entomologie (Journal ofEntemology), 137, 1–26.

Brongersma, L.B. 1934. Contributions to Indo-Australian her-petology. Zoologische Mededelingen (ZoologicalCommunications), 17(9), 161–251.

Departement van Oorlog in Nederlandsch-Indië (WarDepartment in the Dutch East Indies). 1920. Verslag vande militaire exploratie van neder-landsch-Nieuw-Guinee1907–1915 (Report of the military exploration of lower landNew Guinea 1907–1915). Departement van Oorlog inNederlandsch-Indië (War Department in the Dutch EastIndies), 54–72.

Gjellerup, K. 1912. De Saweh-stam der Papoea’s in noordNieuw-Guinea (The Saweh tribe of Papuans in northernNew Guinea). Tijdschrift van het Koninklijk NederlandschAardrijkskundig Genootschap (Journal of the Royal DutchGeographical Society), 29, 171–182.

Hieronimus, H. 2002. Regenbogenfische und verwandte fami-lien: all rainbows and related families. Verlag A.C.S.(Aqualog), Rodgau.

Iwamoto, M. 2016 (November 22). Melanotaenia corona. Thankyou for provided photo and advice [Facebook StatusUpdate]. Retrieved from https://www.facebook.com/mit-suhiro.iwamoto.58/posts/975968149213236?comment_id=976020519207999

Lange, G. 2010 (December 25). Guess what it is? ANGFAforums. Retrieved October 30th, 2016:http://forums.angfa.org.au/viewtopic.php?t=1060&high-light=corona.

Marshall, A. and Beehler, B. 2007. The ecology of IndonesianPapua part one. Hong Kong, Periplus Editions (HK).

Mees, G.F. and Kailola, P.J. 1977. The freshwater theraponti-dae of New Guinea. Zoologische Verhandelingen (ZoologicalTreatises), 153, 3–89.

Meijere, J.C.H. de. 1913. Neue beiträge zur kenntnis der

Endnotes1 McCaffrey, A. (1968). Dragonflight: volume one of the Dragonriders of Pern. New York, USA: Ballantine Books. p. xi.2 While preparing this article, it was suggested that I refer to Chilatherina lorentzi as Melanotaenia lorentzi based on publiclydiscussed Melanotaeniidae genetic examinations. However, as no formal reclassification has been published, I have opted touse the current valid binomial name of Chilatherina lorentzi.

3 Interestingly, the image of Melanotaenia corona that appears on page 110 of Rainbowfishes: In nature and in the aquarium isn’tattributed to any individual. The same illustration appears on page 88 of Regenbogenfische und verwandte familien: all rain-bows and related families by Harro Hieronimus and is attributed to C. Harper. Personal communication with Dr Gerald Allenrevealed that the illustrator was actually Roger Swainston.

4 Bivouac: a military encampment made with tents or improvised shelters.5 Now known as Jayapura.6 For the sake of completeness, subsequent to the Sermowai Expedition, Gjellerup participated in the Lake Sentani and CyclopMountains Expedition, explored the coastal region between Sungai Biri and the mouth of Sungai Mamberamo, took part in theSungai Tor Expedition, explored Sungai Berkombor and Sungai Tenem, was part of the transfer of the Northern New GuineaMilitary Exploration Detachment from Hollandia to Manokwari and explored the Warmasin Lakes in the Arfak Mountains.

7 The waterfall mentioned is the dividing point between the Lower and Upper Sungai Sermowai. It has played a key role in wherepeople have searched for Melanotaenia corona, but a proper name has never been given to this striking geological and hydro-logical feature. For sake of convenience, except where described otherwise, I have elected to refer to it as “Sermowai Falls”.

8 In naming all rivers and streams, unless citing the work of others where they used “river” I have elected to use the commonlabel of “sungai”.

9 Also recorded as Sungai Sermo and Sungai Sermor.

http://forums.angfa.org.au/viewtopic.php?t=1060&highlight=corona

http://forums.angfa.org.au/viewtopic.php?t=1060&highlight=corona

https://www.facebook.com/mitsuhiro.iwamoto.58/posts/975968149213236?comment_id=976020519207999



http://rainbow-fish.org/forums/viewtopic.php?p=2981&sid=1ca26427ec0087fcbcb22e2a05e1d6c3



https://da.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recke

https://da.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karl_Gjellerup

https://www.dki01.dk/svaneke/svaneke_svar_soeg.php

https://www.dki01.dk/svaneke/svaneke_svar_soeg.php

http://www.papuaerfgoed.org/nl/DO/332/2

http://www.nationaalherbarium.nl/FMCollectors/G/GjellerupK.htm

http://www.nationaalherbarium.nl/FMCollectors/G/GjellerupK.htm


10 Also recorded as Sungai Sokota.11 Also recorded as Sungai Pewo.12 Also recorded as Oenoeroem. The use of “oe” instead of “u” is a particularity of the Dutch language.13 Also recorded as Dutasin and Doetassin. The use of “oe” instead of “u” is a particularity of the Dutch language.14 Also recorded as Boearim, Boearin, Buarim, and Buarin. The use of “oe” instead of “u” is a particularity of the Dutch language.15 Also recorded as Muaib.16 Also recorded as Benjom, Benjoin, Genjem, Genyem, Penjom.17 Also recorded as Grigriza.18 Also recorded as Little Loatam and Kecil Loatam.19 Also recorded as Abaisé.20 Also recorded as Saweh.21 Also recorded as Tawarin and Tuorim.22 Also recorded as Sungai Borowai, Sungai Poro and Sungai Porowai.23 Also recorded as Kaptiaoe. The use of “oe” instead of “u” is a particularity of the Dutch language.24 Also recorded as Tarwasi.25 Also recorded as Taronta and Tronta.26 Also recorded as Ansoedoe and Andusu. The use of “oe” instead of “u” is a particularity of the Dutch language.27 Gary Lange and Johannes Graf briefly sampled Sungai Toarim in 2015 and found Chilatherina lorentzi, but no comprehensivesampling has ever been recorded.

28 Gary Lange and Johannes Graf briefly sampled Sungai Moaif in 2015 and found Chilatherina crassispinosa, but no compre-hensive sampling has ever been recorded.

29 2°47’S, 140°00’E, https://www.google.ca/maps/place/2%C2%B047'00.0%22S+140%C2%B000'00.0%22E/@-2.786232,139.9818314,13.57z/data=!4m5!3m4!1s0x0:0x0!8m2!3d-2.7833333!4d140.

30 2°41’S, 140°00’E, https://www.google.ca/maps/place/2%C2%B041'00.0%22S+140%C2%B000'00.0%22E/@-2.6849658,139.9992502,15.65z/data=!4m5!3m4!1s0x0:0x0!8m2!3d-2.6833333!4d140.

31 2°47’S, 140°15’E, https://www.google.ca/maps/place/2%C2%B047'00.0%22S+140%C2%B015'00.0%22E/@-2.7810376,140.2466699,14z/data=!4m5!3m4!1s0x0:0x0!8m2!3d-2.7833333!4d140.25.


https://www.google.ca/maps/place/2%C2%B047'00.0%22S+140%C2%B015'00.0%22E/@-2.7810376,140.2466699,14z/data=!4m5!3m4!1s0x0:0x0!8m2!3d-2.7833333!4d140.25

https://www.google.ca/maps/place/2%C2%B047'00.0%22S+140%C2%B015'00.0%22E/@-2.7810376,140.2466699,14z/data=!4m5!3m4!1s0x0:0x0!8m2!3d-2.7833333!4d140.25

https://www.google.ca/maps/place/2%C2%B041'00.0%22S+140%C2%B000'00.0%22E/@-2.6849658,139.9992502,15.65z/data=!4m5!3m4!1s0x0:0x0!8m2!3d-2.6833333!4d140




Figure 1. Locations of some translocated rainbowfish and blue-eyepopulations in the Wet Tropics region. Map source: GeosciencesAustralia.


Translocated Rainbowfishes (Melanotaeniidae) and Blue-eyes (Pseudomugilidae) in the Queensland Wet TropicsKeith C. MartinPO Box 520, Clifton Beach Qld 4879, Australia, [email protected]

IntroductionIn Australia, the term “translocated” has been used torefer to native fishes that have been moved from onelocation to another where they do not occur naturally.There is a distinction between this and “alien” fish,which are species that have been imported intoAustralia and have subsequently established in the wild(Harris 2013). They include well known pest speciessuch as Tilapia (Oreochromis spp.) and Mosquitofish(Gambusia holbrooki). The distinction between translo-cated and alien species is readily defined in a countrylike Australia, where being an island the political andecological boundaries of the country are similar. In othercountries, such as in Europe, these terms are less clear.The Wet Tropics Bioregion of north-eastern Queenslandis a tropical area with high rainfall, a diversity of habi-tats, and an elevational range not present anywhere elsein tropical Australia (Sattler & Williams 1999). Itincludes a number of biological/geological units isolatedfrom each other by elevation and waterfalls and is con-sidered to be a biodiversity hotspot for Australian fresh-water fish species (Pusey & Kennard 1994). The WetTropics region has also been the focus of a considerablenumber of fish translocations and introductions. It isthought that about 36 species of native freshwater fisheshave been translocated in the Wet Tropics region, alongwith an estimated 20 species of alien fishes so far record-ed in north Queensland (Burrows 2004; Webb 2007).

Most fish translocations in the Wet Tropics have beencarried out for recreational fishing enhancement, withthe commonest species being Barramundi (Lates calcar-ifer), Sooty Grunter (Hephaestus fuliginosus), KhakiBream (Hephaestus tulliensis), Sleepy Cod (Oxyeleotrislineolata), Mangrove Jack (Lutjanus argentimaculatus)and Jungle Perch (Kuhlia rupestris) (Burrows 2004).Translocation of recreational species – commonlyreferred to as “fish stocking” has been a common practicein the Queensland Wet Tropics, and especially on theAtherton Tablelands, for at least 100 years (Russell et.al. 2003; Burrows 2004). It was undertaken initially onan ad-hoc basis, and thence formally through severallocal fish stocking associations under supervision fromthe relevant Queensland Government departments.

Identifying a newly recorded locality for a species as atranslocation, especially for rainbowfishes and blue-eyes, can be difficult to determine as such a new recordcould alternatively be a scientifically important rangeextension. The presence of small native species in newlocalities may have been previously overlooked due tolimited sampling effort, poor baseline data, misidentifi-

cations and remoteness of habitats (eg. Hammer 2006;Hammer et. al. 2015).

For small, non-recreational species like rainbowfishesand blue-eyes, documentation of deliberate translocationevents is unlikely to exist. Some clues to ascertain a pos-sible translocation event may be that: the location isremote from the known distribution or habitat limits ofthe species; there is direct or indirect anecdotal evidencethe species may have been released in the area; thespecies has appeared recently and was not recorded inearlier surveys of the area or; the morphology or colourpattern of the potentially translocated species ismarkedly different to the usual type found in nearbyareas. Modern genetic techniques can also provide cluesas to the origin of potential translocations, although thisrequires collection and analysis of genetic material notonly from the suspected translocated population, but


also from a range of possible source localities. For exam-ple, such genetic techniques were used to identify a sig-nificant remnant (i.e. non-translocated) population ofthe Southern Purple-spotted Gudgeon (Mogurndaadspersa) in South Australia (Hammer et. al. 2015).Fortunately, the dataset for rainbowfishes and blue-eyesis building due to the recent efforts of researchers suchas Michael Hammer and Peter Unmack. Even then how-ever, if a particular population appears in a new localityand is found to be genetically allied to the nearest popu-lation, it cannot be said for certain if this is a transloca-tion or simply a new locality record.

Fishes may have been translocated by one of severalmethods such as: deliberate or accidental release intothe wild by aquarists, landholders, fishers or others;accidental introduction through transport with othertranslocated recreational fishes; “bait bucket” transloca-tions; accidental escape from aquarists or aquacultureponds; accidental introduction by mechanical meanssuch as water pumping; or environmental modificationssuch as stream diversions that may provide fish accessto new areas, including new catchments (Lintermans2004).

The impacts of translocated fishes in the Wet Tropics aresummarised in Burrows (2004). Generally, transloca-tions may result in a change in river ecology, oftenresulting in a decline of biodiversity in local native fishspecies and in extreme cases, translocations have led tospecies extinctions. Most of these threats have comeabout through the introduction of predatory or invasivespecies establishing in the habitats of more specialisedforms. Probably the most well-known example inAustralia is the local extinction of the Lake EachamRainbowfish (Melanotaenia eachamensis) from its typelocality at Lake Eacham, correlating with the transloca-tion of species such as Mouth Almighty (Glossamia apri-on), Barred Grunter (Amniataba percoides) andSevenspot Archerfish (Toxotes chatareus) (Barlow et. al.1987). Until recently, there were no documented cases ofthe impacts on other species from the translocation ofrainbowfishes and blue-eyes. Recent studies do howeverindicate that translocation of large, dominating speciessuch as Eastern Rainbowfish (Melanotaenia splendidasplendida) may be having a serious impact on isolated,closely related endemic species through competitivereplacement and creating a “genetic swamping” effect(Unmack & Hammer 2015; Unmack et al. 2016).

In this review, the probable translocations of five rain-bowfish and two blue-eye species in the Wet Tropicsregion is documented. The information is based on pub-lished or unpublished reports and databases, anecdotalevidence from a range of sources, and recent field sur-veys undertaken by the author and colleagues. By neces-sity, much of the evidence for the possible origins ofthese translocations has been derived from personalcommunications with local scientists, aquarists andother residents of the Wet Tropics region. The informa-tion is therefore unverified and as such should be treatedwith some caution.

Locations of some probable translocation sites in the WetTropics region are shown in Figure 1.

The Species

Eastern Rainbowfish (Melanotaenia splendida splendida)Eastern Rainbowfish is one of the most abundant andwidely distributed fishes of the Wet Tropics region(Pusey & Kennard 1994). It is found in a wide range ofhabitat types and in elevations from near sea level up toover 1000 m (K. Martin unpublished data). It is readilyobserved and easily caught in many accessible roadsidelocations, so is a prime candidate for potential transloca-tion. On an evolutionary time scale, this species is prob-ably a recent coloniser of the higher elevation AthertonTablelands (Hurwood & Hughes 2001).

In a survey of translocated fishes in the Wet Tropics,Eastern Rainbowfish was noted to have been translocat-ed into the upper Barron River catchment, although nospecific translocation localities were identified otherthan Lake Eacham, where Eastern Rainbowfish werenow living where locally extinct Lake EachamRainbowfish once occurred (Burrows 2004). The rain-bowfish presently in Lake Eacham has been confirmedas Eastern Rainbowfish through genetic analysis, and isreported to have been translocated into the lake fromadjacent streams sometime between 2000 and 2007(Brown et. al. 2013) (Figures 2 & 3).

Recent surveys by the author and colleagues on theAtherton Tablelands indicate the species is expandingits range in a number of smaller streams of the upperBarron and North Johnstone catchments includingGwynne and Kennie creeks (Barron catchment) andWilliams, Ithaca and Short creeks (North Johnstonecatchment). Some of these streams were originally popu-lated by “old endemic” rainbowfish species which arenow threatened through genetic introgression fromEastern Rainbowfish (Unmack et al. 2016).

Anecdotal evidence from landholders on the Atherton

Figure 2. Lake Eacham. A locality where many fish species, includ-ing Eastern Rainbowfish, have been translocated.

Photo: Keith Martin

Figure 3. Eastern Rainbowfish photographed in Lake Eacham in October 2016. Photo: Keith Martin


Tablelands indicates that the species has been widelyintroduced into farm dams and cattle troughs for mos-quito control. It is also likely to be accidentally trans-ported through water pumping operations.

Streets Creek (Figure 4), on the Kuranda Range at 370m elevation has a distinctive colour form of EasternRainbowfish well known in the aquarium hobby as“Kuranda Reds” (Tappin 2005). First-hand anecdotalevidence presented to the author suggests that EasternRainbowfish from the nearby Clohesy River have beenreleased into a dam in the upper catchment of StreetsCreek, thus threatening the genetic integrity of this pop-ulation. Over the last few years, collections of rainbow-fish from this this stream appeared to be much lesscolourful that those taken in the 1980s (M. Trennery; G.Watson pers. comm). More specifically, the number of“colourful” fish in the population seems to be lower now

than was previously observed, although fish with goodcolour were collected in Streets Creek as recently as2015 (M. Hammer pers. com.). Fish collected by theauthor at Streets Creek in January 2017 (wet season,when fish movements are highest) showed little of thespectacular colouration of earlier collections (see Figures5 & 6).

Eastern Rainbowfish were observed by Pusey (2004) tohave been translocated into Paluma Dam and BirthdayCreek, in the headwaters of Running River (Burdekincatchment) and it was suggested that this translocationconstituted a threat to an unidentified rainbowfish formthat occurred downstream in the middle reaches ofRunning River. This threat has now been realised, withlarge numbers of Eastern Rainbowfish being recorded inthe Running River in 2015 (Unmack & Hammer 2015).This has prompted a significant conservation effort to


Figure 4. Streets Creek, on the Kuranda Range. Translocated Eastern Rainbowfish and Pacific Blue-eye are present at this site. Photo: Keith Martin

Figure 5. Eastern Rainbowfish collected at Streets Creek in May 2011. Photo: Keith Martin


save the Running River Rainbowfish (now known to bean undescribed species) through captive breeding, iden-tification of potential safe release sites and their translo-cation into those sites (Unmack 2016).

The Tinaroo Falls Dam was constructed on the upperBarron River in the 1950s, with an objective of providingirrigation water to the farmland areas in the north-west-ern Tablelands. This project was followed by theMareeba-Dimbulah Irrigation Scheme, completed in1970 (Tinaroo Environmental Education Centre 2016).Key features of this project were construction of theWest Barron and Walsh Bluff Main Channels, whichdivert water from Tinaroo Dam in the eastern-flowingBarron River catchment to irrigation areas in the head-waters of the Walsh and Mitchell rivers, which flow westinto the Gulf of Carpentaria (Figure 7). Therefore,Eastern Rainbowfish from Tinaroo Dam now have readyaccess to the upper Mitchell River via these channels, anarea that technically is inhabited by another subspecies,the Checkered Rainbowfish (M. splendida inornata). Theauthor has observed large numbers of fishes, includingrainbowfishes traversing these channels. There are

numerous overflow points along the channels and duringheavy rainfall events water overflows into creeks thatthe channel crosses, allowing access for fishes to manyupper tributaries during the wet season. Some of theseupper tributaries, such as Rocky Creek, are known tohave distinctive rainbowfish forms (Martin & Barclay2016).

Although Eastern Rainbowfish appears to have beencommonly translocated on the Atherton Tablelands,these translocations appear to have been quite localisedand there is no evidence to suggest that the species hasbeen brought in from more distant locations.

Banded Rainbowfish (Melanotaenia trifasciata)Banded Rainbowfish has a wide but patchy distributionacross northern Australia and is well known to have avariety of forms across its range (Allen et. al. 2002).Martin & Barclay (2015) examined the many reportedoccurrences of the Banded Rainbowfish in the WetTropics region and concluded that only four populationswere currently extant: in the Starcke area north of

Figure 6. Eastern Rainbowfish collected at Streets Creek in January 2017, showing little of the bright red colour patterning of earlier collections.Photo: Keith Martin

Cooktown; in the McIvor-Morgan rivers system; in theWyalla Plain streams; and at Cooper Creek. Pusey et. al.(2004) noted that possibly failed translocated popula-tions of this species occurred in the Russell-Mulgravecatchment and in the Johnstone Rivers catchment,although no localities, specimens or mechanisms oftranslocation were referenced. No populations could belocated in these areas during the course of more recentsurveys (Martin & Barclay 2015). Unmack (2005) foundthat a specimen of rainbowfish collected from a TrinityInlet stream near Cairns (reported to be Hills Creek inMartin & Barclay 2015) had Banded Rainbowfish mito-chondrial DNA, but it had a mix of nuclear alleles fromthis species and Eastern Rainbowfish indicating thisindividual was a back crossed hybrid. Unmack (2005)concluded this record may have been the result of atranslocation.

In April 2016, a population of Banded Rainbowfish wasdiscovered by G. Birch on private property along MiddleCreek, a Trinity Inlet stream about 14 km south-east ofCairns City (Figure 8). The author, together with G.Birch and B. Hansen visited the site in May 2016 andcollected a series of samples for genetic testing. At the

collecting site, Banded Rainbowfish were not particular-ly common, and were outnumbered by at least 20:1 inseine net drags by Eastern Rainbowfish. However, theredid not appear to be any obvious evidence of cross breed-ing between these two species.

The usual form of Banded Rainbowfish found in the WetTropics region is fairly distinctive, both in appearanceand genetics compared to its nearest relatives in north-ern Cape York Peninsula (Martin & Barclay 2015; M.Hammer pers. comm.). It is generally a slender form,with bluish background colouration and reddish or yel-low fins. When first caught, the specimens from theMiddle Creek site appeared to the author and colleaguesto be different to the Wet Tropics form. The MiddleCreek fish were deep bodied, and had a yellow-greenishbackground colouration most resembling the form foundin western Cape York populations, particularly from theCoen River. This observation was later confirmedthrough genetic analysis, where samples were oppor-tunistically collected as part of a broader taxonomicreview, which indicated the closest genetic match forthese specimens was probably from the Coen area, andnot the Wet Tropics (M. Adams & M. Hammer unpub-


Figure 7. West Barron Main Channel, which diverts water and fish from Tinaroo Dam in the eastern flowing Barron catchment to streams ofthe western flowing Mitchell catchment. Photo: Keith Martin


Figure 8. Middle Creek, Trinity Inlet, Cairns. Locality of translocated Banded Rainbowfish population. Photo: Keith Martin

Figure 9. Banded Rainbowfish collected at Middle Creek, Trinity Inlet in May 2016. Photo: Keith Martin

lished data). The Middle Creek site is about 450 kmsouth-east of the Coen area, and about 100 km south-east of the currently known most southerly population ofBanded Rainbowfish at Cooper Creek (Martin & Barclay2015). Comparison of Banded Rainbowfish examplesfrom Middle Creek and Cooper Creek are shown inFigures 9 & 10.

From these data, we conclude that the Middle Creekpopulation of Banded Rainbowfish is most likely atranslocation from a western Cape York locality,although the mechanism for this event is unknown.Given that the other reported translocation in HillsCreek is only a few kilometres to the north, it is possiblethat these two translocation events could be linked. Theauthor has snorkel surveyed Hills Creek extensively andfound no evidence of Banded Rainbowfish there in 2016(Figure 11).

There is some evidence to suggest that the population inthe Cooper Creek system identified in Martin & Barclay(2015) may also be a translocation. This population ismorphologically and genetically similar to its closestneighbour (Wyalla Plain), but was not noticed in theCooper Creek area until around 2008 (Martin & Barclay2015). This area had been surveyed previously (includ-ing electrofishing and snorkel searches of sites where thespecies is now present) and the species was not recordedbefore that time (Pusey & Kennard 1994; A. Small; M.Trenerry pers. comm.). However, a previously unde-scribed species of Cairnsichthys rainbowfish also eluded

observation in this area until recently, thus the BandedRainbowfish population in Cooper Creek cannot be con-firmed as a translocation at this point and should bemanaged as a native population for now given the smallisolated occurrence.

McCulloch’s Rainbowfish (Melanotaenia maccullochi)McCulloch’s Rainbowfish, as currently recognised,occurs in the Top End of the Northern Territory, insouthern New Guinea, and in northern Queensland(Allen et al. 2002; Cook et. al. 2014). The most southerly


Figure 10. Banded Rainbowfish collected at Cooper Creek in July 2014. Photo: Keith Martin

Figure 11. Author snorkel searching for Banded Rainbowfish in HillsCreek, Trinity Inlet. Photo: Susan Barclay

population group consists of three separate populationsin: the Cape Flattery region north of Cooktown; theForest Creek area on the northern side of the DaintreeRiver; and in the coastal strip between Cairns andCardwell (Allen et. al. 2002).

Dawson & Dawson (1996) note the occurrence ofMcCulloch’s Rainbowfish in the upper reaches ofWallaby Creek at Home Rule, and a photograph of thisform was published in Meyer (2007) (Figure 12). Thiscreek is a tributary of the Annan River system south ofCooktown, an area which has received considerable sci-entific fish survey, yet the species has never been report-ed in this catchment previously (Pusey & Kennard 1994;Hortle & Pearson 1990). Additionally, the collecting loca-tion on Wallaby Creek is a rather unusual habitat forthis species, being a large, rainforest creek in the upperreaches of the catchment, and a long way removed fromany lowland swamp habitat. Large numbers ofMcCulloch's Rainbowfish were observed in a farm damat Home Rule in 1994 (A. Dawson, pers. comm.) so it islikely that the population in Wallaby Creek may haveescaped from there. There have been no recent reports ofthe species in the area, although it has not beensearched extensively, so there is no certainty that thespecies is still present.

Considering the above evidence, it is strongly suspectedthe Wallaby Creek McCulloch’s Rainbowfish populationis likely to be a translocation. The closest locationswhere McCulloch’s Rainbowfish is known to occur natu-rally are near Hopevale (Endeavor River catchment)about 50 km to the north, and Forest Creek (DaintreeRiver catchment) about 60 km to the south.

Black-banded Rainbowfish (Melanotaenia nigrans)Black-banded Rainbowfish occurs across northernAustralia, from the Kimberley district of WA, across theTop End of the NT and northern Cape York Peninsula inQld (Allen et. al. 2002).

Martin (2016) documented the likely translocation ofthis species to a site near Bramston Beach, south of

Cairns, based on a photo of a specimen collected in 2009(Figure 13). The area was searched in December 2014,but no Black-banded Rainbowfish could be located eventhough survey conditions were ideal and a range of otherfish species were recorded. It was suggested the mostlikely explanation for the appearance of this species sofar out of its range was that it had been accidentallytranslocated from Weipa (approximately 720 km to thenorth) with live Barramundi by a local landholder(Martin 2016). Based on the lack of evidence found dur-ing the survey, it was thought likely that the transloca-tion had failed to establish in the long term.

Lake Eacham Rainbowfish (Melanotaenia eachamensis)The Lake Eacham Rainbowfish was originally thought tobe confined to Lake Eacham, on the AthertonTablelands, but became extinct at that locality presum-ably due to the translocation of several predatory fishspecies (Barlow et. al. 1987). Since then, it has beenreported to occur at numerous localities across theAtherton Tablelands, including in the Tully, Herbert,North & South Johnstone, Barron and possibly DaintreeRiver systems (Pusey et. al. 1997; Zhu et. al. 1998).However, much confusion exists over the true identity ofthis species, and it is now known that what severalauthors previously thought were Lake EachamRainbowfish actually represents a complex of crypticspecies. Complicating the issue further is that many pop-ulations have hybridised to some degree with the sym-patric Eastern Rainbowfish (P. Unmack, pers. comm.).Zhu et. al. (1998) found mtDNA from Lake EachamRainbowfish in presumed Eastern Rainbowfish samplescollected in the “Tinaroo Channel” (=West Barron MainChannel) adjacent to a Fisheries Research station atWalkamin where Lake Eacham Rainbowfish were beingcaptive-bred in ponds. They surmised that fish from theresearch station may have escaped their ponds and intothe channel, where they had interbred with EasternRainbowfish. Burrows (2004) also noted this finding as apossible translocation event.

As described earlier in the section on EasternRainbowfish, the West Barron Main Channel divertswater (and fish) from Tinaroo Dam to irrigate farmlandsin the upper Mitchell and Walsh catchments. Lake


Figure 13. Black-banded Rainbowfish collected at Joyce Creek,Bramston Beach in March 2009. Photo: Andrew Small

Figure 12. McCulloch's Rainbowfish collected at Wallaby Creek in1994. Photo: Gunther Schmida

Eacham Rainbowfish does occur at some localities in theBarron catchment above Lake Tinaroo, and is likely tobe present in some small creeks feeding into the dam. Itis therefore alternatively conceivable that this species(or hybrids of this species and Eastern Rainbowfish)could have gained access to the West Barron MainChannel unassisted by humans, although this event initself could be regarded as a translocation as the channelis an artificial environment.

Pacific Blue-eye (Pseudomugil signifier)Pacific Blue-eye is a common species along the east coastof Australia from north of Ulladulla NSW to aboutCooktown, although there are records further northincluding the Torres Strait Islands and the western sideof Cape York Peninsula (Allen et al. 2002; Hansen &Constable 2016). The species occurs in mangrove creeksand even around some offshore islands. It travels wellupstream in clear coastal streams but does not occur inelevated localities in the Wet Tropics (K. Martin pers.obs.). There are however records of the species occurringin elevations above 180 m in the Nightcap and BorderRanges of south-eastern Queensland (M. Stanton pers.comm.).

A population of Pacific Blue-eye is well established atStreets Creek (Figure 4), on the Kuranda Range nearCairns. This is a small rainforest creek at 370 m eleva-

tion. The creek debouches into the Barron Gorge via avertical drop waterfall of about 100 m and it would seemextremely unlikely that this species could climb such anobstacle.

Various collectors have surveyed Streets Creek in thepast as it had a particularly colourful form of EasternRainbowfish. Advice to the author from collectors in the1980s indicates that no Pacific Blue-eye were present atthat time (G. Aland pers. comm.). The author first sur-veyed Streets Creek in about 1997 and found no PacificBlue-eye at the site then, but the species was abundantat the site during surveys by the author in 2011 andlater, and was still present there in January 2017(Figure 14). There are no other records for this species inthe upper Barron River (ie. above Barron Falls) catch-ment, or any other catchments on the AthertonTablelands.

There is a suspicion that these fish may have been intro-duced to the same upstream dam that EasternRainbowfish were released (see earlier section), possiblyaround the early 2000s, but this cannot be confirmed.Other exotic fish species, including Guppies (Poeciliareticulata), Platies (Xiphophorus maculatus) andMosquitofish are also now extremely abundant inStreets Creek.


Figure 14. Pacific Blue-eye collected at Streets Creek, Kuranda Range in January 2017. Photo: Keith Martin

Spotted Blue-eye (Pseudomugil gertrudae)Spotted Blue-eye is a small, attractive blue-eye whichhas a patchy distribution across northern Australia andsouthern New Guinea, extending down the eastQueensland coast as far south as the Murray Swamps,near Cardwell (Allen et al. 2002). This species is restrict-ed to lowland, low elevation habitats, typically in flood-plain environments, swamps, sedgelands and associatedsmall feeder streams (Pusey et al. 2004).

A population of Spotted Blue-eye is present in somesmall tributaries of the upper Barron River, in theMount Quinkan area on the Atherton Tablelands at ele-vations of around 700 m. Given the known natural dis-tribution and habitat preference of this species, theupper Barron population has generally been regarded asa translocation (Russell et al. 2000; Pusey et al. 2004).The upper section of Kennie Creek has undergone signif-icant stream modification through construction of aseries of large dams which have created artificial wet-land habitats (Figure 15). The translocation event islikely to have occurred in that area in the late 1980s,when a property owner is said to have introduced severalfish species into these dams (G. Aland; Z. Holmes pers.comm.).

Spotted Blue-eye is now abundant in the swamps of theKennie Creek area (Figure 16). The author found thespecies to be still present there in September 2016, so

this population seems to be well established. It has alsospread to adjacent and downstream areas and has beenrecorded in Quinkan Creek, Leslie Creek, Gwynne Creekand the main Barron River channel (James CookUniversity 2016; Russell et al. 2000). There has beensome speculation the translocated fish may have origi-nated in New Guinea (G. Aland pers. comm.), howeverthis upper Barron River form has now been geneticallytested and found to match local eastern Queensland pop-ulations (M. Hammer pers. comm.).

ConclusionsGiven the large numbers of fish species which have beenintroduced or translocated in the Wet Tropics region, itis not surprising that rainbowfishes and blue-eyes areamongst them. These fish may have been released eitherdeliberately or accidentally, or may have taken advan-tage of human-induced habitat modifications such asriver diversions. None of the species identified haveexpanded their range very far from their release sites orcatchments, and some translocations may have failed.Not all populations can conclusively be identified astranslocations, and given potential gaps in survey cover-age in space and time, further genetic research offers thebest chance of identifying native status.

Although rainbowfishes and blue-eyes would seem to bebenign fish families, unlikely to have any harmfuleffects, recent evidence suggests this is not the case.Eastern Rainbowfish in particular seems to be an


Figure 15. Extensive artificial wetlands along Kennie Creek, Atherton Tablelands where Spotted Blue-eye has been translocated. Photo: Keith Martin

aggressive coloniser whose recent expansion into smallstreams of the upper Barron, North Johnstone andupper Burdekin River systems has had an extremelydetrimental effect on the integrity of “old endemic” rain-bowfishes through competitive exclusion and interbreed-ing (Unmack & Hammer 2015).

Rainbowfishes and blue-eyes in the Wet Tropics regionmust compete with a number of alien fishes which werelikely introduced by aquarists. These include Guppies,Platies and Swordtails (Xiphophorus helleri), all ofwhich are often extremely abundant in rainbowfish andblue-eye habitats. Based on the examples presented inthis article, there is little evidence that any of thetranslocated rainbowfishes or blue-eyes arrived at theirdestinations through release by aquarists, and even if so,these would be very localised incidents. If aquarists wereregularly releasing rainbowfishes or blue-eyes into WetTropics streams, then it might be expected the morecommon aquarium species would be turning up. Forexample, New Guinea species such as Boeseman’sRainbowfish (Melanotaenia boesemani) and NeonRainbowfish (Melanotaenia praecox) are commonlyavailable in Cairns aquarium shops, but there are norecorded incidences of these species occurring wild in theWet Tropics, even though they are likely to find the habi-tats suitable.

One observation worth noting is that in communicationsfrom research in the area, many well-meaning membersof the general public think they are doing the right thingby “encouraging” native fish for mosquito control or mov-ing them around for biodiversity improvement. While it

is certainly better to use native fish in ponds thanTilapia or Mosquitofish, any movements of native fishcan be detrimental. Greater education on the potentialimpacts of translocations are required, and this needs tobe backed up by detailed baseline surveying of speciesdistributions, as well as research to fully realise biodi-versity conservation targets in the number of speciesoccurring and the locations of genetically distinct popu-lations.

AcknowledgementsSusan Barclay and Gary Moores assisted in the fieldwork. G. Aland, G. Birch, A. Dawson, G. Schmida, G.Watson, B. Hansen, M. Bogart, Z. Holmes, G. Briggs, A.Small, M. Trenerry and R. Constable provided localadvice on some of these translocations. M. Hammer andP. Unmack provided information on recent geneticsinvestigations. B. Ebner and M. Hammer provided valu-able comments on an early draft of this article. Thisresearch was conducted under Qld General FisheriesPermit 162324.

ReferencesAllen, G.R., Midgley, S.H. & Allen, M. 2002. Field guide to the

freshwater fishes of Australia. Western AustralianMuseum, Perth.tt

Barlow, C.G., Hogan, A.E. & Rodger, L.J. 1987. Implication oftranslocated fishes in the apparent extinction in the wild ofthe Lake Eacham rainbowfish, Melanotaenia eachamensis.Marine and Freshwater Research,38, 897–902.

Brown, C., Aksoy, Y., Varinli, H. & Gillings, M. 2013.Identification of the rainbowfish in Lake Eacham usingDNA sequencing. Australian Journal of Zoology, 60, 334–339.


Figure 16. Spotted Blue-eye collected at Kennie Creek, Atherton Tablelands in August 2016. Photo: Keith Martin

Burrows, D.W. 2004. Translocated fishes in streams of the WetTropics Region, North Queensland: distribution and poten-tial impact. Cooperative Research Centre for TropicalRainforest Ecology and Management. Rainforest CRC,Cairns, 83pp.

Cook, B.D., Unmack, P.J., Huey, J.A. & Hughes, J.M. 2014.Did common disjunct populations of freshwater fishes innorthern Australia form from the same biogeographicevents? Freshwater Science, 33, 263–272.

Dawson, A. & Dawson, F. 1996. Magnificent Wallaby CreekRainbow. Fishes of Sahul, 10(1), 439–443.

Hansen, B. & Constable, R. 2016. Blue-eye diversity inAustralia, including new distribution locality records witha focus on the Torres Strait Islands. Fishes of Sahul, 30(2),989–996.

Harris, J.H. 2013. Fishes from Elsewhere. In Humphries, P. &Walker, K.F. (eds) Ecology of Australian FreshwaterFishes. CSIRO Publishing, 423 pp.

Hammer, M. (2006). Range extensions for four estuarine gobies(Pisces: Gobiidae) in southern Australia: historically over-looked native taxa or recent arrivals? Transactions of theRoyal Society of South Australia, 130, 187-196.

Hammer, M. P., Goodmand, T. S., Adams, M., Faulks, L. F.,Unmack, P. J., Whiterod, N. S., & Walker, K. F. (2015).Regional extinction, rediscovery and rescue of a freshwaterfish from a highly modified environment: the need for rapidresponse. Biological Conservation, 192, 91–100.

Hortle, K.G. & Person, R.G. 1990. Fauna of the Annan Riversystem, far north Queensland, with reference to the impactof tin mining. I. fishes. Marine and Freshwater Research,41, 677–694.

Hurwood D.A. & Hughes J.M. 2001. Historical interdrainagedispersal of eastern rainbowfish from the AthertonTableland, north�eastern Australia. Journal of FishBiology, 58, 1125–1136.

James Cook University. 2016. North Australian freshwaterfish – fish atlas of North Australia.ht tps : / / research . j cu .edu.au / tropwater / research-programs/freshwater-ecology-1/fish-atlas-of-northern-aus-tralia.

Lintermans, M. 2004. Human-assisted dispersal of alien fresh-water fish in Australia. New Zealand Journal of Marineand Freshwater Research, 38:3

Martin, K.C. 2016. Black-banded Rainbowfish (Melanotaenianigrans) in the Queensland Wet Tropics – a failed translo-cation? Fishes of Sahul, 30(3), 1015–1020.

Martin, K.C. & Barclay, S. 2015. Distribution and status ofBanded Rainbowfish Melanotaenia trifasciata(Melanotaeniidae) populations in north-easternQueensland. Aqua. International Journal of Ichthyology,21, 54–65.

Martin, K.C. & Barclay, S. 2016. Rainbowfishes(Melanotaeniidae) of the Rocky Creek springs district onthe Atherton Tablelands, north Queensland. NorthQueensland Naturalist, 46, 90–98.

Mayer, F. 2007. Melanotaenia maccullochi. General descrip-tion and breeding. Instream, Journal of the Australia NewGuinea Fishes Association Qld, 16(6), 8–15.

Pusey, B.J. 2004. Freshwater fish of the Burdekin River andassociated drainages: biodiversity, distribution, flow-relat-ed ecology. Appendix H. Environmental conditions report,Burdekin Basin draft water resource plan (WRP). Qld Dept.Natural Resources & Mines.

Pusey, B.J., Kennard, M.J. & Arthington, A.H. 2004.Freshwater fishes of north-eastern Australia. CSIROPublishing, Melbourne.

Pusey, B.J., Bird, J., Kennard, M.J. & Arthington, A.H. 1997.Distribution of the Lake Eacham rainbowfish in the WetTropics region, north Queensland. Australian Journal ofZoology, 45, 75–84.

Pusey, B.J., & Kennard, M.J. 1994. The freshwater fish faunaof the Wet Tropics Region of northern Queensland. Reportto Wet Tropics Management Authority.

Russell, D.J., Mcdougall, A.J., Ryan, T.J., Kistle, S.E., Aland,G., Cogle, A.L. & Langford, P.A. 2000. Natural resources ofthe Barron River catchment 1. Stream habitat, fisheriesresources and biological indicators. QueenslandDepartment of Primary Industries, Brisbane. Report No.QI00032.

Russell, D.J., Ryan, T.J., McDougall, A.J., Kistle, S.E. & Aland,G. 2003. Species diversity and spatial variation in fishassemblage structure of streams in connected tropicalcatchments in northern Australia with reference to theoccurrence of translocated and exotic species. Marine andFreshwater Research, 54, 813–824.

Sattler, P. and R. Williams (eds) 1999 The Conservation Statusof Queensland’s Bioregional Ecosystems. EnvironmentalProtection Agency, Brisbane.

Tappin, A.R. 2005. Kuranda Red Rainbowfish. Instream,Journal of the Australia New Guinea Fishes AssociationQld, 14(5), 18–19.

Tinaroo Environmental Education Centre. 2016. Tinaroo Dam.https://tinarooeec.eq.edu.au/Pages/Kids%20Pages/History/Tinaroo-Dam.aspx Accessed 14 November 2016.

Unmack, P.J. 2005. Historical biogeography and a priorihypotheses based on freshwater fishes. Ph.D. dissertation,Biology Department, Arizona State University, Tempe,Arizona.

Unmack, P.J. 2016. Update on saving Running RiverRainbowfish. Fishes of Sahul, 30(3), 1025–1032.

Unmack, P.J & Hammer, M. 2015. Burdekin rainbowfish onthe verge of disappearing. Fishes of Sahul, 29(4), 933–937.

Unmack, P.J, Martin, K.C., Hammer, M., Ebner, B., Moy, K. &Brown, C. 2016. Malanda Gold: the tale of a unique rain-bowfish from the Atherton Tablelands, now on the verge ofextinction. Fishes of Sahul, 30(4), 1039–1054.

Webb, A.C. 2007. Status of non-native freshwater fishes intropical northern Queensland, including establishment suc-cess, rates of spread, range and introduction pathways.Journal and Proceedings of the Royal Society of New SouthWales, 140, 63–78.

Zhu, D., Degnan, S. and Moritz, C. 1998. Evolutionary distinc-tiveness and status of the endangered Lake Eacham rain-bowfish (Melanotaenia eachamensis). Conservation Biology,12, 80–93.


https://tinarooeec.eq.edu.au/Pages/Kids%20Pages/History/Tinaroo-Dam.aspx

https://tinarooeec.eq.edu.au/Pages/Kids%20Pages/History/Tinaroo-Dam.aspx

https://research.jcu.edu.au/tropwater/research-programs/freshwater-ecology-1/fish-atlas-of-northern-australia.




Fish in focus: Peacock Gudgeon Tateurndina ocellicauda (Eleotridae)

Etymology: The name Tateurndina ocellicauda – bothgenus and species – was coined by John TreadwellNichols (1883–1958), an American ichthyologist-ornithologist, in 1955. The generic name is comprised ofthree parts: -ina means “belonging to”; urnd appears tobe a reference to the closely related genus Mogurnda;Tate refers to two brothers, George H. H. Tate (1884–1953) and Geoffrey M. Tate (1898–1964), both of whomwere colleagues of Nichols at the American Museum ofNatural History (AMNH) in New York City. The elderTate was a botanist and mammalogist who participatedin the Archbold Expeditions to New Guinea, but appar-ently was too sick to join the Fourth Archbold Expeditionin 1953, during which T. ocellicauda was collected forAMNH. Tate died later that year, due in part to linger-ing diseases he had contracted during his many fieldexpeditions to tropical locations. Geoffrey, his youngerbrother, served as business manager for the expeditionsand was responsible for collecting fishes (though he didnot personally collect this gudgeon). The specific name isa combination of ocellus, eyespot, and cauda, tail, refer-ring to what Nichols described as a “large, conspicuous,longitudinally oval black blotch at the base of caudal,partly surrounded by a bright band across peduncle infront of it, which is now whitish, but was yellow ororange when the specimens were placed in alcohol.”

A wild caught male Peacock Gudgeon from Safia, eastern Papua New Guinea, that was brought into Australia by Gerald Allen in 1982.Photo: Gunther Schmida

Distribution: Eastern Papua New Guinea, on thenorth-eastern side of the Owen Stanley Range. Commonin rainforest streams in the vicinity of Popendetta andSafia. Often forms schools that hover over the bottom.Co-occurs with Pseudomugil conniae.

Distribution of Peacock Gudgeon. Map: Peter Unmack


Peacock Gudgeon habitat – Popondetta area, eastern Papua New Guinea. Photo: Gerald Allen Photo inset: Male (at rear) and female Peacock Gudgeon flaring. Photo: Neil Armstrong


Peacock Gudgeon habitat – Safia area, eastern Papua New Guinea.Photo: Gerald Allen

Conservation Status: No conservation issues.

General Aquarium Care: Peacock Gudgeon is bestkept in a species tank as they have a predisposition to finnipping. They can be kept with larger species if a closeeye is kept on them. They are quite comfortable in anano setup with plants and rocky nooks. Depending onthe size of the tank, they can be kept in colonies from 6to 20, however it is recommended that they be removedfor breeding if you want to maximise the number of fryto be successfully raised. Some Java Fern is good forhelping create hidey holes. A gravel base with 2–3 mmsized gravel and some larger rocks provides a suitablesubstrate. Good filtration is required and water changesof 20% every 2 weeks are suggested during summer.

Temperature and Water Parameters: The idealwater conditions are typically between 23–26 oC, pH6.8–7.5, GH 30–50 ppm and a TDS of 100–150 ppm.Peacock Gudgeon are fairly robust, however, they do notlike acid conditions. They have been reported to toleratetemperatures from 15–35 oC (Caughey 1984).

Types of Foods Readily Accepted: Peacock Gudgeonprefer live food; in the wild they eat insect nymphs, andother small invertebrates and crustaceans. In captivitythey will readily eat most standard “real” live or frozenfoods like blood and grindle worms, brine shrimp, daph-nia and mosquito larvae, but with a little persistencethey can usually be trained to eat flakes and granules.

Sexing: Traditionally the easiest way to sex PeacockGudgeon has been to look at the edge of the anal finwhich in females is normally black, however in some

Ripe female Peacock Gudgeon with black edging on her fins. Photo: John Lenagan


Male Peacock Gudgeon in front of PVC pipe, waiting for the female to lay her eggs. Photo: John Lenagan

Male Peacock Gudgeon (at front) trying to entice a female to lay eggs in his PVC pipe. Photo: John Lenagan

populations in the aquarium trade the females have lostthe black edge. Males often grow slightly larger and havedistinct a raised hump on their head.

Breeding Size: Fish start to show sexual dimorphismaround 2 cm and should be mature around 3.5 cm TL.Maximum size is around 7 cm in captivity.

Spawning Aspects: Breeding Peacock Gudgeon is fair-ly easy in captivity. It is best to establish a breedingcolony with 3 males and 6 or more females; you can dothis in a 2 or 3 foot planted tank with good filtration andwater temperature 24 oC or thereabouts. Males typicallyfind a sheltered rock crevice and clean it in preparationfor the female, alternatively an 8 cm length of 2 cmdiameter PVC tubing works well. Generally you can


have four of these in the tank and each male will set upcamp and once it is cleaned will start displaying withfins spread wide and a few rhythmic flutters in front ofhis cave to attract any females that are observing closeby. The female will follow the male into the breedingtube where she will lay 30–60 eggs which are adhered tothe side or roof which the male then comes back in to fer-tilise. The male then constantly guards the nest and fansthe eggs; the female is often driven away from the nestand can be removed from the tank. The breedingtube/cave can also be removed to another tank (with thesame water chemistry). At this point if you want to max-imise hatching, an air hose can be gently positioned intothe lower end of the PVC tube to create constant circula-tion across the eggs until they hatch. The eggs hatch in6–10 days with fry being fairly large and able to take

Male Peacock Gudgeon guarding the developing eggs. Photo: John Lenagan

FISHES OF SAHUL is the official journal of the Australia New Guinea Fishes Association Inc. www.angfa.org.auFishes Of Sahul is produced by the Publications Committee: Greg Martin (layout/design), Glenn Briggs (committee chair), Peter Unmack (article & review coordinator), JohnLenagan, Leo O'Reilly, David Shoesmith, Matthew Stanton, Derek Tustin and Greg Wallis. Contact the committee via [email protected] Subscription inquiries:[email protected] welcomes submission of articles on any topics relating to native fishes. Please submit articles to [email protected], and see our instructions for authors athttp://angfa.org.au/fishes-of-sahul/145-fishes-of-sahul-submission-guidelines.htmlAll submissions to Fishes of Sahul are formally peer reviewed by anonymous reviewers.© photographs: actual photographer. © text: the author(s).

Juvenile Peacock Gudgeon. Photo: John Lenagan


vinegar eels, microworms or baby brine shrimp straightaway. Live food is best for good growth. At 4 weeks andat around 1 cm long, the young will take dry flake food.At 6–8 weeks the young fish should be nearly 1.5–2 cmand the faster growing individuals need to be separatedfrom smaller fry as they will feed on them. The growingup tanks are best set up with a good cover of floatingplants and planted ferns where fish are able to find shel-ter readily. The young fish grow fairly fast and can beready to breed within 8–9 months. Adults can breed sev-eral times each year.

General information: Peacock Gudgeon is one of thesmaller species in the Gudgeon family. They are closelyrelated to Purple Spotted Gudgeons (Mogurnda), differ-ing primarily in having an outer row of enlarged, widelyspaced teeth in each jaw. Their general colour is mauvewith 12 narrow orange/red cross bars on the side, a yel-lowish belly, and a black eye spot preceded by a yellowvertical band occurs at the base of the caudal fin. Theyhave 2–3 reddish stripes across their cheek, the dorsaland anal fins have small reddish spots, and the marginsof dorsal, caudal and anal fins are yellow, except theedge of the anal fin of the females which is broadly black.

Peacock Gudgeon is fairly active in the tank, they arealways looking out and checking you out. They engagewith you directly at feeding time and when you moveinto the fish room. We recommend you have good light-ing and keep plants to the back and sides of the tank to

allow central open areas where fish can be easily seenduring territorial displays which often bring out theirbest colours. They have been known to live up to 4–6years in captivity. Overall Peacock Gudgeon make greatlittle aquarium fish, not as aggressive as most gudgeonsand surprisingly tolerant of variable temperatures.

References: Caughey, A. 1984. The Peacock Gudgeon, Tateurndina

ocellicauda. Fishes of Sahul 2(1), 49–53.

Contributors: Text: John Lenagan, Peter J. Unmack &Bruce Hansen. Etymology: Christopher Scharpf.Distribution map: Peter J. Unmack. Photographers:Gerald Allen, Neil Armstrong, John Lenagan andGunther Schmida.

The first wild-caught Peacock Gudgeon ever photographed was thisspecimen in 1982. Photo: Neil Armstrong

JOURNAL OF THE AUSTRALIA NEW GUINEA FISHES ASSOCIATION · 9/3/2017 · looked. In his seminal work...

Documents

Transcript of JOURNAL OF THE AUSTRALIA NEW GUINEA FISHES ASSOCIATION · 9/3/2017 · looked. In his seminal work...