From CRC (
http://www.cichlidae.com/gallery/species.php?id=411):
Aquaristics: It is not known (and perhaps impossible to determine) when
Hemichromis lifalili was first introduced, for it was and is still subject to many misidentifications. In regards to the name, it is possibly the most popular
Hemichromis species in the hobby, but these ‘aquarium-lifalilis‘ are a mix of several wild and domesticated forms which are most likely
H. guttatus.
A few years ago, a species from the Lower Congo appeared in the hobby (both North America and Europe) which is referred to as
Hemichromis sp. ‚Moanda‘. It corresponds well to Loiselle‘s 1979 description (except for life color data), and indeed he listed specimens from Moanda among the additional material identified as
Hemichromis lifalili. These beautiful fishes have attained a wide, though scattered distribution in the hobby, for they are rather peaceful and easily bred.
Conservation: Hemichromis lifalili is
evaluated by the international union for the conservation of nature in the iucn red list of threatened species as (LC) least concern (2010).
Comments: As noted above,
Hemichromis lifalili was often misidentified. Loiselle (1979, 1992) presented a monochrome photo of a live fish said to be collected near Kinshasa (Pool Malebo according to the latter work). This fish seems to belong to the
H. guttatus/
H. letourneuxi complex. Indeed, Loiselle considered
Hemichromis lifalili most closely related to
H. letourneuxi based on the lower pharyngeal dentition. However, the fish photographed by Loiselle does not correspond to the holotype (as figured in FishBase), which resembles rather
H. stellifer. It may be misidentified due to wrong locality data, although it cannot be excluded that a
H. guttatus/
H. letourneuxi-like species is present in the Congo drainage as well.
Misidentifications in the hobby may have occurred for the same reason, however, much of the confusion is due to aquarist’s disregard of one of the most important results of Loiselle’s 1979 work, i.e. the identification of the then most common species in the hobby as
H. guttatus. Instead, it has been referred to under several other names, above all that of
Hemichromis lifalili. The “Aquarium-lifalili” is thus probably nothing but a mix of different aquarium strains (including oligomelanotic breeds etc.) and wild-caught forms of
H. guttatus. Indeed, it cannot be excluded that other species are involved, since it has long been thought that only one species of Red Jewels would exist -
H. bimaculatus. Already Engmann (1909) reported the existence of different ‘forms’.
In more recent years, several Congolese populations have been introduced, which may well correspond to the true
Hemichromis lifalili as currently defined. These seem to be more closely related to
H. stellifer and
H. sp. ‘Gabon’. One has apparently been reported first by Freyhof (1995) as
H. sp. ‘Bangui’, it is not to be confused with the fish later referred to under this provisional name. It resembles
H. sp. ‘Gabon’ except for having a red iris, a red spot before the opercular blotch, the red body coloration restricted to the lower parts and a somewhat more convex head profile. It has apparently not attained any considerable popularity in the hobby. The same is true for a more intensely colored form of unknown origin, figured by Werner (2003) and Lamboj (2004) as a possible color variant of or an unidentified species related to
H. stellifer, respectively. The fish named
H. sp. ‘Moanda’, on the other hand, has received more attention by the aquarists. It is said to come from the Lower Congo and is easily recognized by the yellow coloration of the lower parts of head and body, which is sharply defined against the red flanks and upper parts. A similarly colored fish from Boma (Lower Congo) was already described by Boulenger (1901) from a watercolor sketch by the collector, Delhez.
H. sp. ‘Moanda’ and the other forms discussed in this paragraph are certainly referable to
Hemichromis lifalili as currently understood. Unfortunately, however, the life colors of the population from the type locality are not known, and it cannot be excluded that several species are hidden under the name
Hemichromis lifalili.
I need a refresher!
