WT-71: The Wild Bettas – Part 1 - International Betta Congress

March/April 1994
WT-71
unimaculata (Popta, 1905)
In 1910, C. Tate Regan renamed Cantor’s pugnax, and declared it to be B. splendens, from
which comes our long finned domestic variety. Thus, after the official name, we see (Regan), as he is
given credit for naming the species at that time. Regan also named and described several other Betta
species: akarensis, bleekeri, fasciata, fusca, macrostoma, and taeniata.
Other discovery/descriptions followed Regan’s: ocellata (Beaufort, 1933), brederi (Myers, 1935),
balunga (Herre,1940), smaragdina (Ladiges, 1975), imbellis (Ladiges, 1975), and also coccina (?).
The pugnax/splendens confusion represents only the tip of the taxonomical iceberg. Few of
these Bettas are known to us today. It is possible that a single may have been described twice with
different names. Often, preserved specimens were used to make the description. Preservation can
radically alter the color and proportions of a single specimen. Because wild Bettas have, until recently,
lacked popularity as aquarium fishes, no one bothered to collect numbers of them, and there was
nothing to compare with the preserved holotypes (specimens from which the original descriptions were
made).
Those who have studied the Bettas in recent years (like Gene Lucas) generally agree that there
are probably fewer species than the descriptions would suggest. Repetition in description, poorly
preserved holotypes, and the geographical variation or single species could account for some of the
duplication. In fact, M.W.F. Tweedie has gone so far as to suggest (1952) that only two species of
Betta are found on the Malaysian peninsula: a bubblenester (represented by splendens) and a
mouthbrooder (pugnax). Whether this concept extends to all Bettas is doubtful, as; evidenced by the
recent appearance of macrostoma in Borneo. It is a mouthbrooder, but preliminary photos (TFH,
October ’81) do not suggest much resemblance to the better-known mouthbrooders.
Accurate decisions about species cannot be made until much more is known about the various
wild Bettas. In the upcoming articles, I will try to differentiate between ‘species’ and “variety,’ which
usually refers to interbreed able types like red, blue, Cambodian, singletailed and doubletailed
splendens. They have been artificially produced. The wild Bettas known to us do not interbreed with
much success, although some have been crossed with domestic splendens (more about that next
month).
As the series unfolds, much will be revealed about the methods of studying wild Bettas. There
are several, and any enthusiasts ought to try as many as possible.
One method is to examine preserved specimens. It is the only way some of us will ever see the
rarer Bettas, it helps to live near an institution like the Smithsonian in Washington, D.C., or the Steinhart
Aquarium in San Francisco. Many universities and museums, however, have collections worth
checking. This is, in my view, the poorest of the methods. Unless one is trained in the professional
analysis techniques like scale, tooth, and ray counting, the specimens — often poorly preserved and
mislabeled — are of little value except for general overview and comparison.
The second method involves reading. Only now are some of the original descriptions being
ferreted out, in some case; translated, and made available to general readers. Many magazine articles
exist from FAMA, TFH, and other sources (some in German). A few books provide information about
these species. Hopefully more are in the works. The bibliographic included with each FAMA article will
Retyped From Original Article on 08/12/02 By Ralph Tran
Public Relations committee ~ Technical Assistance Library ~ Retyping team
Original document date ~ March/April 1994
Illustrations ~ None
4 of 5