One of the most confusing aspects
of the cichlid hobby, can be learning
all of these Latin words, that are
used to name the fish. It seems,
that once you just get to learn
some of the names, they get changed.
But what happens, when even the
scientific community cannot agree
on what to call our fish? You will
see throughout this website, across
the Internet, and through the press
magazines and books, both Maylandia,
and Metriaclima used to describe
the same fishes. Many people do
get confused, and wonder if they
are different fish, but in fact,
they are two different names attempting
to describe fish which are the same.
So, how exactly did this come to happen, and which is the more correct name?
I am not going to try and persuade
you one way or the other as to which
is more correct, but I will provide
you with the basic arguments that
each side uses. Suffice it to say,
this is an argument as much about
semantics as it is anything else.
The genus that these fish came
from derive from was Pseudotropheus
(Regan 1922), but the genus allowed
for subgenera within it. The “zebra”
group and affiliates were part of
this subgroup, and were placed into
a newly formed genus Maylandia
by Meyer and Foerster (1984). The
genus was named in honour of Hans
Mayland, a noted ichthyologist.
This change was generally accepted
at the time, and the “zebra” group,
were then known a Maylandia.
Meyer & Foerster provided a diagnosis
and a 
description of Maylandia
and its type species, M. greshakei,
though the description did have
its flaws, proponents called them
“minor”. The rules of the International
Code of Zoological Nomenclature
(ICZN) put forth how fish are named,
and how these names can be disputed
if someone finds them to be invalid.
The ICZN also states that when two
names have been proposed, and neither
disputed, then the senior name is
to be favoured. Given that Maylandia
has never been properly disputed
using ICZN protocol and steps, supporters
of Maylandia conclude it
must have preference. Those who
challenge the name, suggest that
Maylandia in itself means nothing
(given it is not descriptive, but
a name in honour of someone, which
is typical for species names, but
not for genus), and that the description
is flawed.
In 1997, the group of Stuaffer,
Bowers, Kellogg and McKaye came
to the conclusion that Maylandia
was nomen nudum (latin for means
nothing) and thus an invalid name.
They proposed that Metriaclima
be the name for the “zebra” group
from Pseudotropheus. They
provided a full description of the
genus, that they believe to be without
the flaws in the Maylandia
description.
So in summary, Maylandia
was proposed first, meets the ICZN
requirements, but is not perfect
for a couple of reasons. Another
group suggested Metriaclima
would more correct, but didn’t go
through the correct process and
protocol to have the Maylandia
name overruled. It basically is
an argument over semantics and protocol,
although one can’t wonder if there
is more to it. Until such time as
there is an official agreement,
(hah!) both names will be used and
at least for hobbyist purposes,
both are correct, for now. □
