基本上我非常懷疑台灣所有有關外來種研究或淡水魚研究中對所謂"琵琶鼠"的鑑定是否正確. 台灣的琵琶鼠一開始被大量進口的來源就是東南亞, 如果已經在東南亞成為外來種的琵琶鼠是pardalis和disjunctivus兩個種, 怎麼到了台灣會變成原產於委內瑞拉Orinoco的multiradiatus? 就連菲律賓近期的記錄(Chavez et al. 2006)也顯示東南亞的種類是pardalis與disjunctivus. 此外, 當我們使用google搜尋琵琶鼠的資訊時, 總會看到不少似是而非的資訊, 有些二手傳播資訊甚至指稱台灣水域中的琵琶鼠"還有一種叫Hypostomus plecostomus". 然而這是一種原產於蘇利南的魚, 但台灣的水族貿易商幾乎不從蘇利南進口熱帶魚(因沒有航線), 所以台灣會如何大量得到Hypostomus plecostomus且任其在野外拓殖立足呢? 我認為這類訊息的傳遞應該要基於科學邏輯, 而不是一再地在論文, 科展與資料庫中複製錯誤的訊息. 而且隨便寫兩句把A物種張冠李戴成B物種, 再把幾個物種打包變成"破壞台灣生態環境的X大元兇", 然後再寫幾篇熱情澎湃充滿土地情感但其實反智的文章, 什麼都是"大舉入侵台灣", "什麼都是不肖業者+民眾棄養", 最後都要"有關單位管一管", 外來種的議題就會真得比較清楚而且往正面的方向發展了嗎? 文獻來源: Page LM, Robins RH. 2006. Identification of Sailfin Catfishes (Teleostei: Lorcariidae) in Southeastern Asia. The Raffles Bulletin of Zoology 54(2): 455-457. [全文]
Abstract
Three species of sailfin catfishes (Pterogoplichthys) native to South America, P. multiradiatus, P. pardalis and P. disjunctivus, have been collected recently in several countries in southeastern Asia. Pterogoplichthys multiradiatus is known to reproduce in Taiwan, and P. pardalis is presumed to be reprodusing in Singapore given the frequency of its collection and the range in size of specimens collected. The status of the species elsewhere in southeastern Asia is less certain. These catfishes are common in the pet trade and almost certainly were released by aquarists. It is likely that these fishes will become widely established in southweatern Asia and will have negative environmental impacts, including alternation of food webs, in non-native areas.
