CACrown ArchivesThe cinema collection
EN/FR
Search
Menu
Research dossier · Science & Nature

Heteroclinus tristis

species of fish

Specimen drawers, botanical folios and brass scientific instruments under study light
Science and natureInterpretive dossier study · Crown Archives visual atlas
Record originEnglish Wikipedia
Text licenseCC BY-SA 4.0
Source revisionOct 3, 2025
Entity authorityQ3044035 ↗
Source-derived summary

Heteroclinus tristis, the sharp-nose weedfish, is a species of clinid native to the coastal waters of southern Australia where it prefers sandy reefs with sparse vegetation. This species can reach a maximum length of 30 centimetres (12 in) TL. This species feed primarily fishes, shrimp and prawns.

Editorial summary

The public source identifies “Heteroclinus tristis” as species of fish. This brief keeps that definition visible, then builds a research path around Heteroclinus, tristis and species.

Editorial reviewA sound reference starting point where classification, measurement and the date of the underlying evidence remain visible. The current 47-word lead offers orientation but no explicit four-digit date, so chronology should not be assumed. The selected authority fields contribute no independent date. Its value is orientation rather than verdict, with Heteroclinus, tristis and species providing the first useful test.
Editorial analysis

Why this record matters

A short description can identify a subject without explaining its stakes. For “Heteroclinus tristis”, the useful work is to connect “species of fish” to the records capable of establishing context and consequence.

Evidence profile

Datasets, specimens, observations and peer-reviewed methods provide the appropriate test for the technical claims summarized here. The source revision retrieved here is dated Oct 3, 2025. The linked authority identifier is Q3044035. None of the 0 selected statements returned an explicit reference.

Critical limits

Current terminology should not be projected backward without checking the classification used when the underlying evidence was created. The lead is largely declarative, so disagreement and counter-evidence require a deliberate search beyond the opening account. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.

How to read it

Check terminology, classification and the date of the cited evidence. Scientific names and technical consensus can change while older records retain historical value.

Best used for
  • Current terminology
  • Classification context
  • Finding cited technical literature
Verify next

Primary datasets, specimen catalogues, standards bodies and the most recent peer-reviewed literature.

Three-step research path

  1. Establish the record: confirm the title “Heteroclinus tristis”, its source revision and the description used here.
  2. Expand the search: follow Heteroclinus tristis primary sources, Heteroclinus tristis archive and Heteroclinus research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
  3. Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.

Questions for further research

  1. Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Heteroclinus tristis”?
  2. Which observation, specimen, dataset or publication supports the account?
  3. Has classification or technical consensus changed since the cited source?
Subject index

Search terms from this dossier

Source & attribution

This entry incorporates text from “Heteroclinus tristis” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.