The taxonomic status of Aphyosemion batesii, Aphyosemion splendidus and Aphyosemion kunzi is very much in question.
Currently (2015) in the taxonomic record they're both junior synonyms of BAT; DNA testing is underway to see if the SPL and KUZ fish are just color morphs or species in their own right.
See these notes on A. batesii taxonomy. See also Bounger's description of A. batesii.
The problem with BAT/KUZ is this:
KUZ are genetically distinct from BAT and that is enough to open up questions whether BAT and KUZ are actually the same fish, the fact there are two distinct and different forms of KUZ may imply the BAT morph is a derived form of KUZ; certainly one had to come from the other!
IMO (rjs)the DNS tests, when JVDZ and Sonnenberg are finished doing them, will shot SPL and BAT are derived forms of the KUZ morphospecies and at least three species exist in Raddaella it is possible there could be more still yet to be identified, to say all of Raddaella is BAT seems absurd as the idea there's one type of BIV.