identify this odd pleco?

[sidguppy]

this is a fish from a forum member of the Dutch cichlid forum

it is NOT a gibby, the overal shape doesn't match.......but the colors do!

it's some sort of Ancistrinae, but wich one?







the OP thouight it was some sort of Parancistrus, but it's not flat or broad enough.
it reminded me of Pseudacanthicus, but I can't see any spines.....

anyone fancy a search through the huge load of Loricariids?

[Flex]

In my opinion it's Megalancistrus parananus. But I'm not an expert.

[Mike_Noren]

To me that looks like a deformed gibbiceps. I'd guess some sort of problem with the spine.

[racoll]

Hypostomus latifrons

if you ask me.

[dconnors]

It also looks like a deformed gibby to me as well.

[racoll]

It also looks like a deformed gibby to me as well.

It can't be. There are not enough dorsal fin rays (8 vs. 14).

[sidguppy]

Megalancistrus parananus

looks like a match indeed!


it has the same coloration, the same smooth headshape (the gibby has a 'bumpy' head) and the short stubby build and count of fin rays match.

[racoll]

Megalancistrus parananus looks like a match indeed!

Its not a Megalancistrus. There are no cheek odontodes, and its nowhere near spiny enough.

Therefore, this is Hypostomini rather than Ancistrini.

[sidguppy]

it's a young fish, not even 20 cm TL.
Megalancistrus grows to 60 cm SL, probably 70-75cm TL.......

I think the spines, especially those on the cheeks grow when it reaches maturity, not when it's a juvenile.

maybe not, but most "hairy" or "spiny" Loricariids grow all that spine stuff when they get into breeding size or age.

[Borbi]

Hi,

well, on this one, I would have to back Racoll.
Megalancistrus show their body spines very early, just like Pseudacanthicus. In these genera, they appear to be more of a protective thing rather than related to sexual maturity. That´s especially apparent in the second pic, no spiny "bumps" whatsoever.
Additionally, the cheek odontodes should be visible on the pictures, if it was Megalancistrus.

So, Hypostomus latifrons appears to be right, but I don´t have my literature around, at present.

Cheers, Sandor