Thinking of Synodontis: angelica or brichardi?

[Scleropages]

With regards to the situation in my "disaster strikes" thread, I am getting a new tank tomorrow night through Perfecto's warranty. Looking forward to getting it set back up and getting the cichlids (Uaru and angelfish) back in the tank. I am also looking forward to restocking fish for the lower levels... which usually involves catfish. I am considering getting a group of S. angelica or S. brichardi if I can find them. Considering it is a 125gal tank, am I better off going with S. brichardi because of size contraints?

Of course, if I happen along a group of S. alberti again and the price is right, I may restock with those--I really liked the group I just lost. It was great to observe the tank at night with a red light--they would cruise all over the tank and all over the cichlids as well (while they slept, I assume).

[Birger]

I really like my

Synodontis angelica

so am partial to them...but

Synodontis brichardi

are a great fish as well. Would you want to do a river tank for them or keep them together with the Uaru and angelfish, my

Synodontis soloni

are also rheophilic and I do not think they would do as well if kept with these fish.

Birger

[MatsP]

I've heard that groups of S. angelica don't work that well, as they are quite aggressive/territorial. They do OK with other species that are significantly smaller, but not large ones.

--
Mats

[Richard B]

If it's a choice between these two species then Brichardi would get my vote as it presents less problems IMHO.

However it depends on availability but if you can get them, then,

Synodontis congica

,

Synodontis flavitaeniata

,

Synodontis schoutedeni

or perhaps even

Synodontis nummifer

could be considered? Certainly the first 2 species can be kept in good sized groups without problem & look fantastic

[Scleropages]

Thanks for the advice, guys. I really like S. angelica (it's been something like 20 years since I've last kept one in one of my own tanks) but I understand that I realistically won't be able to raise a group of them together in the 125gal. Whatever goes in that tank will have to be able to get along with my Uaru--I've been breeding this species for the past 8 years or so--when they lay eggs for me. I have no plans to get rid of them. This pair are F1's... or maybe F2's. I bought their parents back in 2002. I have a few juveniles in my 55gal tank that I kept from a previous spawn... waiting for them to grow out before putting them in with mom and dad. Anyway, the S. alberti were getting along with the Uaru beautifully--hence why I want to go with synos again. I had kept royal plecos with the Uaru in the past, but, the Uaru would eventually start picking at them and not stop until either they were dead or I moved them to another tank. While they are not very aggressive, it has been my experience that once a Uaru starts picking at something, they become fanatical about it and don't stop until it is picked away. It seems to me that synos handle themselves very well with fish that like to pick.

So, depending on availability, I will either get another group of S. alberti or I will go with S. brichardi. Richard, thanks for recommending the other species, but I'm not too interested in them at the moment.

[Birger]

but I understand that I realistically won't be able to raise a group of them together in the 125gal

I have not had a problem with this...except when housed with spawning substrate spawning cichlids, then they get pushed together. Otherwise while I have to keep an eye on them things stay fairly stable.

Birger

[Scleropages]

Hmm... you are making me keep my mind open with regards to the S. angelica, Birger. I will see what's available over the next few weeks.

BTW, I got the tank home and almost completely set up. Traded 2 six-packs of craft beer to a friend with a pickup truck to help me make the swap. Just making sure the temp is stabilized before putting the Uaru and angels in.

[sidguppy]

uaru and Angelfish like very warm and soft water.

they also like the tank to be a bit stagnant.
it's no surprise that in this tragic case the Angelfish was the sole survivor!

the brichardi is a rheophile species.
this means that it likes it's water a bit more mineral rich, but far more important: oxygen rich and moving!
current. lots of it.

a tank wich houses brichardi is unsuitable for Angelfish and vice versa

the same goes for brichardi.
this one too needs more watermovement and definitely more oxygen than angels or uaru's.

the angelica is much more at home in the kind of water that Uaru and Angelfish like

unfortunately here's an other issue at work: synodontis angelica is a brave fish with a fair bit of character and it romps about at night
it'll FREAK OUT your cichlids

in short: NEITHER ONE is suitable for your tanks.
1 needs different waterparameters
1 has "too much personality"

there are plenty of synodontis species that would suit a tank with Uaru's and Angelfish, for example synodontis nigriventris or synodontis flavitaeniatus

but not the 2 species mentioned before.

[Scleropages]

Sidguppy, thanks for your input. It reinforces my feeling that S. brichardi would do fine in my tank. You see, I have A LOT of water movement in that tank... actually, I have high flow in all of my tanks. On the particular 125gal tank I am referring to in this thread there is approximately 2770 gph of flow between the hang-on-back filters and powerheads driving the undergravel filter. I contend that, as long as the fish in the tank tolerate it, a higher amount of water movement is always preferred.

I've bred a few generations of Uaru and have not ran into any problems with the high flow. Of course, I remove the eggs so they may be hatched and raised in a separate hatchery tank.

The S. alberti were all over the tank (and the cichlids) at night. The Uaru continued to lay eggs regularly. I don't think spooking is much of a problem. Again, everyone was doing fine until the tank sprung a leak.

As for the angelfish--they are primarily being used as target (or dither) fish for the Uarus. Just something to give them a distraction from themselves. Not that the Uaru are aggressive by any means, but I find they lay eggs more if they have other fish to interact with. They seem to do fine in the high flow--even the one that is totally blind.

I appreciate your opinions, but do not agree with you that neither the S. angelica or S. brichardi are suitable for this particular tank. The main reason why I have reservations with the S. angelica is because of their reputation for high intraspecific aggression and the size they can attain.

[Scleropages]

Man, no one has or wants to order any of the species I'm looking for. Shark Aquarium in NJ has a bunch of 3" S. angelica, but the price is too steep for me to buy 6 or 8 or 10. One friend is going to look into prices on S. angelica, but he said they will be F0's and not cheap. Apparently, it is still pretty expensive to get fish from the Congo. And, around these parts, the hobby is hurting from the bad economy.

Does anyone know of any online shops that sell 3-4" S. angelica? I'd rather buy them small and grow them up together as a group in the same tank.

[Birger]

to buy 6 or 8 or 10.

My opinion is 8 or 10 may be too much for a 125g as they get bigger...6 should be alright
If you want to raise them up a bit and then choose sexes or even as simple as the best patterns (quite variable once you get to know them)or whichever then a larger group would be okay to start...but then you may have to part with a couple.

The price on these has really gone up this past two years, I did not pay more than 20 dollars for any of mine, I think I got lucky but now I have seen them as high as 120 for four inch fish, but usually 80 or 90.

Birger

[zipper]

Have you tried Rehoboth Aquatics? Their website is a little outdated, but it might be worth a shot to shoot them an email.

[Scleropages]

Around a month or so ago, a ~3" S. angelica at Shark Aquarium was $50. I was hoping to pay no more than $30 each--maybe $35.

Birger, I was thinking the same thing. I might start with more than 6, but I'll eventually get rid of a few and try to get it down to around 6.

Zipper, thanks for the suggestion. I'll try giving them a call soon.

[Scleropages]

but I'll eventually get rid of a few

Or, I'll just move a few into a different tank. We'll see...

[MatsP]

I've heard that S. angelica is often available as more fully grown fish - because customers bring their "grumpy" fish back to the shops (or selling them on E-bay/craigslist/aquabid, etc). So you may try finding some of those fish...

--
Mats

[Scleropages]

Gotta love ebay sellers who don't know what they are selling: http://cgi.ebay.com/live-FRESHWATER-CAT ... 3615wt_913

[Richard B]

Gotta love ebay sellers who don't know what they are selling: http://cgi.ebay.com/live-FRESHWATER-CAT ... 3615wt_913

I find it both amusing & frustrating, not to mention disappointing, particularly for those who don't know any better who purchase.....

[MatsP]

Any thoughts on what that ACTUALLY is?

--
Mats

[Scleropages]

My initial reaction is that it is some sort of S. brichardi hybrid.

[Scleropages]

After looking through the Cat-eLog, it could also be S. ornatipinnis or a hybrid thereof.

[MatsP]

Yes, I was leaning toward S. ornaitipinnis, but hybrid is more likely - at which point the asking price is like asking many millions for a fake Picasso!

--
Mats

[Birger]

If you right click on it it is labeled as S. marmoratus, it has some features but it certainly is not according to the original description.

I know there were some fake ornatipinnis around but for some reason I think this fish would be interesting to see down the road, it is still small and may just stay that way if I am right, but unfortunately I will never know .

Birger

[Scleropages]

Good catch on the name there, Birger. That is really weird that they would have the pic labeled as one species but then listed as another for the ebay auction. I wonder if it's supposed to be S. marmorata:

http://www.planetcatfish.com/catelog/sp ... es_id=1502

No photos in the Cat-eLog for that species, just illustrations--so, hard to objectively ID. If it is S. marmorata, they don't get very big, do they?

[MatsP]

In Seegers, it says that S. marmoratus is "a very compact form", and the picture doesn't seem to be a good match. Of course, the caption in Seegers says "Is this S. marmoratus?", so who knows.

The species was, apparently, described from juveniles only.

--
Mats

[Birger]

No photos in the Cat-eLog for that species, just illustrations--so, hard to objectively ID. If it is S. marmorata, they don't get very big, do they?

The original description has a fairly good physical description,some similar attributes but I turned away at deeply forked caudal fin, and yes they do stay very small...much like a

Microsynodontis

hmmm.

http://acsi.acnatsci.org/base/pdf_get.html?file=137831

The species was, apparently, described from juveniles only.

Conjecture on Seegers part unless he got a look at them, but there was a bit of doubt from the start.

Birger

[sidguppy]

are we talking about the Ebay fishes?

http://cgi.ebay.com/live-FRESHWATER-CAT ... 3615wt_913
these are Microsynodontis, look at the tail; it's rounded

ALL Synodontis species have V shaped tails; it's the Microsynodontis that have rounded or elliptical caudals.

[Scleropages]

Sid, good eye. I didn't even look at the Microsyndontis sp. in the Cat-eLog. Probably Microsynodontis batesii then?
http://www.planetcatfish.com/catelog/sp ... ies_id=928

[Scleropages]

I finally have found some S. angelica thanks to some of your suggestions. I hope I don't jinx anything by posting about it now, but I found a guy on aquabid who is in NY and was selling what he claims are 2 female and 1 male 10+" (TL) S. angelica for local pickup only. Since I am very close to him, I contacted him and worked out a price. I'm due to pick them up this Sunday PM.

While I was intending to start with much smaller specimens, I am excited about the prospect of having 3 at breeding size that have been cohabitating for some time

What are your suggestions for transporting them a maximum of one hour by car? I have, at my disposal: two rubbermaid garbage cans exclusively used for my aquariums, bags and rubber bands, and two or three large fish boxes (from a local importer). Should I put all three in a big rubbermaid garbage can? Two in one can and one in the other? Or, should I bag them and put them in the fish boxes?

I'm a little paranoid about putting them in the rubbermaid cans after my S. alberti fiasco, but I've successfully used the cans to temporarily house fishes many times in the past. I think they would be okay for 1 hour--and then I don't have to worry about punctured bags.

Thoughts? Insight? Wisdom?

[MatsP]

A cooler is a great way to transport fish. For three 10" fish, you probably want something in the 30-50gal range. This keeps the fish at the right temperature, and the "rugged" plastic coolers that are very common in the US are also unburstable by fish - plastic bags and large catfish don't mix too well.

But one hour isn't a long time to transport fish. They came to the US from Africa on a plane, in a bag that probably had about as much water as it had fish... Just keep 'em the right temperature, try to not stress them [no "drive it like you stole it" on the way home - that's for another time, if you normally do that ;)].

I've got mixed opinons about slow drip and other acclimatizing methods. If the fish are healthy, the old water and the new water roughly similar, I'd say the sooner they get out of the transport water, the better. Obviously, if you move a fish from high pH to low pH [or e.g. hardness, conductivity], then doing it a bit more slowly, adding tank-water to the transport water.

I have also transported fish in bags and boxes, it works, but if they are big and have sharp spines, you may end up with more water outside the bag than in it. Not a huge problem over an hours transport [as long as the water is reasonably contained (e.g. in a bucket or poly-box), so the fish doesn't go completely dry - even that is PROBABLY ok for an hour, but far from ideal].

I'm sure the short term, rubber-maid bins are fine, too - I have used a "garden tidy", which is a large shallow bucket, for transporting fish. I think I paid £8 (US $12 or so) for it . The one I have holds something like 65 liter [~17 gal], and I wouldn't worry about putting three large Synos in it with about half the height of water.

--
Mats

[Scleropages]

Thanks, Mats. So you don't think it will be a problem to keep the S. angelica all in the same container when I move them as long as the container can hold enough water, yes? They are all around 10" TL and have been kept in the same tank (180gal) for several years. I am concerned about aggression. I have heard they can shred each other up real quick.