First pleco selection for planted tank

jzcombo · Post by **jzcombo** » 01 Mar 2015, 16:38

Hello All.

I have been doing research on the subject and can't decide on a species of pleco to add. I believe I should be selecting from hypancistrus because I don't want them eating my plants. However, I am open to other genus or specific suggestions.

I have an established 30 gallon freshwater tank:
75% ground exposure
79° F
6.6 pH
5 GH
2 KH

I feel like my selection is limited because of the tank size and current stock. As long as they take over a year to grow, I am open to placing him in a bigger tank as he grows.

Thanks, for your suggestions and help you can offer.

jzcombo · Post by **jzcombo** » 01 Mar 2015, 17:02

One other note...

I've had two plecos die on me within the first two weeks... I don't know why... But I don't want it to happen again... L200 and L135
First I tried introducing the L135 and when he didn't work out, I tried the L200.

I will be using my quarantine tank so I can monitor his acclimation better. No gravel with a cave and driftwood. Any tips on this process also would be helpful.

racoll · Post by **racoll** » 01 Mar 2015, 17:19

Unfortunately your water is too cold for most "fancy" pleco species such as , , etc.

Try a instead. There are many colour and fin morphs available to suit all tastes.

jzcombo · Post by **jzcombo** » 01 Mar 2015, 18:20

racoll wrote:Unfortunately your water is too cold for most "fancy" pleco species such as
Hypancistrus
,
Peckoltia
,
Hemiancistrus
etc.

Try a
Common Bristlenose Catfish
instead. There are many colour and fin morphs available to suit all tastes.

I am not a huge fan of the bushy nose look...
I do have some wiggle room with the temperature in the tank. What should the temperature be to have more pleco options?

racoll · Post by **racoll** » 01 Mar 2015, 18:45

84-85F would be appropriate, but this will depend on the stock you already have.

dpm1 · Post by **dpm1** » 01 Mar 2015, 22:41

racoll wrote:Unfortunately your water is too cold for most "fancy" pleco species such as
Hypancistrus
,
Peckoltia
,
Hemiancistrus
etc.

Try a
Common Bristlenose Catfish
instead. There are many colour and fin morphs available to suit all tastes.

79f too cold for Peckoltia?

I have L205 Peckoltia brevis at 22-24c (72-75f) and they are doing great. It is even within the PC profile range of 22.0-26.0°C or 71.6-78.8°F
http://www.planetcatfish.com/common/spe ... es_id=1339

racoll · Post by **racoll** » 01 Mar 2015, 23:17

79f too cold for Peckoltia?

I think that after they have settled down, the temperature could be reduced slightly, but if I were trying to acclimate them to a new tank after the stress of importation and retail, I would keep it at about 29C, at least for the first couple of months.

22C is a temperature they typically would not experience in the wild, at least for any length of time.

dpm1 · Post by **dpm1** » 01 Mar 2015, 23:49

racoll wrote:
79f too cold for Peckoltia?
I think that after they have settled down, the temperature could be reduced slightly, but if I were trying to acclimate them to a new tank after the stress of importation and retail, I would keep it at about 29C, at least for the first couple of months.

22C is a temperature they typically would not experience in the wild, at least for any length of time.

I would argue its likely to be just as stressful to a new fish in being placed in a hot water as it is a cooler tank as its metabolic rate would need to rise - probably not a good thing if the fish is stressed already.

High temp is also often a trigger for breeding and again you are adding more stress rather than reducing.

If the acclimation is done correctly, and the parameters are suitable, then I see no reason to boil the fish for a couple of months - in fact it would eliminate the option to buy completely if there is no dedicated home qt as you would have to get the whole tank running at 29c which I suspect the majority of tank mates would not enjoy in the least.

racoll · Post by **racoll** » 01 Mar 2015, 23:54

I see no reason to boil the fish for a couple of months

It's not "boiling" them, it's keeping them at the temperature at which they are found in the wild.

They will be out of condition and malnourished after import, so the metabolic rate needs to get back to normal so they can start eating and putting on weight.

dpm1 · Post by **dpm1** » 02 Mar 2015, 00:17

racoll wrote:
I see no reason to boil the fish for a couple of months
It's not "boiling" them, it's keeping them at the temperature at which they are found in the wild.

They will be out of condition and malnourished after import, so the metabolic rate needs to get back to normal so they can start eating and putting on weight.

29c is not necessarily the temp they are found at as Ucayali has an average annual temp of 25c whilst the Solimoes river averages 28c (http://www.eosnap.com/tag/solimoes-river/). Iaw your figures the PC profile (and others) is wrong!?

Moving the fish from mid 20s in the wild, to lower shop tank temps, and then in to higher temps again on purchase, followed by dropping again after a few weeks, won't help them. Surely what they need is a stable environment not constant changes.

It is an assumption they will be malnourished on receipt. I have seen many plecs within days of arriving in shops looking in very good condition and having a far less troublesome acclimation than many of the smaller otos and suchlike who are much more difficult to feed up on receipt.

racoll · Post by **racoll** » 02 Mar 2015, 00:43

That website you linked to says the Rio Negro is 22C, which is very incorrect. It's more like 32C, but that could have been a simple typo.

It's correct that the Amazon River is about 28C. This is the same for other similar rivers I have been to, such as the Rio Madeira and the Rio Japurá, so why would the Purus or Ucayali be any different?

I don't agree with the whole stability thing, but others may be able to comment better on how they deal with their new plecs. Certainly, the "hot bath" treatment has worked fine for me.

dpm1 · Post by **dpm1** » 02 Mar 2015, 15:29

racoll wrote:That website you linked to says the Rio Negro is 22C, which is very incorrect. It's more like 32C, but that could have been a simple typo.

It's correct that the Amazon River is about 28C. This is the same for other similar rivers I have been to, such as the Rio Madeira and the Rio Japurá, so why would the Purus or Ucayali be any different?

I don't agree with the whole stability thing, but others may be able to comment better on how they deal with their new plecs. Certainly, the "hot bath" treatment has worked fine for me.

The site actually states the Rio Negro temperature at the point it meets the Solimoes, not a generic figure for the whole 1400mile length, and certainly not for the lower Amazon areas.
It is perfectly feasible that the temperature is very different in sections of such a long and varied drainage system. Matching figures are also noted in various other references both generic, scientific, and local. The 32c may be correct in the lower regions but as the average air temp is lower upstream its highly unlikely these areas of river would be running warmer than the surrounding environment for extended periods. (Maybe rain falls at 32c)

Considering the size of the central Amazon region I find it surprising that you make an assumption that river temperatures would not be capable of variation across different systems, especially considering the length and area of many of these. Those that are primarily within the rainforest or lowland areas are indeed likely to be very similar in composition and parameters, however some like the Ucayali are far removed to the West, and as water runs downhill its fair to summise that through such a tortuously long distance it would also result in a substantial altitude difference. It would be like assuming all SA rivers are soft water because that's what the Amazon basis is, something that is easily disproven. (There are many areas in the tropics where temperatures can be significantly below 'tropical' and water running in these can be well below what it is several hundred miles away)

Am I right in reading that you don't think temperature stability is a good thing? Small changes occur daily, and larger changes over time but you are advocating moving the plecs to 29c regardless of origin or conditions they were transported or shopped - and this would be in quick time.

I have never had an issue with fish kept at lower temperatures iaw their profiles (not just one site but I check new species across several, even asking for first hand advice from other keepers if necessary), and this includes a number of catfish species. I don't believe keeping a fish at several degrees above the printed figures can be a good thing (29c for L205 would be equivalent to keeping L046 at 33c!).

29c may be very useful if the species are conditioned to such temperatures, and several well known catfish species are, however its too generic to say all need it.

jzcombo · Post by **jzcombo** » 02 Mar 2015, 18:09

You guys are getting a little over my head... But that is why I am here!
I am going to lean towards keeping temperature constant between the quarantine and main tank. How long should I leave the pleco in the quarantine tank before transferring to the main tank?
I can probably increase the temperature slightly without disturbing my current stock. But, depending on the average temperature needed by the pleco will determine the new temperature.

racoll · Post by **racoll** » 02 Mar 2015, 19:34

It is perfectly feasible that the temperature is very different in sections of such a long and varied drainage system.

No, not really. The lowland Amazon region has a pretty homogeneous climate. The air temperature rarely drops below 24C. Regarding rivers, I have never encountered a large river much below about 27C, and many much hotter in their lower reaches. Small forest creeks/rivers will be more like 24-25C.

I don't think there is much I can say to persuade you about this. Some stats off some random website will always trump personal first-hand experience.

For what it's worth, Evers & Seidel (2005) list P. brevis at 25-29C. Some species are pretty ubiquitous and adaptable, and can be found in big rivers and in the smaller, cooler rivers and creeks at slightly lower temperatures. This, I imagine, explains why yours are doing well at 22-24C.

dpm1 · Post by **dpm1** » 02 Mar 2015, 21:59

racoll wrote:
It is perfectly feasible that the temperature is very different in sections of such a long and varied drainage system.
No, not really. The lowland Amazon region has a pretty homogeneous climate. The air temperature rarely drops below 24C.

L205 can be found well outside the region as shown in the map on the profile page http://www.planetcatfish.com/common/spe ... es_id=1339
The temperature for the western regions can most certainly drop well below 24c for extended periods as shown : http://www.accuweather.com/en/pe/pucall ... view=table

racoll wrote:Regarding rivers, I have never encountered a large river much below about 27C, and many much hotter in their lower reaches. Small forest creeks/rivers will be more like 24-25C.

But again it will depend on which river is tested. Whilst long stretches of the lowland rivers are likely to be fairly consistent with regards parameters it does not automatically follow that the far west tributaries will follow. I have clearly stated, and maps show it too, that the upper Ucayali is a long way upriver, and to the west of the main Amazon basin, however this is being washed over.

racoll wrote:I don't think there is much I can say to persuade you about this. Some stats off some random website will always trump personal first-hand experience.

You cant persuade me when you are arguing the case of the main Amazonian region whilst ignoring my clear statements that the fish in question extend far beyond this. Why is this not being understood? It is clearly shown in the profiles.
And it is not some 'random website' as you put it but cross checking figures from various sources. I didnt just pull up Wikipedia and assume what is written is absolute gospel although it does match temp, as does Fishbase http://www.fishbase.org/summary/49958 or is that too random and incorrect too? (Although both display only the downstream range of the fish).
And your 'first hand experience', as I have pointed out, is a good distance away from the upstream range.

racoll wrote: This is the same for other similar rivers I have been to, such as the Rio Madeira and the Rio Japurá, so why would the Purus or Ucayali be any different?

So you clearly haven't been to the whole region I am refering to, and despite my providing a reasoned argument as to why its perfectly possible for parameters to differ you have chosen to ignore this.

racoll wrote: For what it's worth, Evers & Seidel (2005) list P. brevis at 25-29C. Some species are pretty ubiquitous and adaptable, and can be found in big rivers and in the smaller, cooler rivers and creeks at slightly lower temperatures. This, I imagine, explains why yours are doing well at 22-24C.

Again I point you to the species map. The 3 pins are very widely distributed and so there is no reason to assume conditions cannot vary, however I would also be wary of singular sources that do not follow a year round testing routine to account for seasonal variations (very many sources and locations have very limited testing, sometime only a singular case). When, where and under what conditions were the E&S readings taken (summer/winter, wet/dry season, once/over months?).

As a final point I shall refer back to your original...

racoll wrote:Unfortunately your water is too cold for most "fancy" pleco species such as Hypancistrus, Peckoltia, Hemiancistrus etc.

I maintain that this is a swingingly vague statement considering the innumerable species that are spread far and wide across the continent including not only Brazil but Venezuela, Peru, Uraguay...West coast to East coast. Imo its as bad as substituting 'Corydoras' and saying they all the same conditions based on those from the central Amazon basin. You cannot simply assume that the conditions in one area, however consistent and widespread, is universal.
.....
It is pointless continuing as I have pointed out why it is not a simple 'too cold' based on species, spread, location, even my own first hand experience with the fish - all to no avail. If you choose to ignore or denigrate the points made then and continue to insist on one-size-fits-all set of parameters then I shall leave you to it.

Mol_PMB · Post by **Mol_PMB** » 02 Mar 2015, 22:03

Whilst all the above is a very interesting discussion with many valid points, I feel sorry for the OP who just asked for suggestions for a cooler-water pleco!

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

dpm1 · Post by **dpm1** » 02 Mar 2015, 22:28

Mol_PMB wrote:Whilst all the above is a very interesting discussion with many valid points, I feel sorry for the OP who just asked for suggestions for a cooler-water pleco!

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Well I tried to say Peckoltia brevis but apparently my own personal experience over the last couple of years with the fish counts for nought.

There's also Chaetostoma spp. Although some of these do better in moderate flow....but that's just my opinion...

racoll · Post by **racoll** » 03 Mar 2015, 01:50

racoll wrote:That website you linked to says the Rio Negro is 22C, which is very incorrect. It's more like 32C, but that could have been a simple typo.

dpm1 wrote: The site actually states the Rio Negro temperature at the point it meets the Solimoes

To explain why I am getting grumpy, your post above is actually trying to convince me that the water temperature of a place that I live right next to, and have literally been to and swum in many times, is fully 10C colder than it actually is.

L205 can be found well outside the region as shown in the map on the profile page http://www.planetcatfish.com/common/spe ... es_id=1339

Those are centroids of that part of the river drainage where the fish is understood to be found. I am not sure if this is automated, or just done by eye by Mats. They do not generally correspond to actual collection records. For example, the location marked for the Rio Purus is nowhere near the actual type locality of the species. They are not representing what you think they are.

You cant persuade me when you are arguing the case of the main Amazonian region whilst ignoring my clear statements that the fish in question extend far beyond this... ... I have clearly stated, and maps show it too, that the upper Ucayali is a long way upriver, and to the west of the main Amazon basin, however this is being washed over ... So you clearly haven't been to the whole region I am refering to, and despite my providing a reasoned argument as to why its perfectly possible for parameters to differ you have chosen to ignore this.

The upper Ucayali is part of the "main Amazon basin". I grant you, if the fishes are collected from the foothills of the Andes, then they would be exposed to a wider range of temperatures. However, it more parsimonious to assume they are well distributed species collected from the lowlands in the vicinity of Iquitos. I'd be happy to be corrected on this if anyone knows any better.

And it is not some 'random website' as you put it but cross checking figures from various sources. I didnt just pull up Wikipedia and assume what is written is absolute gospel although it does match temp, as does Fishbase http://www.fishbase.org/summary/49958 or is that too random and incorrect too?

A database is only as good as the data that is in it, and it doesn't take much sleuthing to find out that all these "cross-checked" and suspiciously identical temperatures all come from a single source: the Baensch Atlas Vol 2---an aquarium book written by aquarists in 1985. I am willing to bet my own organs that these numbers were based on nothing more than whatever popped into the author's heads at the time of writing. Understanding was very limited 30 years ago, and these books simply don't stand up to any scrutiny whatsoever.

I maintain that this is a swingingly vague statement considering the innumerable species that are spread far and wide across the continent including not only Brazil but Venezuela, Peru, Uraguay...West coast to East coast. Imo its as bad as substituting 'Corydoras' and saying they all the same conditions based on those from the central Amazon basin. You cannot simply assume that the conditions in one area, however consistent and widespread, is universal.

I apologise if it read like a "swingingly vague statement", but it was intended as a rule of thumb for the OP, and refers to commonly encountered species/genera in the trade (particularly the L numbers). If someone is paying premium prices for a fish imported from Uruguay or Argentina, then they are probably going to know full well the requirements of that fish.

even my own first hand experience with the fish - all to no avail... Well I tried to say Peckoltia brevis but apparently my own personal experience over the last couple of years with the fish counts for nought.

This is the problem with cognitive dissonance. If you accept any of my arguments, then you have to accept that you are not caring for your fish correctly. To be clear, if your fishes are healthy and behaving normally, then you are looking after them well. I am in no position to judge the health of your fish.

jzcombo · Post by **jzcombo** » 03 Mar 2015, 05:36

I apologise if it read like a "swingingly vague statement", but it was intended as a rule of thumb for the OP, and refers to commonly encountered species/genera in the trade (particularly the L numbers). If someone is paying premium prices for a fish imported from Uruguay or Argentina, then they are probably going to know full well the requirements of that fish.

So this is my question, if my current stock can withstand a warmer tank, what would be a good temperature to allow a broader selection of pleco?
And... What pleco would you recommend?

I would rather it not make a three course meal out of my planted tank either.

My tank has a circulation fan under a Fluval 50 HOB, so there is good water movement and oxygen flow in the tank and at the surface.

dpm1 · Post by **dpm1** » 03 Mar 2015, 12:24

racoll wrote:To explain why I am getting grumpy, your post above is actually trying to convince me that the water temperature of a place that I live right next to, and have literally been to and swum in many times, is fully 10C colder than it actually is.

The ' Meeting of the Rivers' as it's name implies is Two rivers joining at different temperatures and parameters, one measurably cooler than the other - thus clearly demonstrating there is no one singular set of parameters for the whole region. However you still seem to be insisting all SA rivers that ultimately lead to the Amazon are essentially identical regardless of their actual locations and sources.

racoll wrote:
L205 can be found well outside the region as shown in the map on the profile page http://www.planetcatfish.com/common/spe ... es_id=1339
Those are centroids of that part of the river drainage where the fish is understood to be found. I am not sure if this is automated, or just done by eye by Mats. They do not generally correspond to actual collection records. For example, the location marked for the Rio Purus is nowhere near the actual type locality of the species. They are not representing what you think they are.

I fully understand 3 markers are only representative points, common sense alone tells you such a widespread distribution is very highly unlikely to result in only 3 pin point populations, hence why the location chosen to present clear evidence of the lower regional temperature was Pucallpa, which can be seen to sit clearly between the two western markers.

racoll wrote:I grant you, if the fishes are collected from the foothills of the Andes, then they would be exposed to a wider range of temperatures. However, it more parsimonious to assume they are well distributed species collected from the lowlands in the vicinity of Iquitos. I'd be happy to be corrected on this if anyone knows any better.

Is that a recognition that these fish may be more than capable of healthy living at sub-Amazon temperatures? No evidence of the upstream abundance is matched by there being no supporting evidence they are not, nor that they are a common fish in the middle Amazon collection area, merely they are present. Much will depend on where there are people who make reports on species being present/absent and fish can be very plentiful yet considered to be rare, or even extinct, simply because there is no one to see them (not a blue sky notion but fact, and for example precisely what has happened with Celestichthys margaritatus)

racoll wrote:A database is only as good as the data that is in it, and it doesn't take much sleuthing to find out that all these "cross-checked" and suspiciously identical temperatures all come from a single source: the Baensch Atlas Vol 2---an aquarium book written by aquarists in 1985. I am willing to bet my own organs these numbers were based on nothing more than whatever popped into the author's heads at the time of writing. Understanding was very limited 30 years ago, and these books simply don't stand up to any scrutiny whatsoever.

A database is as good as the data is quite true, however you say "these numbers were based on nothing more than whatever popped into the author's heads at the time of writing" and your evidence to support such a theory is - the data is 30 years old. This doesn't mean its incorrect, merely that it would be useful for a someone to revisit the area (and preferably on multiple occasions year round).(If you have the books, and up to date equivalents to cross reference then I would be be more than willing to read them - assuming it covers more than just Mid-Amazon zones, although I fear the Peru/Brazil border area is last on most peoples list)

racoll wrote:I apologise if it read like a "swingingly vague statement", but it was intended as a rule of thumb for the OP, and refers to commonly encountered species/genera in the trade (particularly the L numbers). If someone is paying premium prices for a fish imported from Uruguay or Argentina, then they are probably going to know full well the requirements of that fish.

If the initial statement of species vs temp had been limited to those fish within the main Amazon basin, or to the North and East where the climate is generally very similar, then it would have indeed have been a good rule of thumb. However the way it was written implied it covered pretty much all the SA plecs which is very wrong, for example just sticking with the Peckoltia family P.compta fits squarely in the basket, but P.brevis as I have tried repeatedly to demonstrate is not so 'average'. My first post was to point out to the OP that there are indeed SA plecs that are suited to cooler waters, especially if these are still subject to 'summer' periods.
....
If you still feel the PC profile is incorrect (which you have implied but never openely questioned) then feel free to ask the Mods to update it, although please refer them to this thread.

racoll · Post by **racoll** » 03 Mar 2015, 12:36

The ' Meeting of the Rivers' as it's name implies is Two rivers joining at different temperatures and parameters, one measurably cooler than the other. I would have hoped you understood that without me having to state it, however you still seem to be insisting all SA rivers that ultimately lead to the Amazon are essentially identical regardless of their actual locations and sources.

I'm staggered. You are seriously still trying to say that I am wrong about this?

dpm1 · Post by **dpm1** » 03 Mar 2015, 12:40

jzcombo wrote:

So this is my question, if my current stock can withstand a warmer tank, what would be a good temperature to allow a broader selection of pleco?
And... What pleco would you recommend?

I would rather it not make a three course meal out of my planted tank either.

My tank has a circulation fan under a Fluval 50 HOB, so there is good water movement and oxygen flow in the tank and at the surface.

Without dropping too many new species names

<26c/78f Peckoltia brevis http://www.planetcatfish.com/common/spe ... es_id=1339
>26c/78f Peckoltia compta http://www.planetcatfish.com/common/spe ... ies_id=213
Both are the carnivorous side of omnivore and generally take catfish pellets and flake with ease although the occasional veg or algae may be eaten too. P.compta is far more readily available, at least where I am. (So of course I chose the more unusual fish!)

Or the similar Panaqolus maccus http://www.planetcatfish.com/common/spe ... es_id=1339 although this is a 'wood eater' (often little wood gets ingested, however such fish can make a mess of the water clarity as well as increase filter maintenance, most people wont notice the effect with one small fish however it can annoy some as the fish and its appetite grows, and possibly numbers increase

dpm1 · Post by **dpm1** » 03 Mar 2015, 14:08

racoll wrote:
The ' Meeting of the Rivers' as it's name implies is Two rivers joining at different temperatures and parameters, one measurably cooler than the other. I would have hoped you understood that without me having to state it, however you still seem to be insisting all SA rivers that ultimately lead to the Amazon are essentially identical regardless of their actual locations and sources.
I'm staggered. You are seriously still trying to say that I am wrong about this?

Then please feel free to explain the whole 'Meeting if the Waters' phenomenon if they are all equal.
http://m.earthobservatory.nasa.gov/IOTD ... p?id=79111

Where the two rivers meet, east of Manaus, Brazil, they flow side by side within the same channel for several kilometers. The cooler, denser, and faster waters of the Solimões and the warmer, slower waters of the Negro

Seems the 'random website' that is NASA has definite ideas on why this occurs
This is not a unique occurance but occurs at several points across the globe.

racoll · Post by **racoll** » 03 Mar 2015, 15:15

dmp1 wrote:Then please feel free to explain the whole 'Meeting if the Waters' phenomenon if they are all equal.

I very clearly did not state that they were equal. My words were as follows:

racoll wrote:That website you linked to says the Rio Negro is 22C, which is very incorrect. It's more like 32C, but that could have been a simple typo. It's correct that the Amazon River is about 28C.

This is big enough of a differential to see the effect. It's probably at least 5C, but the lower Rio Negro can be even warmer than 32C. You can feel the difference very clearly.

From Sioli (1984):

Water temperature. Running in an equatorial lowland where temperature fluctuations are minimal the Amazon water has a surprisingly constant temperature of
29 ± 1C all year round. It belongs to the thermally most stable waters on earth.

dpm1 · Post by **dpm1** » 03 Mar 2015, 16:46

So suddenly it is possible to have river systems in the Amazon basin that are at different temperatures, and now try extending the principle to the systems that lead to this point.

The fact that the Mid-Lower Amazon river is a fairly constant 29c is something I have not contested, indeed I have essentially extended the principle to the whole lowland region inclusive of the systems that originate within this zone. However It is also rather irrelevant when talking fish that occur upstream under different conditions - and I have repeated noted Ucalayi-Samiloes tributary, and the L205s that are found there, most definitely does not originate in this same area.

I have provided maps, fish profiles, web references, climate data, reasoned arguments, first hand experience and you have grudgingly admitted that the 'Meeting of Rivers' does have a temperature difference component (albeit with the numbers switched - a ∆t still exists)
This is despite the earlier:

This is the same for other similar rivers I have been to, such as the Rio Madeira and the Rio Japurá, so why would the Purus or Ucayali be any different?

Saying it does not make it true. They are perfectly capable of exhibiting different parameters because they originate from different sources in different physical and geological zones. Extending it to its conclusion the Amazon flows to the Atlantic but it's not the same parameters - or maybe you refute that to?

A couple of quotes from another fishsite when asking for Amazon basin river parameters (note not just the Amazon river!)

Having recently (last week) been to Manaus, Brazil, I can confirm that there is no way they all conform. Our guide states that the Amazon has so many different names depending which bit you're talking about, as well as very different pH values, hardness/softness, density, fish stocking levels, nutrients etc., even temperatures can slightly change.

...
Perhaps in your inevitable reply you can provide something other than mere negatives and provide your own searchable and checkable references with respect to the rivers I have noted. In the meantime I will join others in waiting for Heiko Bleher to fill in a few gaps from outside the usual fish trails. And please tey to avoid constantly referring back to the main river is is both irrelevant and misleading as it covers only a fraction of the whole.

racoll · Post by **racoll** » 03 Mar 2015, 17:47

However It is also rather irrelevant when talking fish that occur upstream under different conditions - and I have repeated noted Ucalayi-Samiloes tributary, and the L205s that are found there, most definitely does not originate in this same area.

So they are found in the Ucayali are they? Different conditions? Go and check the revision of the group by Armbruster (2008), and look at the known distribution map of P. brevis records. They are very widely distributed all across the whole of the Western and central Amazon lowlands in many rivers, but are not reported from the Ucayali (they could well be found there, but probably have never been collected). There are records from the Itaya River adjacent to Iquitos, and it even states that they were collected here by aquarium dealers. In the habitat section it states:"Specimens collected in Peru were from a lowland, muddy-bottomed river. The specimens were collected on and in submerged logs." Many of the records are from lakes. Lakes are hot.

The notion that the Western lowland Amazon is somehow different is bizarre. Evers & Seidel (Wels Atlas 1) make a detailed report of a lake of the Ucayali drainage near Pucallpa in fact. They give a temperature of 34C for the lake, and 28C for its tributaries. This is exactly the kind of place where you would find P. brevis, if it even occurs there.

I am well aware that while the overall Amazon climate is stable, there will be substantial variation between sites according to various factors. But my initial contention remains that 24-25C should be an absolute minimum for lowland Amazon species. I would keep them warmer. This is backed up by all the temperatures recommended by Evers & Seidel (Wels Atlas 2).

As I have explained, P. brevis is demonstrably a lowland species. This idea that they are found in cool upland areas is based on not one shred of evidence apart from extrapolations from a highly dubious figure from a decades old aquarium atlas, the observation of the fishes in your tank, and a big shot of wishful thinking.

dpm1 · Post by **dpm1** » 03 Mar 2015, 19:23

Go and check the revision of the group by Armbruster (2008),

And again you don't bother to provide an actual searchable online reference. Why should I bother?

Well I will add one that clearly emonstrates all rivers are not equal
http://www.hindawi.com/journals/isrn/2014/794583/
Whilst the temps are closer in this example the other parameters show up clearly

...The project mentioned above revealed that the waters of the Negro and Solimões rivers have different speeds (respectively, 0.3 m/s and 1.0 m/s), different conductivities (respectively, 8 μS/cm and 80 μS/cm at 25°C), different turbidity values (respectively, 5 NTU and 80 NTU), different pH values (respectively, 5.5 and 7.0), and different temperatures, indicating a difference of 1°C.

dpm1 · Post by **dpm1** » 03 Mar 2015, 20:04

There are records from the Itaya River adjacent to Iquitos,

Would that be the same Rio Itaya that barely shows up on either Google or Bing maps as a separate entity?
The very same one that is fed by the Rio Maranon, and is barely 50km downstream of the intersection of the Rio Ucayli.

But of course a fish couldn't possibly move that distance, which on the scale of the Amazon is barely a stones throw away.

I suspect the only reason it was detected there was because of the convenience of the town of Iquitos.

Many of the records are from lakes. Lakes are hot

They are also generally much easier places to catch fish compared to flowing rivers. Is it so surprising that the reports focus on these as its where I would choose to catch fish given the options. However they are also not a very convenient place to live for a supposedly widespread species. (They wouldn't be the only Amazon river fish to be caught primarily in flooded forest and lakes as opposed to the rivers themselves - Cardinal Tetra is the most obvious example)

So far all you have done is confirm the lower reaches of the species. You have not explained how the PC fish profile has locations, however vague, far upstream.
These fish are far from the most common and it could well be the primary source of data are collectors near Iquitos, however this does not mean they do not exist elsewhere, and is by no means proof.

dpm1 · Post by **dpm1** » 03 Mar 2015, 20:38

Note there are also reports from a local with Peckoltia species even further upstream from the Rio Hullaga (not just a vague 30year old reference but a web ref with pix!)

http://www.plecoworld.org/modules.php?n ... opic&t=946

jzcombo · Post by **jzcombo** » 03 Mar 2015, 22:19

Without dropping too many new species names

<26c/78f Peckoltia brevis http://www.planetcatfish.com/common/spe ... es_id=1339
>26c/78f Peckoltia compta http://www.planetcatfish.com/common/spe ... ies_id=213
Both are the carnivorous side of omnivore and generally take catfish pellets and flake with ease although the occasional veg or algae may be eaten too. P.compta is far more readily available, at least where I am. (So of course I chose the more unusual fish!)

I have to check these out. They look to be the right size needed for my tank. I've been researching the Hypancistrus genus lately, but if they have the right diet provided by me, my plants should be ok, right? I wouldn't care for an occasional munch here and there, but I don't want to see my plants disappearing.

Or the similar Panaqolus maccus http://www.planetcatfish.com/common/spe ... es_id=1339 although this is a 'wood eater' (often little wood gets ingested, however such fish can make a mess of the water clarity as well as increase filter maintenance, most people wont notice the effect with one small fish however it can annoy some as the fish and its appetite grows, and possibly numbers increase

I have a nice piece of manzanita driftwood that I would rather not be a regular meal. Maybe I will get a different piece for him to gnaw/eat on.

Any other suggestions for a planted tank if I were to warm it up a bit?