History of Ancistrus in the US

[Shane]

Jools has been asking Lee Finley and I to work on this for a long time, so I figured I would start getting some data down in a thread.

-Shane

[dpm1]

Will there be a European version? Probably just as much a murky story....

Hopefully it will help clarify what this most un-species like of 'species' is, or at least enough so there can perhaps one day be a definitive baseline for the...err...nearly said species again...'cf'

Or will it remain a Mystery, wrapped in an Enigma, worded as a Riddle, written in a Lost Tongue, on a Broken Tablet, at the Bottom of a Pond, in a Lost City?

[Shane]

Ideally, we will combine this information with data from the hobby in Europe and even Asia to reconstruct a global history of Ancistrus in the aquarium.

Please note that I am only using published sources of information. They will not give us a 100% complete picture, but word of mouth anecdotes and stories can not be verified and offer no photographic proof that could be used to reconstruct this history and/or lead to species identifications.

Ancistrus Spawning:

Tropical Fish Hobbyist June 1975 "The Mating of Armor."
I do not have the actual article does anyone have a copy?

Tropical Fish Hobbyist March 1980 "Breeding the algae-eating Bristlenose."
I do not have the actual article does anyone have a copy?

Note: These were the ONLY two loricariid spawning articles published in TFH between 1970 and 1980.

Siluroid Journal Vol 1, #2 1989 "A Quick Note on Ancistrus Species Names" Lee Finley
A request by Lee that hobbyists stop attaching the same old few species names (dolichopterus, hoplogenys, lineolatus, temminckii, and triradiatus) to their fish noting it is counterproductive (Amen!).

Siluroid Journal May/June 1990 "Notes on Spawning Ancistrus lineolatus (Bristle Nose Pleco)" Robin Day
No photos, but the author notes "Atlas of Freshwater Catfish page 707 plate 224." I can only assume she is making reference to Burgess' 1989 Atlas which has a page 707 and plate 224 on that page. The pictured Ancistrus is overall light brown and dark brown a net-like pattern, but as it is not the actual fish she spawned the reference does not help much. The articles does mention feeding the breeders fresh vegetables.

The same issue notes a BAP entry for Tim Adkins for "Ancistrus sp" again not much help.

Siluroid Journal Sep/Oct 1991 "Breeding Ancistrus multispinnis (Bristlenose Catfish)" David G. Sidebottom
No photos. Mentions feeding "thawed chopped spinach."

A note of interest, NONE of the above articles mention using spawning caves which we now know are one of the key factors in spawning any Ancistrinae. In all cases the fish spawned in or under an aquarium decoration or even simply in a corner of the aquarium (I have also seen Ancistrus spawn this way at exporters in Colombia where the tanks have no décor or substrate).

North American Catfish Society LTD Magazine Vol 1 # 3 July 1996 "Spawning the Bushy-Nosed Pleco: A Test of Skill" Cynthia Teague
and
North American Catfish Society LTD Magazine Vol 1 # 3 July 1996 "Spawning the Bushy-Nosed Pleco: The Saga Continues" Cynthia Teague
No photos, but a general description of "dark brown with beige spots" and "varying amounts of white edging on dorsal and caudal fins..." Fed vegetables. Spawned under a flower pot saucer in the tank.

Aquarium Fish Magazine Jan 1994 "Midnight at the Oasis or Breeding Ancistrus" Ginny Eckstein and Carol Marks.
Great photos (see cover above) and imported as "Tocantins Blue Spots." Article notes the tank had driftwood, flower pots, and PVC pipe. Note: This is probably the most entertaining loricariid spawning article ever written.

North American Catfish Society LTD Magazine Vol 2 #s 3 and 4 1997 (Double Issue) "Ancistrus dolichopterus and Corydoras duplicareus - Will the Real First Time Breeder Stand Up!" Edward Bogdan
No photos. Author notes his ID is based on Sterba's 1973 Aquarium Handbook. Author claims he spawned the fish in 1977 and sold them "at fish auctions, used in medical research, shipped all over the country, and their income fed my fishroom." Notes that his fry are spread over New England. Of interest the author notes that ".. of the 18 or 19 generations that I have maintained and the thousands of fish raised and disseminated.. there has never been any occasion to recognize anything different, unusual, or unique in the offspring..." Lee Finley added a mini editorial to the above article noting the need/want/desire to attach a species name to Ancistrus and how problematic it is to do so.

-Shane

[Jools]

I've got Europe from about the 1930's until the 70s, I just need to pull that together. Another thing I need to do is play that against where other fishes were being imported from at what time and also put together a timeline of Ancistrus descriptions so I can work out what would be available for identification, when. Just an aide memoir!

[Jools]

Siluroid Journal Vol 1, #2 1989 "A Quick Note on Ancistrus Species Names" Lee Finley
A request by Lee that hobbyists stop attaching the same old few species names (dolichopterus, hoplogenys, lineolatus, temminckii, and triradiatus) to their fish noting it is counterproductive (Amen!).

Indeed! Another key point is when did these names get introduced, by whom and why.

Jools

[Shane]

Another invaluable source would be access to old stock lists from breeders in Florida and the Far East.
-Shane

[TwoTankAmin]

I am not sure this is of any help, but,

Reproductive biology. The earliest record of spawning in Ancistrus appears in the description of A. cirrhosus by Valenciennes (in Cuvier & Valenciennes, 1840: 514) who reported d'Orbigny's field observations that this species attaches its eggs under rocks with a "gluten". Ancistrus readily spawns in captivity and much of the following information on their reproduction is derived from published aquarium observations (e.g.,
Burgess, 1989; Schopfel, 1991; Cerny, 1996; Neal, 1996; Teague, 1996).

Spawning in Ancistrus (Siluriformes: Loricariidae) with comments on the evolution of snout tentacles as a novel reproductive strategy: larval mimicry
Mark H. Sabaj*, Jonathan W. Armbruster** and Lawrence M. Page*
Ichthyol. Expior. Freshwaters, Vol. 10, No.3, pp. 217-229, 6 figs., November 1999
© 1999 by Verlag Dr. Friedrich Pfeil, Miinchen, FRG - ISSN 0936-9902

[Shane]

Thanks TTA,
I have Teague, 1996 cited above. I'll pull the above paper and and get full info on the other refs provided.

-Shane

[TwoTankAmin]

I am usually looking through research on the nitrifying bacteria and normally limit my searching to studies published during the past 16 or so years. When I began searching on this topic I was amazed to find myself reading reports/research from the 1800s such as:
Synopsis of the Fishes of the Peruvian Amazon, Obtained by Professor Orton during His Expeditions of 1873 and 1877
E. D. Cope
Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society
Vol. 17, No. 101 (Jan. - Jun., 1878), pp. 673-701

It is interesting to read through some of this stuff and see how much differently things were done then compared to now. I found myself going far afield from the topic in this thread.

I will keep poking around for specific literature on Ancistrus in America.

[TwoTankAmin]

Because I am not affiliated with any institution, I cannot get access to the full text of many things. I am not sure if there are any Ancistrus on this list:

Species of wild animals bred in captivity during 1979 and multiple generation captive births

Article first published online: 18 DEC 2007

DOI: 10.1111/j.1748-1090.1981.tb01999.x

Issue International Zoo Yearbook Volume 21, Issue 1, pages 263–335, January 1981

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1 ... x/abstract

This list covers all species including fish bred in captivity the world over. It states this includes zoos and aquaria (I assume that means public aquariums), so I am not sure if that helps besides perhaps providing a pointer to something else useful.

[aquariumhobbyist]

Because I am not affiliated with any institution, I cannot get access to the full text of many things. I am not sure if there are any Ancistrus on this list:

Species of wild animals bred in captivity during 1979 and multiple generation captive births

Article first published online: 18 DEC 2007

DOI: 10.1111/j.1748-1090.1981.tb01999.x

Issue International Zoo Yearbook Volume 21, Issue 1, pages 263–335, January 1981

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1 ... x/abstract

This list covers all species including fish bred in captivity the world over. It states this includes zoos and aquaria (I assume that means public aquariums), so I am not sure if that helps besides perhaps providing a pointer to something else useful.

Being a PhD student, I will try to access this article the next time I go to the University Library (or access the Library remotely) and reply if there are Ancistrus on the list.

[ZiggaOfBoulder]

It's been a while since this thread's been updated but hey let's revive it! I'm a university student doing a lit review on sort of everything to do with loris, up to current research and where we need to head next. Loving this thread, helping me to sort of narrow down the historical side of when did we start importing these fish and giving them names, recognizing the wealth of species, etc.

I'm able to access all these articles and I'm not on my university's IPN so everyone check them out for a little background info. Just to share if you search loricariidae and sort by date you'll find we've had a great amount of species found since this thread was last updated. From my brief search on one database I found articles describing 11 new species in 2014 and 5 from 2015, from Columbia, Venezuela, and Brazil. Brazil seems to be leading the way in research articles published, which makes me curious about some of the species that may yet be lurking undiscovered within columbia, venezelua, panama, paraguay, etc.

Update the thread if you've got anything to add I'd love to see what some of you have to say about the history of these fish

[Jools]

There is more that I've only had in note form until now but putting it down...

a) Import patterns change over time, in the 1950s and 60s (Suriname, Venezuela and Guyana) fishes came from different places from the 70s and 80s (Peru, Brazil) and more recently we now have different places in S. America again (Colombia, Paraguay). So we have an influx of things that look the same from different places over time.

b) Compare the UK, USA, German and Taiwanese fish club / purchase models. In the UK there is a strong fish auction culture. Distances are (relatively small) I have been to countless auctions where fish are sold as brown bristlenoses and the key thing is if they are male or female – which because of the well know head tentacles is easy to do. In the USA, it is similar but more distributed and the model tends to still work but only a few states wide. Cheaper fish are not traded interstate as too expensive. It is interesting to note the common Ancistrus in the USA looks different from that in the UK. You might think that in Germany, where auctions are illegal, the common bristlenose might be pure, but it tends to come from large scale breeders often in Czech Rep again with unknown origins. Show someone in Taiwan the common (UK) bristlenose and they will say they have sometimes seen that fish imported, but not very often and it doesn't sell. The prevalent style of fishkeeping in that country (bare tanks, no decor) means that algae eaters for that purpose alone are not popular. No one breeds these fishes and there is not a mechanism for bred fishes to be exchanged – all the status is with new wild caught fishes.

[Jools]

Also, @Borbi, wrote a while back to me (May 2014) on the German perspective.

I totally agree to your thoughts about the time and space dimensions on this "problem".
At least within Germany it is even more obvious:
For historic reasons as well as regional reasons (Germany has centers of population in northern Germany, the west and middle / south), which result in different strains of Ancistrus: the ones in northern Germany look slightly different from what is bred in the south, and even more obvious are the ones bred in former Eastern Germany. And if you then mix in those from the Czech Republic, you end up with a mess only within one country, not to speak about what I saw recently in the US: they have brown Ancistrus, but clearly different ones.
To add to the problem: I know from an employee of Aquarium Glaser that not all of their "regular Ancistrus" are actually bred, but the regular brown ones are to a certain degree (a larger degree the larger the size) actually imported (he says that currently most of them are from Peru or Colombia), because the demand for those still outweighs the supply by breeders!
So there definately is a large collection of different forms / species and certainly from almost all over South America in the hobby, but I believe that without very large scale collection and DNA analysis (of identified specimens - which is yet another issue) would be able to even provide a glimpse at what is actually going on within the brown Ancistrus..

Taking all this into consideration, I grew to actually have a problem with identifying the regular brown Ancistrus as Ancistrus cf. cirrhosus; that might well be correct for certain strains here in Germany (since, I believe, that ID is traced back to investigations by Ingo Seidel), but might well be wrong for different places all over the world. But since they are hard to discern even from pictures makes it kind of a tough problem..

[Jools]

In short, it maybe is time to re-introduce "Ancistrus sp(3)".


Jools

[racoll]

In short, it maybe is time to re-introduce "Ancistrus sp(3)"

Remember this thread?

Sadly very few additional Ancistrus DNA barcodes have been publicly uploaded since 2012, but I ran the analysis again to see if anything has changed. We do now have some trade samples from both South Africa and Germany, and these appear to be the same as the NZ ones I sequenced.

Still not a lot closer to knowing what they are. Definitely not A. cirrhosus though ...

Here is the code to do this, if anyone is interested. I'll re-run it sporadically and see what turns up.

[bekateen]

Interesting!

Aren't the specimens ID'd as A. aguaboensis problematic also?

Cheers, Eric

[racoll]

Aren't the specimens ID'd as A. aguaboensis problematic also?

Haha, yes.