Are all Panaque species wood-eaters?

Deb · Post by **Deb** » 14 May 2006, 23:44

Forgive me if the answer is on these boards somewhere but I couldn't find a definite answer, and I need to get it right.

Are all Panaque species catfish wood-eaters? Is that what defines the genus Panaque?
Has any other catfish species been shown to process wood in quite the same way?

Thank you,
Deborah

synoguy · Post by **synoguy** » 15 May 2006, 00:13

I believe that Panaque species are the only catfishes that have an enzyme specificly designed to prosses wood. I am unsure if other species use wood in their though.

Regards

Simon

MatsP · Post by **MatsP** » 15 May 2006, 12:52

I believe the and it's close relatives are also (at least partially) wodd-eaters.

But yes, all Panaque species are wood-eaters, at least as far as I know - one of the keys to the genus is the shape of the teeth, which are spoon-shaped, to "chisel" wood off with. [And H. cochliodon have similar spoon-shaped teeth].

--
Mats

Deb · Post by **Deb** » 15 May 2006, 13:09

Thanks for your answers. I don't mean to be a simpleton about it. I have read just about everything twice, and more - Nelson's studies (three PDFs), the threads on PC about bacteria and fungi in their GI tracts, Silirus' remarks on the subject, the threads by Shane on PlecoFanatics on the same topic. I have individually listed every known Panaque species and read the profiles to determine if each and every one is a wood-eater. I have taken Hypostomus cochliodon into consideration, and I have great pictures of the spoon shaped teeth!
So, I did the research.

What I am really trying to find out is, if I make the statement,
"Panaque maccus is a wood-eater (xylophagous), as are all species of the genus Panaque." would that be true?

Would it be better to say "... many species..." or, "...as far as we know, all species ..." ?
Thanks again.
Deborah

MatsP · Post by **MatsP** » 15 May 2006, 14:56

I don't see any reason to change that statement at this time. All Panaques eat wood - and they starve to death if you don't have wood for them to eat - or so I've read...

--
Mats

The Stig · Post by **The Stig** » 15 May 2006, 16:03

Its also kind of a good thing that they eat wood, because some of them are really shy and are hard to get eating on foods, so if they'll eat the bogwood in the tank already they won't starve.

YouTube · Post by **Jools** » 15 May 2006, 17:51

deb wrote:What I am really trying to find out is, if I make the statement,
"Panaque maccus is a wood-eater (xylophagous), as are all species of the genus Panaque." would that be true?

Yes and No. If you accept the Armbruster view of the world (i.e. that Scobinancistrus is a Panaque) then it is not true that all Panaque are wood eaters. At the other end of the spectrum, fortunately, we don't have to worry about Panaqolus being considered in Panaque or not as they all are wood eaters too.

So, all described species of Panaque with unextended spoon shaped teeth are wood eaters...

Jools

PS I agree with Mats that the "Panaque like" species of the Hypostomus cochliodon group are also wood eaters but might not have the specialised stomach bugs previously mentioned.

Deb · Post by **Deb** » 15 May 2006, 22:23

Thanks again for all your good answers.
I went here:
http://www.planetcatfish.com/forum/view ... nancistrus
and now I am somewhat familiar with the position of Armbruster.

Jools, I think I like this comment the best:

So, all described species of Panaque with unextended spoon shaped teeth are wood eaters...

So, thanks. Just curious, but if they are not wood-eaters, why should Armbruster want to place Scobinancistrus in Panaque? It seems to me that an unusual characteristic like eating wood would be enough to get a genus to yourself.

Deborah

Post by **Shane** » 16 May 2006, 04:59

Jools hit the nail on the head.

Just curious, but if they are not wood-eaters, why should Armbruster want to place Scobinancistrus in Panaque? It seems to me that an unusual characteristic like eating wood would be enough to get a genus to yourself.

Wood-eating has never been used as a defining taxonomic characteristic of the genus Panaque.

Jon's latest key divides Panaque and the former Cochliodon (also wood-eaters) as
"Cheek with elongated, evertible odontodes"

Panaque is further distinguished by...

"Panaque can be identified from all other loricariids except members of the Hypostomus cochliodon group by the presence of either spoon-shaped teeth (Below, B), or elongate, spoon-shaped teeth (Below, C) vs. viliform teeth (below, A). In addition, Panaque can be separated from most similar ancistrins by the lack of a buccal papilla."

Just curious, but if they are not wood-eaters, why should Armbruster want to place Scobinancistrus in Panaque? It seems to me that an unusual characteristic like eating wood would be enough to get a genus to yourself.

Because, currently, things like special behaviors, reproduction, diets, etc. are rarely considered in taxonomy.
They are not at all useful to a scientist with a collection of preserved fish and do not work well with cladistics or lend themselves to taxonomic keys.
Are we using the right tools for the job or are we picking jobs that fit our tools?
-Shane
PS Great line of questions Deborah.

Deb · Post by **Deb** » 16 May 2006, 23:49

The answers on this thread have been so helpful. I just have my one little Panaque (yes, he has a name - it's Mac) and he gets the royal treatment. He has agreeable tankmates, black sand, and three kinds of wood.

I'd like to see pictures of the three different teeth styles that Shane mentioned. In the cat-e-log there is a good photo of Panaque nigrolineatus and another of P. maccus, both showing impressive teeth. Do these illustrate the teeth styles mentioned in Shane's post? Is there a good example of villiform teeth? There are some good photos in Jay Nelson's pages of an undescribed Panaque:
http://www.towson.edu/users/nelson/Panaque/panaque.html
I still like Jools "unextended" teeth comment, but what are unextended teeth, exactly? I couldn't find this term in the usual Ichthyology dictionaries.

I thought that all the scientists would be like Carl Ferraris and go off to live in a stream for a while until they had learned everything there was to know about a fish, but now I realize that maybe a lot of them only get to work with preserved specimens. I know you can learn a lot from a dead fish, but many of their interesting habits would still be a mystery.

Deborah

H.N · Post by **H.N** » 17 May 2006, 17:45

Not all three were taken, but you can have a look
at different teeth of Panaque spp. on my website.
http://tiger.towson.edu/users/hnonog1/T ... ucture.htm
I do not have an English page for this, but you will see
what species on pictures. All SEM photos are credited
to Jay A. Nelson, Ph.D.
Enjoy!

Deb · Post by **Deb** » 17 May 2006, 18:23

Those are some impressive photos. Thanks, H.N!

Deborah

Candice · Post by **Candice** » 28 May 2006, 19:06

Great pictures!