L104 with tail filaments.

saraya · Post by **saraya** » 22 Jun 2006, 11:47

Hello.

I have had my L104 for about 2 and a half years. During this time, he hasn't really grown much - his head has just got fatter.
However, over the past 6 months his tail has been getting bigger, and he has developed some small filaments. Nowhere near as impressive as say, an L090 - but filaments none the less.

I have had a look at the pictures on the site, but none seem to have these tail extensions. Is this normal - or is my Clown a bit freaky?
Thanks!

Post by **Silurus** » 22 Jun 2006, 12:00

Sounds like it may be something else.

Maybe an L204?

MatsP · Post by **MatsP** » 22 Jun 2006, 13:16

My clowns have a noticably forked tail, but certainly not what I'd call filaments. The top/bottom caudal fin rays are perhaps a centimeter (1/2") longer than the ones nearest inside, but that's about it.

--
Mats

ndoboi · Post by **ndoboi** » 23 Jun 2006, 09:18

My larger male has fin extensions on his tail, but I wouldnt go as far to call them filiaments. Can you post some pics for us to check out??

Cheers
Steve

saraya · Post by **saraya** » 26 Jun 2006, 10:42

Thanks for the replies.

I am wondering then, if maybe I am mistaking them for filaments. They are a lot longer than the rest of the fin rays though.
I'm pretty sure he isn't a L204.
I'll try and get a pic and see what you guys reckon. Thanks!

Judazzz · Post by **Judazzz** » 28 Jun 2006, 12:15

The Datz L-Number Special has a picture of a Panaque maccus with what could be called filaments:

Source: http://www.transfish.de/L151-175.htm

saraya · Post by **saraya** » 28 Jun 2006, 19:46

I thought that was my fish at first!

Yes - he looks exactly like that.

So he is a L104 and filaments are a possibility?
Or are they currently coming up with a different L number or something?

Edit - or are they just elongated caudal rays?

MatsP · Post by **MatsP** » 28 Jun 2006, 19:48

That fish is called L162 - but also "Panaqolus maccus", so obviously whoever runs this website consider L162 to be P. maccus (although they are using the alternative naming convention to the "official" one).

--
Mats

Judazzz · Post by **Judazzz** » 29 Jun 2006, 12:20

MatsP wrote:That fish is called L162 - but also "Panaqolus maccus", so obviously whoever runs this website consider L162 to be P. maccus (although they are using the alternative naming convention to the "official" one).

--
Mats

Since the picture is the same as the one in the Datz, I suspect they also used the magazine as their source of information (Datz L-Number Special calls L104/L162 Panaqolus maccus as well).