PlanetCatfish.com

Hi Martin,
The plunges you hear are most likely from Tetras trying to evade the Tetranematichthys. I have not witnessed mine jumping so far and I can observe them very well in the blue light.
But I understand that you keep your auchenipterids together for the time being? Then it may also be the Tatias that you hear..... Risky.
In order to cycle your new tank quicker, use water from your current tank. By doing so, you could add the fishes next week instead of in a few weeks.

Marc van Arc wrote: The plunges you hear are most likely from Tetras trying to evade the Tetranematichthys. I have not witnessed mine jumping so far and I can observe them very well in the blue light.

OK, will have to try that then. Thanks.

Marc van Arc wrote: But I understand that you keep your auchenipterids together for the time being? Then it may also be the Tatias that you hear..... Risky.

Yes, I know...it's not ideal, but have been keeping the tank topped up with river shrimp to keep the wallecai busy and hopefully ignoring the smaller auchenipterids. It's worked so far, but know i'm taking a chance which is why i am going to try and get the tank up and running this weekend.

Marc van Arc wrote: In order to cycle your new tank quicker, use water from your current tank. By doing so, you could add the fishes next week instead of in a few weeks.

I'm going to have to remove the undergravels and powerhead that it comes with and swap them for an internal - may be able to use a small amount of media from my external in it to help even more.
Thanks
Martin

Martin

You might want to try BLUSTART manufactured by Ferplast, i have had great success with this maturing water very quickly so that fish can be added to new set-ups almost immediately (certainly within a day of set-up after achieving correct temp, using tapwater conditioner etc)

Thanks Richard - will see if I can lay my hands on some.
Thanks again
Martin

Something I don't get to see very often as they are very seclusive, but tonight the Auchenipteridae sp. 'Guyana' were on the move. Have a look.

And this one is for everyone as well, but especially for Martin

Snap

Neat...
What is it Martin...



Cheers
Yann

Yann wrote:Neat...
What is it Martin...

Hi Yann
It's a . Not the best picture as very bright but I will be posting a better one later today.
I'm guessing your picture isn't of C. perugiae...
[edit]

[/edit]
Thanks
Martin

Martin S wrote:I'm guessing your picture isn't of C. perugiae...

Odd. For a moment I was in doubt myself as well. However, I do think it's perugiae. I think this species has a very variable pattern.
And it would be nice to finally find out whether the big spot perugiae is a variety as well or a different species. We still don't have C. altae pictures in the Clog

Martin S wrote:It's a

Tetranematichthys wallacei

.

Nice specimen Martin. Happy to see your specimen has the whitish tail edge as well. My specimens have it too and in the beginning I thought they had some illness....

Marc van Arc wrote:

Martin S wrote:It's a

Tetranematichthys wallacei

.

Nice specimen Martin. Happy to see your specimen has the whitish tail edge as well. My specimens have it too and in the beginning I thought they had some illness....

Mine usually hangs out in the amazon swords, but I came home yesterday to find it 'resting' in the smaller foreground plant, so grabbed the chance of a photograph.
Thanks re: Yann's C. perugiae - they just looked much smaller spots than mine, but yes, looking again, they loo about right.
Martin

Hi Martin!!

thanks for the info...I was wondering since it was some unusual pic...especially the position and fact the fish is shown from the top...couldn't recognize it!!

Regarding the C. perugiae..yes they are...it is a young one of 3cm, offspring of my trio pictured there before in this topic:

Here is a pic of the parents


Cheers
Yann

On Entomocorus spp.

Jools wrote: Hmmm, then I have two species then.

At least one of my five specimens shows dark areas on both caudal lobes, which makes it look like a cross between E. gameroi and E. radiosus with regard to tail pattern

I'm now a woodcat owner thanks to my newly rediscovered .

Tatia sp.2 is circulating under the trade name of "rusty tatia" - maybe that could be a common name listed in the species page as it has none?

E.Gameroi is going by the trade name of "black-tip tatia"

I don't know if this info is of any use to anyone searching for either of these species?

Richard,
There's nothing wrong with the idea, yet I'd personally like names like that in the general remarks section, for instance like: are known to be sold as ..... and soley for referential purposes (this fish is sold as ...... somewhere)
The problem with making these names common is that they may cause confusion.
E. gameroi is neither the one with a black tip, nor a Tatia, to name just two disadvantages

Marc van Arc wrote:Richard,
There's nothing wrong with the idea, yet I'd personally like names like that in the general remarks section, for instance like: are known to be sold as ..... and soley for referential purposes (this fish is sold as ...... somewhere)
The problem with making these names common is that they may cause confusion.
E. gameroi is neither the one with a black tip, nor a Tatia, to name just two disadvantages

Agreed - it was, after all, just info for anyone who wanted to purchase these in the UK so they know what to ask a LFS to get type-of-thing

Yeah, but it'll change when they are imported again in another 5 years. You'd be surprised how many folks in the trade actually look up Planet for a name to put on their lists. There are a number of common names I made up (or were first published on Planet) that have found common use. To that end I vote we call them "Penguin Woodcats" because they remind me in a vague way of Penguin Tetras.

Jools

Hmmm - i see what you mean - that's a good shout

if we have Penguin Woodcats, then we should have Catwoman woodcats, Joker woodcats and Batman woodcats as well; otherwise it's a fluke


OK, now was that funny?
personnaly i think so, yes


but really; why make up common names??
common names are nothing but diversion, confusion, chaos and THE MAINcause of a lot of misunderstandings

we're supposed to educate people about (cat)fishes.
in my book that's cramming scientific (latin0 names in their throats until finally something akin to intelligence dawns and we can talk as a global community about the same fish.

this "allergy" to anything scientific has got to end, or else we're nothing better than cavemen; except we have more sophisticated toolery.

Bit off topic, but a good question and I will tell you why I think common names are vital. It makes fishes more mainstream accessible - in my view that's a great thing.

I really prefer to use scientific names and sometimes I am not good at saying it, reading and thinking scientific names is way different from speaking it.

I find it better to know the scientific name and use the common name unless I am 100% sure whomever I am talking with is comfortable with the Latin. If they are not, then it becomes an obstacle and indeed there is a point where I am just plain showing off. That's not to say I am in favour of the old "super king mega clown cyclone dragon pleco" thing, but well considered common names bring fishes to life and broaden their appeal to other fishkeepers.

I'm not sure your view of forcing someone to use a particular mode of communication is especially productive. I mean, if I spoke Dutch and English and visited a friends house who only spoke English, would I force him to listen to my Dutch? I might throw a few Dutch words in place to encourage him or her but I wouldn't "ram it down their throat" eh?

A lot of the folks here (in the forum) speak scientific names and they should be encourage as communication is not in real time and with the clog links folks can see a picture of what is being discussed and that REALLY helps the pick up of the formal names. Outside of the forum, across the majority of fishkeepers, common names rule.

As to a global term for one species, that's great but we still see sections calling a particular fish Panaqolus maccus or or Synodontis angelicus versus .

Or am I just an optimist and was named the ogre catfish because of Shrek (see, I brought it back on topic!)?

Jools

Sorry for side-tracking this even further, but you can't actually "educate someone to intelligence" - you CAN educate away ignorance, but the ability to use existing knowledge in a new way is something you have to achieve in other ways. [Most so called IQ tests are not at all IQ tests, but knowledge and understanding tests].

--
Mats

Went to the pet shop to get some fish food, and while I was waiting, decide to have a look at the fishes for sale and discover this two beautys labeled as brazilian sharks hiding behind the filter , for 8$ each one can't refuse to take them home , I think they're tatia galaxia, what do you think?, is the first time I see them in my country

jopbgon wrote:Went to the pet shop to get some fish food, and while I was waiting, decide to have a look at the fishes for sale and discover this two beautys labeled as brazilian sharks hiding behind the filter , for 8$ each one can't refuse to take them home , I think they're tatia galaxia, what do you think?, is the first time I see them in my country

Congratulatipns on this find.
Yet I have to make a serious remark:
I see some red areas on the above picture, namely on the dorsal and anal fin. If these spots are really on the fish (not caused by the flash or accidental spots on the bag) I'd like you to keep a very close watch on this specimen. These spots may be caused by bacterial infections and if they don't disappear you'll have to use medications. Sorry to spoil the fun.
I truly hope these spots were caused by something artificial and that your fish is alright.
Btw: were they in a tank with nippy tankmates?? That may also be a cause of wounds....

Yes I saw the red mark after I buy them, they were kept in bad conditions, and I think the fish got hurt when the seller was catching him, I will keep a close watch on the fish, tanks for the advice

My Liosomadoras morrowi left the hideout this morning and I was able to take some pics.
She(?) is 6" SL and becoming quite impressive. Wish I could find her a partner!

She(?) is 6" SL and becoming quite impressive. Wish I could find her a partner!

Yes...looks very healthy!

The I was hoping for have arrived at my LFS - was hoping for some small specimens but what actually arrived are 4 x 6" fish. Apparently they are stunning fish, though larger than I'd hoped for.
At this size, as I understand it, they should be sexable by looking for a genital papillae and from above the pectoral spines should be much thicker. 6" fish should be big enough for any sexual dimorphism to show, correct? I am hoping to be able to try and choose a pair.
[EDIT]
And when they said 6", they meant it! I have never seen jags so big! The four that arrived were all but one regularly marked - the odd one had more spotting than the usual markings, and of these 4 one was a definite male from the thick pectoral spines. The rest I could not be sure.
I think that thay are just too big for me, so back to the 2" fish I'd found at another shop - if I had a larger tank now, I wouldn't hesitate, it's just that these are much bigger than I'd expected.
[/EDIT]
Martin