PlanetCatfish.com

Martin S wrote: Do you have any recomendations on suitable foods ?Martin

What about dried crickets (pre-soaked) or freeze-dried (& pre-soaked) tubifex & bloodworm? Certainly these are a floating food which are good for surface dwellers/feeders like african butterflyfish - maybe worth a go?

Marc van Arc wrote:Martin,
I really doubt these are piscivorous. Okay, they may swallow small fishes by accident, but I don't think they are going to compete with your Tetranematichthys.
Wrt food: I don't expect them to be bottom feeders, so the food has to float and/or sink slowly. What I usually do with new fishes is feed them (and of course all other inhabitants) after lights out. Most fishes react on flakes, but provide plenty.
Frozen foods (defrost before feeding; you know auchenipterids are pretty greedy and you don't want them to swallow lumps of ice with bloodworm - or any other flavour) also float for some time when put gently on the surface. To spread the food properly I take a handful and let the water inlet spread it for me. Mind you, don't get "bitten" for patience doesn't seem to be a characteristic of auchenipterids

Ok, that's fine - just wanted to be sure either way.
I'll be off home in a bit, so will get a chance to see them in the light, and yes, agreed re: frozen.

Richard B wrote: What about dried crickets (pre-soaked) or freeze-dried (& pre-soaked) tubifex & bloodworm? Certainly these are a floating food which are good for surface dwellers/feeders like african butterflyfish - maybe worth a go?

I had considered the f/d food as an option - I'm sure I have a pot at home so will give them a go. Thanks
Martin

OKL, first video to show the issues. I'd say none of the barbels look like they will grow back as they seem to have completely disappeared, but I hope the mouthes heal up because they look quite sore. Am on day 3 of Myxazin treatment, and they are still active and constantly cruising (as you can see).

Enjoy
Martin

Some observations:
They swim a bit "wobbly". That - in combination with their current looks - could make one doubt if these are healthy fish.
I think they are. They could do with some food to bring their bodies back into proportion and of course their mouths should heal. The larger specimen also has a red area on the upper caudal, but I expect that to disappear soon. The reddish part on the anal fin has already vanished.
Their normal colour has returned. They are swimming during the day, which this species apparently does. Imo all factors that show the fish are improving.
What I would like to know is if the fish already had these wounds when they were purchased, in other words: what made them look like this? I know silver sharks can be pretty nasty, but was there anything else in that tank? Fishes may indeed hurt themselves in a head on collision, but these look as if this happened rather regularly. Also the loss of the barbels rather indicates agressiveness by other fishes (nipping?) than self inflicted damage. I would be very surprised if these wounds were just from the short period you have them now (the span between them being caught at Neil's up to them being kept in your tank).
Wrt the barbels: I too doubt that they'll regrow. Wrt the mouths I expect the red to disappear, but I reckon you'll always see some scar tissue - meaning their mouths will always look a bit bumpy. Wrt gender: like you said, two males.
In short: I think you have two wonderful assets. Give them some time to recover and enjoy!

I have a group of these too. Here's a short video. Mine came from Aquarium Glaser as Auchenipterus nigripinnis.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KlvG7a-YEt8

Marc van Arc wrote:Some observations:
They swim a bit "wobbly". That - in combination with their current looks - could make one doubt if these are healthy fish.
I think they are. They could do with some food to bring their bodies back into proportion and of course their mouths should heal. The larger specimen also has a red area on the upper caudal, but I expect that to disappear soon. The reddish part on the anal fin has already vanished.
Their normal colour has returned. They are swimming during the day, which this species apparently does. Imo all factors that show the fish are improving.

Thanks - it's good to know they are healtier than they may look at first glance. I've also added two large airstones since starting treatment to keep the water moving and better aerated.

Marc van Arc wrote: What I would like to know is if the fish already had these wounds when they were purchased, in other words: what made them look like this? I know silver sharks can be pretty nasty, but was there anything else in that tank? Fishes may indeed hurt themselves in a head on collision, but these look as if this happened rather regularly. Also the loss of the barbels rather indicates agressiveness by other fishes (nipping?) than self inflicted damage. I would be very surprised if these wounds were just from the short period you have them now (the span between them being caught at Neil's up to them being kept in your tank).

I mentioned the damage to Mats when I collected them and he said they were in this condition when he purchased them, i.e. no new injuries had occurred whilst in his tank. As you say, I'm not sure what they were in with, but maybe Neil can help?

Marc van Arc wrote: Wrt the barbels: I too doubt that they'll regrow. Wrt the mouths I expect the red to disappear, but I reckon you'll always see some scar tissue - meaning their mouths will always look a bit bumpy. Wrt gender: like you said, two males.
In short: I think you have two wonderful assets. Give them some time to recover and enjoy!

Yes, exactly what I suspected re: scar tissue and barbels, which is fine with me, as long as it heals and they have no further damage to deal with, that will be fine with me.
So, are we 100% these are ?
As always, thanks Marc

Junttis wrote:I have a group of these too. Here's a short video. Mine came from Aquarium Glaser as Auchenipterus nigripinnis.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KlvG7a-YEt8

What sort of size are these now? My two, as you can probably see are at least 7" TL so yours have some growing to do
Nice size group though!
Martin

Martin S wrote:

Junttis wrote:I have a group of these too. Here's a short video. Mine came from Aquarium Glaser as Auchenipterus nigripinnis.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KlvG7a-YEt8

What sort of size are these now? My two, as you can probably see are at least 7" TL so yours have some growing to do
Nice size group though!
Martin

I have 10 of these. The smallest is somewhere around 5cm TL and biggest is probably 8cm TL, but they are growing fast. I've kept many different catfishes, but these are definitely one of my favourites.

Martin S wrote:So, are we 100% these are

Auchenipterus nuchalis

?

I can't give you the full 100%, yet I'd say that they are very likely to be that species. How about 99%

Junttis wrote:I have a group of these too. Here's a short video. Mine came from Aquarium Glaser as Auchenipterus nigripinnis.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KlvG7a-YEt8

Aren't they lovely, these diurnal auchenipterids. Wrt behaviour they remind me a lot of .
If only.....

Nice video btw

What Neil said when I was there (in a very noisy "South American Room") was either Para-something or Pseudo-something - but I think Auchenipterus is a better match, from what little I could see these fishes.

--
Mats

Marc van Arc wrote:

Martin S wrote:So, are we 100% these are

Auchenipterus nuchalis

?

I can't give you the full 100%, yet I'd say that they are very likely to be that species. How about 99%

Thanks Marc - I am now the only keeper of 2 male A. nuchalis...well, at least I will be until Junttis adds himself as a keeper
Martin

Marc van Arc wrote:

Martin S wrote:So, are we 100% these are

Auchenipterus nuchalis

?

I can't give you the full 100%, yet I'd say that they are very likely to be that species. How about 99%

I may have to use that 1% already. I've been reading the paper on Auchenipterus (Ferraris & Vari, 1998) and the issue is that in A. nuchalis the pelvic fins should be unpigmented or only pigmented at the base (page 434, bottom line - 435, top line).
From your video I get the impression the pelvic fins are pigmented, aren't they. Also this species is found in Northern S-Am.

Triggered by Junttis' remark about Auchenipterus nigripinnis I gave that species a look (pp 429 - 434) and this one seems a better match. Caudal pattern fits better (mind you, as said before I prefer live fishes to dead ones), pelvic fins are pigmented and this species is widely spread: it's found in Brazil, Paraguay, Uruguay and Argentina (Argentine woodcat).

Have a look for yourself and see if you agree.
Btw: this would also have some consequences for the Clog species - provided we're on the right track.

Hi , I got these from Argentina in 2008 , I am pretty sure they are nuchalis , they took a hit moveing ?
If you just keep the water ok they will be fine ,
Its possible the barbles will come back
No one wanted then hence the £40 reduction.
What is the temperature , you need more air in the tank than on the video !
They will do the high temp if there is a strong air supply .

sojapat wrote:Hi , I got these from Argentina in 2008 , I am pretty sure they are nuchalis

Hi Neil,

Nuchalis is from the Guyanas & northern Brazil; with your confirmation that these are indeed from Argentina I think nigripinnis is a better match.

Marc van Arc wrote:

sojapat wrote:Hi , I got these from Argentina in 2008 , I am pretty sure they are nuchalis

Hi Neil,

Nuchalis is from the Guyanas & northern Brazil; with your confirmation that these are indeed from Argentina I think nigripinnis is a better match.

My fish came from Argentina.

http://www.aquariumglaser.de/en/aucheni ... _1070.html

Looks like we need to add a new species.

Any chance either Martin or Junttis could send me a few pictures of the fishes?

mats at planetcatfish dot com is my e-mail address. Also copy webmaster at planetcatfish dot com.

Currently the picture adding is broken, so I can't do it right now, but I hope Jools will be able to fix that soon.

Edit: New species added.

--
Mats

Neil
Thanks - I have already added a large twin output air pump to the tank to increase the aeration, especially as I am medicating. Temp is 25.2C, which, as you say, should be fine with the increased aeration. And re: condition, I do hope they improve, though from the looks I think they will both have some scarring and almost definite barbel loss.

Marc
re: the ID - I'll read up now and let you know what I think, though don't doubt you're right.
It's odd because when Junttis mension A.nigripinnis, it rang a bell, and a search came back a few posts, one of Jools saying they were on Glaser's list, so was surprised that there was no entry for them in the catelog and wondered if it was a synonym - obviously not!
I'll try and get some photos Mats, but don't think, at the moment at least, they are in a suitable condition for photos worthy of the catelog, so I'm hoping, if he can keep them still for just a second , Junttis will be able to help.
And, again that will teach me to go adding fish before the 100% sure thing
Martin

Well, a poor picture (or a picture of a poor condition fish) is actually better than NO picture. We can always replace existing pictures with new ones when they become available.

But it's obviously less effort to put good pictures on the page in the first place...

--
Mats

MatsP wrote:New species added.

Synonyms added.

My previous remark wrt consequences actually referred to pictures currently in A. nuchalis. I must take some good looks, but I'd say the "hoover" picture has to be transfered for sure.

"Hoover" (name of FBI former boss and company that makes vacuum cleaners etc) = "Hover" (what a helicopter and for example humming birds do sometimes, and in computer terms means to "hold mouse over").

So you are saying Image #1 needs to be moved for sure. I think the "move picture" is a bit broken with the "uber-bug" at the moment, so I'll attempt that when Jools clears the "uber-bug".

--
Mats

I'd say pictures 1,2 & 3 should go to
Picture 4 is correct imo ( = )
Picture 5 is none of the above imo, but that has to wait till tomorrow I'm afraid

I've posted a post in "Bugs" to remind myself about the need to move pictures around...

--
Mats

MatsP wrote:Looks like we need to add a new species.

Any chance either Martin or Junttis could send me a few pictures of the fishes?

Mats

I'll send you some pictures on weekend, if i'm gonna get my camera back.

I tought that Auchenipterus nigripinnis was a synonym for A. nuchalis, but now i see there's a difference.

MatsP wrote:I've posted a post in "Bugs" to remind myself about the need to move pictures around

While at it, pls move the picture of Ageneiosus sp`llanos` to . It's the same species, only this is a picture of a freshly caught specimen (with less black and more yellow).
The data sheet of A. sp. Llanos can be deleted (or emptied) afaics.

PS: the above has already been discussed with Jools and he has agreed.

Ok, I've added it to the list. I think there's another post about the Ageneiosus change - if I can find it, I'll attach it together with the other two posts on the subject to avoid duplicate "bugs" posts.

--
Mats

I had a look at the invoice for them , they were sold to me a nuchalis .
I honestly dont know .
It makes more sense that they are nigripinnis given the location .
I did never research them as they never interested me .
Hope they are looking happier today .
If not possibly add a little salt , It helps .

Marc van Arc wrote:I'd say pictures 1,2 & 3 should go to

Auchenipterus nigripinnis

Picture 4 is correct imo ( =

Auchenipterus nuchalis

)
Picture 5 is none of the above imo, but that has to wait till tomorrow I'm afraid

When I say something, I should at least be consequent. Thus - looking at the pictures under again, I already have to change the above as pictures 2 & 3 show a specimen with hyaline (transparent, unpigmented) pelvic fins.

Picture 1 should go to
Pictures 2, 3 & 4 are correct imo ( = )
Picture 5 still puzzles me. Afaics the specimen has pigmented pelvic fins, so according to the description it can't be A. nuchalis.

I had a good look at the (dead) specimens pictured in the Ferraris & Vari paper, but can't seem to find a match for picture 5.
The genus Auchenipterus is a difficult one; some species can only be told apart by counting the gill rakers.
It's almost a relief to find that almost all 11 species were once identified as Auchenipterus nuchalis.....

Side note to Mats: I'll edit the info in the S & B forum.

sojapat wrote:I had a look at the invoice for them , they were sold to me a nuchalis

Thanks Neil, for all the extra work on behalf of a bunch of driftwood fans

sojapat wrote:I did never research them as they never interested me

.

Joking, right?

Shouldn't there be more pics in this topic?

South American pangasius sutchii
They aint like the babies I sent you Marc proper beasts.