Page 1 of 1
L134 or not?
Posted: 16 Jan 2010, 16:19
by Sophiru
Re: L134 or not?
Posted: 16 Jan 2010, 16:24
by MatsP
Looks like
. But it's not that easy to say from those photos. I can certainly say it's NOT
.
The photos aren't clear enough that I can tell if it's a male or female.
--
Mats
Re: L134 or not?
Posted: 16 Jan 2010, 16:32
by Sophiru
Just as I suspected.
I'll put up some better photos for betted ID if I manage to get some, as I said, its always hiding and with my crappy camera it's hard to get a decent pic.
Re: L134 or not?
Posted: 16 Jan 2010, 21:18
by AleGer
It is Not L134. As far I know L134's belly is with out any pattern.
And such belly pattern as at the photo has Panaque.
Re: L134 or not?
Posted: 16 Jan 2010, 23:24
by Karsten S.
Hi,
as mentionned before the photos are not good enough for a definite answer.
My guess would be Panaqolus cf. maccus (LDA 67), 100% no L 134.
Cheers,
Re: L134 or not?
Posted: 17 Jan 2010, 04:49
by krazyGeoff
Hi Sophiru,
I agree with Mats.
These hit the market last year with the same label. Here is my post about them.
http://www.planetcatfish.com/forum/view ... 13&t=25816
They are still a really nice little fish though.
Geoff