PlanetCatfish.com

A local tropical fish shop to me says they sell Siamese Algae Eaters but they call them Siamese Flying Foxes.

I'm still very much learning about different species but I thought Flying Foxes and Siamese Algae Eaters are very different.

Although they may look similar their diets are quite different with Siamese Algae Eaters eating more varieties of algae and more of it to boot.

Have I got it wrong or is it the norm to have Flying Foxes and Siamese Flying Foxes?

Thanks in advance,

Andy.

The siamese flying fox is another name for the siamese algae eater.

In the UK, the fish sold as a "flying fox" is usually Epalzeorhynchos kalopterus.

The fish sold as the "Siamese algae eater" will be either Crossocheilus langei or Crossocheilus atrilimes.

On top of this, Garra cambodgiensis are often substituted for either.

The common names are pretty meaningless here, so it pays to get clued up on the differences.

Seriouslyfish.com is down at the moment, but when it's back I will post some pictures.

Thanks for the info

I want a Crossocheilus Langei

It's back up. Here you go:

Crossocheilus langei

Crossocheilus atrilimes

Garra cambodgiensis

Epalzeorhynchos kalopterus

and here I was thinking that the Siamese algae Eater was the species Crossocheilus siamensis.

are they mucking about with that name as well?

There was a lovely key developed by a Petfrd member (niederle) for the genus Crossocheilus and a few related fish / genera. Coincidentally I was searching for it too but I am unable to find it. Getting a Page Not Found error. I will post the link once I find it.

Also, if I remember correctly, Crossocheilus siamensis is a synonym of Epalzeorynchos siamensis.

Also, if I remember correctly, Crossocheilus siamensis is a synonym of Epalzeorynchos siamensis.

exactly the other way around as far as I know

the smaller Asian Labeo species have been put in Epalzeorhynchus ( like the bicolor and the frenatus), and some Epalzeorhynchus have been put in Crossocheilus.

leaving only the larger African Labeo's and a few larger asian Labeo's as well.

that happened a few years ago.

but I found a few recent articles stating that Crossocheilus siamensis doesn't even exist anymore and is now made up of several very similar species, because the fish known as siamensis turned out to be a speciesgroup of closely related fish.....

it's confusing, that's for sure.

Interesting. From what I have read (a long time ago I must confess), what was thought to be E.siamensis was erroneously shifted to Crossocheilus but later turned out to be a different species of Crossocheilus, namely C.atrilmes. This is purely based on my rapidly fading memory but I can check it in a few hours time.

The conclusion though is the same. C.siamensis was never a valid species. Basically ,its like Keyser Soze.

Found only a small part of his work unfortunately. The full article was published in the Aquarium Gazette.

http://math.muni.cz/~niederle/crossoche ... _page.html

Basically ,its like Keyser Soze

now I know why the rest of the fish are scared shitless
hehe

got a pair in my Asian set up, but i'm tempted to keep them, despite the fact that the rest of the Asians are planned to go.

i want to "Africanize" that tank, but i really like the Crossocheilus and they're very mild mannered to each other and the rest.
not to mention a truly gorgeous fish.

shovelnose wrote:C.siamensis was never a valid species.

Not entirely correct, as it was valid for 60 years or so, and it remains an available name.

sidguppy wrote: but I found a few recent articles stating that Crossocheilus siamensis doesn't even exist anymore and is now made up of several very similar species, because the fish known as siamensis turned out to be a speciesgroup of closely related fish

It's not that complicated. Crossocheilus siamensis is just a synonym of Crossocheilus oblongus*. It does say on the seriouslyfish.com profile that C. siamensis is not a synonym of C. oblongus, "since that species was described from Java and E. siamensis from Peninsular Thailand". This information/opinion, as far as I know, has not been published in any peer reviewed scientific literature so should be taken with generous helpings of salt.

*The fishes in the trade do not match with this species.