PlanetCatfish.com

I was sold this pleco as a clown pleco, but wanted to be certain of its ID. I have it in a 46 gallon tank and it's about 2-3 inches right now.

Hi
From the photo, I'd say (also known as L204 and/or Flash Pleco).
You can click the purple text of the fish's name to find out more about it.
HTH
Martin

Feels like a which is one of the "clown" plecos.

I think so, hey guys, how do I ask a question on this forum, thanks

Thanks! That's what I've been suspecting for a while now after seeing a picture of one somewhere else. Will it outgrow my tank? It's a 46 gallon which puts it about 3ft long, 2ft high and about 2ft wide, if I'm estimating correctly...which I'm probably not.

Hi,
It will not outgrow that tank.

Cheers

Ilovefish141 wrote:I think so, hey guys, how do I ask a question on this forum, thanks

Go into the forum area (buttons above)
Then go to the category you think the question belongs in (if you choose wrong the mods will move it for you so no drama)
Then select the new topic button, and ask away.

Cheers

How much did it cost? If I could find these for clown pleco prices, I would buy every last one I could find.

krazyGeoff wrote:

Ilovefish141 wrote:I think so, hey guys, how do I ask a question on this forum, thanks

Go into the forum area (buttons above)
Then go to the category you think the question belongs in (if you choose wrong the mods will move it for you so no drama)
Then select the new topic button, and ask away.

Cheers

Ok thanks very much

Hi he looks like my Panaqolus/panaque Maccus clown pleco. L162 will get two about 10cm. Hope this helps.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

blue teddy wrote:Hi he looks like my Panaqolus/panaque Maccus clown pleco. L162 will get two about 10cm. Hope this helps.

It's already been agreed it's aka Flash Plec/L204, and not aka L162.
Martin

Ok will keep my opinions to my self next time..


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

There is nothing wrong with opinions, but if you're going to disagree with an ID that multiple people have given (and there has been no disagreement), it may be helpful if you say why you think your opinion is correct compared to the given ID (number of rays in the dorsal fin, shape of the head, etc.)

Yikes. Like blue teddy, I also have a couple fish that I believe are L162 that look similar to what's in the picture here. (And that's an observation about the original post, not an opinion on whether the ID of L204 is accurate or not.)

Why do I believe mine are L162, not L204? While they are a darker brownish base color with brighter, narrower stripes than my other clown plecs, they aren't as dark as the L204's I've seen in the past and they've stayed fairly small, more in line with the average size of an adult L162 vs. adult L204. I'd be thrilled if mine are L204 (having never owned one), but I just don't think that's the case.

That said, I do have an opinion on the original post so here's my two cents: I think there's a wide range of what classifies as a L162 clown plec. Personally, what I see in the picture here is a darker brown version of a L162, and a quite striking one at that. Beautiful fish either way.

Maybe the original poster would update us on the temperament of the fish in question...does it hang out on the driftwood all the time? Has it displayed any aggression towards other fish? That might help isolate the species more than one picture can...

I have never seen any maccus with that much yellow on that dark of a base. I will stick with the id of L204.

I am going to have to agree that this is an exceptionally well marked Panaqolus maccus and not a Panaqolus albivermis (L204).

The markings around the snout and head are not in line with how L204 should look but fit perfectly with L162.

Andy

blue teddy wrote:Hi he looks like my Panaqolus/panaque Maccus clown pleco. L162 will get two about 10cm. Hope this helps.

Narwhal72 wrote:I am going to have to agree that this is an exceptionally well marked Panaqolus maccus and not a Panaqolus albivermis (L204).

The markings around the snout and head are not in line with how L204 should look but fit perfectly with L162.

Andy

After reading Andy's comments, and looking closer at the photo, I'm going to apologise to Blue Teddy and retract my suggestion of L204 and go with L162 after all. As stated, the markings are exceptional for L162 but looking closer, the bands on the dorsal don't fit with L204 and the head shape doesn't appear right either.

Martin

Martin

I am pretty sure this is the darker colouration of this population (which is not that commonly exported but does turn up) makes it very easy to confuse with on the basis of a single photo. The lower profile, caudal colouration are characteristics and the yellower hue and relative thickness of stripes are also indicative.


Jools