need help ID of bristlenose

jimmyB · Post by **jimmyB** » 24 May 2006, 15:55

I will try to get pics, but until then, I have a few bristlenose that I am growing out that do not seem like the common brown bristlenose variety. They are overall a brown color, but they have very small light color dots on them, and some orange coloring around the edges of the fins. One of them (might be another species) has more of a splotchy pattern of dark and light brown all over his body. Almost like a Calico pattern. If anyone can throw out some ideas for me to research, I want to narrow it down.

MatsP · Post by **MatsP** » 24 May 2006, 16:24

It doesn't sound like a common, indeed. But they are a bit variable. There are literally around 50 known species of Ancistrus and several L-numbers that are "undescribed" [although from what I understand, some of them may well have been described, just that they aren't sufficiently well-described and easy to identify].

Several photos would definitely help to come up with better ideas. Unfortunately, small spots isn't particularly unique, there's at least three that I can think of off the top of my head:

Ancistrus hoplogenys

--
Mats

jimmyB · Post by **jimmyB** » 24 May 2006, 16:48

Thanks Mats;

The Dolichopterus is too dark, almost black, so that is not it. The Hoplogenys did not have any phtotos, so I'll have to surf for that. The Punctatus looks pretty close, that would be a good guess at this point. Thanks again. I'll try to post some photos soon.

Waldo · Post by **Waldo** » 24 May 2006, 20:28

** just a reminder. Color isn't key. Use body structure and finage to determin the correct sp.

Guppies come in every color in the world but they are all 1 sp!

Azmeaiel · Post by **Azmeaiel** » 25 May 2006, 08:32

here is a thread where I was having similar trouble.

http://www.planetcatfish.com/forum/view ... hp?t=12880

lots of pics.

jimmyB · Post by **jimmyB** » 25 May 2006, 21:36

thanks.....One of the photos of the Piebald is pretty darn close...funny how out of those 8-10 small photos, there is such variation. The close up of the head, and the top left one are close to the one I said looked like a Calico splotchy color. I did notice that his pectoral fins have dots on them, whereas the caudal tail fin had more of the zig-zag stripes on them, not dots. Onely one is big enough to show some stuble that will be whiskers. I think mine are all the same type, just color variation in the darkness of the brown.

Azmeaiel · Post by **Azmeaiel** » 29 May 2006, 11:38

I personally am not sure that the 'piebald' is actually a colour variation. When I was keeping lots of adults it always seemed to be the most senior or alpha male or female that displayed those exact markings. there was always one 'piebald' in each tank. other individuals would show those marking sometimes when stressed or fighting over territory.There always seemed to be at least one individual in each tank that would 'permenantly' show these colours untill re-housed. they also seem to be too regular to be a true piebald marking.

KevinM · Post by **KevinM** » 30 May 2006, 01:39

Are one of the variations of the common Ancistrus sp. much longer than the others please ?

Kevin

MatsP · Post by **MatsP** » 30 May 2006, 14:31

Males should grow bigger than females, but my biggest is still the oldest (oldest overall fish) female in my group... At around 10cm/4" total length. The biggest male is almost as big. But they will probably grow a little bigger. I had a rescue project going where I had a male of around 15cm/6" - unfortunately, the rescue didn't work out...

But as far as I know, the COMMON ancistrus (as per) grow to around 15cm/6" total length, maybe a little bit more. They grow faster up to around 7cm/3" than they do later on in life, just like so many other fish.

--
Mats

KevinM · Post by **KevinM** » 30 May 2006, 21:46

Thank You Mats

These are photos of some of my fry ,they hatched in September 2005 ,these photos are from before christmas when they were younger I havent taken any photos of them recently, are they Ancistrus Sp(3) please ?

http://www.planetcatfish.com/forum/albu ... pic_id=585

http://www.planetcatfish.com/forum/albu ... pic_id=586

At which size could I be pretty sure if they have no bristles in the centre of the head they are females ?

Mike_Noren · Post by **Mike_Noren** » 31 May 2006, 08:59

KevinM wrote:are they Ancistrus Sp(3) please ?

Whether they are or not, you should probably treat them as such, as you do not know what they are.

This is a 100% typical sp3 (a young male):
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/c ... sh_700.jpg

As you can see, it's a dark brown fish with small spots on the head and progressively larger spots towards the rear, a nearly-complete band encircling the base of the tail fin, and staggered lines in the dorsal and caudal fins. Most but not all specimens also have gold tips to the dorsal and/or caudal fin.

Regardless of original origin, sp3 is by now a hybrid strain. The reason I'd recommend that you consider your fish sp3 is because you'll never be able to get a positive id on them, so it's better you add them to the sp3 genepool than claim they are a particular species (and most likely get it wrong).

Sp3 is fast-growing (my three specimens have grown from 2 cm to about 10 cm in under a year) and my male started showing signs of 'beard' when he was about 5 cm.

MatsP · Post by **MatsP** » 31 May 2006, 10:32

<fx>Climbs onto soapbox</fx>
We've had the discussion about A. sp(3) being a hybrid several times. I'm following Shane's and Jool's line that they probably ARE NOT A HYBRID between two species. It's just not possible to find the original wild species, for one or more of these reasons:
1. There are plenty of undescribed Ancistrus.
2. There are LOTS of Ancistrus that are brown with lighter spots, and telling them apart by looks only is quite difficult, capture location would be much helpfull - but since these are captive bred, and has been for many years, the original capture location of these fish is long lost.
3. There's been several books published where a fish looking like A. sp(3) is pictured with what is almost certainly _NOT_ the correct name (such as calling it ).
4. Many of the older described Ancistrus species are described quite vaguely - Brown fish with lighter spots isn't easy to distinguish when you have three other species with exactly the same description.

There are several reasons to NOT believe in the rather frequently mentioned hybrid theory. The main one is that they breed true - if you have a hybrid that have fertile off-spring, you'd quite often get "throwbacks", where the genetics of a one or another ancestor turns up again. All my 100+ babies have turned out exactly the same looks, aside from when the mom got his son to fertilize the eggs and the babies turned albino....

Note: This doesn't mean that ALL fish that are labeled Ancistrus sp(3) are NECESSERILY the smae species!

<fx>Stepping off soapbox</fx>

Now for Kevin's questions: Yes, I believe your fish is . If nothing else because it's one of the most common variety of Ancistrus species in the trade, and they are quite often available as small babies in the LFS because someone local is breeding them.

You can reasonably well sex them around 5cm/2" or slightly bigger. Anything that has bristles at that size (as of Ancistrus sp(3), not necessarily OTHER Ancistrus species) are males. My 3-year+ female is over 10cm/4" long, and she's still not got ANY bristles. The males that she's brought to the world tend to have bristles around 4-5cm/1.5-2".

--
Mats

Mike_Noren · Post by **Mike_Noren** » 31 May 2006, 13:28

MatsP wrote:I'm following Shane's and Jool's line that they probably ARE NOT A HYBRID between two species.

I actually agree that sp3 is probably originally a real species, and for the same reason you do - that it breeds true (mostly). I've even seen wild-caught specimens almost identical to sp3. However, I'm pretty sure it's not a pure species _any more_, because it's bred in such huge numbers by people who do not care at all about keeping it separate from other Ancistrus (notably the "original" common ancistrus of the 70's and 80's, which, at least around here, was a drab mottled brown fish quite dissimilar to sp3, and of course the real Ancistrus dolichopterus).
This is why I don't really want to afford it a name - because then, when/if the pure species is imported again, it'll get mixed up with it.

KevinM · Post by **KevinM** » 31 May 2006, 15:43

Thank You Mike and Mats.

Kevin