FishProfiles.com Message Forums

Just picked this little fella up , primarily because he was in a display tank with a load of malawi's and about to get his face beaten in and most likely would not have done well in their water quality, liking it both better oxygenated and more acidic, basically perfect for my tanks.

What I want to know is, is this a hemichromis bimaculatus or a cristatus. His colour is a little off since the move,it was quite a long journey, and ive only had him a few hours, but he was really very red in the shop. Any ideas?

The plan is to get it a mate, im not even sure of the sex either, but obviously the right species would be a start.lol

http://i12.photobucket.com/albums/a245/longhairedgit/IMG_4267.jpg

http://i12.photobucket.com/albums/a245/longhairedgit/IMG_4270.jpg

http://i12.photobucket.com/albums/a245/longhairedgit/IMG_4268.jpg

Not knowing the age and size of the fish in the pic, I am assuming it is mostly grown from its appearance.

From my knowledge, firstly this is not a cristatus, as it does not have the definative yellow to white glow or shadow area around the mid-lateral line spot. This usually yellow haze area, is one of the number one identifiers of the cristatus. Even when scared and colored down, they will have an area that can be seen. Unless this fish is the evolution of a highly inbred, or linebred fish, where as the surrounding haze of the spot has been bred out of it, I would say it is not a cristatus.

As for the bimaculatus, there is much confusion about this particular fish, as in the identification and such. It is believed by many aquarists and many scientists, that those found in the hobby are all miss identified. As well, most that have been scientifically identified are miss labeled. The main reasoning is the name. As the name in latin is "2 spots". And most all the fish labeled as bimaculatus have three spots. In actuallity, a true bimaculatus is considered to be a rare fish. The reasoning is, that the type local of this fish is not 100% known. In most all scientific research papers and such, it is listed as "possibly Liberia". In many instances, any fish that cannot be correctly identified as some other hemichromis is placed in this species. As this is the only species that does not have conclusive evidence and/or conclusive definitive charicteristicts, within the hemichromis genus. So it has become a catch all group now. As well, many hybrids have become labeled as bimaculatus as well, due to the fact that their definitive identification is almost impossible.

Going down the list of jewels, I cannot place it with any other species at this time, for one reason or another. My closest guess though, would be to place it in the bimaculatus species for two reasons. Firstly, it is the catch all group. And secondly, with the caudal peduncle spot fading on your fish, it may end up only having two spots on it in the end.

I know this does not help your definitive or proper identification of this fish, but I hope this helps.

_____________________________________________________________

There is always a bigger fish...

Thanks for the thoughts there acidrain. Identifying this little dude (2.5 inches approx)is proving to be a lot more difficult than I imagined. He /she looks young, as if it has yet to fill out and become heavier featured, so im assuming he may yet grow another inch, making it one of the larger species.

Ive looked through loads of stuff on the net, the overall impression I get from that is that most people havent got a clue about the exact species they have, and even looking at the picture references in baensch im getting even more confused. From what I can tell, unless theres a great deal of variability, the skull isnt quite right for a bimaculatus, the colour around the midbody spot isnt right for a cristatus, the scalation is wrong for a cerasogaster, so now im actually torn between two more possibilities- the guttatus (which perhaps he looks the most like), or even a lifalili, although he was very red, im not sure he was quite that red. I guess even a hybrid is not completely out of the question.

What makes it even more confusing is when I take a picture with flash, he comes out looking completely different than he does without.Ill take a piccy when the sun is out tomorrow without flash and see if it brings out the colours I see a little more accurately for the camera.

Nightmare.

At 2.5", he/she may be too young to tell for sure. However, it looks a lot like a young H. guttatus to me. I've kept them in the past, and from what I've read they're the most common Hemichromis import and are usually mislabled as H. bimaculatus.

Eric

Its coloured up a bit now, looks a lot better, and is a little more belligerent , which I take it, is a good thing.
Maybe his new colours might help the ID a bit, but bimaculatus seems to fit.

http://i12.photobucket.com/albums/a245/longhairedgit/IMG_4349.jpg

Can you get a profile shot, from the side?

_____________________________________________________________

There is always a bigger fish...

yeah it looks like the blue jewel

I still think it's H. guttatus (usually sold as H. bimaculatus but has been mislabelled in the hobby since it was first introduced).

Eric

ok, heres a side profile pic.

http://i12.photobucket.com/albums/a245/longhairedgit/IMG_4398.jpg