FishProfiles.com Message Forums

I don't think we're dealing with farowella species, here, but yeah, I agree. They are ridiculously fragile. Makes you wonder how they manage to survive in the wild.

well i found at a local shop what i'm getting. they showed me a few that stay under 7 inches. i'm going with a sweet looking tiger pleco. when i asked about a zebra, he about fell on the floor laughing

http://www.tropicfishcenter.ch/images/Pleco%20Tiger%20Anapu%202.jpg

http://www.fishprofiles.com/files/profiles/252.htm

only thing that bites.... $25 a pop. but their cool looking and worth it

Fish tanks are an expensive addiction

I thought you were looking for a pleco that eats algae...

---

I'm not your neighbor, you Bakersfield trash.

i am. and i see what the profile says. but i'm also trusting a local mom/pop shop thats been around for 30 years.

unless there is somebody on here who has had one and is 100% about what the profile says.

Fish tanks are an expensive addiction

I've never kept that particular species, but I have kept several other Peckoltia species, and I have never witnessed them eating algae. It's just not something that specific genus is known for.

Most stores, even knowledgeable "ma and pa" stores, seem to be under the misconception that all plecos eat algae. It's best to take what they say about the family Loricariidae with a grain of salt, and put your trust more with venerable online sources such as PlanetCatfish.

---

I'm not your neighbor, you Bakersfield trash.

I am confused. The first link is a picture of a panaque. The second is a profile of a peckoltia. Both with browse on awfuchs, which includes algae, but neither chews on the stuff regularly. Plus, it would depend on what kind of algae you had in your tank. Some strains do not even have fish that will chance to eat the stuff.

*will, not with

Ah - the moment I hear the word Peckoltia, the alarm bells start to ring.

Because ... of a nice article that I have in one of my magazine back numbers (Cup_of_Lifenoodles has the page scans from this I sent a while back).

The problem with Peckoltia as a Genus is that it contains an assortment of Loricariid catfishes that have different diets. Some of them (which were proposed for membership of a new Genus erected specifically for them, namely Panaqolus, but this move was rejected for reasons unkown to me at this juncture) differ from what might be termed the 'standard' Peckolatia species (at least, 'standard' in terms of reference to the type species) in that they are wood eaters. Check the details of ANY prpopsed Peckoltia acquisition with GREAT CARE because of this anomalous situation, as some of the species lumped into that Genus have substantially different dietary requirements from the norm!

Peckoltia, Panaqolus, whatever this assorted group of fishes ends up being called, they're a taxonomic headache AND a headache to track with respect to maintenance requirement because of the 'default assumption' that all Loricariids eat algae or are afuwuchs browsers. For that matter, even Otocinclus, which ARE primarily herbivorous, will eat animal matter including live foods - I have a photograph of one of mine munching on a live Bloodworm for crying out loud!


Panda Catfish fan and keeper/breeder since Christmas 2002

Actually, Panaqolus was created for members of the genus Panaque, not Peckoltia.

Hence Panaque maccus would be Panaqolus maccus; further studies, however, revealed there weren't enough morphological differences between Panaque species to warrant the creation of an entirely new genus.

---

I'm not your neighbor, you Bakersfield trash.

Ah, got my wires crossed. I was recalling the bit in the article where Erwin Schraml said:

My opinion is that Panaqolus is much more closely related to Peckoltia Miranda-Ribiero 1912 than to Panaque. They are a kind of wood eating Peckoltias.

The confusion arises also because the would-be Panaqolus species are all small, like Peckoltia, while most of the 'conventional' Panaque species are juggernauts.

To illustrate the confusion, take a look at Panaque changae a.k.a. L206, L226 and LDA26 (yes, it has THREE L-numbers!) - among other features, instead of having relatively recessed eyes like the majority of 'conventional' Panaque species, it has protrusive 'button' eyes, only reaches a max SL of 3.9 inches, and is a wood eating species, while L90 (yet to be described) is a hulking great battle tank of a fish (no max SL given in Planet Catfish, but the photo I have in the magazine article on page 55 suggests strongly that it's capable of reaching two feet in length!).


Panda Catfish fan and keeper/breeder since Christmas 2002