Page 4 of 21
Posted: Tue Jun 27, 2006 5:56 pm
by Emma Turner
Posted: Tue Jun 27, 2006 6:02 pm
by Martin Thoene
Now whydya haf to go an' do dat?
Now I'm looking at the underside shots and I cannot believe they are Schisturas anymore. They HAVE to be Vanamania......unless.......you somehow got another species eggs into that system somehow.
Ain't no way those fins or mouth are a Schistura.
Martin.
Posted: Tue Jun 27, 2006 6:49 pm
by NancyD
Very cute whatever they turn into. I don't see the bands on these latest pics. I think we should know the details of your Ehiem filter, Emma. Maybe it's the key to loach egg survival
![Very Happy :D](./images/smilies/icon_biggrin.gif)
.
Nancy
Posted: Tue Jun 27, 2006 6:52 pm
by Emma Turner
Hehe! There's certainly plenty of twists and turns with this mystery!
Re: the glass pics - I thought I'd better point out that the fry don't spend their time actively clinging to the glass, they only seem to do this when startled (like when I get up close with my camera). At all other times they hide under the sponge filter or else in amongst some of the ceramic ball/tube media that's still their substrate. They are very fast little critters and can move at an alarming speed when disturbed.
No new fish have been added to the River tank for some time - certainly nothing within time range of this spawning. It's still got to be either
Schistura,
Annamia, or
Sewellia. Can't be anything else. Whatever they are, they certainly appreciated your manifold design, Martin!
Emma
Posted: Tue Jun 27, 2006 7:40 pm
by Emma Turner
Mouth/underside comparisons. However these may not be all that helpful as we know that young fish can change dramatically as they grow:
Loach fry....
Annamia....
Sewellia....
I (fairly obviously) don't have pics of the underside of my
Schisturas. There is a diagram of the underside of the mouth of
Schistura balteata in Kottelat's 'Indochinese Nemacheilines' book, but have not yet got my scanner connected up to be able to post it here.
Emma
Posted: Tue Jun 27, 2006 7:48 pm
by Martin Thoene
Hmmmm....try a
Homaloptera smithi for size......
Somewhat in an
Annamaniacs mode
Martin.
Posted: Tue Jun 27, 2006 9:13 pm
by Jim Powers
I swear, I get more confused each time I see these cute little guys!
I agree with Martin. From underneath, they sure look like tiny H. smithi.
I'm now leaning back to the annamia as parents...but I wouldn't bet on it.
Posted: Wed Jun 28, 2006 4:15 am
by Graeme Robson
Hahah! This is Great!
*scratches head AGAIN*
Posted: Wed Jun 28, 2006 8:57 am
by CKfish
Emma, that's terrific. Keep the photos coming!
Posted: Wed Jun 28, 2006 10:53 am
by mamaschild
Emma, that's FANTASTIC
Definately keep the pics coming.
![Very Happy :D](./images/smilies/icon_biggrin.gif)
Posted: Wed Jun 28, 2006 12:29 pm
by mikev
A slightly insane idea for your consideration:
It is also possible that the breeding did not occur in Emma's tank at all. Could it be that some gravel or plant or nice stones were moved from the store tank (or another tank Emma owns) to this? Or even the filter itself?
----
Also: the triangular shape of eyes -- is there anything one can conclude from it?
Posted: Wed Jun 28, 2006 12:58 pm
by Emma Turner
No, not insane at all.
We've thought about this, but the only thing we have moved was a Cryptocoryne motherplant from our Clown Loach tank over to the River tank a little while back. We moved it because we wanted to rescue it from the relentless munching of the barbs in there.
The only fish in that aquarium are:
~ 45 Clowns
a breeding group of
Puntius filamentosus (the fry of which are very different to the new loach fry)
a couple of old dark
Ancistrus (which used to breed but don't seem to do so very often these days - again, the new loach fry look nothing like these)
some ageing
Hemigrammus ulreyi (must be around 11 years old, which is amazing for tetras!)
and a single ancient
Corydoras.
Other than that nothing has been moved/added; the River Tank has been going for well over a year with the same filter from the start. We haven't changed the sand or added to it, no new plants other than the Cryptocoryne mentioned above, no new rocks etc. We only use RO for our water changes taken from our own unit at home.
And nothing new has been added to the Clown Loach aquarium either. With such a low pH we haven't added anything to that tank for a long time.
So, it's still a mystery!!!
Emma
Posted: Wed Jun 28, 2006 1:05 pm
by mikev
Hmm, no good candidates on this list. I think that the babies are loaches.
Maybe it still worth checking for other contamination possibilities, like sharing a net, or gravel suc, or anything of this nature....
And if you want a REALLY insane idea: hybrids are not totally out of the question either.
![Very Happy :D](./images/smilies/icon_biggrin.gif)
Posted: Wed Jun 28, 2006 2:14 pm
by DarrenMnaples
those swellas are awsome looking fish !!! cool pics too
Posted: Wed Jun 28, 2006 2:28 pm
by Tony T.
The juvenile is rather scaly, so it is not
Schistura. Can you try counting pectoral fin rays?
In older Loach forum I had posted pics of juvenile
Schistura before so someone may dig those pics up?
*Edited by Graeme* Here's Tony's Juvenile
Schistura nicholsi.
In the case of
S. nicholsi the dorsal and lateral blotches merge to form body bands when they grow up, which seems to be the opposite of what is documented in
S. mahnerti.