Loaches Online Forum

Botia are scaleless, Pangio are not, or so I've heard. Are sids scaleless?

Edit
So i've been reading tons of links on this and getting like a 50:50 ratio of sites saying scaleless or tiny scales.

A sidheymunkey are in the Botinidae family, that is, they are Botids

Now the phrase scaleless is most often used for catfish, which loaches are definitely not.

What do you need this for? For medication? or for other purposes

Botiine loaches are scaleless

Bas Pels wrote:A sidheymunkey are in the Botinidae family, that is, they are Botids

Now the phrase scaleless is most often used for catfish, which loaches are definitely not.

What do you need this for? For medication? or for other purposes

https://www.reddit.com/r/Aquariums/comm ... h_contest/

Just a picture contest. I was talking to one of the mods in irc and we couldn't tell if it was just kuhlis that had tiny scales or if yoyos and dwarf chains also have small scales. There were 4 of us looking for info at one point but we couldn't really find anything reliable so I thought I'd ask you guys.

I don't think Pangios have scales either

Hi
On Chromobotia macranthus we can find this

"Treatment must be carefully monitored, as the fish, like all loaches, is scaleless"

seen here
http://www.tropicalfishkeeping.com/cypr ... us-192353/

Of course it's a must. But the basic statement is wrong.

Some facts instead

"The fishes of the superfamily Cobitoidea (suborder Cobitoidei minus Catostomidae) are popularly called “Loaches” "
"The fishes are usually scaleless; scales when present, small and cycloid."
seen here
http://www.ijpab.com/form/2014%20Volume ... 58-264.pdf

Means: some species are scaleless others do have scales. I can't evaluate the whole loach-family and do know just some genera and species, so can't tell what "usually" means.

Some examples:
Barbatula barbatula seems to be scaleless, Barbatula nuda is nearly scaleless
http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/do ... 1&type=pdf

Lepidocephalichthys hasselti does have scales

"Lepidocephalichthys hasselti is distinguished from other members of Lepidocephalichthys by the combination of a truncated caudal fin; scales absent on top of head"
seen here
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Ju ... 000000.pdf

Sometimes the lack of scales on the head helps to distinguish species or more (?)

"On the base of the absence of cheek scales and the wider distribution area of Botiinae, Tang et al. (2005) considered Sinibotia (meaning Botiinae) to be basal in respect to the Leptobotiinae."

seen here
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Jo ... 47336c.pdf

or this

"On the basis of cheek scale patterns, Chen (1980) classified the Botiinae into two groups. The genus Botia is believed to be the basal group because of the absence of cheek scales. Myxocyprinus asiaticus does not possess cheek scales, so the absence of cheek scales is plesiomorphic, and the presence of scales is apomorphic. Consequently, the lack of cheek scales in the genus
Botia represents the plesiomorphic condition, while the presence of scales in Parabotia and Leptobotia supports their common descent."

seen here
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Qi ... 263f2e.pdf

Other scaleless species are easy to find as Triplophysa rosa
seen here
http://www.lancang-mekong.org/Upload/up ... 049821.pdf

Some Botia have scales as Botia lohachata

"Botia lohachata
(Lohacht)
...
3. Scales very small, body with a series of 'Y'-shaped marking"

as well as Pangio pangia

"Pangio pangia
2. Scales minute, embedded in skin."

seen here
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Ma ... 6f7a47.pdf

Other Botia have no scales, respectively there is nothing mentioned.

Cheers Charles

I won't have time to read that til after work but thank you very much for the detailed reply!

Edit,
So I got a chance to read some of it. As far as sidthimunki go, all I can see is discussion on the absence of cheek scales. I get that that is used for placement purposes, but does that imply that they have no scales when they don't have cheek scales?

mellor21 wrote: As far as sidthimunki go, all I can see is discussion on the absence of cheek scales. I get that that is used for placement purposes, but does that imply that they have no scales when they don't have cheek scales?

Hi
Yes indeed. The problem is: as long there is no notice about body-scales - as in the description of A. nigrolineata - we have no positive information. On the other hand it seems probable, that the mention of "cheeks without scales" implicates, that the rest of the body is scaled. As far I can judge it by the pics I have taken of both Ambastaia-species they have tiny scales, cheeks look different - no structures at all.
I have to ask M. Kottelat.
Cheers Charles