Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
No, I do not kwow of anybody who was experimenting that strict and comprehensive as it would have to be done in order to get clear and stable results. And I know many good breeders who had the same problems, in fact nearly all (Walther Foersch, Willi Harveyi, Allan Brown, Horst Linke, Günter Kopic, Martin Hallmann, and others). No aquarist has a laboritory and the time to start seriously an experimental series on this.
But I know some scientists who have done research on the question of the development of sex in fishes and other animals who do not fix it in the moment of fertilization. But to my knowledge all they have found out is the relationship to those environmental factors, and not how to influence it quatitatively by experiment. I do not know of any rows of results indicating that e.g. such an increase/lowering of temperature results in such quatitative a change of the sex ratio. But I shall try to contact them and ask. One of them is a German colleague from Berlin; maybe he knows more.
But I doubt it. When he put forward his results in lecture I heared and in an article I read, he was concentrating on the necessity of humic substances für blackwater organisms. He proposed to use oak and beech leaves, but there was no statement on quantity. So I presume that all these findings are results of qualitative research and not of quantitative research. But I shall ask him.
Dear Helene, sorry to say but this is a very common experience many breeders have to endure. And mostly there is no explanation for it. There have been broods with 6o nagyi, all female. Or broods with 70 linkei, all male and only two or three female.
All or nearly all environmental factors could play a decisive role in finally fixing the sex of a young fish developing from a larvae to ab age of about two or three months. We know that for instance pH, temperature and the content of humine substances coud affect the sex ratio of the very young fish. But we cannot say definitely which is responsible in a certain case except there is some really borderline value indicating that it is probably the causer.
Did you control temperature? Was it especially high or low? Have you been conscious about the amount of humic substances? P. harveyi is especially bound to the typical blackwater conditions, more than nagyi or linkei or spec. Sentang, not to speak of paludicola. It will spawn at several pH-stages (all well below 7.0) but all of these are compatible with more or less shares of humine acids. We also know that typical blackwater-fish (just as harveyi) do often spawn in clearwater, too, and we do not know to which effect.
At any rate, I use that “Eichenextrakt” too, but I am not sure that it contains the same qualities in every charge. To my knowledge it does contain little “Eiche” (oak) but much phosphoral acid. It must be manufactured cheaply. Nevertheless I am rather content with it in most cases.
But I am not sute that this is the cause of your one-sex-experience. Without heavy experimenting we will not solve the riddle. Sorry, but youz are memmber of a big community of experinenced breeders woho all share your problems and – in the end – don’t know what the reason is…
Do you know “Finke’s rule”? (A friend of mine, joking, formulated it):
If you have found one fry, then the probability to find a second is very high.
If you find a second fry, the probability to find a third is not quite as high as in the case of the first, but still rather high.
If you find a third fry, the probability to find a fourth is still a little less high, but nevertheless high.
And so on. I think you could continue.[quote=”Stefanie” post=1966](…)
– I understand that state 2 of males is similar to state 3 of females – is that right?
– Do I get it right, Peter, that only females may (in state 4) show some sort of speckled markings? There are no speckles in males?[/quote]If you mean that females of state 3 resemble somewhat superficially males of state 2, then you are right. But this female resemblance is only partly to be seen and does never show the full brilliance of male´s state 2. We therefore should prefer to speak of the correspondence of state 2 male to state 2 female and the corresondence of state 3 male to state 3 female, although the colouring might suggest something different. More improtant than similar colouring is the similarity or correspondence of mood. Even if it leads to different sexual consequences in colouring. I arranged my explications in that order: similarity of mood.
Ted is right. Male P. filamentosus are easily to be recognized by the constant form and colouration of the caudal fin alone. Your fish are round-tailed fish of the bintan-group; the reddish tinge in dorsal and caudal may indicate opallios (there are opallios presently in European countries available) but it is more likely that it is different a species. The colours are not as intense as they must be for a more exact determination because the fish are not yet accustomed to its new home. Only with very good photos a determination of fish belonging to the bintan-group may be possible.
Fewer colour-types with the females? I am not sure (see 4.). And there are some spectacular specialities:
1. standard type one = individual without a mate courting: the mostly depicted state without “sexy eyes”.
2. standard type two = individual mated to a courting male: females with “sexy eyes” and very pale resp. yellowish (according to the species) body lacking the stripes. In some cases the otherwise clear dorsal and anal fins get coloured brownish or with dark markings (nagyi, filamentosus, alfredi, …).
3. affected by positive emotions = individual female aroused by aggression against rivalling female or troubling/annoying male but feeling dominant: intense colours especially of the fins, in some species even reminding (partly) of male (f.i. tweediei).
4. affected by negative emotions = individual female aroused by fear because of danger or feeling weak: may be identical with 1. or slightly different by speckled markings(?).This does not apply to P. ornaticauda and P. parvulus. Females of ornaticauda change in heavy courtship their whole colouring to am appearance nearly similar to the male, including the “red flame” in the caudal. In parvulus many females tend to a similar change but by far not as extreme as ornaticauda.
Additionally, there is an aberrant variant of P. paludicola (probably a subspecies or species of its own), namly spec. Wakaf tapei. There, the females darken in heavy courtship instead of becoming lighter. This surely indicates a big difference to the normal colour change which is to be observed with other paludicola-variants, too.But who shoots (good) photos of females? Nearly nobody. We lack them more than those of males. This is understandable, but it’s a gap nevertheless and we should try to fill it!
[quote]
“With my spec Ampah I have observed 4 different distinct colorations with males.
1. Dominant, dark with some color
2. Normal stripes imitating female coloration
3. a very drab coloration all over not even distinct stripes and not dark, the current loser
4. full bright Mating colors accompanied with dancing and courting a female”
/quote]Very well observed, Ted. Normally, we can distinguish these four different states of colouration in male licorice gouramies:
1. standard type one = individual without a breeding territory and cave of its own); this is your 2.: the mostly depicted state with lacking colours.
2. standard type two = individual possessing a breeding territory and cave of its own; this is your 4.: the mostly depicted state in full colours.
3. affected by positive emotions = individual aroused by aggression against rivalling male but feeling dominant; this is your 1. You don’t see much colouring in your spec. Ampah because they don’t show much colours at all (“the black and white licorice gouramy”). Very typical is the blackish colouring f.i. in aggressive P. filamentosus.
4. affected by negative emotions = individual aroused by fear because of danger or feeling weak; this is your 3.There are not many good photos of Parosphromenus. If, they most depict states 1 or 2. The “normal” picture that allows to distinguish between the species is state 2. But there are some photos depicting states 3 and 4, too, however mostly mixed within the others. For instance take the booklet edited by D. Armitage, page 7, top photo of alfredi (A. Brown) shows state 4. This fish is frightened, had no time to become accustomed to the situation of a new tank. There are more photos of this kind to be seen in the booklet.
Or take page 11, the lowest photo of anjunganensis. You don’t see two males but only one mirrored. The fish itself seemed to see a potential rival male and shows enhanced colouring, the stripes are reduced (state 3). The speciality of this species is that the body does not become darkish in that mood.As Helene told already, most Paros tolerate many different hiding places and caves. But most prefer caves that are not too wide. Normally. coconuts are very wide indeed. Our German breeder Bernd Bussler is very successful using extremely narrow caves measuring not more than 1 centimeter in diameter. Even species with large nests (as filamentosus) breed there successfully. But with this species they can be wider too. A coconut however is too wide, normally. Nevertheless, if there is no alternative, they take it.
I once have used in two of my 33 small Paro-tanks (which contain one pair and one cave, very different caves, each) coconuts too, because they look so “natural”. But I did not repeat that because of bad experiences. I was unable to control what happens inside and the male fish obviously did not like the wide room very much. Are you able to have a good look into your coconut? You should in order to explain breeding success or breeding failure. In your case it looks like a failure. But why?
Most species maintain a cave for very long times. In my tanks, they have only one on the bottom and are very reliable in going there. Sometimes, I offer a swimming photo canister as an alternative, and then they sometimes change their home.
Now I don’t understand any longer. Obviously we have here a difference between Europe and America!
What we mean is an “electric torch” as the Britains call it (at least they did in former times, according to my dictionary and my student’s time at Oxford in the sixties). Is there any better word in Britain today?
But indeed: I learn that the Americans call that “flashlight”. What a strange use of that word!
In my view a flashlight produces a short flash only, for instance for photographing our fish with a camera. There is no use for this apparatus in observing the dark interior of a cave, if you won’t make a photograph. Instead, you need an equipment producing a contant small beam of light. Mostly this item could be rather small that it fits into one’s trouser pocket; so the Germans call it “Taschenlampe” = “pocket lamp”.
I don’t want to say that the Germans have the best word for it (they have not because there is no affinity to trousers and pockets) but I dare say: “flashlight” is not better either! Is there anybody able to help us linguistically?
Everything normal, as it is usually with P. parvulus:
1. clutch small: Most parvulus – clutches are between 8 and 15 eggs, some could be bigger. Clutches of other P.-species are mostly bigger, especially by filamentosus or nagyi.
2. The female: The female’s second or third try (which you will see in near future) will hardly be much bigger. That’s parvulus! A typical K-strategist as opposed to r-strategists that produce big clutches.
3. Eggs gone: Quite normal with parvulus. They must not really be gone. P. parvulus males are sophisticated egg-carriers, and afterwards they often visit the new places (plural!) but not guarding as intense as before. Weeks later the young appear. But it could equally be the case that the eggs are really gone, either eaten by the male or by snails or … That’s a puzzle with this species.
Be proud you have it and be patient. It will not be the last clutch.
Everything you do is rightly done. Now you only can hope that spawning will take place.
P. parvulus often likes to spawn unser a leaf. Often in this case one is unable to locate eggs because of the mass of the leaves. And if they don’t spawn under leaves but do it in a firm cave, then – possibly – they transfer the eggs under a leaf, later. Or from one leaf to another. The parvulus like especially very small caves only with half an inch or less in diameter.
I hope that this time you placed the cave in such a way that you could easily inspect it with a torch. If not, you surely could correct it now with the male in it. But correct it in slight steps only. One a day.
Reducing the pH to 3.5 is a right action, too. Now the danger of an aggression to eggs by germs is much reduced. Nevertheless you must control the eggs (if there are some). They must stick under the ceiling of the cave, not lie down on its bottom. The last will inevitably result in egg-loss. But the first might also, by unknown reasons. But all you can do against it has been done.
If the eggs lie on the bottom of the cave, this is most likely caused by water too hard. But I don’t think that this will be the case in your tank; otherwise you could not reduce the pH to such a value.
If they spawn and there are eggs on the ceiling cared for by the male, then you must control whether larvae hatch. At first the larvae look like longish eggs. But some days later they become more longish and blackish, and the they sometimes move, but still fixed at the cave’s ceiling. The male is the best guard for them. Taking them out in this stage mostly results in loss. You cannot substitute the intense care of a caring male.
There are three methods to proceed after about a week. First, leave everything as it is, the adult fish included. I should recommend that if there is much of hiding place on the bottom of your tank. The pair will spawn several times. Second, you could take the adukt pair out, but only after the young have left the cave. This would increase the surviving prospects of the young. But normally adult parvulus tolerate young at their side. Third, you could pipe out the young that dash around in the cave into a small jar with exactly the same water and frequnet water change. But then the controlled feeding is most important: not too little, not too much. Perhaps you should do so with a later spawning in order to have a second chance.
At any rate you need patience now. It sometimes needs four weeks or more (!) before you see any young. Good luck!
“Blue line” is one of the few trade names that has been given by the traders themselves. It is not helpful, of course. Reasonable are only names giving locations. All species or forms which have been found and imported by experts have been given names of the locations where they have been found.
“Blue line” is an expression either of helplessness (which bintan-like Paros is not “blue lined”?) or of the intention to conceil the location (For the trade it’s a business: If you found a rich catching ground you are a fool if you speak out loudly where it is). It needed about two years to learn that the most “blue lines” come from Sumatra, in the north of the district Jambi. At that time (about 2005/06) we were far from knowledge how many bintan-like Paros were swimming in Jambi alone. Horst Linke was the first who seriously travelled there in 2008/2009 to find more than seven variants at different places, and some others clearly not bintan themselves).
Another Jambi-based bintan-variant that was given the trade name by the traders themselves is spec. Sentang. They called it “P. sintangensis” camouflaging by this that this form is not yet scientifically determined or – on the contrary – suggesting that one has found a new species by imitating the way science names them (“sintangensis”). Without a scientific description in a scientific journal including ardeous measurement work, preserved “types” stored at an institution (museum) and a clear location no latinized name is valid. So, we call this form rightly P. spec. Sentang as long science has not clarified its relation to bintan and others.
But all this is not the really crucial point with “blue line”. That is: There have been different forms sold bearing that name. It’s hardly possible to decide which was the original “blue line”. I had different fish (some with long whitish ventrals for instance, some with short bluish ventrals, …) at different times, all sold as “blue line”. The clear background is: The trade is not interested in correct names, it is interested in business. In the years from 2005 Sumatra was detected as a big catching ground for Paros. There a newly detected catching ground could not be named openly, and a insignificant name as “blue line” was helpful. And since people normally don’t look very closely at these fish several similar forms were sold bearing the same name. Then another productive catching ground was found in the north of Jambi with fish looking slightly different, not as blue and sparkling as the “blue lines” but a bit greenish and less spectacular. Ans so the trade decided: Let’s sell it as a new species, we call it as new species are named by science: P. sintangensis. That was unjustified, of course, but it helped commerce. At that time (around 2007/08) when we learned which location was meant we corrected the name to spec. Sentang.
Only science is allowed to give latinized names, but the trade should keep hands off naming fish or give the location.
However: the “blue lines” can be wonderful, beautiful fish! Especially those with that long whitish ventrals, but this with the short bluish too. Their colours are sparkling more than that of the spec. Sentang and remind of that of P. harveyi (from Western Malaysia). So, try to get some of them and breed them. In the last years the “blue lines” were sold significantly less than before, replaced by the never-ending spec. Sentang. And mixed with it. So, I hope you will be lucky a receive the original “blue line”, although it is not fully clear what the “original blue line” was 😉
O well, two further strange fish!
The second (photo by Michael Lo) is a clear male deissneri, only the black filament is missing (but this could happen). The fish has been photographed in a fearful mood, but all important markers are to be seen.
But the first and the second? Both are males but no defnite bintan-specimen! Again there are intermediate markers to deissneri to be seen. The third fish seems to be rather young.
Well, I do not know what they are! We should know whether they are aqiarium bred or caught in the natural habitats (on Bangka?). The second fish, the deissneri, is probably caught there, because M. Lo does not breed licorice gouramis but visits their habitats. But the first and the the third? Without knowing this we should prevent us from speculating.
Very interesting individuals, Sverting!
If there is one pair in a small tank, then one cave is enough. Especially the slim species ornaticauda and parvulus are prepared to move eggs from the cave in which the spawning took place to another, if there is another one.
The cave should be placed in such a way that you could look easily into it with a torch. If you have seen the eggs, the light young larvae, the darkening of the larvae some days later, still hanging on the ceiling of the cave, and finally their dashing around with the male trying to catch them and bring them back, everything still within the cave: then perhaps a week after spawning the larvae will leave the cave and you will not see them, especially if the floor of the tank is covered with leaves of oak or beech.
Only weeks later you will find one, two, three and finally more very small young mostly beneath the surface. But you have to feed whole the time tiny amounts of Rotatoriae, Paramecium and finally freshly hatched (!) very small Artemia naupliae.
