Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
What strikes me most is that your males (!) have no irridescent lines at the edges of their unpaired fins. I know this only in females. With males the lines are often slim but they are there. But as you describe the animals, they are really males. Dorsal filaments are often to be seen with different species, not rubrimontis only. The length of that filaments vary..
The most important question is: Where do you have got your fish from? If they are privately caught in Asia, there are many possibilities. If they are offspring of those fish, one must ask for possible hybrids. But I think you found them in trade, and that means: probably they are exemplars of the few species presently (= the last half of the year) in trade in Europe. Of course, sometimes it happens that a strange form/species is mixed with the more regular forms/species, but mostly this is not the case. And we have only very few species of Parosphromenus presently in the pet shops in European countries, mostly distributed by Ruinemans, Glaser or Imazoo. And that are spec. Sentang for the most, possible some so-called blue-line (I have seen very different fish called like this!), anjunganensis and ornaticauda. I have not heared of others traded presently. So I think, your fish are variants of the most-traded form, spec. Sentang. The filaments fit within the range of their appearance scheme. The absence of any striking markings too.
There is no better help than a good (!) photo. I am sorry.O Big Tom, don’t you have an easier question? I am entirely unable to give you good advice on a “trap for females”. And I doubt that anybody could be able to do so.
Perhaps try a normal catching device. The licorice are no fast swimmers, you will get a female by time without damaging your fine landscape.Martin, you are lucky and you behave consequent: I do not think it is necessary to change water every two days. But it is by far better to go on like this than to become lazier now. For it’s a common thruth that one likes to believe that things could be easier and work nevertheless. That will work for some time, but then often the turnover happens …
And I think that “Finke’s rule” has probably come to its end by now. It’s a good rule but it works for a certain time only, and then the last fish has been detected. But 10 young is quite a good result for the first time!
So congratulations! Now we have to hope that there are both sexes. That is not self-evident. We had spawning with 100% males or with 100% females … The smaller the number the bigger the possibility of a one-sided result. But perhaps you are lucky in that respect, too. I am inclined to believe that the fish in the foreground with the light edges of its dorsal could develop into a male. It’s an interesting business to ask who could recognize the sex as early as possible …Bennie, did you have great numbers of offspring?
Most breeders engage in extensive breeding, i.e. small numbers off offspring. And it is a matter of numbers, of course. If you have five young, the distribution of sex-ratio is insignificant. If its fifty, the thing gets interesting.P. pahuensis, similar to filamentosus, is known for some unusual nesting sites, but normally they don’t avoid caves. I had a spawning below an algae magnet near the surface.
We should be happy about our many pahuensis. Only some years ago this species was totally missing in our aquarium stocks all over the world, except Japan. Team Borneo caught some, and very few of them were brought from Japan to Europe. Horst Linke gave me a pair: I hardly couldn’t believe it. They were propagated mainly in Germany, and now we have quite a good stock. Let’s handle them with care. Some misfortune, and they could be Lost again!For those of you working with Care 2 (petition site) they now offer a link for supporting this issue, too:
The same thing can be supported now via the Care 2 – petition site:
Felix: Excellent summary of the important issues. Yes, they would have loved Parosphromenus, but they were entirely unable to keep them alive, not to speak of successful breeding. They had no knowledge whatsoever on the specifics of blackwater aquaristics. Even the famous ichthyologist Michael Tweediei, curator of the fish section of the Raffles National Museum in Singapore at the beginning of the fifties (1950 …) kept for some times “Parosphromenus deissneri” (today we would probably say: P. alfredi or P. tweediei) in aquaria. He loved them, decribed them as “marvellous” when displaying, “the most beautiful of all small aquarium-fish I know”, but then he added (I cite it from the head): “There must be more skillfull aquarists than I am to keep them alive. After a few weeks the joy of life seems to fade out of their bodies, they become dull and die.”
This was the case until Dr. Walter Foersch exercised his famous experiments in the seventies and published them in the DATZ-journal 1974/75. Only then the Paro-aquaristics really began. All imports before were surely gone after some weeks time and no breeding was accomplished.Dear “Schellfisch”, I have no experience myself with this method, but I know some German experts who work this way. And seen the good results. It does work indeed. It is quite useful if you have “bad eggs” that hatch to a low percentage only. Then you can avoid that mess with many unhatched eggs by removing the eggshells before. On the other hand avoiding the handling of any chemical solutions and the necessity of exact dosage is an advantage, too.
If anybody has used the method himself he should write on it here. If you want to get in contact with such persons I could help with addresses.Dear “Oberhausener”, your finding in the “Wochenschrift” of 1912 is remarkable. Is that really true, is that advertisment dated from 1912??
There is – to my knowledge – no proof of a Parosphromenus being imported commercially earlier than in the thirties of the 20th century. And then only some fish as a “side-catch”, and nobody was interested in them. There was certainly no specific book on them (there is none at present …) and we don’t know of any detailed article in magazines. All that began after WWII (as you mention rightly).
It would be useful to know the company which authorized that advertisment. It is really remarkable. It’s one more of the few dates we have on the history of the knowledge on our fish.Martin, this is a nice description of a well-known behaviour. It does not happen with each spawning that the eggs are being transferred to another place, but it is not a rare event. And sometimes they are transferred a second time and – perhaps – a third. Sometimes even larvae are transferred in this manner. This tranfer often happens in tanks with more than one cave, or with many leaves that are cave-like. Mostly, in the small breeding-tanks of experienced breeders only one cave is offered and readily accepted. If there is no alternative, then there is no choice for the pair and the male. And they don’t seem to feel uneasy.
Some species are more used to this transferring of the eggs than others; we have often observed it with parvulus and ornaticauda, but less often with others.
Your pictures give us nice insights into the breeding behaviour. And then it is not of great importance if they are not of the best quality. But perhaps you could post such a “bad” photo smaller than usual; that would be sufficient to identify the important detail that you want to show us.“Infusoria” is no precise biological term; it only means “microorganisms that live up in combination with water”. So it’s infusoria, of course. But the question is: which? And the more practical question is: Will they be useful or harmful? Will young Parosphromenus feed on them or will they be threatened by them? I don’t know. What do you observe, Helene?
Martin, you are right: Waiting is the best you can do at present.
Your fish are definitely from the group that resemble the species and varieties around harvey and bintan. Probably we shall never know where they are exactly from and what they exactly are. But this is totally unimportant, too. Important is that they are healthy, that males and females recognize one another and that they can produce healthy young. And that we can call them (probably) P. cf. bintan.
Most Paros that are cared for in the aquaria of the world are frum trade. And most of them are never identified without doubts. The reason is that the trade has no informations about the true origin of these animals. They are wild-caught, that’s the only sure information. But the exporters in south-east Asia don’t give locations because they don’t want to destroy their own commercial base. They have a number of catchers looking for nice fish, but Paros will play the smallest role in this business. They even throw a meagre harvest from one plave together with a meagre harvest from another, because they don’t realize the risks.
All the Paros to be bought presently in Europe are of very limited sources, mostly from Sumatra, and from some other places. The so-called spec. Sentang represent about 50% of all. The there are some spec. Sungai Bertam, and very few others. I am not sure whether the so-called “blue line” are still in that trade, but even in 2006 – 2008 when this form was at it’s trade-peak, we observed different fish being traded under this name.
This obscure trade-habits are the main reason why we prefer fish with a clear location. But that means the fish must be self-caught or caught by very reliable people.
Nevertheless, the fish traded are not less beautiful or less healthy. As I indicated it could even be that there is a bigger diversity as the traders believe themselves. So, be happy with your somewhat strange and – to a certain extent – unclear fish and try to breed them and to raise the young. That’s what is necessary and urgent and interesting now.I think that a 50 liter-tank is too big for a single pair. They don’t need such a space. I prefer 12 liters or at most 25 liters.
If the tank is too big you risk breeding at a place which you cannot inspect. But the main point is feeding. You cannot feed the young properly. You have to put too much food in it, and that will contaminate the water. Therefore I advise you to take a smaller tank.Bartian, the smallest linkei that I saw breeding were about 3 to 3,5 cm (the male). But the length is not the decisive factor. The fish must be in breeding condition, and that depends mostly on their food. Freshly hatched Artemia naupliae are good, Moina are good, Grindal equally, Cyclops or Culex are very good and white glassworms are best. Don’t underestimate that! Especially young females must get in that condition first, and that takes time. And you can judge that mostly from behaviour.
It is very advisable to keep even young fish under best circumstances in a tank with the right water and with caves. Then in principle breeding is possible there, too. In any case, you should observe the behaviour very closely. If the males begin displaying, the females are often not yet ready. They must respond by changing their colours and getting lighter, and react to the males gestures. Then you should observe the first attempts of the male to attract the female to a cave an into the cave. All this should happen in the normal tank, and only then, when that happens, the time has come to catch that pair and transfer it to a small breeding tank (if the normal tank is not conveniant for that purpose for whatever reason).
I do not distinguish between breeding tanks and tanks simply for “keeping”, but I admit that this is sometimes reasonable (for instance if you have a lot of young to raise).
