Re: Interbreeding

[Mike & Diane Wise <apistowise@bewellnet.com>]

Steph & Dave wrote:

> When I look at Linke and Staeck (pgs 204 & 206) I see quite different
> head shapes.. am I seeing things?

Not really, Steph. What you are looking at is an older male N. aureocephalus and a
younger N. anomala. Basic body and fin shapes are similar in both species, although N.
anomala is a slightly more slender species. It's not a good idea to rely on just a
couple of photos to ID a species.

> When I look at my fish some show a more protruding lower jaw, and some
> do not.  They are all MEANT to be aureocephalus, but I have never kept
> mature fish of either species before so Im a little in the dark as to
> waht they are all meant to look like, and can only work of the pics in
> the books.

True, and the more photos you see, the better the idea of what is important. Actually
the most easily seen diagnostic feature separating the species is the color pattern on
the flank scales:
dark centers with light edges - N. anomala
light centers with dark edges - N. aureocephalus.

> I started to wonder about the obvious male as he occassionally shows
> some green colouring the flanks/body and his anal fin has a dark line
> across the bottom, but I cant see any pattern of dots in it, as
> described by L&S.  This may be because he is not mature enough for this
> yet?

Maybe they are too young. L&S are referring to the spot rows on the soft (back) part of
the anal fin. This is seen on many apistos, too. Remember, colors are not generally
useful as diagnostic features in dwarf cichlid species. Rely on the pattern of dark
markings.

> Are there any other diagnostic features other than scale pattern that
> can be used to distinguish the two species?

Yes, but they are not easily seen on live specimens. N. aureocephalus usually has fine
dots in the soft part of the dorsal fin as well as the hard part. N. anomala has fine
dots only in the hard part of the dorsal, extending slightly into the soft part. But
now we have populations of both species that show gradations that make this feature
less reliable.

> I would never deliberatly mix fish that are so closely related and never
> mix ones that I was not able to distinguish between.  However when
> buying juveniles of a species I havent bred before, I am reliant on the
> other person telling me the right thing, my fish came from two sources,
> one was private and I trust them, the other .. who knows.

I understand your dilemma. Personally, I never keep fish of the same species, bought
from different sources, together unless I'm absolutely positive they are the same
species. It's better to mix them with a different species if necessary. This avoids any
questions of hybridizing.

Without seeing your fish, I'd bet that they are the same species. N. aureocephalus is
rarely found as wild caught species in North America and wild-caught fish are more
commonly misidentified. N. aureocephalus we see here are almost all domestic offspring
of fish brought in from Europe so the name is probably correct.

Mike Wise

> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> This is the apistogramma mailing list, apisto@listbox.com.
> For instructions on how to subscribe or unsubscribe or get help,
> email apisto-request@listbox.com.
> Search http://altavista.digital.com for "Apistogramma Mailing List Archives"!




-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This is the apistogramma mailing list, apisto@listbox.com.
For instructions on how to subscribe or unsubscribe or get help,
email apisto-request@listbox.com.
Search http://altavista.digital.com for "Apistogramma Mailing List Archives"!