I agree with Fredrik, A. macmasteri would (usually) be easier to breed than A. gibbiceps. A. gibbiceps is a member of the A. gibbiceps-Group (See issue #53 of The Apisto-gram). This group has two sub-groupings, or complexes, within it - the personata-complex and the gibbiceps-complex. The personata-complex contains a group of robust bodied species similar in shape to A. cacatuoides originating in the upper Rio Negro and upper Rio Orinoco. It includes A. personata, A. brevis, A. cf. brevis, A. sp. Breitbinden (Broad-striped), and A. sp. Caño Morrocoy (probably a geographic color variant of A. sp. Breitbinden). The gibbiceps-complex includes the slender forms coming from the lower and middle Rio Negro and Rio Branco. It includes A. gibbiceps (with fine horizontal stripes in the tail) and A. cf. gibbiceps (also with fine horizontal stripes, but it also has rows of vertical stripes in the central part of the tail fin). A. cf. gibbiceps (exported out of Barcelos, Brazil) may possibly be the same as A. roraimae, which has a similar tail pattern. Kullander feels A. roraimae is quite likely just a different population of A. gibbiceps. The interesting thing about A. gibbiceps is the variation in difficulty hobbyists have breeding this species. Many experienced breeder have found it next to impossible to get consistent breeding from this fish even when using optimum conditions for it (pH <5.5, total hardness <1º dH). Others, on the other hand, have found it very easy to breed on a consistent basis at normal apisto water values (pH ~6.5, total hardness ~ 5º dH). This possibly is due to the different habitats in which these fish were collected. Perhaps the Rio Negro form (A. gibbiceps) absolutely requires black water conditions, while those (A. roraimae/A. cf. gibbiceps) from the Rio Branco, a clear water system, do not. What ever the reasons for this, more study is needed on the group of species - both on species identification and breeding requirements. Sorry, didn't mean to ramble on. Just a habit. Mike Wise