Common Bristlenose colour variety?

Azmeaiel · Post by **Azmeaiel** » 29 Sep 2005, 01:09

I was wondering if anyone had any info on the common BN colour varietys. I bought a small common that was the regular grey with white spots, then an almost mature pair that had a very orange colouring compaired with the first. this later pair has bred and produced similar coloured offspring. Are there any recognised colour varietys besides normal and albino?

here is a pic of the difference in the two least coloured females (they are always like this wether 'blending in' stressed or otherwise)

Post by **Silurus** » 29 Sep 2005, 01:10

There's piebald.

Azmeaiel · Post by **Azmeaiel** » 29 Sep 2005, 01:18

Thankyou, the big male in the pic is very closley patterned to the one I have. Are these a more unusual BN?

Jackster · Post by **Jackster** » 29 Sep 2005, 01:26

What about Ancistrus sp. (L110) as they are known chameleons.
Just a guess.
There is also a gold spotted Ancistrus sp. L255B (Gold Spotted Medusa).

Azmeaiel · Post by **Azmeaiel** » 30 Sep 2005, 02:56

I might have though so but I live in australia where there are pitifully few varietys of pleco available, anything other than your common bristlenose costs a fortune. Someone else suggested that bristlenose cover a very large area in the wild so there are browns, greys and almost blacks. does this sound true?

Jackster · Post by **Jackster** » 30 Sep 2005, 06:40

Actually there are many more species of "bristlenose" than I realized. I was looking in my
Aqualog all L-Numbers book and I found quite a few Ancistrus that I never noticed before.
When importers get in catfish they can be mixed species and most of the time identification
may not be totally correct so one could end up with a rare species without it being properly
identified (that's were this forum comes into play).

I'm glad to say that some of the people in this forum know 1000 times more than I do
and that's why we all ask questions from the experts.

Azmeaiel · Post by **Azmeaiel** » 02 Oct 2005, 06:04

Not too likley where I live. there are very few species even let into the country. those that are must come through pretty strict species ID, customs then be quarantined for a long time. By the end of this process any fish that gets through usually costs 100's. Not very likley that they will get 'misplaced'

The only other BN's available near me are the peppermint and gold-spot, both of which the supplier owns, sells and can redily ID (at the shop I bought them)

I was wondering whether there was a chance of these fish hybridising at all (gold-spot or peppermint with common BN)

MatsP · Post by **MatsP** » 03 Oct 2005, 10:04

There's almost certainly a chance of hybridizing. Since the "Common" bristlenose isn't clearly identifiable [you'd need to know where it's from, and since we don't, it's hard to figure out which of the dozen or more fish that match the description is the right one]. But it's likely that it's just colour variation... It is of course also possible that it stems from a different specie that is very similar to the "common", and that it's been tank-bred with the same specie for a long time, still within Australia. If it was brought in a long time ago [or even if it was brought in recently, but identified as "Common bristlenose"].

--
Mats

Azmeaiel · Post by **Azmeaiel** » 30 Nov 2005, 00:16

Thanks for the advice. Not knowing what the 'grey' was I separated her from the breeding trio. The other day I came across another mature male Ancistrus of the same colour

I am noticing a lot of temperment differeces between these two and the browns, also both have a blueish irridescence on the dorsal. Both show more pronounced, slightly larger white spots.

Will keep them as a separate pair and not breed them with any 'browns'

MatsP · Post by **MatsP** » 30 Nov 2005, 10:04

There are certainly at least two "common" species - at least if we believe Kathy Jinkings book on bristlenoses. The one I've got has a darker spot at the front-bottom of the dorsal fin. The other specie, so it's said, doesn't have this spot. Does this match your fishes?

Of course, there are about 6 dozen different Ancistrus species, all of which are some nuance of grey/brown/black with more or less lighter/darker spots. That's what we know today, and there are probably some yet to be found species too...

--
Mats

Azmeaiel · Post by **Azmeaiel** » 30 Nov 2005, 12:10

I will try to get a good look at both and do a comparison. All this has got me really interested in studying the old 'common'. It has me very curious as to why we know so little about the little brown monster that inhabits almost every community tank. Has there been anyone doing genetic testing or cataloging of catfish to find possible ancestry?

as for differences so far I have noticed the following

: Different scale patterning on heads of both males
: bluish irridescence on dorsal of both greys, only visible when a torch is shined on the fin.
:Larger bolder spots on the grey, when two adults are within visual range they will gain a brownish yellowish tinge to the head
: The greys are outstandingly more agressive and active, even the female 'aggrivating' even large fish like hoplo and gibbyceps untill they leave their territory.
: males also have different ontontode (sp?) growth and bristle formations but that seems to vary from fish to fish anyway.
:Greys seem to have more slender bodies than the browns

not sure if any of this is useful or just difference between individuals. There seems to also be a great variation from fish to fish which would probably make ID even harder.

MatsP · Post by **MatsP** » 30 Nov 2005, 12:40

Kathy Jinkings book has some scientific material, but I think to fully understand everything about these and their close relatives, we'd need some proper revision on all the fish in the genus, perhaps also collecting new specimens in some cases. That's a big piece of work, but I think it's necessary, because the current situation is a bit of a mess - and I think I'm kind when I sayt that.

I just got more confused - Kathy Jinkings says that one of the species of Ancistrus sees as Common Bristlenose may be Ancistrus cirrhosus - which isn't in the Cat-eLog. Fishbase has it, http://www.fishbase.org/Summary/species ... =cirrhosus - However, Fishbase also says that it's 81.8 cm SL. Maybe that's just meant to be mm rather than cm - that would make sense.

Edit: I might add that the other fish described by Kathy as "Common" is . There's no picture in the Cat-eLog, and the Fishbase picture looks like a "Common", but there's no saying if the fishbase picture is actually correctly identified - We've had that discussion several times.

--
Mats

Azmeaiel · Post by **Azmeaiel** » 30 Nov 2005, 13:53

thankyou for the links and names. I did an image search on the Ancistrus temminckii and It came up with many images of fish incredibly similar to my greys. Most obvious was the white spots on grey. I notice all males in images found also had a small very fine 'moustache' of bristles along the lip, which I have never seen on the brown ancistrus. There were even images of the fish displaying its yellow/brown head colouring.

Are the bristles on the head unique to the fish or to the species? I notice there are different arrangements/ Thicknesses and amounts on different species while the actual branching, position along the bristle sprouting area seems to be unique to each male

Brown male:

MatsP · Post by **MatsP** » 30 Nov 2005, 14:29

Your picture looks very much like mine:

I haven't got any grey ones tho'.

--
Mats

Azmeaiel · Post by **Azmeaiel** » 30 Nov 2005, 22:42

they are very alike, although I have never seen one over here with quite so fine spotting

here is another image of the grey female showing slight head colouring:

the head of the grey male:

Its very interesting to see the fish people have bought as 'commons'

Post by **Shane** » 01 Dec 2005, 03:21

These are all what has become known as Ancistrus sp. 3. The slight brown/gray color variations probably have to do with individual temprements (maybe gray is a "dominant" color over a subdominant male or the opposite), diet, lighting, substrate, what foods the fish was raised on as a fry, what color substrate it was raised over, how much light it was raised with, etc, etc.
One reason I do not buy into the belief that A. sp 3 is a hybrid is because photos shown by hobbyists from the US, Europe, Asia and Australia all show what is clearly the same species. If these fish were the product of hybridization, wouldn't we expect to see different combinations of characteristics in different populations around the world? This would be especially true in a place like Oz where "new blood" has not been imported in decades. Despite this, the fish continue to breed true and look just like the same A sp. 3 in Canada or Norway. I would expect the spots to vary from individual to individual just as they do among other loricariids.
With regards to the identifications A. temmincki and A. cirrhosus, these names have pretty much just been attached to any imported Ancistrus sp. Just as pretty much every aquarium book and magazine incorrectly refers to the common Farlowella (F. vittata) as F. acus.
A. cirrhosus was described from southern Argentina. Not exactly a hub of tropical fish exportation. There is photo of this fish in Baensch Atlas #6.
A. temmincki was described from Cayenne (French Guyana). Once again, not a tropical fish exporting location.
My best guess is that A. sp. 3 is a Venezuelan or Guyanese fish as these were major exportation hubs throughout the 1950s-70s. Their ease of captive spawning was picked up on early and they were likely bred, and exported, in huge numbers from the fish farms of Florida and SE Asia. Fish Farms are still breeding that stock as well as many hobbyist the world over.
As communications spread and the hobby continues to grow, I suspect it is only a matter of time before some aquarist collecting in Venezuela or a Guyanese aquarist collecting fishes in a local stream sends out a "What is my catfish?" photo of A. sp. 3 from the wild.
-Shane

MatsP · Post by **MatsP** » 01 Dec 2005, 11:37

Shane,

First of all, thanks for your comments. You've probably forgotten more about these fish than I've ever known, and I don't think you're the forgetfull type of person, if you see what I mean...

I agree, they are MOST LIKELY not hybrids. They may or may not be either of A. Temminckii or A. Cirrhosus. They may even be an undescribed specie. And I agree, the books, magazines and shops will just pick any scientific name for just about any fish.

Interesting that you say that the colour difference would be based on it's upbringing and perhaps even status.

I'm looking forward to seeing the wild-caught sp(3) in the near future, but I'm not holding my breath...

--
Mats

Azmeaiel · Post by **Azmeaiel** » 01 Dec 2005, 22:53

I have been breeding the 'browns' for a while but have never had them drop a 'grey'. As stated earlier the grey female had also been removed from a breeding trio, she had never layed eggs with the 'brown' male even though the brown female in the trio has produced many successful spawns. The recently purchased male was also being sold as part of a trio, a Grey male and two large brown females. Strangley enough these were being sold because they were unsuccessful at breeding at all. Is it possible these fish just simply will not mate with each other?

For experementation and curiosity sake I will attemps to cross the two pairs at a later date

In a way I hope shane is right and that they are just colour variations of the same species.

Its Very unfortunate, the limited availability of different fish in aus, both from transport cost between states.And tight quarantine laws. Although I find that once a breeding population of fish is introduced to a particular area not many ever leave, or are even added at a later date, the isolation probably helps conserve gene-pools here rather than the other way around. Even the common ancistrus is a quite expensive fish (5cm $7.50-$12 mature $20+). Fishery laws also prevent the hobbyist selling fish commercialy so this also limits availability.