PlanetCatfish.com

Hey,

it took me almost an hour to make a decision but at the end I decided I like the look of this syno enough to take a risk even if it is not genuine. Sadly in LFS I found only single specimen .

Sorry for quality of pictures. I will take better when fish settle down a little. Now it is in my Q-tank .









What do you think guys? A real thing or a fake one?

Regards.

Hey Worton,

This looks genuine to me, nice one

Hey,

thanks Richard for your opinion - that's what I belive in also .

I've just noticed cat-elog says it grows to 40cm! That is super big . Has anybody seen specimen of this species so big? Looks like I have to set up a new tank - much bigger one .

Regards.

Biggest i've seen was 21cm SL - this was a 9cm (TL) fish we had in the shop that was quickly sold, but i got to view it at the customer's house some time later - i don't know how much bigger it got?

Hey,

holy cow I really have to get rid of my bed :]. Well I was going to set up a riverine tanks for Centromochlus perugiae and Trachelyopterus galeatus anyway ;) so this syno will share his home with galeatus .

Regards.

to go back on the Synodontis: S ornatipinnis should have a spotted, not vermiculated head pattern.....


sorry to spoil the fun, lads

to go back on the Synodontis: S ornatipinnis should have a spotted, not vermiculated head pattern.....
sorry to spoil the fun, lads

With the above in mind, what is your opinion on the photos in cat-e-log as half of them have vermiculated heads?

In forming my opinion that is was a genuine ornatipinnis i looked through several books & most head patterns appear vermiculated in young fish which becomes more spotted with age?

Very interested to hear your thoughts.

I could have sworn this was the real thing, but now I think Sid is right.

Damn, Sid, you ARE a troublemaker!

Hey,

hehehe love to have Sid back to the Forum .
As I said it is sad it is hybrid not a real thing but I really like the look of this syno and I pay a little for it. Shopowner said this syno ate a whole, pretty expensive import of young neon tetras because someone forgot he is in a tank :]. So being really angry he sold it to me for 10 PLN it is something about 3 euros .

I understand Sid arguments. What about you Dinyar? Also markings on the head are not right or there is something else? As Richard said a lot of pictures of younger fish has vermiculated head pattern - that doesn't mean this pictures are right however on the base of the head my syno got tiny spots not stripes so maybe with age...

Anyway thanks for your opinions guys! Keep them coming .

Well Marc what can I say - you rock! Now I will have to set up even bigger tank hehehe . Thank you very much for an identification. I personally think fisheri looks even cooler than galeatus

With the above in mind, what is your opinion on the photos in cat-e-log as half of them have vermiculated heads?

easy: the catelog is not a by dogma 100% foulproof infostash
I've seen and still see plenty misidentified fish in there
the fact that there are such fish labelled in the catelog is not proof at all!
it should be the reverse....

first a proper determinated fish, then it goes in the catelog

not backwards


maybe Synodontis ornatipinnis does have a vermiculated head when young and does it turn into spots when they mature
it could be the case

we know for example that Synodontis eupterus starts out as vermiculated and turns to spots when it matures
but that also gives me a HUGE warning.......because that very species is the most used species when it comes to fabricating hybrids

plenty other Synodontis with a black, white and grey make up and wich have spotted heads do NOT change from vermiculated when they mature
Synodontis petricola, Synodontis polli, S multipunctatus, S pleurops, S decorus, S brichardi (!!) etc etc.

the case against these is that the closest relatives have spotted heads when young. some retain the spots, others get a darker color.
but -I'm not 100% sure, but I strongly suspect- I assume that the closest relatives of Synodontis ornatipinnis are Synodontis decorus, Synodontis brichardi, Synodontis pleurops and maybe even Synodontis acanthomias.
none of these have vermiculated heads; ALL start out with a finely spotted head and a spotted or banded body.

in ornatipinnis the body pattern turns from bands in fry to a very contrasted vermiculated pattern but the head stays spotted

in decorus the head is spotted, the body of a baby decorus has a few big dark spots, NOT vermiculated bands and the number of spots increase with age. the fins are bandad horizontally in youngsters and adults both.

in brichardi the bands get bigger and in some cases curl up to something resembling a bit of vermiculate. the spotted head turns darker and the fine grey spots are very hard to see on the grey background color. the fins are banded in both younsters and older fish.

in pleurops the head is spotted, the body vermiculated and old specimen loose the vermiculate body pattern, but retain the very fine brown spots on the head. these are hard to see on darker specimen

another Syno wich to me resembles a "mini pleurops" also has a spotted head: Synodontis contractus.

No I don't think these are genuine.
yes I am a bad tempered paranoid kind of person that doesn't trust others and usually assumes the worst....but that doesn't automatically prove me wrong, does it?

sidguppy wrote:first a proper determinated fish, then it goes in the catelog

not backwards

That is a good principle - however, it puts a great burden on Jools to prove that every picture that is submitted to go into the Cat-eLog is indeed the fish the photographer proclaims it to be, and I'm sure that Jools does as best as he can [at present, Jools is the only person that can add new photos to the Cat-eLog]. If you see (earlier, now or later) misidentified [or questionable identification], feel free to post in the Bugs forum.

I totally agree Sid, that cat-e-log can & does contain misidentified species, (if only it was 100% accurate things would be so much easier )

I too am paranoid but try to keep an open mind as often as possible, but there are so many hybrids out there it is utterly ridiculous & spoiling the hobby.

Bad-tempered is not a comment i'd use about you Sid, no-one who reads your posts would! You have experience & lots of knowledge which has guided many , myself included & PC is just so much better now you're back

before i made the comment i thought the fish was genuine i had looked at seegars which states "the head exibits smaller dots or narrower stripes" & Sands CotW which pictures the stripy head of a juvie & the more spotted adult colouration, & i'd hope these pics were taken before hybrids raised their ugly heads.

Whilst the body pattern on Worton's fish does not seem typical, the humeral looks correct, as does the adipose & caudal and the body pattern resembles specimens seen earlier this year, my only doubt was the slenderness of the individual as ornatipinnis "body should be noticeably deeper than s.brichardi".

Chrysichthys - any chance of photos of your fish, for us to consider, to help us out???

I feel i'm still open to opinions either way

sidguppy wrote: easy: the catelog is not a by dogma 100% foulproof infostash
I've seen and still see plenty misidentified fish in there
the fact that there are such fish labelled in the catelog is not proof at all!
it should be the reverse....

first a proper determinated fish, then it goes in the catelog

not backwards

At first glance, I think you are right, however, thiking about it, I'd regret loosing all other info

Would an A and B register (A for facts, B for probably) work out? The format, or letter colouring could distinguish between the registers

Bas Pels wrote: At first glance, I think you are right, however, thiking about it, I'd regret loosing all other info

Would an A and B register (A for facts, B for probably) work out? The format, or letter colouring could distinguish between the registers

It would certainly be technically possible to have some sort of indication [akin to what fishbase does "Not verified by fishbase"] on images. The hard part is going through the nearly ten thousand images that are in the Cat-eLog right now and set each of them to "verified" or "not verified".

--
Mats

MatsP wrote:The hard part is going through the nearly ten thousand images that are in the Cat-eLog right now and set each of them to "verified" or "not verified".

You could ask a number of specialists to check their favourite family/families?

Sure. I still think my request to note questionable/incorrect ID's in the Bugs forum is sufficient. We can then (in public, rather than trusting one individual to make no mistakes) discuss the image(s) in questions.

--
Mats

Hey,

I am not obiective since I prefer this fish being real thing however I just totally do not get one thing. Why someone would create hybrid that looks 95% like original fish. Mostly hybrids are created to resemble tanganyikan Synos. I can understand it - money - tanganyikan species are much more expensive and more ppl buy them than riverine synos. Yup and someone not so long ago said "fish are nor a carbon copies".

Still I know I am not obiective :] but just wanted to share my thoughts with you ;). I looked at this fish more and compared humeral process with cat-elog. It is the same like in my fish. More, striped head and spotted head - both have the same shape of humeral process. Just my observations .
It is time to buy some catfish books... ;). Any have to have titles you can advice guys? .

Regards.

Mostly hybrids are created to resemble tanganyikan Synos. I can understand it - money - tanganyikan species are much more expensive and more ppl buy them than riverine synos. Yup and someone not so long ago said "fish are nor a carbon copies".

I don't think this is actually true, as i now consider "valentine" (the decorus look-e-like) to be one of the most prolific out there. I know of a breeder who was going to try to create some unusual hybrids to "see what they looked like".

Also if a fish can look 95% like a real fish but be produced at a fraction of the cost , then thats where the money comes into it.

It is time to buy some catfish books... . Any have to have titles you can advice guys? .

Catfishes of the World (Vol 2) David Sands
Aqualog photo collection 1, U Glaser sen. (inc CD Rom)
The catfishes of Africa, Dr Lothar Seegers...

...would be a good start

worton[pl] wrote:Hey,

I am not obiective since I prefer this fish being real thing however I just totally do not get one thing. Why someone would create hybrid that looks 95% like original fish. Mostly hybrids are created to resemble tanganyikan Synos. I can understand it - money - tanganyikan species are much more expensive and more ppl buy them than riverine synos.

It is probably not so much that there is a big difference between species from different locations, but the ease with which you can produce MANY of a species. Some of the riverine species (e.g eupterus) produce HUGE number of eggs, whilst other species are much less prolific - meaning that it's harder to make "many" of them. So taking a "good" male and mixing that with a prolific female quickly gets you lots of fish that are saleable.

--
Mats

Hey,

I just cannot understand why they cannot use hormones on male and female of the same species :/. Okay with multipunctatus it may not work since eggs are big and there is not a lot of them but the rest? :/

Anyway I will take a picture of my syno for 6 months and we will see what it turn out to .

worton[pl] wrote:Hey,

I just cannot understand why they cannot use hormones on male and female of the same species :/. Okay with multipunctatus it may not work since eggs are big and there is not a lot of them but the rest? :/

Well, I don't KNOW, but I suspect a mature female ornatipinnis may not carry as many eggs as some other species - not to mention that the fish sometimes dies in the process of stripping the eggs from the female, so you don't want to use "expensive" fish for that process.

--
Mats

Hey,

well I still have hope for this syno being real thing. Maybe human made but still a true ornatipinnis. So I will put him in a bigger tank as soon as possible and feed him a lot to let it grow as fast as it can.

I guess it will be a good lesson if we all see what this syno turn out to be .

Regards.

I just cannot understand why they cannot use hormones on male and female of the same species

and let's not forget that those who think they are "playing god" ain't exactly short on hubris

the temptation to play creator and mix up stuff to see what happens is likely too tempting, especially when there's big wads of cash to be made from the whole thing

these hybrids are incredibly succesful. even the smallest LFs have them.

the real ornatipinnis is very hard to get. so bogus ornatipinnis would sell like hot cakes....it's not just Tanganyikan Syno's wich are more expensive.
that's where the Mad Professors started out with their evil trade, but it's obvious they're branching out

same with angelicus. try to find a genuine baby angelicus these days....the're all too stripey, too vermiculated.
the angelicus has had a bigger pricetag and reputation for exclusivity for decades now and the labrats are smelling cash here too.


too bad I haven't got some pilots, a few old Havilland Mosquito's with night radar and a shed full of bombs

MatsP wrote: I still think my request to note questionable/incorrect ID's in the Bugs forum is sufficient. We can then (in public, rather than trusting one individual to make no mistakes) discuss the image(s) in questions.

That sounds fair enough. There may indeed be some misidentifications in the Clog, but I doubt that there are many. After all, new entries aren't added just like that but carefully.
With regard to correct ID-ing and (un-)justified Clog entries the hybrid-Synos are becoming quite a nuissance......

Richard B wrote:Chrysichthys - any chance of photos of your fish, for us to consider, to help us out???

I've got a couple of pics, but they might not be good enough. I'll check when I get home. I might be able to take some more. I think my fish are vermiculated, but I'll need to check.

For what its worth, I would suspect any hybrid * would be partly (due to their similarity), which has a very different humeral process (blunt vs. narrow and sharp).

I would imagine a hybrid would have an intermediate humeral process, but worton's fish appears consistent with the photo of S. ornatipinnis in my copy of Kobayagawa's World of Catfishes. I assume the photos of these fish in these now old books occurred before the hybrid trend, and are wild caught.

There is a PFK dyed fish pledge in the UK that stores can sign up to say they will not stock dyed fish. Perhaps the same could be done for synos if there was enough of a momentum. This blog about hybrids on the PFK website has had some pretty lively discussion.

These stupid hybrids really are ruining the hobby, and the trend should be nipped in the bud before loaches (see blog above) or God forbid L numbers (or anything else for that matter) are messed around with



------------------------------
* I think its really helpful for people browsing the post to be able to go straight to the cat-elog page, especially when the photos therein are being discussed.

It saves a lot of time, especially when you don't have a very fast connection like me. I just timed it, and it took me nearly one minute to get to the cat-elog page. Doesn't sound like much, but it is irritating.

I always like to add the clog tags at least once in the topic. I recommend others do the same.

by racoll
For what its worth, I would suspect any hybrid Synodontis ornatipinnis* would be partly Synodontis decorus (due to their similarity), which has a very different humeral process (blunt vs. narrow and sharp).

I would've suspected maybe brichardi in the parentage of an ornatipinnis hybrid???

by sidguppy
too bad I haven't got some pilots, a few old Havilland Mosquito's with night radar and a shed full of bombs

I'd like to be your wing man on that mission!!!

by racollThere is a PFK dyed fish pledge in the UK that stores can sign up to say they will not stock dyed fish. Perhaps the same could be done for synos if there was enough of a momentum.

I wish! I think the problem with this is that a lot of dealers will have difficulty telling what's real & what's a hybrid. It's a hell of a lot easier with a dayglo striped indian glassfish! Anyone think this could work in practice?

I would've suspected maybe brichardi in the parentage of an ornatipinnis hybrid???

Yes, if I were "making" an S. ornatipinnis, then I would indeed cross S. decorus with S. brichardi.

I wish! I think the problem with this is that a lot of dealers will have difficulty telling what's real & what's a hybrid.

True, but the thing that really bothers me is that I would bet most folk who just want a cheap little catfish for their tank neither know nor care that they are getting a hybrid. They would probably be just as happy with a little S. eupterus, S. flavitaeniatus, S. decorus or S. ocellifer etc if they were available at the same price.

I don't agree with the idea that they sell on the basis of being new. They are not being sold to catfish enthusiasts looking for interesting species.

They are sold to typical "community tank man" with his red-tailed shark, platies, mollies and angelfish.

I think its all down to the price, which makes these hybrids popular.

Hey,

Well new cutie eats nicely so in few days I will move it to much bigger tank

True, but the thing that really bothers me is that I would bet most folk who just want a cheap little catfish for their tank neither know nor care that they are getting a hybrid. They would probably be just as happy with a little S. eupterus, S. flavitaeniatus, S. decorus or S. ocellifer etc if they were available at the same price.

I don't agree with the idea that they sell on the basis of being new. They are not being sold to catfish enthusiasts looking for interesting species.

They are sold to typical "community tank man" with his red-tailed shark, platies, mollies and angelfish.

I think its all down to the price, which makes these hybrids popular.

I agree entirely - it's why people buy fake rolex's.