PlanetCatfish.com

Ive bought an african shovel nose recently and he does look the part but does anyone have any info as all i keep getting is info about tigers, cheers

I have no personal experience, and looking across t' Internet, I find that fishbase says that it is Parauchenoganis monkei, but another website quotes it to be P. loennbergi - but that is, in current fishbase a synonym.

If we assume that fishbase is correct (which is USUALLY the case, but like all large collections of data, the odd mistake sneeks in from time to time) it should be OK for aquariums from a size-perspective.

There are some other species in the Cat-eLog. I haven't looked at them, but it may give you some idea of its behaviour and needs.

--
Mats

I think andy.cole94 is referring to .

I agree

I've seen Bagrus docmac sold as "African Shovelnose".....

a real nice fish as a juvenile; unfortunately it gets huge...even bigger than the already too large South American Pseudoplatystoma species.

a few years back when I still kept Tanganyikans instead of Malagasy fish I was tempted.
but the size adult Bagrus can reach kept me from making a stupid mistake (stupid for me, cause I should know better).

they were very nice. about 8-10" long, metallic silvery grey with very long whiskers.

andy.cole94 wrote:Ive bought an african shovel nose recently and he does look the part but does anyone have any info as all i keep getting is info about tigers, cheers

Do you have, or can you get, a pic?

Thanks Richard B, have a look

is only about 3inches

That's .

you're in luck!

unlike the Bagrus wich will ouitgrow any tank, this fish will get fairly bulky, but at about 1 foot or so, it's fully grown and hence can be kept in a roomy tank

it's not much of a mover, so a 5-6 foot long, 1.5-2 feet wide tank will do fine for an adult.
great find, it's not that common.

A-ha C.Ornatus! I've not heard this called an african shovelnose before

uhuh

I could flog the dead horse and start another rant about me being mordicus against the use of common names


again


but this post is just another (as if I needed another) argument for proving me right

what else is new, eh?