ID help

[FishAddict74]

I picked up a couple assorteds from a higher end LFS today and I’m hoping to get a positive ID on them. The first one I think I know, but looking for opinions, the second one I have no clue
Thanks for any help

 

[Wyomingite]

What color are the pelvic fins? My first thought was a Copadichromis sp. at a glance and off the top of my head, specifically C. azureus. But the eggspots don't match. I've been looking through pics of the thousand and one varieties of Aulonocara stuartgranti and think it may be A. stuartgranti 'cobue'. In short, I'm not as sure on this one as I usually am on rifties. As for the second one, well, juvies and females can be really hard. I suspect it may be the female to the male in the first pic. If we confirm what the first pic is it may be very easy to confirm the second.

WYite

 

[FishAddict74]

What color are the pelvic fins? My first thought was a Copadichromis sp. at a glance and off the top of my head, specifically C. azureus. But the eggspots don't match. I've been looking through pics of the thousand and one varieties of Aulonocara stuartgranti and think it may be A. stuartgranti 'cobue'. In short, I'm not as sure on this one as I usually am on rifties. As for the second one, well, juvies and females can be really hard. I suspect it may be the female to the male in the first pic. If we confirm what the first pic is it may be very easy to confirm the second.

WYite

Thank you,
The pelvic fins on the first one are grayish blue with whitish trim and the smaller one has the same white trim with a little bit of gray . If it helps narrow it down, I asked two other places as well and they both agree the first is a Stuartgranti, one is being a little more specific and saying chilumba. The second one I did a visual venting and I’m pretty sure it’s male unless that’s not accurate at this size,, about two inches on the second one. One person isn’t sure on the little one and the other said possibly Otopharynx lithobates but said the profile is too steep. I just looked at pics of the Cobue and chilumba and I think you’re right, the chilumba I saw had more red, mine has a slight touch of red in the tail and anal fin. That and you’ve been spot on with ID on others for me

 

[FishAddict74]

Here’s a vid if it helps, they weren’t overly cooperative tho

Cichlids

youtube.com

 

[Wyomingite]

Cool. Grayish-blue pelvic fins do kinda point back to a 'chilumba', and after seeing the vid it just may be. It's definitely one or the other. There is so much variation within some of the A. stuartgranti varieties that it can be hard to tell sometimes. The 'ngara flametail', for example, varies from almost solid orangs sides, tail and anterior of the dorsal fin to barely any orange on the sides and dorsal with most of the orange on the tail, but they're all the same genetic population. A lot of the A. stuartgranti variations probably should be separate species IMO, and I do mean a lot of them. It may be a little easier once he settles in a bit.

I can see an Otopharynx in the second one now that you mention it. My mind got so fixed on it being a female that I honestly didn't think much on that one at all. It very well may be O. lithobates, so that very well may be correct. If you can get a good enough vent on it that you can determine it's a male then it probably is. When he colors up it will really help.

WYite

 

[FishAddict74]

Cool. Grayish-blue pelvic fins do kinda point back to a 'chilumba', and after seeing the vid it just may be. It's definitely one or the other. There is so much variation within some of the A. stuartgranti varieties that it can be hard to tell sometimes. The 'ngara flametail', for example, varies from almost solid orangs sides, tail and anterior of the dorsal fin to barely any orange on the sides and dorsal with most of the orange on the tail, but they're all the same genetic population. A lot of the A. stuartgranti variations probably should be separate species IMO, and I do mean a lot of them. It may be a little easier once he settles in a bit.

I can see an Oropharynx in the second one now that you mention it. My mind got so fixed on it being a female that I honestly didn't think much on that one at all. It very well may be O. lithobates, so that very well may be correct. If you can get a good enough vent on it that you can determine it's a male then it probably is. When he colors up it will really help.

WYite

I just looked at a bunch more images and I see what you mean between the cobue, chilumba and even ngara. The red on mine so far seems to come and go depending on mood, but I’ve only had it about 24hrs.
The other person that said possibleOtopharynx lithobates is very knowledgeable as well, so if you’re both seeing that, that’s probably it I had a friend come by a little while ago and he’s thinking possible Protomelas Spilonotus, something about how the bands are. Maybe I’ll take your advice and revisit this when it gets some color

 

[FishAddict74]

Cool. Grayish-blue pelvic fins do kinda point back to a 'chilumba', and after seeing the vid it just may be. It's definitely one or the other. There is so much variation within some of the A. stuartgranti varieties that it can be hard to tell sometimes. The 'ngara flametail', for example, varies from almost solid orangs sides, tail and anterior of the dorsal fin to barely any orange on the sides and dorsal with most of the orange on the tail, but they're all the same genetic population. A lot of the A. stuartgranti variations probably should be separate species IMO, and I do mean a lot of them. It may be a little easier once he settles in a bit.

I can see an Otopharynx in the second one now that you mention it. My mind got so fixed on it being a female that I honestly didn't think much on that one at all. It very well may be O. lithobates, so that very well may be correct. If you can get a good enough vent on it that you can determine it's a male then it probably is. When he colors up it will really help.

WYite

Well, after I made the video, one of the others is saying hybrid for the blue guy. He said the body is Aulonocara but the head is wrong. Is that something that you see?

 

[Wyomingite]

Well, after I made the video, one of the others is saying hybrid for the blue guy. He said the body is Aulonocara but the head is wrong. Is that something that you see?

I watched the vid again, several times, and I don't see head shape as being abnormal for an Aulonocara sp. Actually, the biggest concern I had with an Aulonocara ID from the beginning was the number of eggspots. It does have a lot of egg spots for a peacock, the number being more in line with the typical utaka. With that said, the number of eggspots isn't anywhere near being outside reasonable for a peacock when you consider the plasticity of peacock appearance. The number of egg spots is just on the high end.

I am a firm believer that the occurence of cichlid hybridization in the hobby is severely overstated. I stopped posting at MFK and the Cichlid Forum years ago because there was a group of guys at each who would say everything was a hybrid, even when the OP was just sharing pictures and would actually state that they were pure-bred in the post. Sometimes the OP would show parent and offspring pics and these guys would say that one or the other or both parents were hybrids, in the face of all evidence to the contrary. These guys' interpretation of "Assorted Africans" was that they were all hybrids. What "Assorted Africans" actually means is that the fish included are either oddball fish (sports) that were accidently imported or shipped in a group of a specific species (i.e. one Melanochromis sp. with a group of Metriaclima sp.) and couldn't be shipped with an order or that these are fish that were leftovers that didn't go out with other fish of their species because a retailer ordered 12, and there were say 14 left. The extra two go into the "Assorted African" shipment. Sometimes these fish actually are not known to the wholesaler when they come in with a shipment of wild fish. I'm not saying there are no hybrids in assorted African shipments. The fact is that OB "peacocks" (which may or may not be hybrids, that's a whole other topic in itself) and line-bred varieties of peacocks end up in these shipments, so I'm sure that the occasional hybrid makes it in as well. I am saying that just because a fish is in an "Assorted African" shipment does not mean it is automatically a hybrid, and in an overwhelming number of cases it is not. Since pure-bred fish are worth far more, it doesn't profit a breeder or fish farm to breed a bunch of mongrel offspring that can't be identified and won't bring top dollar. The only exceptions to this economic philosophy are hybrids that have become fixed strains and are available as such, like flowerhorns, parrots and OB peacocks (maybe). Even here, a fish that is recognizable as a specific strain is going to bring a lot higher price than a hybrid between the strain and another fish.

My observation has been that a lot of folks claim hybrid when they can't identify what a species actually is. A lot of hobbyists are under the misunderstanding that putting a male and female of two different species together will automatically result in mating and hybrid offspring. I've seen folks claim "hybrid" stating two species so different that it is genetically not possible for them to hybridize. Mother nature has built in mechanisms that discourage (and often prevent) hybridization, even between two closely related species. I'm amazed how so many cichlid hobbyists labor under this "hybrid" fallacy, when livebearer and killifish hobbyists face the same problems but don't see a "hybrid" in every fish they can't ID.

So, I'm not saying that the guy on the other forum who suggested it's a hybrid is one of the uninformed folks who sees a hybrid in every fish, don't get me wrong. I'm not downplaying his opinion or expertise. I don't know anything about him. He may be right. I said from the beginning that I wasn't as sure about ths one as I usually am. Even though I had concerns about the egg spots as well, I do disagree. I just wanted to clarify that any time "hybrid" is thrown out as an ID for a fish that the reasons it's being called a hybrid should be looked at a little deeper and not merely accepted as gospel.

WYite

 

[FishAddict74]

I watched the vid again, several times, and I don't see head shape as being abnormal for an Aulonocara sp. Actually, the biggest concern I had with an Aulonocara ID from the beginning was the number of eggspots. It does have a lot of egg spots for a peacock, the number being more in line with the typical utaka. With that said, the number of eggspots isn't anywhere near being outside reasonable for a peacock when you consider the plasticity of peacock appearance. The number of egg spots is just on the high end.

I am a firm believer that the occurence of cichlid hybridization in the hobby is severely overstated. I stopped posting at MFK and the Cichlid Forum years ago because there was a group of guys at each who would say everything was a hybrid, even when the OP was just sharing pictures and would actually state that they were pure-bred in the post. Sometimes the OP would show parent and offspring pics and these guys would say that one or the other or both parents were hybrids, in the face of all evidence to the contrary. These guys' interpretation of "Assorted Africans" was that they were all hybrids. What "Assorted Africans" actually means is that the fish included are either oddball fish (sports) that were accidently imported or shipped in a group of a specific species (i.e. one Melanochromis sp. with a group of Metriaclima sp.) and couldn't be shipped with an order or that these are fish that were leftovers that didn't go out with other fish of their species because a retailer ordered 12, and there were say 14 left. The extra two go into the "Assorted African" shipment. Sometimes these fish actually are not known to the wholesaler when they come in with a shipment of wild fish. I'm not saying there are no hybrids in assorted African shipments. The fact is that OB "peacocks" (which may or may not be hybrids, that's a whole other topic in itself) and line-bred varieties of peacocks end up in these shipments, so I'm sure that the occasional hybrid makes it in as well. I am saying that just because a fish is in an "Assorted African" shipment does not mean it is automatically a hybrid, and in an overwhelming number of cases it is not. Since pure-bred fish are worth far more, it doesn't profit a breeder or fish farm to breed a bunch of mongrel offspring that can't be identified and won't bring top dollar. The only exceptions to this economic philosophy are hybrids that have become fixed strains and are available as such, like flowerhorns, parrots and OB peacocks (maybe). Even here, a fish that is recognizable as a specific strain is going to bring a lot higher price than a hybrid between the strain and another fish.

My observation has been that a lot of folks claim hybrid when they can't identify what a species actually is. A lot of hobbyists are under the misunderstanding that putting a male and female of two different species together will automatically result in mating and hybrid offspring. I've seen folks claim "hybrid" stating two species so different that it is genetically not possible for them to hybridize. Mother nature has built in mechanisms that discourage (and often prevent) hybridization, even between two closely related species. I'm amazed how so many cichlid hobbyists labor under this "hybrid" fallacy, when livebearer and killifish hobbyists face the same problems but don't see a "hybrid" in every fish they can't ID.

So, I'm not saying that the guy on the other forum who suggested it's a hybrid is one of the uninformed folks who sees a hybrid in every fish, don't get me wrong. I'm not downplaying his opinion or expertise. I don't know anything about him. He may be right. I said from the beginning that I wasn't as sure about ths one as I usually am. Even though I had concerns about the egg spots as well, I do disagree. I just wanted to clarify that any time "hybrid" is thrown out as an ID for a fish that the reasons it's being called a hybrid should be looked at a little deeper and not merely accepted as gospel.

WYite

Thanks for explaining this.
I had no ideas what assorted really meant, I had always assumed it was laziness or a lack of knowledge about species., or hybrids. I’ve kept rifties for a long time, but aside from a few of the common ones , I’m not very knowledgeable on specific locations or species. The last year I’ve been trying to step my game up with learning the Latin names and identifying specific species and locations. It was MFK where I was told it was a hybrid and I have seen that thrown around a lot over there. Someone posted a pic of a young Senegal bichir and a few users said it was a hybrid because of the stripes not knowing that sens can have stripes when young. The person that said chilumba is a YouTuber from Italy that I’ve been conversing with for a few years. I like MFK, but it does seem like people tend to be more judgmental and jump to conclusions more over there which is why I really like this forum even if it’s not as active.