tranced Posted February 17, 2012 Share Posted February 17, 2012 just wondering if there are any true to species victorians getting around over east? and perhaps some pics for my drooling pleasure i have a bunch of brownae and xmas fulu but they look suspiciously ... exactly the same. not fully coloured up yet but i suspect another disappointment is on the horizon... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
krellious Posted February 19, 2012 Share Posted February 19, 2012 I hve fulu there are a few folk breeding brownai and flamebacks that i know of Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ged Posted February 19, 2012 Share Posted February 19, 2012 Astatotilapia sp. 44 Aka Thickskins are floating around. I think Johns has a breeding colony. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrew Posted February 21, 2012 Share Posted February 21, 2012 Hi all,Without wanting to drop a bombshell, I want to put forward the following info and get your opinions on it.A couple of years ago, I set about amassing whatever Vics were around to stop them dwindling in numbers. Two of the first I got were Xystichromis phytophagus and Neochromis nigricans (now rufocaudalis). The nigricans were the exact same fish we have always had as "nigricans" in Oz and I began to doubt their purity based on differences in size and appearance. I liaised with Ole Seehausen and supplied him with pics of the fish, which he confirmed for me were definitely hybrids. He said they appear to be from a hybrid population that has existed in the European hobby for decades. The long and the short of that is that any N. nigricans flaoting around Oz are Hybrids. Ole also made a point of saying that there is no need to start panicking and eradicating this hybrid strain - and that it is a perfectly legitimate ornamental fish as long as it is not interbred with any pure species.I also became concerned that the "Fulu" are incorrectly labelled in Australia. The fish that I obtained and proliferated are certainly not X. phytophagus and appear to be H. sp. 44 "Thickskin". I believe that if you were to obtain some "Fulu" and some "Thickskin", you would find it very difficult (if not nigh on impossible) to distinguish them from each other. I am of the impression that we may never have had real "Fulu" here and that "Thickskin" has been introduced twice - once as itself and once as "Fulu". I have never seen a fish in Australia that appears as X. phytophagus should.I'm not claiming to be a great guru on Vics - it's just that when something like this comes up, I research the daylights out of it and formulate an opinion.It's important for me to raise this issue and get any feedback on it. It would be terrific if anyone who has any of these fish looks into these possibilities - also, if anyone claims to have irrefutably pure X. phytophagus or Neochromis rufocaudalis, please let us know and post pics if possible!Cheers,Andrew. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tranced Posted February 22, 2012 Author Share Posted February 22, 2012 interesting stuff! quite sad for the vics tho... lets see some pics heres my only vic species so far... pundamilia sp. "red head" (zue island) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ged Posted February 22, 2012 Share Posted February 22, 2012 Andrew it is a real shame that the state of Victorian species here in Australia are in dire straits. It does not surprise me that there are issue about the identity and purity of the three species that you have mentioned. It would be great to see some photos of the Vic species that are being kept. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fishinf Posted February 23, 2012 Share Posted February 23, 2012 i recently saw some 44 thickskins and i keep xmas and they didnt look at all alikeandrew could you please put up a pic (google image )of what an xmas shold look likeid love to see Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrew Posted February 23, 2012 Share Posted February 23, 2012 Here are a few examples (there are many more on Google images). Note the horizontal markings in each example. I have not seen these markings in any specimen in Australia. Our "phytophagus" resemble sp. 44 much more closely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrew Posted February 23, 2012 Share Posted February 23, 2012 The below fish is Astatotilpia sp. 44 Thickskin.The below fish is what we have as X. phytophagus in Australia. A. sp. 44 is highly variable from individual to individual, and I noticed the same in my "Fulu". But all in all, the "Fulu I have seen in Oz seem more like washed out 44s than what they're supposed to be. Then, of course, there is the disastrous possibility that the below fish is hybrid between the two... I will try to contact Ole Seehausen again and see what he says... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.