A. Agasizii F1 ID

[Alex92]

Hi,

Already posted these pics as a contribution to another thread but probably better to post here...
What is your guess on this F1 couple?

The male was still a bit stressed on the first serie of shots so I added a few more at the end.

 

[Mike Wise]

It looks like Apistogramma sp. Tefé. It is not A. agassizii.

 

[Alex92]

Hi Mike,

Thanks for your reply.
The person who gave them to me calls them Apistogramma Agassizii Téfé Mutum.
Are you saying this is a different superspecies within the agassizii-complex?
Or a different form of A. Agassizii?
Could Apistogramma cf. Agassizii Téfé Mutum be an acceptable naming?
OK now I'm confused...

 

[dw1305]

Hi all,
Mike is saying that A. sp. "Tefé" is a good species in its own right, and not a form or sub-species of A. agassizii. It would be part of the same species complex as A. agassizii & A. gephyra etc.

It is possible that some other the other "forms" of A. agassizii are actually separate species as well.

Your extremely attractive fish should be referred to just as A. "Tefé", until it is eventually scientifically described with a new name.

cheers Darrel

 

[dw1305]

Hi all,
I should have also said that more details can be found in "Sudamerikanische Zwergcichliden / South American Dwarf Cichlids. New A-Numbers, Habitat, Care and Reproduction" Stawikowski, Rainer, Ingo Kosloswki & Volker Bohnet, DATZ (2005). The book is published in a combined German/English edition and is well worth getting hold off.

cheers Darrel

 

[Mike Wise]

Thanks Darrel. I couldn't say it better. Mutum is a location name for this local population of A. sp. Tefé.

 

[briztoon]

So what makes this species different from Agassizii?

 

[Mike Wise]

The wavy markings on the flanks are unique to A. sp. Tefé. Crossbreeding this species with different forms of A. agassizii produced fertility problems and physical deformities typically seen on hybrid apistos. Finally genetic studies indicate that it is a separate species. That makes me confident to say that it is not a form of A. agassizii (sensu lato).

 

[Alex92]

Thanks for all the info, interesting stuff, so Apistogramma sp. Téfé (Mutum) it is.
I've ordered the Cichlid Atlas v2 to learn more about the apisto subject in general.

 

[animalmgc]

I also did Alex as they say you should read one book for knowledge and another for your own fun This fish stuff is getting fascinating(addicting) and I have my g son to thank for getting me involved in fish again oh and ApistoDave

 

[briztoon]

The wavy markings on the flanks are unique to A. sp. Tefé. Crossbreeding this species with different forms of A. agassizii produced fertility problems and physical deformities typically seen on hybrid apistos. Finally genetic studies indicate that it is a separate species. That makes me confident to say that it is not a form of A. agassizii (sensu lato).

Ok, now things are a little clearer. Sorry Mike I was a little confused between my last Agassizii ID thread, this thread and from recalling past conversations with other local hobbiests. I thought the Agassizii from the Rio Tefe had the wavy markings on the flank. I misread your first post from my thread.

I believe in the past, similar fish to the ones pictured above have been sold locally as A. cf. agassizii (Tefe), meaning they are an agassizii variant from the Rio Tefe. When I bought my pair, another hobbiest had said he didn't think they were agassizii "tefe" as they lacked the wavy lines along the flank. I bought my pair on the understanding that they were mislabled. So locally we have been under the impression that agassizii from the Rio Tefe had to have the wavy lines, when infact they aren't agassizii at all.

However, I know understand that the fish pictured above is not an Agassizii, but does belong to the Agassizii family along with gephyra, pulchra and abacaxis (sp. 'wilhelmi').

OK, another question. Genetic studies indicate that this is a seperate species. Does A. sp. Tefé contain some of the same dna markers as the agassizii variants from the Rio Tefe? And at what point do scientists "split" new species off? Is there, say a certain percentage where fish have to share the same number of dna markers to be classified as the same species, and any less they are split in to new species. For example, the agassizii variants from the Rio Tefe share 90% of the same dna markers, but the A. sp. Tefe only shares 32% of the same dna markers as the two agassizii variants.

 

[Mike Wise]

I believe in the past, similar fish to the ones pictured above have been sold locally as A. cf. agassizii (Tefe), meaning they are an agassizii variant from the Rio Tefe.

Before hobbyists realized that A. sp. Tefé was a separate species it was originally labeled "A. agassizii (Tefé). Later, after many problems with breeding it with A. agassizii from the Rio Tefé (deformities, infertility, poor survival rates, etc.) several authors realized that we were getting 2 different species mixed together in a shipment. Once the collectors were informed, and kept the 2 species separate, we had a lot fewer problems. At the time A. sp. Tefé was often discussed under the name A. cf. agassizii (Tefé). The term "cf." means 'confir', Latin for 'similar' or 'conforms to'. It does not say anything about whether or not the species is the same as the original. Most taxonomists use cf. to indicate that it doesn't completely match the holotype form of a species in every way, but is very close. In other words, they're not sure if it is the same species or not! They use cf. to 'hedge their bet'. Now that we know that A. sp. Tefé is a separate (udescribed) species, we have given it a separate common name.

When I bought my pair, another hobbiest had said he didn't think they were agassizii "tefe" as they lacked the wavy lines along the flank. I bought my pair on the understanding that they were mislabled. So locally we have been under the impression that agassizii from the Rio Tefe had to have the wavy lines, when infact they aren't agassizii at all.

That's right. Old information dies hard. That's why you still see people selling A. sp. Inka 50, A. sp. Pandurini, etc.

OK, another question. Genetic studies indicate that this is a seperate species. Does A. sp. Tefé contain some of the same dna markers as the agassizii variants from the Rio Tefe? And at what point do scientists "split" new species off? Is there, say a certain percentage where fish have to share the same number of dna markers to be classified as the same species, and any less they are split in to new species. For example, the agassizii variants from the Rio Tefe share 90% of the same dna markers, but the A. sp. Tefe only shares 32% of the same dna markers as the two agassizii variants.

That's an interesting question that no one has answered currently. Maybe there isn't an absolute percentage of differences that can be used to arbitrarily separate different populations into unique species. From what I understand, there is only a 2% difference in the genetic makeup of human beings and chimpanzees. The trick is to determine which genes are the important ones that determine a species. Ready, et al. were able to distinguish 3 different species of A. cf. caetei genetically, but the only major difference (other than location) was color of the males. Are these truly different species? I can't say. As for A. agassizii and A. sp. Tefé we know that they don't successfully crossbreed often, and when they do they show hybrid features - a classic indication that we are dealing with 2 separate species.

 

[Alex92]

All this hybriding talk between A. agassizii and A. sp. tefe is getting me a bit paranoid
I noticed the female has what seems to be a slight deformity on the dorsal fin, around the 3rd or 4th spike (see pics from the first post + extra close-up below).

Though the original owner seemed confident with his strain, could this be the result of crossbreeding?
Mike, can you tell from these pics if the female is a "pure" A. sp. Tefe or a possible hybrid?
Should I be worried about this deformity?

Another reason I'm wondering is that the female seems very eager to breed: yellow color, twisting and showing her belly to the male etc...
The male totally ignores her teasing and even chases her away from his "territory".
And they haven't bred in their previous tanks either...

Parameters are pH=6.0 Temp=25°C Conductivity=80 µS/cm
Pure RO water, peat, cattapa leaves, plants, wood, coconut shells, lots of hideout

 

[Mike Wise]

From your photo, I see no features typical of hybrid apistos. Most apisto hybrids show irregular rows of scales on the caudal peduncle area. The scales on your female appear very even and regular in this area. The odd dorsal fin spine appears to be due to damage at some time in the past. It might regenerate or it might not. It should not affect any offspring. Your fish should be able to reproduce in your water conditions. Personally, I believe that you might get better breeding results if you lower the pH to <5,5 and the conductivity to 35µS/cm. I know that I could not get fry from my A. cf. agassizii (Madeira-gold) until I lowered the water values. There are other factors that affect successful breeding. Could your fish be too young? Do they have only suitable tankmates? Is the aquarium designed for breeding?

 

[Alex92]

Thanks for the good news!
They are adult (a year and a half, give or take) and have always stayed in couple, no spawn to their record yet...
I got them last sunday. No tankmates except a few little snails that invited themselves.
As for the tank itself, it's a 54 liter (approx. 14 gallon) 60cmx30cmx30cm (approx 24"x12"x12") and pretty close to an amazonian biotope.
Cycled since about 6 months.
I wasn't too sure about the ideal pH, I've seen recommendations up to 6,5 for agassizii breeding so I thought it didn't need to be very low compared to other apistos.
But will try to bring it down based on your recommandation.
Conductivity is down to 50µS since today's water change, haven't checked pH yet.

 

[Alex92]

Pics of the tank:

 

[Mike Wise]

Nice tank! I doubt that you will have any problems with reproduction of the species: just slightly lower pH, live foods, and good water.

 

[Alex92]

Thanks for the good advice Mike!
Got the parameters down to pH=5,2 cond=40µS and 27°C and there you go:

 

[Mike Wise]

Wonderful! Isn't it amazing what slight changes in water values can produce?

 

[slimbolen99]

A beautiful tank and fish! Congrats on the spawn.