• Hello guest! Are you an Apistogramma enthusiast? If so we invite you to join our community and see what it has to offer. Our site is specifically designed for you and it's a great place for Apisto enthusiasts to meet online. Once you join you'll be able to post messages, upload pictures of your fish and tanks and have a great time with other Apisto enthusiasts. Sign up today!

Copella nigrofasciatum.

rasmusW

Active Member
Hi all!

On next friday i’m going to pick up some Copella nigrofasciatum. I think they are really nice looking fish, but i have never kept them before.
-So i wondered og any of you have any experience in keeping them?

I have read what little i could find on them from other sites like fishbase and seriouslyfish.

Thanks in advance.

-r
 

Tom C

Well-Known Member
5 Year Member
I'll guess you are talking about this fish, and that you will receive it from Peru?



Taxonomicly there is no fish with the name Copella nigrofasciata anymore.
Up to 2006, we called this fish Copella nigrofasciata. Then Zarske did a revision of the Copella genus, and said
this species should have the name Copella nattereri.
Then, in 2017, Marinho did another review, and said this fish should have the name Copella callolepis.
(Copella nigrofasciata was here considered as a junior synonyms of C. callolepis.)

I have collected this beautiful species in Peru many times, kept it and bred it, and a little information could
be found at my site.
 

rasmusW

Active Member
Thanks a lot you two. You have been a great help. Now i’m really looking forward on getting them.

Tom: i’m not sure of their origin, but i hope they look as good as in your picture.

I’ll try grab some pictures once they are in the tank.

-r
 

Drayden Farci

Active Member
Sorry to hijack this thread, but...

Anyone know if there are regional differences among species such as C. nattereri? I have a group from Colombian that I believe to be C. nattereri, with red spots on the scales and a dark dorsal spot, and none of them have noticeable black bars running horizontally. However, we have some from Peru that appear to be similar/the same species with a few differences. One, the spots on each scale are darker, more gray/black than red/pink. The dorsal spot is lower on the dorsal fin comparatively. Finally, they have a noticeable band on their body that appears to be made of many scale spots in closer density, and these bands darken or fade with mood.

If you examine Fig. 21 on the link above, the C. eigenmanni has a dark band that is not as solid as the photo at the beginning of this thread. However, it doesn't have any spots above or below the band, whereas C. nattereri has spots covering the body.

Any ideas?
 

gerald

Well-Known Member
5 Year Member
Looking at the wide geographic ranges for C. arnoldi, nattereri, callolepis, and eigenmanni in those maps in the Marinho & Menezes paper, I'd be very surprised if they did NOT show significant variation across their range. Species that live in big rivers generally have more genetic mixing across their range than species that live mainly in small streams and isolated swamps and don't get into the main river channels much, like these guys. Also, the six species recognized in the M+M paper are based solely on morphological and color distinctions. There might be more species "hidden" among the wide-ranging ones that can't be adequately defended as species until their genetics is studied.
 

Drayden Farci

Active Member
Looking at the wide geographic ranges for C. arnoldi, nattereri, callolepis, and eigenmanni in those maps in the Marinho & Menezes paper, I'd be very surprised if they did NOT show significant variation across their range. Species that live in big rivers generally have more genetic mixing across their range than species that live mainly in small streams and isolated swamps and don't get into the main river channels much, like these guys. Also, the six species recognized in the M+M paper are based solely on morphological and color distinctions. There might be more species "hidden" among the wide-ranging ones that can't be adequately defended as species until their genetics is studied.
This was my thinking as well, but when dealing with selling fish online "sight-unseen", you understand why we have to be careful what we call these fish! Just seeing if anyone knew of a fish that I'm describing :) Sounds like I should go with Copella sp. without the identifier.
 

rasmusW

Active Member
hey everyone!

thanks for all the great info guys.
here is a picture of the fish i got. looks like the ones you caught in peru, tom. -though the red on the fins is not as dominant as in your pict. i hope that will come as they adapt to their new home.
IMG_4609_2.jpg


i have a few more pictures in my "biotope-ish tank thread".

-r
 

rr16

Active Member
5 Year Member
There are for sure differences in fishes from Colombia:











In this beautiful small blackwater tributary to the Colombian Rio Negro,



we collected these:



Non-dominant/suppressed fish often show the dark lateral band:

Are these the C. callolepis, now C. nattereri that I have from you Tom? I've still not had eggs, but they're in a community and currently competing with the large male C. compta, so I think I need to separate them out into a tank of their own.
 
Top