Loaches Online Forum

check out the post on sex differentiation on clowns?

http://forums.waterwolves.com/New-sex-d ... 08086.html

anybody notice any tubercles on their clowns?

Well yes, Clowns do have some such markings on their heads. They're sensory pores.

This is a big picture so's you can see the detail.



However, I'm ever the cynic because I can get this fish in "breeding condition" really quickly......



Photoshop is a wonderful thing

I'm not convinced......because the fish does not appear to be large enough to likely be of breeding age.

Because people have been keeping Clowns for aeons, so how come nobody saw this before?

Because apart from the bit around the eyes, there's no real defined pattern to the "tubercules", whereas in many Cyprinids there are areas of definite concentrations which are somewhat symetrical.

Martin.

You can fool some of the people, some of the time......but

Take that post with a pinch of salt. I do!

I'd like to read that paper pintius talked about.
And the thread contains quite a bit of info (of the accurate type) that I find intriguing. He is also clearly quite knowledgeable in the field and seems to have a similar mindset to the philosophies espoused by many here. (did a bit of looking around about him. . .)

Skepticism is good as long as it doesn't stop us from learning . . .
I tend to use salt sparingly as it can obscure the flavor of more delicate dishes.

...............

I'm not convinced......because the fish does not appear to be large enough to likely be of breeding age.

And Martin, years ago I was also told (somewhat summarily and with a great deal of salt) that it was HIGHLY unlikely that my little yoyo was gravid due to her small size and immaturity. That was proven untrue.

I'd hate to miss out on a valuable piece of information that gets written off simply because it is 'new' and outside the currently accepted knowledge base. That's the whole point of 'new' stuff. It is previously unknown. Shouldn't automatically make it suspect. Nor should we believe everything we hear. However, we have a tendency here to grant greater credence to those who've been around here for a while and apparently less of a tendency to credit others. Just because an aquarist hasn't joined this community doesn't mean they don't have valuable stuff to share.

I'm willing to keep an eye out on this one. And I'll eat crow (well salted!) later if my naiveté cooks me that banquet.

Well the first thing I did was look at the date of the post to see if it was around early April, but no

I would certainly like to see better evidence. It's easy for someone to be believable if they hide the dubious stuff in amongst truth.
Enough people here believed the picture I posted a ways back of my Male Sewellia in "breeding condition"(flushed with red). It took them a little while to work out the ruse.

Now they've been bred, I doubt highly that anyone would have been convinced by the picture because the knowledge base is higher.

I'm with Jerry McGuire

Martin.

Another of his posts (which are multitudinous...)

http://forums.waterwolves.com/index.php ... try1006185

He is no troll. Does not mean he could not be wrong. And the fact that the post wasn't in April (not an April fool ) may mean nothing more than that he took the time to get his thoughts and research together before posting in the typical hobbyist "OH WOW! Look what I found!" fashion.

See what I mean about us granting credence to people we know here? You got away with a real April fool on many because we BELIEVE you! Whether we should or not, well...

I'm definitely not dismissing it totally. How long have I owned Gastromyzon scitulus?

Ages..........

Only a couple of weeks ago I noticed pectoral fin "fences" on the males, just like Sewellia. Sometimes we look, but don't see.

All things are possible.

It's just that the good old days of "You can always believe a photograph are LONG gone".

Martin.

True, but in this thread the photos are only the beginning. Plenty of discussion of other stuff describing them goes on afterwards.
But the majority of this guys stuff is in photographic form...I'm pretty sure he knows his way around photoshop.

Righty ho.......I'm rockin' and Rollin' with the new site at the moment, so I haven't looked. Jeff's taking down the site this afternoon, so I'll check out this stuff later.

Martin.

as far as not noticing things for a long time goes; isn;t it only very recently that Emma noticed the weird bobbles at the top of big clown's ventral fins?

Bobbles.......Shari, add that to the Glossary

Martin.

"Bobbles--extra appendages, or protolegs, at the base of Marge's ventral fins."

Scepticism is an essential part of introducing new information. Without scepticism or questioning all information given would be accepted generally and no scientific data could ever be concidered to be accurate.
All new information must be thoroughly examined and investigated before it can be widley accepted. That is why I have and still continue to accept any questions concerning the topic

Moderators should be able to detect any image enhancing modifications containted within these pictures

Thanks for the hormone paper pintius. Came through with odd formatting, however. But it's readable.

new format sent, should be better