I need an algae eater

[KuhliDude]

I am aware of the kuhli problem, my lfs just doesn't have any at the moment.

 

[jaylach]

The only algae eater that I can think of that MIGHT work would be Panda Garra which are voracious algae and bio film eaters but there are still issues with them and a 10 gallon tank as they get up to ~3 inches. Also, while they are OK being solo, they do better in a group of 2-4 which would very much over populate a 10 gallon tank. The reason 2-4 is better is that they like to play and if there is only 1 it is likely to try to play with the other fish which the other fish would not welcome. With all this I really don't recommend but, if you were to insist, would be the only ones I would even consider.

On the plus side they do eat a lot of algae and will even eat black beard algae. While they DO spend some time on the substrate I would not really consider them bottom dwellers so, unlike a pleco, any type of substrate is pretty much OK. When they aren't zipping around playing tag (if there at least 2) they spend most of their time on the glass or using plant leaves as a hammock. Also they will strip algae off of a plant leaf without causing damage One more thing is that they are afraid of nothing and are human friendly. Any time I reach in my tank I'll have a couple latch onto my hand.

Again I can't say that I'd recommend in your tank but Pandas are the only thing I can think of that would even be a possibility. You mentioned cute so here is what they look like... The second image is my 4 beasties chilling together on glass.

Oh, while many think they are a loach they are not. They are actually in the carp family.

 

[KuhliDude]

That is adorable

 

[Byron]

Before considering the panda garra, I would read the SF profile. Note the tank size, and comments about behaviour. If the kuhlii loaches remain, I see trouble. Fish have needs and we must provide them.

Garra flavatra – Panda Garra — Seriously Fish

www.seriouslyfish.com

 

[Ichthys]

I have a otto cat in my 5 gallon and he is happy. I just keep the algae at a moderate amount and he is healthy and has been in there for months now.

So healthy means happy? So you wouldn’t mind if you never saw another human?

 

[jaylach]

Before considering the panda garra, I would read the SF profile. Note the tank size, and comments about behaviour. If the kuhlii loaches remain, I see trouble. Fish have needs and we must provide them.

Garra flavatra – Panda Garra — Seriously Fish

www.seriouslyfish.com

I agree and said a few times that I did not recommend but the OP seemed sort of insistent and Pandas are the only possibility that I see.

I agree and don't with Serious Fish saying they are aggressive if solo. The problem is that they want to play. If there is only one Panda they will attempt to play with other fish which I also brought up. If there are at least two they will just play with each other and leave other fish alone.

I will again say that I do not recommend but, if insisted, I see 2 Pandas as the only possibility.

 

[KuhliDude]

Before considering the panda garra, I would read the SF profile. Note the tank size, and comments about behaviour. If the kuhlii loaches remain, I see trouble. Fish have needs and we must provide them.

Garra flavatra – Panda Garra — Seriously Fish

www.seriouslyfish.com

Indeed

 

[jaylach]

Ahhh, https://www.seriouslyfish.com/ ... In general they are a GREAT resource but not always correct in some aspects. I have three species of fish in my tank and the info from https://www.seriouslyfish.com/ is incorrect on two of those.

One miss info is the Panda Garra being aggressive if solo. While my experience with these critters is short lived this just does not seem to be the case. They want to play which is one of the reasons that I would not have just one. If they are solo they still want to play and, without another option, will try to play with other fish which may look like aggression but really isn't. These are one of the most peaceful and friendly fish I've ever had.

Another case is a rope fish which they say will reach a length of 15-18 inches and possibly larger. While this is accurate as to these fish in the wild it just is not when in captivity. Off and on I've dealt with ropes for something like 35 years and, even in a 175 gallon tank, have never seen one get longer than 8-8.5 inches in length in an aquarium.

Sorry but I just have to go with what I've seen personally over what I see on-line.

Also https://www.seriouslyfish.com/ allows input and comments from outside sources which can be conflicting. Don't get me wrong as https://www.seriouslyfish.com/ is a great resource but what they say is not gospel. As with any other resource on the net you have to look at several sources and sort of take an average.

Don't get me wrong as I DO consider https://www.seriouslyfish.com/ to be a great resource. Just don't take everything said on the site as total fact without comparing with other sites.

 

[DoubleDutch]

The trouble is that otos are shoaling fish so they need to be in a group.

I agree they seem to like to be in groups but I have never seen footage that these fish are shoalingfish. To an extend that I seriously doubt that.

Yes there are some vids on youtube which all show Oto's being caught from a place which doesn't seem to be their natural habitat, but is always mentioned to "proof" the live in shoals. I have never seen a vid of a shoal of Otos in the wild to be honest.

BTW they definitely shouldn't be kept alone (as hardly any fish)

 

[Ichthys]

DoubleDutch

 

[Byron]

The term "shoaling" seems to be misunderstood by some. It does not mean the fish swim together in all cases; some species do. like Corydoras and most all of the characins (tetras, hatchetfish, pencilfish) but some of these can be spread out too. The biological fact behind "shoaling" as we understand the term is that the fish have to be in a group and they are recognized by each other. By "recognized" I mean they may visibly see each other, or detect each other by pheromones. In an aquarium this recognition is the same. And as the video clearly shows, they are together in a sizable group.

 

[Byron]

DoubleDutch

This is a video from Ivan Mikolji, and you can be assured it is accurate. This is on natural habitat of Otocinclus.

 

[Byron]

One miss info is the Panda Garra being aggressive if solo. While my experience with these critters is short lived this just does not seem to be the case. They want to play which is one of the reasons that I would not have just one. If they are solo they still want to play and, without another option, will try to play with other fish which may look like aggression but really isn't. These are one of the most peaceful and friendly fish I've ever had.

I think there is confusion over the term "aggressive." I understand that what we term "play" in fish is actually aggressive interaction. Aggressive does not always refer to a fish tearing into another fish, though that is one aspect of aggressive. Within the shoal of a species that is "shoaling" there is always (so far as biologists reason) some "back and forth" interaction. I can cite the botine loaches as a clear example. A group of five or six (or more) of say Botia kubotai an hierarchy that forms relatively quickly after the group is introduced to an aquarium. They have an alpha fish which is often if not always a female, and they recognize the hierarchy. I had this species for over a decade, and this was certainly obvious even to me. There was never any physical aggression in the form of tearing fins or bites, but there was "aggressive" "play" as we would see it.

 

[Byron]

So healthy means happy? So you wouldn’t mind if you never saw another human?

This is a very good observation/question. I just posted in this thread mentioning "aggression" and "play" and touched upon this. But it is worth stating, because there is a real misunderstanding among some in the hobby who think that the fish swimming, eating and even spawning means they are "happy" or "healthy." This is not the case. It is absolutely impossible to discern happiness because we cannot communicate with a fish to know. And in any case what does "happy" mean to the fish. Healthy falls in the same category. Like all animals, the primary instinct in a fish is to reproduce to continue the species. This is how evolution works. The fish will do everything it can to spawn, and the fish will tolerate whatever environment we force them into in order to achieve this goal. This can go on for considerable time, until something causes the fish to literally give up because it can no longer manage to withstand the problems caused by an improper environment. And "environment: here means the water parameters, water conditions, physical aquascaping, numbers of its own species and the other fish in the tank which may or may not be compatible. All of these factors affect the health of the fish through stress. We know that over 90% of aquarium fish disease is the direct result of stress. I don't know how many times I have read posts about sick fish where it is so obvious that the aquarist is responsible because the fish has beeen placed in an unsuitable environment and it has no option but to struggle to manage. Survive and thrive are very different.

 

[jaylach]

I think there is confusion over the term "aggressive." I understand that what we term "play" in fish is actually aggressive interaction. Aggressive does not always refer to a fish tearing into another fish, though that is one aspect of aggressive. Within the shoal of a species that is "shoaling" there is always (so far as biologists reason) some "back and forth" interaction. I can cite the botine loaches as a clear example. A group of five or six (or more) of say Botia kubotai an hierarchy that forms relatively quickly after the group is introduced to an aquarium. They have an alpha fish which is often if not always a female, and they recognize the hierarchy. I had this species for over a decade, and this was certainly obvious even to me. There was never any physical aggression in the form of tearing fins or bites, but there was "aggressive" "play" as we would see it.

I actually agree with your post and thought about just about what you said after the fact but you had already posted before I got back here.

I still don't believe that a solo Panda Garra is aggressive in any hostile way but unwanted 'play' is still a form of aggression. That is pretty much why I stated that would not keep just one as it is still going to want to play and will play with other fish. Even though there is not going to be any physical damage this could easily still cause stress for the 'playmate'. I have 4 or the beasties and they 'play' with each other and ignore everything else in the tank. Still, if only one, it will still want to play and will likely cause stress to one or more other fish.

I appreciate your input as to aggression not having to be hostile good sir.