Ram question

[Paulie B.]

What say ye all? OK to keep a pair of Colombian Rams and a pair of Bolivian Rams in a 29-gallon tank?

 

[Colin_T]

What's the difference between them, are they different species?

 

[Paulie B.]

Slightly different. Microgeophagus ramireze vs. microgeophagus altispinosus. I'm more more concerned with the four rams in the 29-gallon space. Think they'll be happy enough?

 

[Colin_T]

Not sure how big a 29 gallon tank is but anything less than 3 feet and they will probably argue. A 4ft tank would be better for 2 prs.

 

[Guyb93]

Unless you know they are all the same sex I would say bad idea . These dwarf cichlids pair and have breeding aggression just as much as the larger cichlids, I would opt for either one of each or a pair of the same

 

[threecharacters]

Mikrogeophagus ramirezi is going to be territorial like most dwarf cichlids and you probably shouldn't keep more than one male in a 29 gallon. However, Mikrogeophagus altispinosus is a social species and like being kept in groups. Mikrogeophagus altispinosus is odd for a cichlid in this way, but as a relative of Geophagus it makes sense.

I would keep either a pair or a small harem of Mikrogeophagus ramirezi in the 29 gallon or a small group of Mikrogeophagus altispinosus. I would not mix them. Be aware that a group of Mikrogeophagus altispinosus will take up most of the stocking potential of the tank, so you shouldn't add too many other fish.

 

[Paulie B.]

Mikrogeophagus ramirezi is going to be territorial like most dwarf cichlids and you probably shouldn't keep more than one male in a 29 gallon. However, Mikrogeophagus altispinosus is a social species and like being kept in groups. Mikrogeophagus altispinosus is odd for a cichlid in this way, but as a relative of Geophagus it makes sense.

I would keep either a pair or a small harem of Mikrogeophagus ramirezi in the 29 gallon or a small group of Mikrogeophagus altispinosus. I would not mix them. Be aware that a group of Mikrogeophagus altispinosus will take up most of the stocking potential of the tank, so you shouldn't add too many other fish.

This sounds like very sensible advice. I like Colin_T's 4-foot tank idea too, but there's no way I'll be able to shoehorn one into my apartment. So for a 29-gallon you think maybe 3-5 altispinosus, threecharacters? Any other fish would just be some Cory cats and maybe some Harlequin rasboras to fill out the top, but I could do without those if need be.

 

[threecharacters]

This sounds like very sensible advice. I like Colin_T's 4-gallon tank idea too, but there's no way I'll be able to shoehorn one into my apartment. So for a 29-gallon you think maybe 3-5 altispinosus, threecharacters? Any other fish would just be some Cory cats and maybe some Harlequin rasboras to fill out the top, but I could do without those if need be.

Yes, I would get 3-5 altispinosus. Try to get them as juvies if you can, and get them all at once, this will reduce the odds that one will get rejected by the group. There's a delicate balance between getting more (reducing aggression, reproducing social hierarchies) and not overstocking. 29 gal is probably the bare minimum for a group like this. I think it can work though.

If you want both Corydoras and Harlequins you'll want to get Dwarf or Pygmy Corydoras. This way you'll be limiting the bioload in the tank and matching the temperature requirements of the fish (many other Corydoras prefer colder water than the Bolivian Rams). I would aim for something like 77-79 deg F in the tank. The Bolivian Rams are also semi-bottom dwellers, and you probably don't want to overfill the lower portion of the tank with a bunch of Corys.

If you do get all these fish make sure the filtration is overspec'd.

 

[Paulie B.]

That's a good point about the bottom dwellers. I'll stick to some salt and pepper pygmies, 3-5 Bolivian rams and a small group of Harlequins. Thanks everyone for your input!

 

[Byron]

The answer to the question in post #1 is, in short, no. I'll explain why in what follows to correct some misinformation in this thread.

First, the two species Mikrogeophagus ramirezi and M. altispinosus are not closely related to eartheaters although they are in the same family (cichlidae) and sub-family (Cichlinae) and tribe Geophaginae, and sub-tribe. The original description of M. ramirezi by Myers & Harry in 1948 placed this species in the Apistogramma genus of dwarf cichlids. Within ten years, ichthyologists realized that the fish had significant differences from the Apistogramma species, and it went through a series of genera including Microgeophagus, Pseudogeophagus, and Pseudoapistogramma. In 1977, a complete redefinition of the two "ram" species was made by the Swedish ichthyologist and cichlid authority Sven Kullander that established the name Papiliochromis for the two rams; scientific discussion again occurred in the late 1980's and in 1998 Kullander settled on Mikrogeophagus [with a "k"] and this is now the accepted valid name.
Originally described as Crenicara altispinosa by Haseman in 1911, for a time the Bolivian Ram was also considered in the genera Microgeophagus and Papiliochromis until 2003 when Kullander placed it in the re-established genus Mikrogeophagus along with the closely-related species M. ramirezi. These are the only species in this genus that was originally erected in 1968 by Meulengracht-Madsen.

The genus name derives from the Greek mikr [= small], geo [= earth] and phag [= eat], literally "small eartheater," but was chosen solely for the fish's method of eating, not genealogy.
[Kullander (2011) has a very full and detailed account of the taxonomy for those interested.]

As for the tank size, I would not recommend more than the one species (whichever) in a tank as small (to the fish) as here. A 4-foot tank might work...I say might because a male of either species is very likely to consider the entire tank "his." This played out with my lone Bolivian Ram in a 5-foot 115g tank.

Neither species is "shoaling" in the accepted definition of the term. They are both cichlids and both are very, very territorial. A 29g tank, assuming this is the "standard" with 30-inch (75 cm) length, will house one male Bolivian, or a mated/bonded pair. Same holds for the Blue (common) ram species. They are not "social" like Corydoras, Botia, etc. Quite the opposite at least with the Bolivian Ram. Observations made in the habitat suggest that this species lives in solitude (individual fish alone) apart from reproduction periods (Linke & Staeck, 1994). Single fish are therefore good cichlids for a community aquarium. More than one can be housed if the tank provides sufficient floor space for individual territories, and they are introduced at the same time--but peace may not last regardless.

If you want more than one, this will usually [there are always a few exceptions, the fish do not read the science texts about them but ichthyologists do know] only work with a bonded pair. These are not harem fish; the male selects his female and if she accepts, they will bond. This often lasts their lifetime, but not always [exception again]. But if they have selected each other and show signs of bonding within the tank of a group of the species (like in the store, or you can buy a group at let this play out at home but then getting rid of all but the pair may not be so simple), they are more likely to live together peacefully.

As I have been typing, another serious issue has arisen, the cories. Do not put either Corydoras pygmaeus or C. hastatus or C. habrosus in with either ram. The larger-sized cories are fine, they will be pushed and poked periodically, but this sort of aggressive dominance especially when the ram is mature is likely to cause issues for the tiny catfish. The Bolivian male I had in the 5-foot tank seemed to tolerate some species of cory but not others, at every feeding when inevitably cories would try to chow down on the ram's "food" selection. Spotted species were well and truly sent packing.

 

[Byron]

Just realized I neglected to mention the temperature issue. M. altispinosus is fine in the "normal" tropical range in the high 70's (24-26C). But M. ramirezi must have it very much warmer, in the range 82-86F (28-30C) and a lot of fish will not manage. No cories can live in this warm water long-term.

 

[threecharacters]

Neither species is "shoaling" in the accepted definition of the term. They are both cichlids and both are very, very territorial. A 29g tank, assuming this is the "standard" with 30-inch (75 cm) length, will house one male Bolivian, or a mated/bonded pair. Same holds for the Blue (common) ram species. They are not "social" like Corydoras, Botia, etc. Quite the opposite at least with the Bolivian Ram. Observations made in the habitat suggest that this species lives in solitude (individual fish alone) apart from reproduction periods (Linke & Staeck, 1994). Single fish are therefore good cichlids for a community aquarium. More than one can be housed if the tank provides sufficient floor space for individual territories, and they are introduced at the same time--but peace may not last regardless.

Interesting, that is entirely counter to the information on Seriously Fish entry for Mikrogeophagus altispinosus which says "M. altispinosus is a relatively gregarious cichlid and should ideally be maintained in a mixed-sex group of 6-8 or more."

In fact, essentially all profiles I can find online suggest Mikrogeophagus altispinosus is a gregarious species.

 

[Paulie B.]

The answer to the question in post #1 is, in short, no. I'll explain why in what follows to correct some misinformation in this thread.

First, the two species Mikrogeophagus ramirezi and M. altispinosus are not closely related to eartheaters although they are in the same family (cichlidae) and sub-family (Cichlinae) and tribe Geophaginae, and sub-tribe. The original description of M. ramirezi by Myers & Harry in 1948 placed this species in the Apistogramma genus of dwarf cichlids. Within ten years, ichthyologists realized that the fish had significant differences from the Apistogramma species, and it went through a series of genera including Microgeophagus, Pseudogeophagus, and Pseudoapistogramma. In 1977, a complete redefinition of the two "ram" species was made by the Swedish ichthyologist and cichlid authority Sven Kullander that established the name Papiliochromis for the two rams; scientific discussion again occurred in the late 1980's and in 1998 Kullander settled on Mikrogeophagus [with a "k"] and this is now the accepted valid name.
Originally described as Crenicara altispinosa by Haseman in 1911, for a time the Bolivian Ram was also considered in the genera Microgeophagus and Papiliochromis until 2003 when Kullander placed it in the re-established genus Mikrogeophagus along with the closely-related species M. ramirezi. These are the only species in this genus that was originally erected in 1968 by Meulengracht-Madsen.

The genus name derives from the Greek mikr [= small], geo [= earth] and phag [= eat], literally "small eartheater," but was chosen solely for the fish's method of eating, not genealogy.
[Kullander (2011) has a very full and detailed account of the taxonomy for those interested.]

As for the tank size, I would not recommend more than the one species (whichever) in a tank as small (to the fish) as here. A 4-foot tank might work...I say might because a male of either species is very likely to consider the entire tank "his." This played out with my lone Bolivian Ram in a 5-foot 115g tank.

Neither species is "shoaling" in the accepted definition of the term. They are both cichlids and both are very, very territorial. A 29g tank, assuming this is the "standard" with 30-inch (75 cm) length, will house one male Bolivian, or a mated/bonded pair. Same holds for the Blue (common) ram species. They are not "social" like Corydoras, Botia, etc. Quite the opposite at least with the Bolivian Ram. Observations made in the habitat suggest that this species lives in solitude (individual fish alone) apart from reproduction periods (Linke & Staeck, 1994). Single fish are therefore good cichlids for a community aquarium. More than one can be housed if the tank provides sufficient floor space for individual territories, and they are introduced at the same time--but peace may not last regardless.

If you want more than one, this will usually [there are always a few exceptions, the fish do not read the science texts about them but ichthyologists do know] only work with a bonded pair. These are not harem fish; the male selects his female and if she accepts, they will bond. This often lasts their lifetime, but not always [exception again]. But if they have selected each other and show signs of bonding within the tank of a group of the species (like in the store, or you can buy a group at let this play out at home but then getting rid of all but the pair may not be so simple), they are more likely to live together peacefully.

As I have been typing, another serious issue has arisen, the cories. Do not put either Corydoras pygmaeus or C. hastatus or C. habrosus in with either ram. The larger-sized cories are fine, they will be pushed and poked periodically, but this sort of aggressive dominance especially when the ram is mature is likely to cause issues for the tiny catfish. The Bolivian male I had in the 5-foot tank seemed to tolerate some species of cory but not others, at every feeding when inevitably cories would try to chow down on the ram's "food" selection. Spotted species were well and truly sent packing.

Ah, Byron. I could feel you lurking, waiting to foil my perfectly laid plans. Seriously though thanks for all the good info. A bonded pair should be easy enough to find around these parts if I'm willing to travel a bit. I'll look into it.

 

[itiwhetu]

The answer to the question in post #1 is, in short, no. I'll explain why in what follows to correct some misinformation in this thread.

First, the two species Mikrogeophagus ramirezi and M. altispinosus are not closely related to eartheaters although they are in the same family (cichlidae) and sub-family (Cichlinae) and tribe Geophaginae, and sub-tribe. The original description of M. ramirezi by Myers & Harry in 1948 placed this species in the Apistogramma genus of dwarf cichlids. Within ten years, ichthyologists realized that the fish had significant differences from the Apistogramma species, and it went through a series of genera including Microgeophagus, Pseudogeophagus, and Pseudoapistogramma. In 1977, a complete redefinition of the two "ram" species was made by the Swedish ichthyologist and cichlid authority Sven Kullander that established the name Papiliochromis for the two rams; scientific discussion again occurred in the late 1980's and in 1998 Kullander settled on Mikrogeophagus [with a "k"] and this is now the accepted valid name.
Originally described as Crenicara altispinosa by Haseman in 1911, for a time the Bolivian Ram was also considered in the genera Microgeophagus and Papiliochromis until 2003 when Kullander placed it in the re-established genus Mikrogeophagus along with the closely-related species M. ramirezi. These are the only species in this genus that was originally erected in 1968 by Meulengracht-Madsen.

The genus name derives from the Greek mikr [= small], geo [= earth] and phag [= eat], literally "small eartheater," but was chosen solely for the fish's method of eating, not genealogy.
[Kullander (2011) has a very full and detailed account of the taxonomy for those interested.]

As for the tank size, I would not recommend more than the one species (whichever) in a tank as small (to the fish) as here. A 4-foot tank might work...I say might because a male of either species is very likely to consider the entire tank "his." This played out with my lone Bolivian Ram in a 5-foot 115g tank.

Neither species is "shoaling" in the accepted definition of the term. They are both cichlids and both are very, very territorial. A 29g tank, assuming this is the "standard" with 30-inch (75 cm) length, will house one male Bolivian, or a mated/bonded pair. Same holds for the Blue (common) ram species. They are not "social" like Corydoras, Botia, etc. Quite the opposite at least with the Bolivian Ram. Observations made in the habitat suggest that this species lives in solitude (individual fish alone) apart from reproduction periods (Linke & Staeck, 1994). Single fish are therefore good cichlids for a community aquarium. More than one can be housed if the tank provides sufficient floor space for individual territories, and they are introduced at the same time--but peace may not last regardless.

If you want more than one, this will usually [there are always a few exceptions, the fish do not read the science texts about them but ichthyologists do know] only work with a bonded pair. These are not harem fish; the male selects his female and if she accepts, they will bond. This often lasts their lifetime, but not always [exception again]. But if they have selected each other and show signs of bonding within the tank of a group of the species (like in the store, or you can buy a group at let this play out at home but then getting rid of all but the pair may not be so simple), they are more likely to live together peacefully.

As I have been typing, another serious issue has arisen, the cories. Do not put either Corydoras pygmaeus or C. hastatus or C. habrosus in with either ram. The larger-sized cories are fine, they will be pushed and poked periodically, but this sort of aggressive dominance especially when the ram is mature is likely to cause issues for the tiny catfish. The Bolivian male I had in the 5-foot tank seemed to tolerate some species of cory but not others, at every feeding when inevitably cories would try to chow down on the ram's "food" selection. Spotted species were well and truly sent packing.

Have you kept both of these species, you seem very knowledgeable

 

[Byron]

Interesting, that is entirely counter to the information on Seriously Fish entry for Mikrogeophagus altispinosus which says "M. altispinosus is a relatively gregarious cichlid and should ideally be maintained in a mixed-sex group of 6-8 or more."

In fact, essentially all profiles I can find online suggest Mikrogeophagus altispinosus is a gregarious species.

If you could provide me with links to this data, I'd appreciate it. I seriously will look into it. As for SF, that is an old profile but I will check into that later and see if anything is amiss. The "live in solitude" was the observation of this species in the habitat, by Linke & Staeck. Habitat observations are always the best evidence. My own experience with this species has been along similar lines, though "experience" is not often the best evidence, as specific circumstances and/or individual fish can impact the behaviours and lead to a false conclusion.