🌟 Exclusive Amazon Black Friday Deals 2024 🌟

Don’t miss out on the best deals of the season! Shop now 🎁

Thoughts on L-519 pleco’s

Magnum Man

Supporting Member
Tank of the Month 🏆
Fish of the Month 🌟
Joined
Jun 21, 2023
Messages
3,905
Reaction score
2,746
Location
Southern MN
I seem to have a special spot in my heart, for these smaller varieties of suckers…

I have a spot I could add something new, in the algae eater department, and had been looking at 519’s for a while ( definitely wouldn’t be an impulse buy ) but lately have been seeing these fish, with no L designation, that I’m assuming are a hybrid 519, described as

German Honeycomb Bristlenose Pleco (Ancistrus sp. `WABENMUSTER`)​

They look very similar, but with heavier lines between the spots… curious if anyone has either????

This is the German Honeycomb…
1727526273848.jpeg


This is the 519… both are sellers pictures…
1727526336837.jpeg
 
This was a comment on Planet Catfish…


Ancistrus sp. Wabenmuster were originally imported as by-catch with other Ancistrus specimens, so locality data is unavailable and it is currently impossible to identify them as a species. Their common name refers to the honeycomb color pattern covering the body, which is actually rather common among several types of Ancistrus. Specimens available for sale are typically not imported but are bred and traded among fish keepers.
 
Not exactly sure, of what above is saying… maybe, that these are likely 519’s, but because they were in a batch of already caught fish, away from their native habitat, they couldn’t be identified properly, as 519’s so they could be a different variety… and at this point, I’m not sure if the heavier pattern, is from the particular fish, or the variety???
 
Do folks understand what the L numbers are?

As more and more different looking plecos were discovered and not yet formally identified, they needed a way to give them an "identification" before being given a species name resulting from their being formally identified. So the L number system was created as a temporary identification system. Once a given species has been formally identified and it has a species name, the L number should be discarded. The problem is fish keepers often prefer the L number to the name.

The L-number system is a semi-scientific classification system of catfish based on photographs of shipments of tropical catfish of the family Loricariidae published by the German aquarium magazine DATZ (Die Aquarien- und Terrarienzeitschrift (The Aquarium and Terrarium Magazine)). The first L-number was published in 1988.

An L-number is not a formal scientific designation, but it allows people to identify various loricariid catfish by a "common name" before the fish is officially described. When a loricariid receives an official scientific name, the L-number (or numbers) is retired;[1] best practice is then to use the scientific name.

A specific L-number classification does not guarantee a discrete species, multiple L numbers have been given to different populations of the same species. To add to the confusion, sometimes a single L-number may be used for multiple species.

Additionally the aquarium magazine 'Das Aquarium' introduced a similar system using the prefix 'LDA

It gets more interesting as science gets involved:

The Rio Xingu is home to a bewildering array of pleco species, many of which have been in the aquarium hobby for decades now. Despite this fact, the relationships between these species’ complexes are still poorly understood, and relatively few are described scientifically. In a paper published earlier this year, the genetics of several species of Hypancistrus from the region were analyzed to help clarify their relationships to one another. Based on this analysis, the authors concluded that two forms of Hypancistrus well known in the hobby—L066 and L333—are in fact differently marked variants (phenotypes) of the same species.
from https://www.amazonasmagazine.com/20...ates-xingu-plecos-l066-l333-are-same-species/

The paper was mentioned in a thread on PlanetCatfish in the Taxonomy & Science News sub-forum. So I read the paper. One of the criticisms of the paper is that it did not dig deeply enough into tall the genetics for the conclusion not to be refuted in the future. Here is the thread on PC https://www.planetcatfish.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=297377&hilit=L066+and+L333#p297377
 

Most reactions

Back
Top