# male or femal acaras



## fishyink (Mar 24, 2006)

hi, i have to acara's, i think i got either 2 males or 2 femals but i am unsure. can some one please tell me weather i got 2 males or 2 females or hopefully a pair! cheers for your help

these are the best i could get atm ... if cant identify of these i will try get some better ones =)


----------



## SinisterKisses (Feb 24, 2004)

Well, they're not acaras in the sense you may think they are...they're in the "acara" family, but they're silver saums. Hard to tell sex, but it looks like you may have two males.


----------



## bernie comeau (Feb 19, 2007)

Those are not silversaums. They are WHITEsaums -----same thing as a goldsaum; in fact seing that they are young fish, their tails may still end up turning gold or orange-ish with time. They do not have the right scale coloration pattern for a silversaum, nor the right fin trim. Nevertheless, all these fishes are usually known as a Green terror, rather then as a 'saum'.

And yes, as a larger group, these types of fishes ( Genus Aequidens, Cichlasoma, and Krobia ) are often refferred to as a Acaras ----the very old genus name that is still used today as a common name.

I would think they are male as well, though they are young enough that it is hard to be absolutely certain.


----------



## dwarfpike (Jan 22, 2008)

Wow, so many things I could say .... 

But I'll leave it with nice silversaums!! (using the common name for them all of the US and BC, not as a comment to their species).


----------



## bernie comeau (Feb 19, 2007)

dwarfpike said:


> Wow, so many things I could say ....
> 
> But I'll leave it with nice silversaums!! (using the common name for them all of the US and BC, not as a comment to their species).


Yeah, I guess as a common name this fish probably goes by that :lol: I know these fish are young, and all these saums are very similar fishes but I certainly do not beleive that the fish in question is the same strain (Or species if you want to call it that ) as in the C-F profile Aequidens sp. "silversaum" :

http://www.cichlid-forum.com/profiles/species.php?id=2437

IN other words the fish in question is a goldsaum with a whitish colored fin trim, nothing unusual! If you were to order a silver saum from an importer, from the correct locale, it would be a diiferent fish.

A white fin trim on a goldsaum is not unusual especially for younger fish or females; less common though on mature males. Look at the C-F profile Aequidens sp. "goldsaum", scroll down to # 6 picture, and note the WHITE trim on this males fins:

http://www.cichlid-forum.com/profiles/species.php?id=502


----------



## dwarfpike (Jan 22, 2008)

Hey *bernie* ... I just didn't want it to drag into another whole 'which is the real green terror' debate. :lol:

The fish pictured in the profile you linked for 'silversaum' is the species Alf Stalsberg believes is the oringally imported 'Green Terror' (though many disagree) and he calls 'silbersaum' which many think is just the European spelling, but on his page he lists both 'silversaum' as well as 'silbersaum' ... both being differant species.

I am with you in thinking the three common saums (gold, silver, red) will probably be the same species, but am waiting until they get hashed out by the scientists. After all, I didn't think there would be four convicts, and some of them seem to have less differances than those 3 saums. After all, they don't even have a current genus atm, being orphaned when Kullander restricted _Aequidens_ to the 'true acara' group. GT's (all 3-5 species depending on whom/what you believe) are in the 'blue acara' group, which is presently orphaned.

Alf's 'silbersaum' is deffinately a differant species from the other saums as well as _'Aequidens' rivulatus_. The whole group needs work desperately!!!

You are right in that the GT's are in the Acara grouping, though the port cichlids _Cichlasoma_ aren't. Remember only a few were ever in _Aequidens_, most were in _Cichlasoma_ to begin with. The only reason those few species were in _Aequidens_ was because of anal fin counts. If you believe in Kullanders division of the South American species, then by default _Cichlasoma_ would be in the Cichlasomine group, not the Acara group despite common names. In fact they are regarded as the baseline Cichlasomines. Personally, I do believe the ports were the jumping point the acaras evolved from, but that's just my personal opinion.

Sorry, I do love the science behind the genus splitting and groups, even when I don't agree with them!!! ((ie Kullander recent due to DNA testing removed _Retroculus_ from the Geophagine group!!!! Appearantly the DNA says they are much closer to the baseline Cichlasomines (aka ports) and the shape/gill arch rakers are a result of covergant evolution insteald of direct evolution!!! :? ))

PS: Sorry OP, I tend to get carried away sometimes. Again, they are beautiful fish. The only GT's I've owned have been silversaums, I prefer the white borders over the orange. How large are they? Might help with sexing.


----------



## bernie comeau (Feb 19, 2007)

dwarfpike said:


> Hey *bernie* ...
> 
> You are right in that the GT's are in the Acara grouping, though the port cichlids _Cichlasoma_ aren't.


I know this is a little off topic, from the identity and sex of the fish in question :lol: But I can't see why fishes that have been known as Port Acaras, for decades and decades would still not be seen or known to be an Acara. After all the true port was originally described as Acara portelgrensis, then became Aequidens portelgrensis after the Acara genus became defunct, and only became Cichlasoma portalgrensis after the kullander revision in the 80"s. Because portalgrensis was very closely related to the black acara, Cichlasoma bimaculatum, which was the first Cichlasoma described, it then became a Cichlasoma. A black acara by the way, was also commonly known in the hobby as a port acara as well, rather then black acara. Anyways, today Cichlasoma is a genus of Acaras, and NOT CA heroine (as it mostly was in the past) :lol:


----------



## bernie comeau (Feb 19, 2007)

I apologize to the OP for going off topic :lol: but i need to rephrase my last post.

It is VERY much my understanding that Cichlasoma is 'sister' to Aequidens, Krobia and Laetacara. Closely related geunses. And more distant from Austroloheros ( chanchittos) , Heros ( severums) and Mesaunata ( festivums) (all what used to be known as SA Cichlasomas) and even more distant from CA heroine.

Someone correct me If i am wrong.


----------



## bernie comeau (Feb 19, 2007)

dwarfpike said:


> Remember only a few were ever in _Aequidens_, most were in _Cichlasoma_ to begin with. The only reason those few species were in _Aequidens_ was because of anal fin counts.


 Just noticed this so I have to respond to this because it is not really true. Only ONE port was originally in Cichlasoma ----- Cichlasoma bimaculatum. The type species of Cichlasoma. Only 3 species before the Kullander revision. ALL others either were removed from Aequidens and placed in Cichlasoma or have been described SINCE the revision. They are newly described species from what was formerly seen as another Aequidens species or a newly discovered unknown species.

You can look at it the other way around: the only reason C. bimaculatum was in a genus with CA heroine is because it was a peculiar Acara in having 4 or more anal spines ----- all the other Cichlasomas do not!


----------



## bernie comeau (Feb 19, 2007)

Could a mod please delete my last 3 posts as I am VERY, VERY off topic :lol: . If i want to continue the discussion I should PM.


----------



## fishyink (Mar 24, 2006)

the LFS down here, they sold them as a pair(m & f) and told me they were green acaras (gt's) maybe the fish i got are cross bread ?, read that thats comon

i have got a reputable fish shop to order in 2 pair's of blue acaras so i will see how i go with them =) ill post pics up to see what u guys think. i have 2 featherfin catfish a pleco and a lge clownloach, and the acaras are gona be the feature fish when they get bigger.

4 acaras should be allright in a 280l tank ? 3ft wide, 2 ft deep and 2.8ft high


----------



## dwarfpike (Jan 22, 2008)

They deffinately aren't green acaras (_'Aequidens' sapayensis_) and are most deffinately green terrors, specifically the kind known most commonly as 'silversaums.'

I wouldn't get the blue acaras, they are close enough the green terrors might harass them. Actually, given the size of your tank ... that pair of green terrors will claim the whole thing cichlid-wise, and even the cats and loach might be in trouble. These fish will get at least 8", some males have been known to get up to 10" or even 12"/30cm.


----------



## fishyink (Mar 24, 2006)

im gona trade the green terrors in, so with 4 blue acaras, 2 featherfins(large and are bullys), xlarge clownlaoch and pleco. will these be allright together ?. if the featherfins get attacked i got another tank i can put them in, i was thinking just acaras even though ther awsome when they get bigger, might be a little boring thats why im thinking to keep the featherfins and pleco and loach in ther aswell


----------



## dwarfpike (Jan 22, 2008)

I've kept a breeding pair of blue acaras in a 3'x18" tank before, I couldn't keep other cichlids with them. The catfish would hide at the far end of the tank while they were tending the fry (had a rapheal cat and pleco).


----------

