# Melanochromis auratus males



## AC (Jul 26, 2010)

I am perplexed by the identification of these fish.

At the profile section in this forum one can review photos and see what I am questioning.

http://www.cichlid-forum.com/profiles/s ... php?id=750

When I purchased my fish as extreme juev's (appx 1") I bought what I thought was three different species of melanochromis.

According to the profile I linked above, I have two males of the same species, yet they are remarkably different.

I mark the differences as being similar to the differences between a brook trout and a brown trout as an analogy.

I don't see how these two males can be the same species....

I'll post some pics in different stages to show what I am talking about.


----------



## Kanorin (Apr 8, 2008)

Please post some pictures of your two different males. It's common that only a single dominant male of a species will attain full color in a tank. Subdominant males often only undergo partial color change. So they often look something in between a male and a female. Is this what you observe?


----------



## AC (Jul 26, 2010)

Here is male #1 at about 1"-1.5" on or about July 4th.










Here is male #2 at the same time and period.

Within about a week male #2 began color transformation after show downs with male #1.


----------



## AC (Jul 26, 2010)

This is male #2 about 1 week ago.

He was separated from the other into another tank.

There was no distinct color changes after that.


----------



## AC (Jul 26, 2010)

Here is male #1 about a week ago too.

While he has become more colorful, he hasn't really changed all that much.


----------



## AC (Jul 26, 2010)

Another pic of Male #1 taken at the same time as the previous.

This pic just shows the golden flash of it's upper body a little better.


----------



## AC (Jul 26, 2010)

Kanorin said:


> Please post some pictures of your two different males. It's common that only a single dominant male of a species will attain full color in a tank. Subdominant males often only undergo partial color change. So they often look something in between a male and a female. Is this what you observe?


No what I have observed is two distinctly different fish of the same genus, but are both identified as the same species.

Male 1 has never really changed at all.

He is as he was as a fry.

Male 2 has changed, but not anything similar to male two.

Yet they are still classed as the same species...


----------



## bernie comeau (Feb 19, 2007)

Need more, and better pics of male #2. Could very well be M. chipokae or even a mix of the 2.


----------



## AC (Jul 26, 2010)

I just tried to take some more pics of male 2.

He is very difficult to get shots of.

He's extremely camera shy.

However, the very same issues I am pointing out with my two fish is also displayed in the profile section of this forum http://www.cichlid-forum.com/profiles/s ... php?id=750.

If you look through the photos in this profile they show the two very different males as both m. auratis.

I had seen on another site somewhere where there is actually three species of this yellow and black auratis.

the defining characteristics between them was the barring in their tales, with one of the three growing a little larger body size.

I'll see if i can find that link again also.


----------



## AC (Jul 26, 2010)

Taken with flash which brings out the blue which is not visible under normal lighting.










Taken without flash


----------



## Fogelhund (Dec 3, 2002)

Both look like normal auratus to me... at least from these pictures.


----------



## AC (Jul 26, 2010)

I appreciate your response and I agree that they both look like the auratus males from the profile section here on the board.

What I am really questioning here is how the auratus males can have two very different types of males in the species.

I just used pics of my fish as an example because I have been witnessing this and kinda perplexed by it for about 4 months.

Male 1 was his basic appearance and coloration from early juev.

Male 2 was yellow and black as a juev and turned black with a blue stripe.

They are remarkably different throughout comparable life stages.

The only thing that would make sense to me would be that males like male 2 have Melanochromis parallelus in their genetic history.


----------



## mbuna77 (Aug 25, 2010)

My two males look exactly alike, but I have seen other males that look quite a bit different. So I don't think you have anything to worry about.


----------



## AC (Jul 26, 2010)

I'm not really worried.

At this point I have no females of this species.

This whole hybrid thing that people talk about and can be rather fanatical about is interesting to explore from just a conversation point though...

My thoughts are that if the fish can cross breed in aquariums they can and have been doing it in the wild.

Probably for thousands of years since these lakes are very ancient lakes.

So many of the species we are worrying about keeping pure are actually hybrids to begin with.

That would also explain why so many of the various species are very similar to another...


----------



## Fogelhund (Dec 3, 2002)

Male 1 adopted his colouration very early, he would have been just like Male 2 at some point, predominantly yellow.


----------



## Kanorin (Apr 8, 2008)

AC said:


> My thoughts are that if the fish can cross breed in aquariums they can and have been doing it in the wild.


You are mistaken. 
Each species of malawi mbuna (as well as haps and peacocks) inhabits just a select region or a few select regions of the lake. Likely, this area is less than one-thousandth of one percent for most species. Furthermore, within each region of the lake, there are different habitats such as Rocky, substrate, intermediate zone, deeper than 20 meters, etc.

Just because two fish will mate in the aquarium does not mean they ever have the chance to do so in the wild.

Most of the time that we mix species in our fish tanks, the fish would never see each other in the wild barring some crazy changes in the lake geology (which does happen, albeit very very rarely).



AC said:


> So many of the species we are worrying about keeping pure are actually hybrids to begin with.


What? Please explain what you mean. 
There are biologists who spend literally years studying and perfecting (and they aren't perfect, but they use the data the best they can) the classification of these fish. Be careful what you say.


----------



## AC (Jul 26, 2010)

I can believe that, Fogelhound.

The one I am calling male two actually started his color change very shortly after being housed with male 1.

I bought all of my fish at wallyworld.

I went to one store and cleared out their tank, then drove to another about 8 miles away and cleared out their tank.

These two are from separate store tanks.

When brought home and housed together, the change began in a matter of days.

At first I thought it was from being harassed and a result of stress.

i found an article shortly after and learned what was really going on....


----------



## AC (Jul 26, 2010)

As far as explaining what I meant by hybridization you have to look at it over the course of thousands of years.

Just because biologists have identified a particular species at some point in time in the last 50 years does not mean that it's origins aren't the result of hybridization 1000 or 20000 years ago, or even a couple hundred years ago for that matter.


----------



## Kanorin (Apr 8, 2008)

AC said:


> As far as explaining what I meant by hybridization you have to look at it over the course of thousands of years.
> 
> Just because biologists have identified a particular species at some point in time in the last 50 years does not mean that it's origins aren't the result of hybridization 1000 or 20000 years ago, or even a couple hundred years ago for that matter.


All animal life on this planet shares a common single-celled organism as an ancestor. Does that mean that humans are the same species as yeast? No. 
Are we related to yeast? Yes.

Similarly, all cichlids in lake Malawi are very closely related. In fact, most of the species diversity happened quite recently compared to most animals.

And you are right that over the course of thousands of years, an ancestor species A probably mated with ancestor species B and C - likely in response to some shift in lake geology or habitats. This was a natural course of events and the offspring which were most fit to survive in the newly changed habitat survived and eventually spun off and is now it's own species.

However, I do not buy the argument that just because some hybridization has occurred in nature over tens of thousands of years, that we can crossbreed different species of fish in our tank and call it _*"natural"*_.


----------



## AC (Jul 26, 2010)

It wouldn't really even need a shift in lake geology for it to happen although that could help create a boom in species variations at one time.

Other things as simple as food source decline could cause fish to move to another area too.

Fish are somewhat strange in that some species will most likely stick to a given area, but a small amount of them will be well traveled.

I've seen this in studies done by tagging and tracking game fish in the states here.

For instance one study I recall large mouth bass were generally contained within about a 400 yd radius of where they were born in a given lake, but a few were found to travel the entire lake.

Another where muskellunge that was tracked regularly feeding over a 17 mile stretch of the Miss. river.

The amount of species contained within these African lakes is so much greater than what is found in the Great Lakes for example that the mouth brooding and ability to cross brood seems to be a logical root.

I can show you photos of fossil fish that are 50-75 thousand years old and from the skeletal remains we can see where they are related to and very similar to modern species.

4 thousand years is not really a long time in the evolutionary period...


----------



## bernie comeau (Feb 19, 2007)

Can't say I have ever seen a male auratus look quite like your male #2, but it may very well be a male auratus. Though I would think it tough to rule out the possibility of a cross with another Melanochromis---- M. parrallesus(?) or M.chipokae(?)---- the yellow on the tail and blue stripe is reminiscent of some chipokae.

Likely there have been more then one variant of auratus imported from lake Malawi though it was my understanding that the species is fairly wide spread and not generally as isolated as many species of mbuna(?).And the fact that it has been in the hobby for a long time; since early '60's at least. Given the fact that the vast majority of fry do not survive and grow up to reproduce in the wild (a population generally stays at an equilibrium), right from the start, an aquarium population goes in a different genetic direction then it would under natural selection. lot's of opportunity, over the course of about 50 years or so, to get some different looking fish.

Not meaning to throw a wrench into the conversation, but there is always a chance that male#2 is actually a female. As Loisselle notes in his article, masculinization of female Melanochromis is not unusual:http://www.cichlidae.com/article.php?id=80

These are pics of my 2 females. they are KNOWN females as both have held numerous times.The larger female #1 has been this color for many months, while the smaller has just changed over the course of the last 2 days.

Female#1:









Female#2:


















Both females:









Here's a couple pics of my male for comparison. He's significantly smaller then female #1 but still top dog amongst my mbuna (she's #2 amongst my mbuna).



















Strangely enough, my other auratus in this tank has female colors but I beleive it to be a male that has yet to change colors:


----------



## AC (Jul 26, 2010)

Now _that_ is interesting...

I realize we are all hypothesizing and so on here so I am interested in your opinion on this aspect.

When I housed the two I have together, the one I am calling male 1 began chasing the other relentlessly around the tank, but not really fight at all.

Male 2 was also very very active.

They were fun to watch together because as they were growing one would beef up a little over the other and seem to gain an advantage for a day or two until the other caught up or overcame that size.

Male 1 seemed to be the most instagating of the two though...

I seperated them fearing that one was going to get chewed up sooner or later.

Maybe I should put them both in the 125 together for a while and see what happens.

As far as the female having male coloration I seem to have a johanni (I think that is the species) that is female and has the male blue and black colors too.

In fact, I have a pic of her holding.

She spit her fry last week.

I've also read where some of these fish can actually change genders based upon a population in order to breed and others can self fertalize just as some reptiles can.

Any truth to that?


----------



## bernie comeau (Feb 19, 2007)

AC said:


> I've also read where some of these fish can actually change genders based upon a population in order to breed and others can self fertalize just as some reptiles can.
> 
> Any truth to that?


Self fertilization is not possible for a cichlid --- not too sure if it is even possible for any fish.
No, no evidence, whatsoever, that cichlids can change gender, beyond the fry or very young juvie stage. Cichlids are not really born one sex or another, but the sex of a cichlid developes at a very young age. No eveidence that one can reverse sex at a later age, once a fish becomes a male or female. Methyl testosterone is used in Tilapia aquaculture to change entire broods to almost 100% male -----but that only works at the fry stage. At later stages, methyl testosterone will only make females grow faster; not change their sex. pH has been shown to affect sex ratios of many cichlids (eg. convict cichlid), though pH will NOT change the sex of a cichlid at later ages. Social heiarchy has been shown to determine sex in the midas cichlid, though again, the pecking order will not reverse the sex of a midas cichlid beyond the very young juvie stage.

Interestingly enough, in Tilapia experiments, these methyl testosterone altered females exhibit the male phenotype and breed like males but are actually, genetically female. When these methyl testosterone females are crossed with a regular female they produce all female broods (XX crossed with XX = all female). 
Anyways, as Loiselle notes, Melanochromis females that take on more male colors are still recognized by the male, as females. They are not seen or treated any differently then females with the more 'typical' female coloration.
Not too sure it's a good idea to put your auratuses back together -----you'd have to make sure they are able to tolerate each other and that their is suffecient secondary targets so they do not focus solely apon themselves. It's usually much easier to have success with a larger numbers of auratus in the same tank tank, then just 2.


----------



## AC (Jul 26, 2010)

bernie comeau said:


> AC said:
> 
> 
> > I've also read where some of these fish can actually change genders based upon a population in order to breed and others can self fertalize just as some reptiles can.
> ...


Have you seen this article published from a controlled experiment done at Penn State?



> Sex reversal in the Lake Malawi cichlid, Metriaclima cf. livingstoni, was documented. A functional male in an aquarium was separated from three functional females by a divider of clear PlexiglasÃ‚Â® sealed to tank walls. After the male was removed, one of the functional females developed male secondary sexual characteristics and fertilized eggs produced by the other females. In a second experiment, 6Ã¢â‚¬â€œ7 functional females were placed in tanks without males. Again, sex change was noted with one of the former females fertilizing several broods.


http://www.asihcopeiaonline.org/doi/abs ... /CG-06-143

There is also this article to consider.



> The isolation experiment tested the hypothesis that female C. punctulata would change sex without the presence of conspecifics. After social isolation, females that were previously dominant among a group of females in a male harem developed male secondary sexual characteristics. Histological analysis revealed that these individuals possessed testes, whereas all dominant females examined possessed mature ovaries. The results from behavioral, isolation, and histological portions of this project strongly suggest that C. punctulata is a protogynous sequential hermaphrodite, at least in captivity.


http://www.bioone.org/doi/abs/10.1643/0 ... lCode=cope

I couldn't find any documentation of protandry which is what your auratis colony could possibly suggest.


----------



## AC (Jul 26, 2010)

Kanorin said:


> Just because two fish will mate in the aquarium does not mean they ever have the chance to do so in the wild.


Here is an article that you may find interesting.

The jist of it is that almost all the shellies from Lake Tan. are the result of hybridization in the wild.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1790888

In searching articles last night I also found one in which I lost the link to that studied breeding habits of the cichlids.

It found that females selected the males by color and in trials to promote hybridization in a labratory the ratio was 7:1 in the female chosing the approriate male over others based on color.

It also stated that hybridization does occur in the wild, but most often at depths where color is not as visible or where specific species of the needed sex do not exist for whatever reason.

When I have some time I will try to find that link again for you.

One of the thoughts I had was that hobbyists and breeders could use that info to limit the possibility of hybridization when chosing tanks mates...

I just can't torture my eyes anymore this AM.

I thought I had bookmarked it...


----------



## DJRansome (Oct 29, 2005)

There was a recent article by respected authorities about gender changing in mbuna. It happened in a controlled tank experiment. This is pretty amazing since for years it was completely accepted that this was impossible. I'm not expecting it to happen in my tank any time soon.

I was reading a travel-log by a well-known cichlid enthusiast who travels to Lake Malawi for 2 months of diving every year with Ad Konings and others. He stated that in 10 years of diving and over 500 dives he has seen a single hybrid on one occasion.

It is thought that cichlids in Lake Malawi originated from a single ancestor (or a very small number, depending on who you read) and as fish were isolated by geographical features (the water level dropped) they evolved separately. That is why Lake Malawi fans try to preserve the separate species...it's so unique and we want to preserve it.


----------



## AC (Jul 26, 2010)

A few of the articles I read last night on species hybridization talked in depth about the F1 hybrid generations and why they are very often not succesful in the wild.

It was related that often they lose neccesary traits both physical and adaptative for survival in the environment.

I understand why people want to preserve blood lines.

It's really not that different than pedigree dog breeding in some ways.

At the same time, I could not fault a person for putting in the time and effort to create a hobbyist hybrid that was very special and unique.

And it would take a lot of time and effort to really create a new species through hybridization.

There is accidental occurance, and then there is repeating it over and over....

Some that are sold now are already hobbyist hybrids, correct?


----------



## AC (Jul 26, 2010)

I also wanted to add that the one study I mentioned where females chose appropriate males by color in a ratio of 7:3 (70% of the time) also would explain why the diver wouldn't see very many along with the F1 generation short comings.

From that study, we should be able to limit the possibility of hybridization by keeping colors balanced and appropriate lighting in tanks.

One thing I did not see mentioned in the study was if they actually tried to confuse the female with two similar colored males.


----------



## mbuna77 (Aug 25, 2010)

There's a quite a few well known hybrids in the hobby from central or south american cichlids. In my short time dealing with and learning about africans is that most african cichlids breeders are focused more on preserving what nature gave them. Not so much on creating a hybrid no matter how colorful it may be. The biggest things with hybrids is that fry can take on the appereance of one of the parents without showing traits of the other. So if these hybrids get leaked out it causes problems for serious breeders. For example if a lab and a red zebra cross the fry could look just like a regular yellow lab for the most part. If these are bought by a breeder that is unaware of their background he breeds them and the next generation may show some more traits of the red zebras or god only knows what. I agree with most of the guys on here hybrids should not be produced and if they are by accident keep them to yourself. If nature produces a hybrids then that's evolution. If we in the hobby create a hybrid we're now playing god. Let's take what we were given by nature and be happy and preserve it. Let's not be conducting science experiments in our fish tanks. Just my two cents!


----------



## AC (Jul 26, 2010)

Do you eat tomatoes or tomato products?



Sorry, I couldn't resist.

I'll go to my room now.


----------



## mbuna77 (Aug 25, 2010)

Actually I don't but it's all good. I'm just not a fan of man made hybrids concerning fish. But that's my opinion and we all know what opinions are like.


----------



## AC (Jul 26, 2010)

You never eat pizza?



I think I'm 'getting' that hybridization is such a hot topic that it can't really be discussed as openly and matter of fact like as it should be.

It is one of the factors in evolution and really a part of the process that people like me have to understand and think about when venturing into waters like this.


----------



## 702Cichlid (Feb 28, 2010)

Just chiming in because this subject interested me so much. I've done some research and found that you may just have two different collection points of Auratus. The link goes to a french site but they show males and females of M. Auratus from different collection points which may explain why your two males look a little different. More specifically, i think male #2 looks like Likoma Island, while male #1 looks more like a Thumbi West Island.

http://www.malawi-dream.info/Melanochromis_auratus.htm


----------



## bernie comeau (Feb 19, 2007)

Thanxs AC, for the links to the abstracts. I stand corrected. I learnt something new this morning :thumb: I guess it sort of makes sense given the fact that cichlids are not really born one sex or the other but develope as a male or female from early age. I suspect, though, that sex reversal after adult stage is not a common occurence for most cichlid species ---- otherwise aquarists would be seeing it in many of their breeding cichlids.

No, I don't beleive, that my auratuses are an example of protandy.Could be, but as Loiselle notes, it is not uncommon for female Melanochromis to take on male or somewhat -male coloration, especially when holding. Male coloration in auratus may very well have more to do with the fishes place with in the heirarchy of a tank, as well as other unknown variables, rather then simply being male coloration.. Enviromental ---a reaction to particular situations and conditions the fish is put under. My male auratus has no problem recognizing these dark females as females, and displays and interacts with them as if they are females. The females, on the other hand, have no problem producing egg, and holding them in their mouth.

Getting back to your male #2, it does have an egg spot -----something my 2 feamales do not pocess. I'm sure it's not a full proof way to tell the sexes apart but I would sort of suspect it's the norm for male auratus to pocess an egg spot(s) and for females auratus to lack one.


----------



## bernie comeau (Feb 19, 2007)

702Cichlid said:


> different collection points of Auratus.


That's a good link; shows a number of different variants. The young male from Likoma island, with it's blue stripe and lack of light coloration below the dorsal, would apear to be a fairly close fit with AC's male#2.

Edit: I see after re-reading 702's post that he/she has come to the same conclusion that male#2 resembles the Likoma island strain. It's neat to see the different strains of auratus side by side because I wasn't even too sure of their existence: I was of the understanding that the species could also be found in sandy areas(?) and that sandy areas were not much of a barrier for this species. Therefore, unlike most mbuna, populations were not as geographically isloated(?). But that is off the top of my head from reading done many years ago; I could be confusing it with another species of Melanochromis(?).


----------



## Kanorin (Apr 8, 2008)

> For instance one study I recall large mouth bass were generally contained within about a 400 yd radius of where they were born in a given lake, but a few were found to travel the entire lake.
> 
> Another where muskellunge that was tracked regularly feeding over a 17 mile stretch of the Miss. river.





> The jist of it is that almost all the shellies from Lake Tan. are the result of hybridization in the wild.
> 
> http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1790888


I'm all for discussing facts, but you are comparing apples to oranges. We are talking about mbuna from lake malawi. I don't see how large-mouth bass studies proves anything about mbuna. There are species of fish which migrate hundreds of miles - mbuna are not among these.



> The amount of species contained within these African lakes is so much greater than what is found in the Great Lakes for example that the mouth brooding and ability to cross brood seems to be a logical root.


Actually, the main reason why there are more species of mbuna in lake malawi is because there are hundreds of isolated reefs (rocky shallows). Mbuna are specialized for feeding and breeding among the rocks - there are only a few species which you will ever see over the open sand. Thus, there is little to no migrating of mbuna between reefs unless they are very close.

Really the only appreciable moment when hybridization occurs is once every couple of hundred years when the lake geology shifts or the water level drastically changes. Now all of a sudden reef A and reef B become connected. Likely, there will be a drastic increase in the hybridization of two previously separate species. If and only if those offspring are fit to survive, then the gene pools of species A and species B merge and a new "hybrid species forms. I'm sure this has happened in lake malawi, but I'm willing to bet it's the exception and not the rule.

Also during these times of water level change a single reef A can split into two isolated reefs B and C. In this case, one species will eventually become several. This is probably the main way that speciation occurs in fish which live in isolated rocky reefs such as lake malawi.

I found the study on Tanganyikan shellies interesting, but shellies live in shells in the open sand. Their habitats are not fragmented like the isolated reefs of mbuna.

Hybrids are a bit of a touchy subject. Some people don't mind keeping hybrid fish because there are some combinations that are very appealing and colorful. Other people, to quote DJRansome, really want to "recreate a slice of the lake" and mimic - as close as they possibly can - a natural rocky lake biotype.

The main problems with hybrids are not about their creation or their existence, but how they trickle into the petstores often mislabeled as characterized species. There are a dozen or more posts each month from people who go to the petstore and purchase mislabeled hybrid fish. I recall a post about someone who did their research on fish behaviors and purchased what they believed to be a group of yellow labs to keep with their peacocks. Then, to their dismay, the "yellow labs" rip the peacocks to shreds because they are actually hybrid yellow-lab zebras and are much more aggressive.


----------



## AC (Jul 26, 2010)

702Cichlid said:


> Just chiming in because this subject interested me so much. I've done some research and found that you may just have two different collection points of Auratus. The link goes to a french site but they show males and females of M. Auratus from different collection points which may explain why your two males look a little different. More specifically, i think male #2 looks like Likoma Island, while male #1 looks more like a Thumbi West Island.
> 
> http://www.malawi-dream.info/Melanochromis_auratus.htm


I came across some links to that site during my google searches yesterday and passed over it because of the language issue knowing that at another time I could come back and use google page transaltor.

I appreciate you pointing out that a very plausable explanation to some of my questioning lies within that site.


----------



## AC (Jul 26, 2010)

> I'm all for discussing facts, but you are comparing apples to oranges. We are talking about mbuna from lake malawi. I don't see how large-mouth bass studies proves anything about mbuna. There are species of fish which migrate hundreds of miles - mbuna are not among these.


Bringing that up was not meant to prove anything.

It was only meant to open one's mind to the possibility.



> Really the only appreciable moment when hybridization occurs is once every couple of hundred years when the lake geology shifts or the water level drastically changes


Given that I am now seeing that estimated ages of the lake range from .5My to .7My that is quite a lot of opportunity over the life of the lake.

Combining the two factors of periodic hybridization followed by periods of geographic seperation as a workable theory seems to me much more sound at this point.



> The main problems with hybrids are not about their creation or their existence, but how they trickle into the petstores often mislabeled as characterized species. There are a dozen or more posts each month from people who go to the petstore and purchase mislabeled hybrid fish. I recall a post about someone who did their research on fish behaviors and purchased what they believed to be a group of yellow labs to keep with their peacocks. Then, to their dismay, the "yellow labs" rip the peacocks to shreds because they are actually hybrid yellow-lab zebras and are much more aggressive.


I agree that is a problem.


----------



## AC (Jul 26, 2010)

bernie comeau said:


> Thanxs AC, for the links to the abstracts. I stand corrected. I learnt something new this morning :thumb: I guess it sort of makes sense given the fact that cichlids are not really born one sex or the other but develope as a male or female from early age. I suspect, though, that sex reversal after adult stage is not a common occurence for most cichlid species ---- otherwise aquarists would be seeing it in many of their breeding cichlids.
> 
> No, I don't beleive, that my auratuses are an example of protandy.Could be, but as Loiselle notes, it is not uncommon for female Melanochromis to take on male or somewhat -male coloration, especially when holding. Male coloration in auratus may very well have more to do with the fishes place with in the heirarchy of a tank, as well as other unknown variables, rather then simply being male coloration.. Enviromental ---a reaction to particular situations and conditions the fish is put under. My male auratus has no problem recognizing these dark females as females, and displays and interacts with them as if they are females. The females, on the other hand, have no problem producing egg, and holding them in their mouth.
> 
> Getting back to your male #2, it does have an egg spot -----something my 2 feamales do not pocess. I'm sure it's not a full proof way to tell the sexes apart but I would sort of suspect it's the norm for male auratus to pocess an egg spot(s) and for females auratus to lack one.


I think progyny and protandry are very fascinating aspects of nature.

I think it is probably latent in the cichlids.

Left over from evolutionary survival of the species traits.

Fish are the only vertebrate that display this ability.

The gobbi goes back and forth throughout life...

Right now, after reading some of what you have posted and some of what I have found in search of answers I think that protandry is worth exploring in the melanochromis at least on the experimental level such has been done finding progyny already.

I appreciate the references to Loiselle and his observations.

What I am not clear on is if his findings and conclusions all come from simple observation or more in depth exploration including controlled environmental experiments and physical disection in order to draw conclusions.


----------



## AC (Jul 26, 2010)

Just to chum the waters a little on protandry...

8)


----------



## bernie comeau (Feb 19, 2007)

AC said:


> What I am not clear on is if his findings and conclusions all come from simple observation or more in depth exploration including controlled environmental experiments and physical disection in order to draw conclusions.


I would suppose probably simple observation, as this was part of a series of articles he wrote 30 years ago for FAMA. As a kid, I rember his articles quite well, and actually got a subscription to the magazine, after borrowing FAMA magazines from our local aquarium society, because of his articles. Anyways, I really don't know if any disections of masculinized female Melanochromis have been carried out(?).

Auratus is not a new fish to me ---had them in the '70's and a number of times since. However, male and female in the same tank is a very new thing for me (since last february). I guess I'll see over time if the females continue to become more masculine ---- develope egg spots(?) and actually reverse sex(  I doubt it!). I have another 20 or so young fry. Some will end up being feeders but I'm likely to end up keeping some as well; so I'll see how these end up developing.

What I have noticed with my smaller female that has changed color over the last few days, is that the color change coincided with a sharp increase in it's aggressiveness. It's actively defending a very small territory from most of it's tankmates and has even had numerous scraps with the larger female, ending with the larger female chasing the smaller. Actually all 4 auratus in this 125 gal. tank defend small territories, at least from some of the tankmates.


----------

