Fire Eel Q's - tank size?

[EmrePekdeniz]

Hmmm...

 

[jclyde13]

the few breeding incidents I've seen, and I'll try and find the articles described the "male" as being smaller then the female by a noticable amount and the fish being approx 24". These where private hobbyists who didn't doccument everything exceptionally well. but this was a consistant in the "accidents" as well as the fish being in planted set-ups over 180 gals. My own experiances with my 3 also suggest this info is fairly accurate. Obviousely the older fish get the bigger they get.. And there are deffinately some Giants out there to be aware. But they seem to be few and far between. One has been a confirmed female as well.. so until one is a confrimed male I'll follow what the evidance suggests. Even a 24" fire eels is no small fish...

And Bigger is better.. buy the biggest tank you can afford/hold. You'll regret it later if you don't. Since you can't sex them readily be prepared for the "worst".

Emre - You're look for an unbroken pattern under the belly. The pattern will "fade" under the belly of Armatus.

I guess most of the adult fire eels I've seen have been females then, because I don't recall ever seeing one over 3-4 years old that was less than 30".

 

[jclyde13]

If the eel in the video is M. favus, I strongly suspect I have a M. favus as well. Which is fine and dandy because my current tank is 130 gal. What do you exactly mean by "unpatterned belly" though? The lower half of the eel, or the very ventral strip?

Am I correct to assume that this is M. armatus, with patterns over its upper half body only...

Whereas this is M. favus...?

I'm not 100% sure the one in the vid was M. favus, but I'm about 95% sure of it (it's a little hard to tell due to the vid's quality, but I'm pretty sure I see some patterning on its belly). But yes, the one on top is M. armatus and the one on the bottom it M. favus. Not every M. armatus is quite as patternless as the one in that pic, though. It's just the very bottom of the body that will never have any pattern whatsoever. M. favus can have varying degrees of patterning on their bellies, which can sometimes make them somewhat difficult to differentiate from M. armatus, but they almost always have some patterning that lets you know they aren't M. armatus (ie spots, splotches and/or partial zig-zags of the darker brown coloration).

Here's a pic of a more typical pattern for M. armatus:

And here's a good example of an M. favus with a broken belly pattern:

 

[MonsterMinis]

I guess most of the adult fire eels I've seen have been females then, because I don't recall ever seeing one over 3-4 years old that was less than 30".

You bring up a good point as the Majority I see are well over the 24" mark as well. Not all. But the incidents when breeding has occured, one the eggs where unfertilized/never hatched. and the second the fry i'm assumeing starved from lack of food. and where both first reports. so the pairs where likely just maturing. I am deffinatly not saying my knowledge and research is 100% accurate and will never be unfounded.. only that the extent fo my knowledge have lead me to draw these conclusions. TBH I would love to see more information on these fish since in general so little is known to the hobby 'specially compared to most other tropicals in the hobby.

And excellent pictures of the TT species differences.

 

[EmrePekdeniz]

Drgnfrc, thanks for the info. Minis, has anyone ever successfully bred spiny eels in captivity?

 

[StripeGirl]

You guys are going by length to tell male from female but i believe its in the girth that tells the story.My huge female fire eel,yes female as she has laid eggs everywhere a few months back is very very big around at high 36+.I also see 3-4 year old fire eels all over 30 inches but....some are much thicker then others.

 

[MonsterMinis]

You guys are going by length to tell male from female but i believe its in the girth that tells the story.My huge female fire eel,yes female as she has laid eggs everywhere a few months back is very very big around at high 36+.I also see 3-4 year old fire eels all over 30 inches but....some are much thicker then others.

Thanks for the input, def agree with you there.. I have 2 already very thick ( that I believe to be females) and 1 smaller ( and def thinner, more petite? what I believe male.) Everyone is hand-fed and gets the same amount of food. the largest one and the smallest one also hang-out together. and the other large one is tolerated, but the larger one of the "pair" will attack if the smaller one spends to much time with what I'm surmiseing is the other female.

Which is fairly typical of cichlid females that care for a brood/territory. these guys obviousely aren't cichlids but I've seen con-specific behavior that mimics typical SA/CA and African pair behaviors.

So adult sizes do make me wonder.. but it is also very plauseable that at 24" and breeding the fish may have also been stunted. Or poor genetics or a multitude of other factors. I don't think 24" is an unreasonable min adult size to expect.. anything smaller is deffinately stunted. But it is a min size.. not a max size. The more Drgn likes to argue with me and I think, takeing in info the more I think the adults where stunted in the 2 cited cases.. and if the males are indeed more slender then it would be easy to actually underestimate sizes, since the sizes where never backed with pictures.

 

[StripeGirl]

look at the girth of this female.

 

[jclyde13]

You guys are going by length to tell male from female but i believe its in the girth that tells the story.My huge female fire eel,yes female as she has laid eggs everywhere a few months back is very very big around at high 36+.I also see 3-4 year old fire eels all over 30 inches but....some are much thicker then others.

That's exactly what I was thinking. And your )v(onster is an awesome example of it.

 

[MonsterMinis]

She is a stunning example of these fish taken care of properly!