You wont see any ids with mouths like that
Sent from my SHV-E300K using MonsterAquariaNetwork App
Sent from my SHV-E300K using MonsterAquariaNetwork App
Guess what this is...the answer might suprise you
- Thread starter ichthusfish
- Start date
Pretty sure these are MGCs now... compare them with the one with pic of zeb hogan on it...
Sent from my SHV-E300K using MonsterAquariaNetwork App
Sent from my SHV-E300K using MonsterAquariaNetwork App
How big are they now?
how big were they when u got em? Also, could u cite where u got that photo with zeb hogan? I did my homework on this and will consolidate amd reply my take in a bit later.Sent from my iPhone using MonsterAquariaNetwork app
How big are they now?
Theyre screenshots from the monster fish series from National Geographics
Sent from my SHV-E300K using MonsterAquariaNetwork App
Disclaimer: I am in no way an expert on catfish. I'm just trying to point out a few things which i found out through the research and asking around i've done as I too am very much interested in positively identifying these fish because I have purchased a fish labeled as a Mekong Giant Catfish as well. This will be quite long.
Case 1. ID Shark.
Heres a quote from what TBTB quoted when i initially asked him about MGC:
http://www.planetcatfish.com/common/...species_id=767 says: Identification: "The center of the eye above the horizontal line through the mouth angle in juveniles; eye totally below the level of mouth angle in subadults and adults. The maxillary and mandibular barbels well developed in juveniles, mandibular barbels becoming rudimentary in subadults and adults. Gigantic size; oral teeth and gill rakers present in small juveniles, absent at about 30-50 cm SL; dorsal, pelvic and pectoral fins without filamentous extensions."
http://www.fishbase.org/summary/Pang...don-gigas.html says: "Dorsal spines (total): 2; Dorsal soft rays (total): 7-8; Anal soft rays: 35; Vertebrae: 48. Body without stripes; posterior nostril located near anterior nostril; 7 branched dorsal-fin rays; gill rakers rudimentary or absent; fins grey, never black (Ref. 12693). The center of the eye above the horizontal line through the mouth angle in juveniles; eye totally below the level of mouth angle in subadults and adults. The maxillary and mandibulary pairs of barbels well developed in juveniles; mandibulary barbels become rudimentary in subadults and adults (Ref. 9448). Gigantic size; oral teeth and gill rakers present in small juveniles, absent at about 30-50 cm SL; dorsal, pelvic and pectoral fins without filamentous extensions (Ref. 43281). Distinguished from other large catfish in the Mekong by its lack of teeth and the almost complete absence of barbels (Ref. 2686)"
He initially compared it to a Paroon Shark but i believe you could tell them apart easily just by looking. The more common suspect would be an ID shark as (to me at least) they resemble each other the most and they do come from (and the only two species under) the same genus; Pangasianodon.
So here's what i got from Fishbase:
http://www.fishbase.org/summary/14154...Fins dark grey or black; 6 branched dorsal-fin rays; gill rakers normally developed; young with a black stripe along lateral line and a second long black stripe below lateral line, large adults uniformly grey (Ref. 12693). Dark stripe on the middle of anal fin; dark stripe in each caudal lobe; small gill rakers regularly interspersed with larger ones (Ref. 43281).
So if it would be a debate between a MGC and a IDshark, I think the only probable solution would be to to actually sedate the fish and count it's spines, vertebrae etc. check for teeth? as it would be close to impossible to see from pics.
In your last example with the pic of Dr. Zeb Hogan (Not knocking on zeb or National Geographic), siding with fishbase, we could see the "stripe along the lateral line and a second long black stripe below the lateral line" whilst fishbase expressly stated as well that in MGC; "Body without stripes" and we can clearly see stripes with yours and Zeb's. I honestly think that this case could a misidentification either from the part of NGC or the people who procured the specimen in the said pic.
Personally, If i saw a pic of a Wallago Micropogon and a Wallago Leerii, I wouldn't know which is which either. What more with a MGC that is EXTREMELY RARE.
After everything I said, examining your pics, I wouldn't jump in to the conclusion that the fish you have right there is a ID shark because I admit that it does not look like the ones we often see either. So what could it be?
On to the next point.
Case 2. A different Pangasius? A HYBRID?
I replied to this post last October saying "I remember this look from about two years ago coming in as mgc as well. We may be wrong but it was once said to be another kind of pangasius. Will let you know once i get to contact the person."
I apologize not being able to get back at you until now as it totally slipped my mind. My supplier/importer can't specifically remember the actual specie he said back but he said that it could've also been a cross between species of PANGASIUS. I trust this guy as he is like the "Wes" here in our country. He expressly said Pangasius and not Pangasianodon and did so because he believed that it is not ID nor MGC as well.
At around that time (2013) was the first time I've heard that MGCs are coming in our islands. Being in the aquaculture business and more so being a monster fish enthusiast, I was very ambitious and very interested in having my hands on an MGC (both in large numbers as i wanted to try and breed them myself) What I did was message Cliff (Necrocanis) and ask him how to tell them apart.
He told me that my best bet would be to shoot Viktor (TheBiggerTheBetter) and ask about a guy named "Hook Neo Gin" who is supposed to be an expert on these or to actually go to Thailand and visit an established hatchery.
I am from southeast asia (Philippines) as well and Thailand is just a 20-50 USD 2 hour flight from here and I've decided (sorry viktor) that I'd rather go there and see for myself. I've been to Thailand numerous times in the past and i was lucky that the driver of my mother (a thai national) every time she visits thailand told us that he knows of a farm. For some reason, either calamities (flood/typhoon) or politically related trouble here or in bangkok, the said trip never materialised from 2013 till now.
When I got another chance on a supposed "MGC" i believe it was Viktor who told me to send a message to Wes (Fugupuff) with regard to positively identifying the said fish. So I did and here's what Wes had to say:
"Hello Bob,
Thanks for the message. However, like I said in the past, most of these fish are more or less extinct in the wild, they are all being manually artificially bred. The true one is on CITES appendix (I , all the ones you see are probably either hybrids rather. There are more than 10 species of these fish, varying in sizes, and some are even brackish fish. I know they hybridize them and also farm raise them for food. So it will always be hard to tell if the one is a true giant or not. Either way, most species will grow to 36" or bigger, bigger than most hobbyist can house, so I think it doesn't matter too much. Hope that helps answer some questions.
Regards,
Wes"
He was the one who brought the idea of Pangasius Hybrids to my attention and as most of us here would trust Wes and his opinion, I chose to do so as well.
Thus, I think the another way to positively tell it apart from another species of pangasius is to actually (Again) sedate it and count its rays etc. and cross-reference it to that of other species and begin the process of elimination as the MGC and other Pangasius would share some traits but would vary in some. If im not mistaken, there are 20 or more? species under pangasius and I don't have the patience to list down what fishbase' short description has to say with every single one of them.
Moreso, as tough as it is to cross-reference it to an entire genus, what more if we include the possibility of it being a hybrid. I think that exponentially raises the chances of these fish not being positively identified.
However, there is a glimmer of hope. I, like you, am not giving up just yet in actually getting a MGC. I really wanted to breed these fish and if were able to locally breed IDsharks, then there is that possibility that we can locally breed these species as well.
As Cliff once told me "We really need every hatchery we can get to ensure the future of this gentle giant. Also we need to try to get a few around the world so that everyone can enjoy them!!"
I came upon this video and at around the 0:10 second mark, we can hear Wah Yap Hon, the curator of Singapore's river safari saying that the MGCs they have on display came from a captive breeder (THE ONLY CAPTIVE BREEDER) in Thailand.
<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/fPvUWSOtMQ0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
That gives us all hope. I wanted these fish because apart from being a collector and the bravado(I won't lie) that comes with owning a very rare fish,I in all honesty really want these fish to thrive and have our kids as future monster fish keepers appreciate such fish like we do. They are critically endangered and I think that if more people are working on breeding them, the higher the chances that we succed and that the specie eventually survive. I know it's a long shot but it is a possibility i am not willing to pass upon.
(Sorry for the bit of derailment)
In conclusion, I honestly believe that it would be very hard to tell (at this size at least) whether or not these specimens are indeed MGCs or not. However, that I also suggest you call it as you please until the time we all have a positive ID (as hard as it may seem) because just as hard to tell if it's a MGC, it is just the same to prove that it's not.
Hope I was able to help even just a little bit and yes, whatever kind those fish are, THEY ARE INDEED BEAUTIFUL and AMAZING.
I also want to share the two fish I've got as "MGC".
This is the first one I got on May 2014 at around 24"
He is now 28-30" in another pond with my Gars, pacu, snakeheads etc.
(come to think of it, i'll transfer it to my aquapond soon)
This is the second I got on October 2014 at around 12-13"
He is now 19-20" in my aquapond and can be seen in recent videos/posts here
Both these fish are probably not true MGCs but both has yet to be identified as any either so i call them MGC or just "Pangasius" in general.
They say third times the charm, and MFK will be first to know.
Case 1. ID Shark.
Heres a quote from what TBTB quoted when i initially asked him about MGC:
http://www.planetcatfish.com/common/...species_id=767 says: Identification: "The center of the eye above the horizontal line through the mouth angle in juveniles; eye totally below the level of mouth angle in subadults and adults. The maxillary and mandibular barbels well developed in juveniles, mandibular barbels becoming rudimentary in subadults and adults. Gigantic size; oral teeth and gill rakers present in small juveniles, absent at about 30-50 cm SL; dorsal, pelvic and pectoral fins without filamentous extensions."
http://www.fishbase.org/summary/Pang...don-gigas.html says: "Dorsal spines (total): 2; Dorsal soft rays (total): 7-8; Anal soft rays: 35; Vertebrae: 48. Body without stripes; posterior nostril located near anterior nostril; 7 branched dorsal-fin rays; gill rakers rudimentary or absent; fins grey, never black (Ref. 12693). The center of the eye above the horizontal line through the mouth angle in juveniles; eye totally below the level of mouth angle in subadults and adults. The maxillary and mandibulary pairs of barbels well developed in juveniles; mandibulary barbels become rudimentary in subadults and adults (Ref. 9448). Gigantic size; oral teeth and gill rakers present in small juveniles, absent at about 30-50 cm SL; dorsal, pelvic and pectoral fins without filamentous extensions (Ref. 43281). Distinguished from other large catfish in the Mekong by its lack of teeth and the almost complete absence of barbels (Ref. 2686)"
He initially compared it to a Paroon Shark but i believe you could tell them apart easily just by looking. The more common suspect would be an ID shark as (to me at least) they resemble each other the most and they do come from (and the only two species under) the same genus; Pangasianodon.
So here's what i got from Fishbase:
http://www.fishbase.org/summary/14154...Fins dark grey or black; 6 branched dorsal-fin rays; gill rakers normally developed; young with a black stripe along lateral line and a second long black stripe below lateral line, large adults uniformly grey (Ref. 12693). Dark stripe on the middle of anal fin; dark stripe in each caudal lobe; small gill rakers regularly interspersed with larger ones (Ref. 43281).
So if it would be a debate between a MGC and a IDshark, I think the only probable solution would be to to actually sedate the fish and count it's spines, vertebrae etc. check for teeth? as it would be close to impossible to see from pics.
In your last example with the pic of Dr. Zeb Hogan (Not knocking on zeb or National Geographic), siding with fishbase, we could see the "stripe along the lateral line and a second long black stripe below the lateral line" whilst fishbase expressly stated as well that in MGC; "Body without stripes" and we can clearly see stripes with yours and Zeb's. I honestly think that this case could a misidentification either from the part of NGC or the people who procured the specimen in the said pic.
Personally, If i saw a pic of a Wallago Micropogon and a Wallago Leerii, I wouldn't know which is which either. What more with a MGC that is EXTREMELY RARE.
After everything I said, examining your pics, I wouldn't jump in to the conclusion that the fish you have right there is a ID shark because I admit that it does not look like the ones we often see either. So what could it be?
On to the next point.
Case 2. A different Pangasius? A HYBRID?
I replied to this post last October saying "I remember this look from about two years ago coming in as mgc as well. We may be wrong but it was once said to be another kind of pangasius. Will let you know once i get to contact the person."
I apologize not being able to get back at you until now as it totally slipped my mind. My supplier/importer can't specifically remember the actual specie he said back but he said that it could've also been a cross between species of PANGASIUS. I trust this guy as he is like the "Wes" here in our country. He expressly said Pangasius and not Pangasianodon and did so because he believed that it is not ID nor MGC as well.
At around that time (2013) was the first time I've heard that MGCs are coming in our islands. Being in the aquaculture business and more so being a monster fish enthusiast, I was very ambitious and very interested in having my hands on an MGC (both in large numbers as i wanted to try and breed them myself) What I did was message Cliff (Necrocanis) and ask him how to tell them apart.
He told me that my best bet would be to shoot Viktor (TheBiggerTheBetter) and ask about a guy named "Hook Neo Gin" who is supposed to be an expert on these or to actually go to Thailand and visit an established hatchery.
I am from southeast asia (Philippines) as well and Thailand is just a 20-50 USD 2 hour flight from here and I've decided (sorry viktor) that I'd rather go there and see for myself. I've been to Thailand numerous times in the past and i was lucky that the driver of my mother (a thai national) every time she visits thailand told us that he knows of a farm. For some reason, either calamities (flood/typhoon) or politically related trouble here or in bangkok, the said trip never materialised from 2013 till now.
When I got another chance on a supposed "MGC" i believe it was Viktor who told me to send a message to Wes (Fugupuff) with regard to positively identifying the said fish. So I did and here's what Wes had to say:
"Hello Bob,
Thanks for the message. However, like I said in the past, most of these fish are more or less extinct in the wild, they are all being manually artificially bred. The true one is on CITES appendix (I , all the ones you see are probably either hybrids rather. There are more than 10 species of these fish, varying in sizes, and some are even brackish fish. I know they hybridize them and also farm raise them for food. So it will always be hard to tell if the one is a true giant or not. Either way, most species will grow to 36" or bigger, bigger than most hobbyist can house, so I think it doesn't matter too much. Hope that helps answer some questions.
Regards,
Wes"
He was the one who brought the idea of Pangasius Hybrids to my attention and as most of us here would trust Wes and his opinion, I chose to do so as well.
Thus, I think the another way to positively tell it apart from another species of pangasius is to actually (Again) sedate it and count its rays etc. and cross-reference it to that of other species and begin the process of elimination as the MGC and other Pangasius would share some traits but would vary in some. If im not mistaken, there are 20 or more? species under pangasius and I don't have the patience to list down what fishbase' short description has to say with every single one of them.
Moreso, as tough as it is to cross-reference it to an entire genus, what more if we include the possibility of it being a hybrid. I think that exponentially raises the chances of these fish not being positively identified.
However, there is a glimmer of hope. I, like you, am not giving up just yet in actually getting a MGC. I really wanted to breed these fish and if were able to locally breed IDsharks, then there is that possibility that we can locally breed these species as well.
As Cliff once told me "We really need every hatchery we can get to ensure the future of this gentle giant. Also we need to try to get a few around the world so that everyone can enjoy them!!"
I came upon this video and at around the 0:10 second mark, we can hear Wah Yap Hon, the curator of Singapore's river safari saying that the MGCs they have on display came from a captive breeder (THE ONLY CAPTIVE BREEDER) in Thailand.
<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/fPvUWSOtMQ0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
That gives us all hope. I wanted these fish because apart from being a collector and the bravado(I won't lie) that comes with owning a very rare fish,I in all honesty really want these fish to thrive and have our kids as future monster fish keepers appreciate such fish like we do. They are critically endangered and I think that if more people are working on breeding them, the higher the chances that we succed and that the specie eventually survive. I know it's a long shot but it is a possibility i am not willing to pass upon.
(Sorry for the bit of derailment)
In conclusion, I honestly believe that it would be very hard to tell (at this size at least) whether or not these specimens are indeed MGCs or not. However, that I also suggest you call it as you please until the time we all have a positive ID (as hard as it may seem) because just as hard to tell if it's a MGC, it is just the same to prove that it's not.
Hope I was able to help even just a little bit and yes, whatever kind those fish are, THEY ARE INDEED BEAUTIFUL and AMAZING.
I also want to share the two fish I've got as "MGC".
This is the first one I got on May 2014 at around 24"
He is now 28-30" in another pond with my Gars, pacu, snakeheads etc.
(come to think of it, i'll transfer it to my aquapond soon)
This is the second I got on October 2014 at around 12-13"
He is now 19-20" in my aquapond and can be seen in recent videos/posts here
Both these fish are probably not true MGCs but both has yet to be identified as any either so i call them MGC or just "Pangasius" in general.
They say third times the charm, and MFK will be first to know.
Great thread,glad that it's been bumped.The fish in post #86 look very much like the fish in the Photo with Zeb Hogan.The fish in the last two photos however look like totally different species...different tail and fin shapes though I'm not sure if the fins change shape as the fish grows and ages.
They look like thesee
http://youtu.be/e4wMgsupGg0
Sent from my iPhone using MonsterAquariaNetwork app
