phoenix44 Posted December 30, 2009 Report Share Posted December 30, 2009 This is an L002. I blame him for some scratches on the glass. Just thought I'd share. Panaques have teeth so they can eat wood and bark. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flatfish Posted December 30, 2009 Report Share Posted December 30, 2009 Nice shots Phoenix44. Just a slight correction. Many plecos have teeth, only Panaques have short spoon-shaped teeth (ie wider at tips than base) so they can rasp wood, bark, and algal biofilm. Goldie plecos (and other Scobinancistrus), which are closely related also spoon-shaped teeth but they are much longer and narrower than in Panaques, and are thought to be for eating molluscs (i.e. snails, etc.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phoenix44 Posted December 30, 2009 Author Report Share Posted December 30, 2009 lol. I wish I had a DSLR camera with a macro lens. I would get some awesome shots then. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rabbit Posted December 30, 2009 Report Share Posted December 30, 2009 Its believed that the lignin or lignen within the wood serves as a part of the fish's diet, along with a supposed symbiotic gut fungi that helps break the wood down. Studies have shown that the wood in a panaques diet provides little to no energy and the small amounts of bio film and aufwuchs provide more substantial amounts, some take this information as indication that the panaque species was never actually designed to eat wood. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cricketman Posted December 30, 2009 Report Share Posted December 30, 2009 linky to site or paper for the above information please? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rabbit Posted December 30, 2009 Report Share Posted December 30, 2009 http://pd.bio.uci.edu/ee/dgerman/images/PDF/German%20(2009)%20JCPb_gut_online.pdf The above is in refference to the findings of wood as a supposed main part of the diet. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skippy_49nz Posted December 30, 2009 Report Share Posted December 30, 2009 Didn't they find similar when McD's was putting sawdust in their burgers. They found sawdust was of no nutritional value. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rabbit Posted December 30, 2009 Report Share Posted December 30, 2009 lol Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scottie841 Posted December 30, 2009 Report Share Posted December 30, 2009 Didn't they find similar when McD's was putting sawdust in their burgers. They found sawdust was of no nutritional value. I thought they found that the saw dust had more/equal nutrition than the burgers... On second thoughts the burgers were always made from sawdust so adding more would just make the burgers bigger Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cricketman Posted December 30, 2009 Report Share Posted December 30, 2009 Interesting article. Though the article negates to mention or take headence the effect of wood on the digestability and the speed of which the bolus moves through the animal. Whilst indeed it shows that wood is of no energy value (or of very little at least) it does not show a wood-starved control group. I think that therefore the conclusion that they cannot digest the wood therefore their niche may be to " take macroscopic detritus (i.e., woody debris) and reduce it to <1mm" as part of a carbon cycle is ubsurd. There has to be a behavioural, structural or some other benifit to the organism. Also, the wood that he is giving them is only of one variety (water oak) results could be different depending on the species of wood. It also does not state if the wood was previously in an environment whereby diatoms or micro-algae could grow prior to being offered up for ingestion, thereby could affect the ratios of digestibility. The idea that the wood may be benificial to the organisms as a means to ensure the pulse or bolus does not become impacted causing a gastro intestinal blockage is also not explored. Too many loopholes to make a blanket "wood is of no real benifit" statement. Common sense and Darwinism states that it must have some effect or they would not be behaviourally or physically aligned to the task of consuming wood. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rabbit Posted December 31, 2009 Report Share Posted December 31, 2009 As stated above that "some" believe, this is not my personal opinion, but P. Maccus surely proves the point that the neglect of wood in the diet has no adverse effect on the fish's health as seen in many aquariums where wood is not used as long as the the diet is stabilized (highly fibrous). My opinion is exactly as stated The idea that the wood may be beneficial to the organisms as a means to ensure the pulse or bolus does not become impacted causing a gastro intestinal blockage is also not explored. In the article he does state that it took 18hrs for the bolus to move through the digestive system, whether this is effected by the type or grade of wood would of course require more information but seems to of course make sence. Im aware of the many loop holes his work shows and how much more is required, but the aim was to show the point how little the wood provides nutrition wise. I think that therefore the conclusion that they cannot digest the wood therefore their niche may be to " take macroscopic detritus (i.e., woody debris) and reduce it to <1mm" as part of a carbon cycle is ubsurd. There has to be a behavioural, structural or some other benifit to the organism. I agree 100% As for "Darwinism" i don't believe that the reason for the teethe was aimed at the wood but more the bio film and aufwuchs within, and that this was an adaptation in order to reach that food source, this also raises the possibility that the wood over time has become a necessity to the digestive system of the more exclusive species of wood eaters. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
livingart Posted December 31, 2009 Report Share Posted December 31, 2009 does consuming the wood affect their breeding ability? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cricketman Posted December 31, 2009 Report Share Posted December 31, 2009 As for "Darwinism" i don't believe that the reason for the teethe was aimed at the wood but more the bio film and aufwuchs within, and that this was an adaptation in order to reach that food source, this also raises the possibility that the wood over time has become a necessity to the digestive system of the more exclusive species of wood eaters. Perhaps the adaption was for both points. Wood for fibre, and the algae/diatoms attached to it. Physical removal of diatoms from a surface is pretty hard. Marine snails rasps work furiously, and a slow pace across the surface. Why not cut out the middle man and take the whole surface off, diatoms, algae wood and all? then the chemical action(probably more effecient than the physical in terms of diatoms) can take place. Just a quick thought, now moving on... JBL novo tabs also contain 10% wood fibre. They must deem it to be of some importance. Agreed then that scientifically balanced and shall we say "designer" foods are probably fulfilling the gap in the nutrition/fibre that may be found in the aquarium without natural sources of wood. But, the question becomes do we want to fulfill the nutritional needs, or do you want to re-create a natural environment. Thats obviously up to the individual. By the way, I'm not "having a go" at you or anything, just the article. Your point is valid and proven, but the article, for me, raised more questions than answered. Which is *always* a good thing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rabbit Posted December 31, 2009 Report Share Posted December 31, 2009 but the article, for me, raised more questions than answered. Which is *always* a good thing. I agree. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rabbit Posted December 31, 2009 Report Share Posted December 31, 2009 does consuming the wood affect their breeding ability? I don't believe it would effect the ability but many of the Panaqolus (dwarf) species stake out holes in wood as territory and breeding locations, again this would be conflicted by many factors including species. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alanmin4304 Posted December 31, 2009 Report Share Posted December 31, 2009 How about the possibility that they know better than us why they eat wood and we are still trying to find out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bronze-dragon Posted December 31, 2009 Report Share Posted December 31, 2009 just because they may not be able to properly digest the wood, does not mean its not essential, some herbivores ingest small stones as a crucial part of their digestive system. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phoenix44 Posted December 31, 2009 Author Report Share Posted December 31, 2009 Interesting. The big panaques (royals and the likes) eat lots of wood. apparently its needed for the digestion, and wood forms an essential part of their diet. Ive seen branches in the wild that have been stripped off the bark. they must like it any how. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
reptilez Posted January 2, 2010 Report Share Posted January 2, 2010 ahhhh that on MysticVampire looks Scary,wouldnt want to get sucked on by one of those LOL!!!!!!They love it, and WILL strip a branch no sweat. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phoenix44 Posted January 2, 2010 Author Report Share Posted January 2, 2010 sure its not a her? have pics of the head? nice teeth too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skippy_49nz Posted January 2, 2010 Report Share Posted January 2, 2010 Is that well enough fed? My royal looks a lot more pot bellied than that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skippy_49nz Posted January 2, 2010 Report Share Posted January 2, 2010 Mine is probably around 6in so maybe still carrying some baby fat lol Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
reptilez Posted January 2, 2010 Report Share Posted January 2, 2010 MysticVampire is he the one which is on trade me so awesome!!!!!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.