HOME AQUARIUM

This story began several years ago when I received an order for the re-registration of the aquarium, in which three small gray charats were frightenedly floundering among large scalars, huge veil synodontises, sword-bearers and various-sized barbs. They looked so bad that at first, in low light, I could not even figure out what kind of view it was.
Former owners of the fate of these ordinary tiny fishes did not interest, so they soon found themselves at my house, where in good conditions they calmed down and painted. Only now I realized what a rarity I got - "flashlights", and, fortunately, unisexual: two males and a female.
This fish can not be called a novelty. But the craze for the suddenly available exotic imports from Europe, Asia and South America led to the fact that many venerable Russian fish farmers abandoned their farms and some of the traditional species of aquarium fish (including haracin) disappeared from the Russian zoo market. I do not know where and where my "flashlights" were bought, but I already considered them to be a kind of lost for domestic aquarists. It was also obvious that it would be pointless to expect an importer of such a low value fish, in fact, to order an importer. I think it is now clear how pleased I was with the acquisition.
From the literature on aquaristics I knew by then that there are two subspecies of "flashlights": Hemigrammus ocelifer and H. o. Falsus, that is, false. "Thus, the first, of course, must be considered" real, "although it was never officially called, at least in literature, this name did not come across to me. In addition, I somewhere read that in Russia was allegedly brought in and received the "fake" distribution, and it remained a mystery how they differed from each other and which one they came to me with. I had to take up the periodicals and reference books again.
Rarely found comparative descriptions indicated the presence of a well-noticeable double spot in Hoocelifer immediately behind the gill cover: a brilliant iridescent and a dark gray, almost black. The Czech book Bunte Welt der Aquarien Fische, Stanislav Frank, 1980, was very helpful in which photographs of both subspecies were published. It became clear that I became the owner of a false "flashlight". And where to get the present?
Sent a letter to the Bulgarian "haratsintsiku" with world renown Dimitar Penev. On my happiness, in Bulgaria, "flashlights" were found, although the addressee did not know exactly what kind of subspecies they were. With the next opportunity I got a dozen teenagers who were still undecided on the floor, at first glance I realized: this is exactly what I wanted.
The time has passed, the new fish have reached maturity, and I could already objectively compare both subspecies. In behavior and reproduction, there were no differences. But in appearance, in color, it was very similar, but the topic is not less different hemigrammus.
Both had bright "glowing" spots at the base of the caudal fin (apparently, it was due to them that the species received its philistine name) and a bright ruby-red upper part of the eye.
Fins transparent, with the exception of the caudal, in the center of the base there is a diamond-shaped black spot, and immediately behind it on the blades are vague whitish or pinkish blurred spots. Their saturation, according to my observations, depends on the mood of the fish. At the edges of the caudal fin, blackish stripes sometimes appear.
Now about the differences. At Hoocelifer behind the gill covers there are one after another bright spots: greenish, black, golden and gray. In Hofalsus, only two spots are visible on this part of the body - black and golden, and even slightly pronounced, and the front corner of the black diamond-shaped spot decorating the tail is stretched in a line reaching the middle of the body. Hoocelifer does not have this band. In general, the "real flashlight" looks a little more elegant, whereas the color of Hofalsus is more strict. Fish are different and the shape of the body: in Hoocelifer (especially in females) it is relatively high, as in Hemigrammus pulcher. The body of the Hofalsus is extended in length.
Now it remained to find out whether there were differences in the breeding of "flashlights". Unfortunately, according to the domestic descriptions of the habits of the inhabitants of the aquarium, it is rarely possible to form a clear idea of ​​the spawning of a particular species: it is extremely rare and mainly relates to fish with which in the immemorial times have dealt with the coryphaeus of domestic aquarists. One of these objects was just a "flashlight". This fish, easy to breed and quite popular in previous years, was easily given to aquarium enlighteners. In any book that mentions "flashlights", there is a description of how they should be planted, sometimes very detailed - clear evidence that the old authorities, whose messages are most often based on modern authors, thoroughly investigated this issue.
Since the reader can easily find these recommendations in popular literature, I will not dwell on them, but I will tell you how he organized the breeding of "flashlights" - let it be one of the possible options. At once I will note that I used unjustifiably soft water for spawning, but for that I have my reasons. From the Mytishchi water pipeline, water flows with dGH 22 - 24 degrees and dKH 16 - 17 degrees. In South America there is probably not a single kharatsinka (except, perhaps, blind cave Astyanax), which could produce offspring in such conditions. Therefore, from the very beginning of my aquaristic practice, I extract soft water from self-assembled five-liter ion-exchange columns with complete demineralization and electrical conductivity of the finished solution 20 - 30 uS.
At one time, in the obtained very soft (dGH 0.1 - 0.2 degree) water, I added a solution of calcium sulfate (CaSO4) and magnesium chloride (MgCl) to raise the stiffness. Later, the fuss with the chemicals was boring me, and I was also convinced that he did not suffer from very soft water either the fish or their offspring, and the stories of seasoned people about the fact that soft water provokes dropsy of larvae and fry is just an erroneous estimate A disease caused by other causes. Moreover, I can hardly explain why it is necessary to increase the rigidity of water, which contains fry of American hara-like ones. By many authors this is presented as an indispensable condition for improving the health of their pets. But how then do the fish survive in the Amazon river basin, where there are no caring aquarists, and the water is extremely soft throughout the year?
In general, I began to plant producers in soft demineralized water, only slightly diluting it with tap water. In large quantities tap water can not be added, since its high carbonate component will eliminate all the work to nothing: it is well known that carbonate salts are the main obstacle in the breeding of soft-water fish.
In the spawning aquarium, I place 2-3 clusters of Thai fern, but not as a substrate, but for sheltering fish, if for some reason the spawning is delayed. Producers are better to put into spawning in the evening - for the night they manage to get used to the room and new water. If the fish are ready for spawning, then spawning begins in the morning, although in my practice there were delays already up to 8 days!
Often (but not always) the female first chases the male, which is actually characteristic of many haraakovidnyh. Then the spawning gong begins. The male continuously pursues the female moving along the walls, trying to cling to it sideways. When she stops to rest, the male also freezes nearby. If there is a second male nearby, then between them there are fights, the purpose of which is to push the opponent. At the moment of the fight, they lose the female, start to rush about in her search, again grasp, that is spend a lot of time and effort for nothing. So it's better if the male is in spawning alone.
Mating occurs at a moment of a brief stop and looks like a short vibration and a mutual push by the body. Caviar flies anywhere and falls to the bottom; It is completely devoid of stickiness and easily rolls over its surface. I can not say that "lanterns" in principle do not eat pitted eggs, but this does not happen during spawning. These fish are generally reluctant to take food from the bottom, and if the spawner is equipped with a safety net, consider the safety of the eggs provided.
Parents should be removed from the spawner no later than in 24 hours, otherwise the movement of the turned-off larvae will attract the attention of fish. By the end of the second day, most of the larvae break away from the bottom and hang on the walls. At this time, you need to remove the safety net.
I never take away the unfertilized, whitened caviar. This procedure makes sense only in very small containers; If the pairs spawn in vessels with a capacity of 15 to 35 liters, then there is no problem with spoilage of water. I repeatedly checked the post-spawn water for the content of nitrites: the tests always gave a negative result.
On the fourth day, the larvae have eyes - a signal that less than a day remains before the start of feeding. This rule, incidentally, also applies to the rest of the captive-bred haraakovid.
For the first feeding "lanterns" use "pond dust" or infusoria, a slipper of home breeding. After two or three days, you can already give nauplius artemia or small cyclops. In this regard, "flashlights" also do not stand out among the other "haratsinok": Artemia is preferable, since it is more difficult to catch a Cyclops.
Further from the amateur it is required patience and attentive care of growing up livestock according to the usual scheme: three-hour feeding and daily replacement of a part of water with fresh ones.
When raising juveniles in small containers, strictly dose the feed. Snails and small ancestors can eat up the remains.
If everything goes well, after three weeks (again the haracin standard) you will notice that a flashlight has started to form on the tail stalk. With good care, puberty occurs in 4 - 5 months, and you can start a new natural cycle.
According to my observations, the first half of the month the fry grows relatively slowly, and then the growth is markedly accelerated. Beneficial to this process is the intensive replacement of water and a spacious aquarium.
"Flashlight" - the fish is peaceful. Favorite time-conduct - a quiet "standing" in the open, so that you can in all the details to consider the object. Revitalization causes the appearance of food. And if in the morning you noticed that the fish show unusual mobility, the males chase each other and for some of the females, then the spawning gong began and you will soon become a witness to spawning.
The experiment on the crossing of H.ocelifer ocelifer and H.ocelifer falsus was unsuccessful. This I wanted to confirm (or refute) the assumption that this is the same species, differing only in color. Unfortunately, when the fish that came from Bulgaria ripened, only one "fake" male remained alive. The first spawning with his participation was not successful, and soon he also died. Maybe someone from the more successful lovers will resolve this issue?


I. Vanyushin, Mytischi, Aquarium No. 3, 2001.