11" Wild Caught C. moorii

[RD.]

Yes, definitely an oddball looking fish compared to the rest of the haps found in that area.

 

[tiger15]

I currently have one pushing 8 inch. It’s hard to believe Moori could reach 11”. Is it just an estimate without scale verification. Was it wild caught in Lake Malawi or in someone’s fish pond. The classic book “The cichlid fishes of the Great Lakes of African” reported that wild caught fish grow slower and reach smaller size than comparable species in fish ponds and aquarium.

 

[RD.]

I currently have one pushing 8 inch. It’s hard to believe Moori could reach 11”. Is it just an estimate without scale verification. Was it wild caught in Lake Malawi or in someone’s fish pond. The classic book “The cichlid fishes of the Great Lakes of African” reported that wild caught fish grow slower and reach smaller size than comparable species in fish ponds and aquarium.

The fish and tanks were at the lake side, at the late Stuart Grant’s facility. The person who took the photos was working for Stuart at the time. A local guy I know, and the fish was measured with tape. Not everything can be found in a book. The books also state that in the wild yellow labs were rare. Even Konings said that. Not true, not rare at all, just deeper than most collectors want to dive.

 

[RD.]

FYI ....... same person took the photos in this thread.

Wild Caught Labidochromis caeruleus "Lion's Cove" | MonsterFishKeepers.com

Also note the markings on the wild male that he collected while he was at Malawi working for Stuart, as well as some of the smaller (most likely females) in those photos. In books, and by folks that are ignorant on the subject, white bellies and black moustaches are typically frowned upon in domestic fish, as though those are undesirable traits, or the fish are genetic misfits.

Don't believe everything that you read in books.....

 

[tiger15]

The size thing was not the findings from one book, but collaborated by many ornamental fish collectors thereafter. The book mentioned was a fishery studies sponsored by the United Nation with focus on food fish but the authors expanded the study findings onto ornamental fish. The size findings represent statically average of many species of cichlid in African Great Lakes, not individual fishes that can break the norm.

Moori is one of the few Malawian cichlid I still keep and love because of the unique body shape. My current Moori is the fifth or sixth replacement fish I keep after previous ones expired, but none exceeded 9“. I don’t doubt the validity of the 11” size cited if it was measured by tape from professional and not by hobbyists estimates. It’s not the norm to find monster size fish in the wild rather than in well fed aquarium environment.

 

[RD.]

Its size, is exactly why it was shipped to a customer in Japan. $$$$$$

 

[danotaylor]

It’s not the norm to find monster size fish in the wild rather than in well fed aquarium environment.

I don’t agree with this part of your comment. The water quality in big lake systems is more better and more stable than most people’s aquarium environment. The amount of high quality food is perhaps more prevalent in an aquarium, but food alone is not the driver of size. Length of life, water quality and food availability all play major roles in size, in addition to obvious genetic capabilities of each species. I have seen huge wild tropheus in comparison to tank raised tropheus. Just one example of the point I’m making. The TR ones may get as big if they live that long, but sadly many hobbyists don’t provide the consistency & longevity required to see species reach their genetic potential in captivity.
There is a bunch of peeps on here who have captive kept species for decades and they do get to their maximum potential if kept in large enough aquatic environments, but for the most part during my 41 years in the hobby that is to e exception, not the norm.
Just my 2c worth

 

[Milingu]

I don’t agree with this part of your comment. The water quality in big lake systems is more better and more stable than most people’s aquarium environment. The amount of high quality food is perhaps more prevalent in an aquarium, but food alone is not the driver of size. Length of life, water quality and food availability all play major roles in size, in addition to obvious genetic capabilities of each species. I have seen huge wild tropheus in comparison to tank raised tropheus. Just one example of the point I’m making. The TR ones may get as big if they live that long, but sadly many hobbyists don’t provide the consistency & longevity required to see species reach their genetic potential in captivity.
There is a bunch of peeps on here who have captive kept species for decades and they do get to their maximum potential if kept in large enough aquatic environments, but for the most part during my 41 years in the hobby that is to e exception, not the norm.
Just my 2c worth

You are correct in general. But the situation is more complex and there are more details that can play a role.

For example in lake Malawi you can find different maximum sizes in the same species depending on the different locations. Some places simply offer more food and/or less competition resulting in bigger individuals.
The other way round a lot of Mbuna could potentially grow quite big in the lake, but don't achieve their maximum sizes because there is simply too much competition for food. These are the fish that get "unnaturally" big in most aquariums if not kept on a proper diet.

On the other side the example of Tropheus where it can sometimes be hard to provide the proper constant feeding very young fry needs for proper growth.
And it's seems that hierarchy plays a also a role in their growth. Dominant individuals seems to grow faster. But that last point is just my personal impression.

 

[RD.]

danotaylor

Did someone ask about world record sizes? lol


Unfortunately what's typical, is that most hobbyists overfeed their fish, typically with foods that are higher in protein and fat than a wild fish would typically ever see on a daily basis, in the wild. I have bred and raised a LOT of L. caeruleus over the years, both line bred over many generations, as well as F1, offspring from my friends WC group that he collected in Malawi. IMO 5" should not be a typical size, for a male fish that in the wild is typically 3 1/2". But that's just my personal opinion.

I used to tease a local breeder about his labs, they were a beautiful German line bred strain, but overall fairly large, with females in the 5" range. His line to me always was "I Feed to Breed". lol I'll never for get that, but I raised offspring of his as well, and by controlling the diet I kept his labs the same size as the rest of mine over the years. I guess it's a personal thing, no right or wrong way, I'm just not into power feeding.

My friend who spent 6 months working for the late Stuart Grant at Malawi told me that he was shocked at how small the fish in the lake were, until he realized that he was guilty of the same thing with his fish at home, overfeeding nutrient dense food. He said he barely recognized many species due to the size difference.

Kyle is also the only white person that I know of that has collected as many yellow labs in Lion's Cove, or anywhere else on the lake for that matter - collecting over 100 in a single day. If he says that in the wild they average 2 1/2" - 3 1/2" , then I reckon that is the true average size for this species, in the wild.

That comment, and the rest of that discussion can be found here.
Average size | MonsterFishKeepers.com

I suspect the same thing would be found if one compared the rest of the Rift Lake species.


On the flip side of this equation. it can sometimes go the other direction, with some of the larger species of fish that we keep in captivity.
For some bizarre reason my posting the following caused quite the uproar. lol

20 inch ex-Cichlasoma festae | MonsterFishKeepers.com


HTH

 

[RD.]

Something else to ponder regarding max sizes - - > IME beyond the basic care needs, and of course genetics, IME the largest restriction on maximizing fish in this hobby, is that most hobbyists do not keep the same fish for 10 years or more, or they keep them in less than ideal conditions, so that fishes maximum is typically never experienced by the person posting in these discussions.