you dont have any pics from the side... any chance of a side view and then we can eliminate any possibility of them being 66,270 etc..
Is this definitely a Female L333
- Thread starter Khaifish
- Start date
IMO they are not 66 unless the camera is giving them a brown look.
Cheers
thegeeman
There extremely similar in pattern (and colour) i wouldn't be surprised to find there from the same clutch. They are of the same species :yes:
The banding is far to thin to be L270, and the colour is far to much to be that of L66 along with the body shape being far to "stuby".
The banding is far to thin to be L270, and the colour is far to much to be that of L66 along with the body shape being far to "stuby".
Last edited:
l333
after seeing the new pics I would agree l333 pair although they are very different but the same. I have a similar fish which I have put in with my l270 and difference is minimal if any right down to the cheek and brow I bought it as a l333 it is 2and half years old and no bigger than 9cm t/l so I would say mature. I got them at the same time same age from different people.
The L333 I had with it grew at twice the rate of this imposter fish. My L270 came from a reputable breeder so yes they are L270. Do L333 have such a big size variant? It is nearly identical to the first photo you posted
Henk
after seeing the new pics I would agree l333 pair although they are very different but the same. I have a similar fish which I have put in with my l270 and difference is minimal if any right down to the cheek and brow I bought it as a l333 it is 2and half years old and no bigger than 9cm t/l so I would say mature. I got them at the same time same age from different people.
The L333 I had with it grew at twice the rate of this imposter fish. My L270 came from a reputable breeder so yes they are L270. Do L333 have such a big size variant? It is nearly identical to the first photo you posted
Henk