# what are some Central American biotope plants?



## imzadi (Apr 3, 2007)

I find all kinds of info on South American biotopes, but little on Central America. I'm planning a biotope tank with firemouth meekis and swordtails, but I have found nothing about CA plants! HELP!


----------



## neonfish3 (Feb 12, 2004)

I don't know if you've seen www.mongabay.com , but I think it is one of the best biotope info sites.
Heres a link to CA river--> http://fish.mongabay.com/biotope_central_america_river.htm
HTH,


----------



## DonaldmBoyer (Aug 18, 2005)

This is probably because most CA native fish live in rocky fast moving streams and rivers. The plant choice is going to be limited. Most CA aquariums that I have seen limit the plant choice to hardy species like anubias, java fern, etc. because CA cichlids will have a field day ripping other plants apart, uprooting them, or eating them. Or, they don't use any plants at all.

With Firemouths, you can plant the tank with whatever you want, and as long as you provide some "caves" and such, they are really good to plants. Obviously, swordtails won't do anything to the plants either.

Recently, Firemouths have been found as far north as Florida, and as far south as northern Venezuela, so you could TECHNICALLY do a South American biotope and not be incorrect in that.


----------



## gacp (Sep 11, 2006)

There is no "Central American biotope tank".

Mesoamerica is a big place, and a very varied one. There are many habitats, and many biotopes in each habitat. Also, is a contact zone, into which NA and SA species mix in diff ways.

There are resources, specially for México, Panamá, and Costa Rica. But remember always to check for the habitats, as scientists, being lazy, often settle for simple plain species lists.

Then again, it is still the Neotropics. So, most clades well represented in the Netropics will also be present there (e,g. _Echinodorus,_), if not the very same species. Same goes for even more widespread groups.

And yes, it is true what donaldmboyer says: many oranmental Mesoamerican species come from rocky streams, where algae dominates, and the true plants found there are difficult to keep in aquaria, like Podostemmonacea.


----------



## imzadi (Apr 3, 2007)

> Heres a link to CA river--> http://fish.mongabay.com/biotope_cen...rica_river.htm


Thanks for the link to that great website!



> Recently, Firemouths have been found as far north as Florida, and as far south as northern Venezuela, so you could TECHNICALLY do a South American biotope and not be incorrect in that.


Yeah, your right, blame my persistance on CA on my desire to be just a teeny bit different. How does this sound; Background of Americana vals(in a corral, they breed like bunnies), with two different echinodorus species in front, like cordifolius (tall stems with arrow shaped green leaves)and Kleiner bar(shorter, oval leaves, reddish). some low-lying wood with java fern and/or anubias nana petite. 
Foreground of Brazilian microsword or open sand?


----------



## DonaldmBoyer (Aug 18, 2005)

That sounds do-able! Or, you could "rock-out" your aquarium and throw a powerhead or two in there to recreate the "rocky stream" biotope.

Either way, it should be cool!


----------



## gacp (Sep 11, 2006)

With firemouths _(Thorichthys_ spp.)? Open sand. Quite a lot of it. They are filter feeders! Tie everything else down, pot it tight, float it, or do without.

Keep good filtration, but remember, AFAIK, firemouths are not common in strong currents, like some other Mesoamerican cichlids are (makes sense---strong currents and sand or mud bottoms don't go together, right?).


















Good refs: http://cichlidae.com/article.php?id=7
http://cichlidae.com/article.php?id=148


----------



## DonaldmBoyer (Aug 18, 2005)

I wasn't advocating that he blows them downstream with a 900gph powerhead or two! And my experiences with Firemouths is that they are quite hospital to planted tanks (even planted community tanks) if they are given a place or two to hide near the substrate where they can dig. I'm only saying that if he wanted to, he could have a planted South American biotope without much problem, a rocky stream (in which case there would be a lot of sand/substrate anyways), etc.

Or, he can do what you suggested.......they are fairly adaptable fish, and even tempered for a larger cichlid species. Filter feeders? Maybe if they are wild-caught! Mine took flakes, no problem.

How specific to the biotope do you want to stick to before it becomes impractical? You might as well leave them in the wild, then!


----------



## gacp (Sep 11, 2006)

_I wasn't advocating that he blows them downstream with a 900gph powerhead or two! _

What is a "gallon"?

These barbarians; 21st century and they still.... tsk tsk tsk :heh:

Now, seriously, I never thought so were. I just thought imzadi _might_ think so, so I wanted to spell it out. After all, he did start about a "Central American biotope", quite a wrong concept, sorry. And _some_ Mesoamerican cichlids do live in fast-moving waters, so the confusion was there for the making, so to speak.

_And my experiences with Firemouths is that they are quite hospital to planted tanks (even planted community tanks) if they are given a place or two to hide near the substrate where they can dig. _

Agree. Still, imzadi wants them as the macrofauna of a biotope tank, and they _are_ filter-feeders and that's the kind of place they are found in.

_I'm only saying that if he wanted to, he could have a planted South American biotope without much problem._

Sorry, no native _Thorichthys_ in South America. Not by a long stretch. Again, imzadi wants a biotope tank.










_A rocky stream (in which case there would be a lot of sand/substrate anyways), etc._

A rocky stream? Often there is little sand in rocky parts, and I expect _Thorichthys_ spp. mostly outside of rocky areas. In sandy-muddy pools, mostly (unless competition is truly lax in that stream).

Again, a stream is _not_ a biotope; a stream has _several biotopes_ in it. Most biotopes are quite small, although there may be very common in a region.

_Or, he can do what you suggested.......they are fairly adaptable fish, and even tempered for a larger cichlid species. _

Larger cichlids? Are you kidding? They are almost _dwarfs_ for the group they belong to (Heroini). But yes, they are quite mellow for their size and group.

_Filter feeders? Maybe if they are wild-caught! Mine took flakes, no problem._

Flakes, pellets, you name it, they eat it provided it is 'meaty' stuff. So I found out when I bred them the first time, 15 year ago, when I had not clue about their eating habits in the wild.

Still, yes, they _are_ filter feeders. Sifters actually, to be precise. And not very good at it, really, and of course quite opportuninistic. Esentially, they are chanchitas trying to be eartheaters. But that's the truth about "su lugar en el mundo", their place in the world, their biotope: sifting fine substrate for animal matter in slow-moving to stagnant water bodies of tropical lowlands in Yucatán.

_How specific to the biotope do you want to stick to before it becomes impractical? You might as well leave them in the wild, then! _

HAHAHA  How fake/sloppy do you want it? Go far enough down that slope, and nobody will be able to know it is _supposed_ to be a biotope :heh:


----------



## DonaldmBoyer (Aug 18, 2005)

Well, I hope that he flies to Central America to get these filter-feeding, non-large dwarf cichlid, Firemouths that live in non-stream biotopes. Hmmm.......

Because, of course, is how true can the biotope be without these true CA cichlids. Don't go to the LFS!! You absolutely must fly to the Yucatan or find a seller from there to get these true, one of a kind, only found there Chiclasomma Meeki's, right?

Give me a break! Because they range from Florida to Venazuela, why does one HAVE TO DO THE ORIGINAL BIOTOPE? Why not a biotope from Florida where they now reside?

Imzadi.....you better fly gacp from Buenos Aires so he can monitor what you should do exactly, or apparently you are a fool. Apparently, we have a science snob on our hands. I used to be a science teacher myself, too, but I guess Imzadi's experience is more "powerfuler" than mine.

Yeah, never mind about any of my suggestions.......I guess from now on, I'll write special posts so some people here who have nothing better to do than to dissect my posts line by line for an hour or so for the end result to make me look like an idiot here at APC. 

Good Goin' GACP!! I hope that you and your metric system have a good time, ok? HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!! Sorry, I guess I advocate sloppiness! Whoo-hoo!


----------



## gacp (Sep 11, 2006)

_Why not a biotope from Florida where they now reside?_

Better yet: why not a *glass box biotope*, where they live now by the _millions_ and have for tens of generations? 

_Because, of course, is how true can the biotope be without these true CA cichlids. Don't go to the LFS!! You absolutely must fly to the Yucatan or find a seller from there to get these true, one of a kind, only found there Chiclasomma Meeki's, right?_

Oh, please, is that the best you can argue?

First, I never suggested firemouths, imzadi wants them. I just added what kind of biotope they live in (most often, at least), so he can enjoy watching them live in something resembling the environment they evolved in and they best eco- morpho- and ethologically match.

Second, you can have a perfect Mesoamerican biotope tank without firemouths. I did just that more than once. You can have very many kinds of them, in fact---there are over a hundred cichlid species in Mesoamerica (although they are rather uniform, compared to the diversity in SA). I don't keep track of the other fish groups, but there are even more species there than there are cichlids.

Again, donaldmboyer, what _was_ your point, exactly? 

_they range from Florida to Venazuela_

Where the hell did you get that??? Simpy preposterous. 

_Imzadi.....you better fly gacp from Buenos Aires so he can monitor what you should do exactly, or apparently you are a fool._

Imzadi, you are welcome here, anytime, to discuss cichlids or other subjects. We can even go for local chanchitas and eartheaters. But of course, I hope only donaldmboyer would think I expect you to do as I wrote---I just took the time to answer a question on an interesting subject I am knowledgeable about.

Oh, I forgot - PS: donaldmboyer, would you be so kind as to correct my map of the distribution of the _Thorichthys_ clade? I posted it because I thought it was correct, and so I want it to be. Just send me the corrected data; I'll redo the map myself. TIA. :flame:


----------



## imzadi (Apr 3, 2007)

I would like to get this back on track, and away from the nuclear war that seems to be brewing....

Perhaps I am unclear about what a biotope tank really is. I thought it was a fish tank containing species of plants and fish that could and probably would be found together in the wild. I know that meekis and swordtails are frequently found in the same streams. I just want to know what plants could be found with them that would survive in an aquarium. So far, only *neonfish3* has been very helpful.

I am not a science major, I am not even an experienced fish/plant keeper. I do currently have a planted tank and juvenile (3-4") meekis, just starting to form pairs. I do have breeding swordtails, but not many, yet. So far, the meekis love to hide in the plants but do not uproot them, and they don't dig in my pea-sized gravel substrate. I'm sure they will get rough when they actually breed. I would like to have a biotope tank for them (MY definition, not going to extremes) by the time my orange veil tail swordtail population gets to the third generation.

So please stop your bickering *gacp and donaldmboyer*, you sound like overeducated six year old children. I would know what that sounds like, because I am a homeschooling mother of two kids, ages 10 and 13, who behave better than you two.


----------



## DonaldmBoyer (Aug 18, 2005)

Ummm.....you don't know me, and you aren't much better than us if you start scolding either.

But, you are right. Now that this issue is put aside.....

Now, technically what gacp is proposing is correct. A biotope aquarium is supposed to mimic as closely as possible the natural conditions in which a native fish (in your case firemouths) comes from.
This means correct substrate (sand), correct plants (none), correct water and lighting conditions, etc., etc. that simulate (in this case) the Guatemalan/Yucatan area from which the meekis originated from.

The potential problems that arise with some of these very specific biotopes, or any biotope for that matter, is the relative specifications that you would want to follow when setting up your aquarium. In other words, would it be better to find a dealer from that area that could get you sand that was specific to the meekis origin, or would any sand with comparable color do fine? What about any hardscape? I know some people that only buy wood that comes out of Africa for their cichlid Lake Malawi biotopes, but is that really necessary? Or rocks? Is it ok to mix meekis that comes from Florida, or do they need to be caught in the wild in the Yucatan for that to work?

It just boils down to personal opinion, really. GACP appears to be more of a truist; he would prefer to have his aquarium resemble the native habitat as closely as possible, which means that he would likely get a special substrate, be a little more picky where the fish came from, look at photographs and study the native habitat in literature to know specific water conditions and temperature, and so on.

While he and others have every right to do so, this can be wrought with frustrations. For instance, I live in Michigan, and it would likely cost a ton of money for me to have someone in the Yucatan ship special sand up to here, or wood, or rocks, or fish, etc. So, most people, out of convenience, "cheat" by obtaining items that are readily available to them (like using regular play sand instead of Yucatan specific substrate) but will concentrate on getting fish that all come from the same area. So, on one hand, it "looks" like a biotope, but technically is not because it could mimic that natural conditions a bit better by having native substrate, or fish that come directly from that area.

My problem, as you probably surmised by now, is weighing practicality and cost with what really is a "true" biotopes by the purist biotope aquarium keepers. Also, I have read from several different sources online that the meeki's biotopes are extending northward and southward from their native habitat, as they are a pretty hardy species. The point is: if a species can thrive in different biotopes, then there really isn't a "true" biotope of that species anymore. There remains a "native habitat," but the species isn't limited to just one common biotope. You see what I'm saying?

In my literature alone, I see Firemouths in Amazonain biotopes, rocky pond-like biotopes, river biotopes, etc, etc. It may not represent the true native habitat, but meeki's can live and thrive in a multitude of biotopes! I wouldn't put them in an African or Malaysian biotope....that's a bit of a stretch, but I wouldn't have any problem adding them to a Central American rocky river type of habitat, because they can live and are found in similar condtions in Nature, same with a Northern Amazonian biotope aquarium or a Floridian biotope aquarium, etc.

If you have a planted tank that represents an Amazonian habitat, you can leave them in that because Meekis can be found occuring in the very beginnings of the Amazon. If you absolutely have to be specific, look up their native habitats in Central America and follow that as closely as possible.

WHATEVER YOU LIKE AND FIND ENJOYMENT WITH! This is supposed to be fun!

Sorry about "nerding-out" on you.....I'm at the end of a 35 hour straight shift in a hospital in Detroit trying to help people, and I tend to get crabby. So, sue me if I was trying to stick up for you and help you out.

I'm staying away from the Biotope forum here....it's too annoying.


----------



## gacp (Sep 11, 2006)

OK, let me clarify a few things.

A biotope tank is not a tank that house species that are often found together in nature. It tries to mimic a _specific patch of nature_, and what you would find in it: substrate, flora, fauna, &c.

Now, there is no such thing as a Central American biotope! Nor an Amazonian biotope, or a Pampasian biotope. Biotopes are far, far smaller, far more specific. An Amazonian tank is a _geographical tank_, a tank that houses species of the same geographical area, and often species that are *NEVER* found together, on even in the same location. Even with fishes from the very same stretch of the same river, it is still not a biotope tank.

Biotopes are, as I said, much smaller, often a few meters. Biotopes, on the other hand, can be common in an area. That is, many parts of a region, each one meters in size, that are very much alike in biota and abiotic factors. But travel a few meters, and you usually find yourself in quite a different biotope, with different fauna and flora and abiotic conditions.

So... what is this biotope you want to recreate in your tank? That is the key question.

If you want just a few Mesoamerican fishes that will live happily together, then by all means do so. Just don't call this a "biotope tank", it is not, and doing so only confuses people, specially those who know enough about it to help you.

I fully agree with donaldmboyer: you can go crazy recreating a biotope. Better kill yoursef by slow torture, it is more humane. In fact, it is not even really possible, not for a hobbyist, not for most biotopes, and certainly not unless you spend a fortune.

But you can define what the target biotope is, and then decide what you can do, what concesions you must make, and what you want to exclude---as Steven Chong and me agreed on in other posts, true biotopes include mosquitoes! 

But I think those who really care about biotope tanks should have a clear picture of _what the target is_, and then deviate from it knowingly. Tradeoffs---I do that all the time. One must.

Example: A biotope from the Upper Río ***** blackwater creeks, where you would find cardinal tetras. Truly, those biotopes often have very few to no plants. No, I won't go for that, and there are biotopes there with _some_ plants. Then, I want driftwood. Fine, plenty of of biotopes like that there. Now, true Upper Río ***** driftwood? Out of the question, substitute with those from the LFS. Sand? Find what the mineralogy is, then get a local substitute. Glass shrimp: they are there, I want them. The ones in that region is _Palaemonetes amazonicus_. Impossible to get them; substitute with the local species, _Palaemonetes argentinus_: only an expert can tell them appart, and cardinals and plants probably cannot. Other tetras? No, I want schooling behaviour, and 2 species would get in the way one of the other. So cardinal only, chose fishes from other guilds (e.g. loricariids). And of course, there will be predators in the biotope; still, a _Boulengerella_ pike tetra, while quite appropiate for recreating the biotope, would ruin _my_ biotope tank, since the focus is the cardinals schooling, not them being eaten. (That would be quite a tank to behold, tough! :mrgreen: )

And again, and again, until you have your tank and you can stop compromising, or you drop the idea as unrealizable to YOUR taste in the matter.

As for the Amazonian firemouths... I have no clue where that came from. Firemouths are Yucatanian, and even the _Thorichthys_ genus (about a dozen species) is only to be found nearby, and only on the Atlantic slopes. Check the map I included. And they are lowlands fishes, found in warm waters of little current, unlike other cichlids in the area (e.g. _Paraneetroplus_ spp.)

Again, it is up to you, and what _you_ want in your tank. But if you want to recreate a biotope in order to approximate the ecological conditions of the fishes and other critters you have, for the firemouths it is a good idea to keep in mind that they are substrate-sifters. That's much closer to their normal, natural behaviour in the wild than taking flakes from the surface. And plenty of sand for sifting will affect your planting scheme, and what plant species you can include. And so on.

I say again what I first posted: found out what the real thing is like, and decide whether you want and impression of the _place_ in Nature or a _naturalistic setting_ for your fish (or other critter), then start substrating, deviating, compromising, until you get what you want, or you drop the idea altogether. For plants, most of what is in Mesoamerica is in the Amazon too, or close relatives thereof. So find out the actual species, then find them or get a sensible substitute. Or change the specific biotope---often there are similar biotopes, and some species are in common and others not (e.g. _Potamogeton gayii_ stands and rushes often shelter the same tetras, &c.). But remember, for a biotope tank, _think small and specific_. Meters, not continents. 

All in all, have fun!


----------



## imzadi (Apr 3, 2007)

Thank you both! I have gained knowledge and insight, which is what I hoped for from the beginning. Apparently my impression of what a biotope tank is, is what has occurred after all the compromises have already been made. I was unaware that they were compromises, I thought that was the way it usually was. Now I know that that isn't always the case, and I agree with *donaldmboyer* that it would be impractical for most people to be true to nature.

I'm aware that biotopes are smaller than continents. That is why I specified that it would have meekis and swordtails in it. Currently I own plants from all over the globe that would survive in a non-co2 tank. I just started CO2, so my options for plant-keeping are open, and I wanted to know what plants would provide a very natural setting for a tank with meekis and swordtails. From what I have found on fish tank forums, Central America has very few plants that can be identified as being from there. Perhaps, *gacp*, being from the area and obviously knowledgeable, you could suggest a few updates to some plant profiles? I can usually only find 1-3 plants that are labeled as CA, but MANY that are labeled as SA.

I've really learned a lot from the two of you, and I appreciate what you have shared with me, even if I don't really like the answer. The idea of a tank without plants in it doesn't appeal to me at all, so I won't be going with the original meeki habitat of bare, sandy, and muddy. I have also read that meekis are found farther north (Texas)and south (Brazil) than gacp's map, but perhaps that map labels their original habitat, not their current range. Without knowing the source of the map, it is hard to tell.

I welcome more info.....


----------



## gacp (Sep 11, 2006)

Sorry, I only have a moment.

I don't expect you to read Castilian, but Latin is Latin. So check this list:

ANGIOSPERMAS ACUATICAS MEXICANAS 1
http://biblio68.ibiologia.unam.mx/F...c/newreply.php?do=newreply&noquote=1&p=296860

---excerpt

MONOCOTILEDONEAS

ALISMATACEAE 
Echinodorus andrieuxii (Hook. & Arn.) Small 
E. berteroi (Sprengel) Fassett 
E. grandiflorus (Cham. & Schldl.) M. Micheli var. grandiflorus
E. nynphaeifolius (Griseb.) Buchenau 
E. ovalis C. Wright 
E. paniculatus M. Micheli 
E. tenellus (C. Martius) Buchenau 
E. virgatus (Hook. & Arn.) M. Micheli 
Sagittaria demersa J. G. Smith 
S. guyanensis Kunth subsp. guyanencis 
S. intermedia M. Micheli 
S. lancifolia L. 
S. lancifolia L. subsp. lancifolia 
S. lancifolia L. subsp. media (M. Micheli) Bogin 
S. latifolia Willd. var. latifolia 
S. longiloba Engelm. ex Torrey 
S. macrophylla Zucc. 
S. montevidensis Cham. & Schldl. subsp. calycina (Engelm.) Bogin 
S. platyphylla (Engelm.) J. G. Smith 
CYMODOCEACEAE 
Halodule beaudettei (Hartog) Hartog 
H. wrightii Asch. 
Syringodiun filiforne Kuntz 
HYDROCHARITACEAE 
Egeria densa Planchon 
Halophila decipiena Ostenf. 
H. engelmanii Asch. 
Hydrilla verticillata (L. f.) Royle
Hydromystria laevigata (Willd.) J. H. Hunz. 
Thalassia testudinun Konig 
Vallisneria americana Michaux 
JUNCAGINACEAE 
Triglochin concinun Davy var. debile (Jones) Howell
T. mexicanum Kunth 
LEMNACEAE 
Lemna aequinoctialis Welwitsch 
L. gibba L.
L. minuscula Herter
L. obscura (Austin) Daubs
L. trisulca L.
L. turionifera Landolt
L. valdiviana Phil.
Spirodela intermedia W. Koch
S. polyrrhiza (L.) Schleid.
Wolffia brasiliensis Weddell
W. columbiana Karsten
Wolffiella gladiata (Hegelm.) Hegelm.
W. lingulata (Hegelm.) Hegelm.
W. oblonga (Phil.) Hegelm.
W. welwitschii (Hegelm.) Monod.
LILAEACEAE
Lilaea scilloides (Poiret) Hauman
LIMNOCHARITACEAE
Hydrocleys parviflorus Seub
Limnocharis flava (L.) Buchenau
L. laforestii Duchass ex Griseb
MAYACACEAE
Mayaca fluviatilis Aublet
NAJADACEAE
Najas guadalupensis (Sprengel) Magnus var. guadalupensis
N. marina L.
N. wrightiana A. Braun
PONTEDERIACEAE
Eichhornia azurea (Sw.) Kunth
E. crassipes (C. Martius) Solms-Laub
E. heterosperma Alexander
Eurystemon mexicanum (S. Watson) Alexander
Heteranthera limosa (Sw.) Willd.
H. peduncularis Benth.
H. reniformis Ruiz Lopez & Pavon
H. spicata Presl
Pontederia rotundifolia L. f.
P. sagittata Presl
Zosterella dubia (Jacq.) Small
POTAMOGETONACEAE
Potamogeton crispus L.
P. diversifolius Raf.
P. foliosus Raf.
P. illinoensis Morong
P. natans L.
P. nodosus Poiret
P. pectinatus L.
P. praelongus Wulfen 
P. pusillus L. 
P. sp.
RUPPIACEAE 
Ruppia maritima L.
SPARGANIACEAE 
Sparganium americanum Nutt 
S. eurycarpum Engelm.
TYPHACEAE 
Typha domingensis Presl 
T. latifolia L.
T. sp.
ZANNICHELLIACEAE 
Zannichellia palustris L.
ZOSTERACEAE 
Phyllospadix scouleri Hook. 
P. torreyi S. Watson 
Zostera marina L.

DICOTILEDONEAS

CABOMBACEAE
Brasenia schreberi Gmelin
Cabomba palaeformis Fassett
CERATOPHYLLACEAE
Ceratophyllum demersum L.
C. muricatum Cham.
ELATINACEAE
Bergia texana (Hook.) Walp.
Elatine americana Arnott
E. chilensis C. Gay
MENYANTHACEAE
Nymphoides fallax Ornduff
N. indica (L.) Kuntze
NELUMBONACEAE
Nelumbo lutea (Willd.) Pers.
NYMPHAEACEAE
Nuphar luteum (L.) Sibth. & Smith. subsp. 
macrophyllum (Small) E. O. Beal
Nymphaea aff. amazonum Mart. & Zucc.
N. amazonum Mart. & Zucc. subsp. amazonum
N. ampla (Salisb.) DC.
N. conardii Wiersema
N. elegans Hook.
N. gracilis Zucc.
N. jamesoniana Planchon
N. mexicana Zucc.
N. odorata Ait. var. gigantea Tricker
N. sp.
N. tenerinervia Casp.
PODOSTEMACEAE
Marathrum aff. elegans P. Royen
M. aff. schiedeanum Cham.
M. elegans P. Royen
M. haenkeanum Engler
 M. minutiflorun Engler
M. achiedeanum Cham.
M. sp.
M. tenue Liebmann
Oserya coulteriana Tul.
Podostemum aff. ricciforme (Liebmann) Royen
P. ceratophyllum Michaux
P. sp.
Tristicha trifaria (Bory ex Willd.) Sprengel

----

The list includes only those families that are strictly aquatic plants, and not those that are primarily non-aquatic but have a few aquatic species. And of course, not all are found along with firemouths. But it is a good start. You may want to search for "YUCATAN" to restrict the list to those most likely to be there. If you find a species that you cannot get but is related to one you can get in the LFS or otherwise, you can use the later as compromise.

Have fun


----------



## net (Mar 27, 2007)

thats some good info.


----------



## JG06 (Nov 5, 2006)

Imzadi,

I've kept firemouths alive and happy in an aquarium full of other Latin American cichlids and absolutely no plants. Were I you, I would create what I thought was a Latin American biotope and put the firemouths in it. Chances are they'll be just fine. 

Life's too short to sweat minute details.

-Jason


----------

