New 🐟 Mercury Safety Guide & Omega-3 Rankings Updated for 2026. View Omega-3 Rankings →

💧 Freshwater 🌡️ Tropical

Pelvicachromis Silviae

Pelvicachromis silviae Lamboj, 2013
Max Length
4.8 cm
Max Weight
-
Lifespan
-
Trophic Level
3.2
Depth
-
Climate
Tropical
Resilience
High
Vulnerability
10.00/100
Typical Length
-
Depth Zone
-

📖 Overview

In aquaria, this species is a monogamous, pair bonding cave-spawner; frequently imported to Europe and North America for ornamental fish trade; seems not to be rare .

Scientific Name
Pelvicachromis silviae
Authority
Lamboj, 2013
Habitat
Freshwater
Climate
Tropical
Max Length
4.8 cm
Trophic Level
3.2
Resilience
High
Vulnerability
10.00/100
Salinity
0–0.5 ppt

🐟 Physical Description

Dorsal spines (total): 14 - 16; Dorsal soft rays (total): 9 - 10; Anal spines: 3; Anal soft rays: 7 - 8. Diagnosis: Pelvicachromis silviae is distinguished from other species of Pelvicachromis by a combination of characters . It differs from P. subocellatus in somewhat greater body depth, being 37.4-43.0% of standard length vs. 34.5-41.6%; shorter snout length, 20.4-28.1% of head length vs. 23.4-30.9%; greater eye orbit diameter, 31.3-35.7% of head length vs. 28.9-32.9%; greater lower jaw length, 30.9-38.5% of head length vs. 25.4-35.3%; lesser scales between pelvic and pectoral, 3-5 vs. 5-6; in males in lappet-like elongation of some rays of caudal fin vs. no such elongation; and in females in greenish and yellow coloured parts on dorsal parts of body, situated over red belly region, vs. silver coloured scales around red belly region . It differs from P. sacramontis in greater body depth, being 37.4-43.0% of standard length vs. 29.0-36.5%; greater head length, 33.2-36.9% of standard length vs. 27.0-32.0%; greater caudal peduncle depth, 15.8-17.5% of standard length vs. 14.0-15.3%; shorter snout length, 20.4-28.1% of head length vs. 26.2-38.7%; greater postorbital distance, 40.4-45.7% of head length vs. 31.7-41.8%; shorter interorbital distance, 24.0-27.9% of head length vs. 29.4-45.3%; and shorter preorbital distance, 16.3-17.3% of head length vs. 18.7-26.5% . It differs from P. pulcher in greater body depth, being 37.4-43.0% of standard length vs. 32.6-38.3%; greater head length, 33.2-36.9% of standard length vs. 27.8-32.0%; greater caudal peduncle depth, 15.8-17.5% of standard length vs. 13.0-15.3%; shorter caudal peduncle length, 12.4-14.5% of standard length vs. 13.8-16.5%; shorter snout length, 20.4-28.1% of head length vs. 27.6-36.6%; greater postorbital distance, 40.4-45.7% of head length vs. 34.8-40.4%; shorter interorbital distance, 24.0-27.9% of head length vs. 25.9-33.1%; and shorter preorbital distance, 16.3-17.3% of head length vs. 21.0-33.8% . It differs from P. roloffi in greater body depth, being 37.4-43.0% of standard length vs. 33.6-37.6%; geater head length, 33.2-36.9% of standard length vs. 31.5-33.0%; greater caudal peduncle length, 15.8-17.5% of standard length vs. 9.4-12.2%; and higher number of pored scales of lateral line, 26-28 vs. 24-26 . It differs from P. taeniatus in greater body depth, being 37.4-43.0% of standard length vs. 29.9-36.4%; greater head length, 33.2-36.9% of standard length vs. 28.4-33.8%; greater pre-anal distance, 66.2-69.8% of standard length vs. 62.8-66.7%; greater prepelvic distance, 37.9-44.3% of standard length vs. 36.0-37.5%; shorter preorbital distance, 16.3-17.3% of head length vs. 18.6-21.1%; and fewer spines in dorsal fin, 14-16 vs. 17-18 . It differs from P. kribensis in greater body depth, being 37.4-43.0% of standard length vs. 30.4-37.3%; greater prepelvic distance, 37.9-44.3% of standard length vs. 32.5-37.7%; shorter preorbital distance, 16.3-17.3% of head length vs. 17.0-22.3%; and lesser spines in dorsal fin, 14-16 vs. 17-18 . It differs from P. sp. aff. taeniatus "Wouri" in greater body depth, being 37.4-43.0% of standard length vs. 28.7-35.1%; greater prepelvic distance, 37.9-44.3% of standard length vs. 33.4-39.5%; greater eye orbit diameter, 31.3-35.7% of standard length vs. 22.6-32.5%; more slender caudal peduncle, its length 73.2-85.3% of its depth vs. 93.9-124.6%; and fewer spines in dorsal fin, 14-16 vs. 17-18 . It differs from P. humilis, P. rubrolabiatus and P. signatus in absence of 7-8 vertical bars on body, visible in several behavioural situations; in three infraorbital bones vs. two; in greater body depth, 37.4-43.0% of standard length vs. 26.4-34.1%; shorter caudal peduncle length, 12.4-14.5% of standard length vs. 13.1-18.1%; greater anal-fin base length, 18.6-22.5% of standard length vs. 13.6-21.0%; shorter snout length, 20.4-28.1% of head length vs. 25.3-43.0%; greater interorbital distance, 24.0-27.9% of head length vs. 18.2-25.6%; and shorter preorbital depth, 16.3-17.3% of head length vs. 19.8-28.7% .

🌀 Behaviour

Behavioural data for Pelvicachromis Silviae is currently being reviewed.

🦐 Diet

aquatic invertebrates
small fish
algae
detritus

🥚 Reproduction

🐣 Oviparous 👄 Mouth Brooder 🛡️ Egg Guarder
Spawning Season
spring
Spawn Location
Substrate
Fertilization
External

🌍 Habitat & Distribution

Freshwater; benthopelagic. Tropical

🌿 Ecology

Zone Preferences
💧 Freshwater
Trophic Level
3.2±0.4

📐 Morphometrics

Length–Weight Relationship: W = 0.00389 × L3.12 (TL)
Max TL
4.8cm
Dorsal Spines
15
Dorsal Rays
10
Anal Spines
3
Anal Rays
8

🌡️ Water Parameters & Tolerance

Salinity Range
0–0.5ppt

📊 Population Risk & Fisheries

Population Resilience
High
Minimum doubling time
Fishing Vulnerability
10.00/100
Low vulnerability
Trophic Level
3.2
Predator
Climate Zone
Tropical
Described By
Lamboj, 2013

👥 Community & Contribute

Aquareap Community Observations
0 Observations logged on Aquareap

No observations yet - be the first to log one!

View all observations for Pelvicachromis Silviae ↗
Suggest an Edit

Spotted incorrect or outdated data? Submit a correction and our editorial team will review it. Approved edits go live within 48 hours.

Link to a scientific paper, FishBase, or other authoritative source
Report an Issue

Found a factual error, broken data, or inappropriate content? Let us know and we will investigate promptly.