I think you've got SAEs. My LFS labels theirs Thai Flying Fox as well, but
they are true SAEs. I used the term SAE once while talking to the owner,
and he chuckled and said he doesn't hear that term very often but it was
correct. Thailand used to be called Siam, so the names are practically
interchangeable. I guess the fish are listed as Thai Flying Fox on the LFS
order form, so that it what they label them in the store. And, "flying fox"
sounds a little more sexy than "algae eater", so it's kind of marketing
thing as well. Otocinclus and plecostomus could technically also be called
algae eaters, but they're usually not. The bottom line is that we need to
be able to identify our fish (and plants) visually and not necessarily rely
on the labels at the stores. I recently picked-up a breeding pair of
Nannacara for $10 that were in an unlabeled tank. By the way, these are
great fish for planted tanks; kind of shy, though.

Jody

"Scott Rogahn" wrote in message
...
I have seen may post about false SAEs, But my fish store may be going the
other way. Six months ago I ask them what they have that eats hair algae.
She sold me two flying foxes about 2 to 3 inches long. The ate the hair
algae in no time. From the descriptions on the web and other post I
believe
them to be SAEs. They have clear fins. The black stripe goes to the end
of
the tail, and they eat flake food.

One has since died due to me being stupid and misadjusting my CO2 before
work (the only Casualty of 100ppm CO2). So I went back and ask for a
Siamese algae eater. They did not have any, so I ask about flying foxes.
She showed my a tank of Thai Flying Foxes very small about an inch to
maybe
and inch and half. for $4.99 each. Once again clear fins and stripe to
back of the tail.

This is a very knowledgeable fish store so if they were SAEs I would think
they would mark them as such.

Did I get lucky are these SAEs? Is a flying fox much less of an algae
eater?

Thanks
Scott