General Aquaria Discussion • 'Ideal Specimen'.... For all fish 'collectors'

For general fish and aquarium topics. Including catfish, aquatic plants, ponds, photography, etc.

Moderators: DJRansome, fmueller

Postby bernie comeau » Sat May 03, 2008 2:31 pm

Number6 wrote:
There is NO such thing as hybrid vigor


I know this is a little off topic, but I'm not sure why you say there is NO such thing as hybrid vigor? My understanding is that this term, "hybrid vigor" is used to describe crosses in which desireable traits of both parents are dominant in the offspring and the undesireable traits of both parents are recessive and therefore not expressed.

Certainly there are, for example, crosses of plant strains, of which the innitial cross will significantly out-yeild either parent, because desireable traits of both parents are dominant in the offspring. Now of course, since the hybrid is heterozygous for many traits, subsequent crosses result in a "mish- mash" of traits and the "hybrid vigor' is lost in the next generation. In other words, the hybrid is a superior crop, producing higher yeilds for consumption, but is useless for breeding stock to produce seed. Unless, that is, a select few are line bred over many generations to produce a new homozygous strain.
bernie comeau
 
Joined: Mon Feb 19, 2007 2:38 am
Location: saskatoon, SK Canada

Share On:

Share on Facebook Facebook Share on Twitter Twitter

Postby Number6 » Sat May 03, 2008 3:59 pm

Darkside, normal is by definition: conforming to the standard or the common type. The only subjectivity to the term normal is what degree of variance is acceptable enough to be called similar to the holotype.

Can mistakes be made when the holotype is described? sure... does time change the holotype description? you betcha... but at a point in time, the holotype is real and is the norm.



Bernie... you are correct in your definition of where the term hybrid vigor arose from... perhaps instead of saying that there is no such thing as hybrid vigor I should have stuck to my usual line of "hybrid vigor is largely a myth". There is a short term boon to hybrid offspring in the first few generations in some cases followed often by a longer term decline in overall fitness. :wink: so you got me on this one... I wasn't being very precise. :)
My WC cichlids are gonna be caught on rod n reel!
User avatar
Number6
 
Joined: Thu Mar 13, 2003 5:36 pm
Location: Sunny Tampa!

Postby Darkside » Sat May 03, 2008 4:16 pm

Number6 wrote:(or at least fish I would label as abnormal)


Subjectivity enters the equation when you personally ascribe "your" definition to the condition of being normal. Hence when "you" label something as abnormal, that by nature is subjective. This is why I didn't criticize your use of the word normal. What I meant to point out were the conditions that you used to describe the quality of "being normal".
User avatar
Darkside
 
Joined: Wed Feb 06, 2008 6:34 pm
Location: Guelph

Postby CichlidWhisperer » Sat May 03, 2008 4:50 pm

Number 6, You stated "So far... I do not see a solid argument why abnormal fish (or at least fish I would label as abnormal) deserve consideration as normals." But, I am not truly what you think is abnormal... But yes, defining what is abnormal is what my initial post was about. As far as I am concerned, a simple cross of fish within a species creating a new 'morph' is not an abnormal fish... Crossing between species on the other hand, depends on the species and their offspring. To me, a fish is not 'abnormal' based on it having a slightly different color pattern than the text book says. I am not saying to take abnormal fish (for an acurate look at what I consider abnormal, check out those wierd cat fish things that someone posted warning not to buy) and breed them by any means.

This post was intended to develop the discussion of what abnormal really is and peoples individual opinions about what should and should not be breed. It was not intended to come to any definitive conclusions, but merely hear other peoples opinions... It is and will always be up to the individual to decide what they want in their tank and what they wish to do with them.

One other point, I think most people comprehend the general concept of Family, Group and Species based on high school biology. Hybrids can be within a species or outside of it as you pointed out. However, the more distantly related two fish are, the more likely they are to have truly abnormal offspring, such as those 'catfish' things.


I am actually very happy with how people have discussed this matter.. I am really starting to understand where some people who want very 'pure' fish are coming from. I still disagree, but I can at least see why they would feel this way.
User avatar
CichlidWhisperer
 
Joined: Sat Apr 12, 2008 5:43 pm
Location: New Jersey

Postby Fogelhund » Sat May 03, 2008 4:58 pm

Dictionary.com

Normal - conforming to the standard or the common type; usual; not abnormal; regular; natural.

By definition, if something does not conform to the standard, or is natural, it is abnormal. Improper markings, colour, shape, hybridization of geographical strains, hybridization of species... by definition are abnormal.
User avatar
Fogelhund
 
Joined: Tue Dec 03, 2002 12:34 am
Location: ON, Canada

Postby Number6 » Sat May 03, 2008 7:45 pm

Darkside wrote: What I meant to point out were the conditions that you used to describe the quality of "being normal".
Yup... I understood that.

This is really what the conversation boils down to. Cichlidwhisperer is very lenient on just how abnormal a fish can be and it would still be acceptable for breeding...

as you can see from Fogelhund's post and mine, improper markings, shape, color or any hybridization deserve the abnormal label.
My WC cichlids are gonna be caught on rod n reel!
User avatar
Number6
 
Joined: Thu Mar 13, 2003 5:36 pm
Location: Sunny Tampa!

Postby PsYcHoTiC_MaDmAn » Sat May 03, 2008 8:45 pm

[quote=â€
Live in the UK?
Interested in cichlids?
Then Join the British Cichlid Association
http://www.britishcichlid.com
User avatar
PsYcHoTiC_MaDmAn
 
Joined: Mon Dec 26, 2005 7:31 pm
Location: Wales

Postby dwarfpike » Sat May 03, 2008 9:13 pm

PsYcHoTiC_MaDmAn - unfortunately most pics you see are hydrids with Amphilophus citrinellus which don't have the enlarged lips, which seems the more dominate trait. But since WC individuals would be exposed to the enviromental effects you described. Though the F1 babies usually get them too so hard to say. Most midas and red devils now a days are a mix of the two species or even some of the newer species.
User avatar
dwarfpike
 
Joined: Tue Jan 22, 2008 1:51 am
Location: Emerald City

Postby CichlidWhisperer » Sun May 04, 2008 7:26 am

LOL... now I have a wierd image of a fish-dog (half boxer dog, half yellow lab fish.) And yes, I think that is very abnormal...

In any case, what do you all think about the OB Peacock?
User avatar
CichlidWhisperer
 
Joined: Sat Apr 12, 2008 5:43 pm
Location: New Jersey

Postby dwarfpike » Sun May 04, 2008 7:51 am

I'm bias on the OB peacock, as I've yet to see a OB fish I liked no matter what lake it comes from natively and in wild types.

Yet I like calico cats, go figure. :P
User avatar
dwarfpike
 
Joined: Tue Jan 22, 2008 1:51 am
Location: Emerald City

Postby CichlidWhisperer » Sun May 04, 2008 8:05 am

Hey, I just got an awsome picture of my OB Peacock Literally about 10 minutes ago.) I am still having a few issues (mostly lighting and glass issues) learning to take perfect pictures, so give it a little slack. But, this is the first time I caught a pic of a fish yawning.

Image
User avatar
CichlidWhisperer
 
Joined: Sat Apr 12, 2008 5:43 pm
Location: New Jersey

Postby DJRansome » Sun May 04, 2008 9:55 am

If I'm going to make more fish whether I want to or not, where possible I'd like to replicate the conditions of healthy specimens living in a healthy environment in the lake. I'm told a healthy female on her own will chose the healthiest male of her own population if one is available. Most often this means bright colors and fabulous fins, without bars or beards or mustaches.

No matter how fabulous the "new fish", I do not want to create an environment which will alter the choice the fish would make in the lake.

I necessarily have to limit the choices, and I'm not as smart as the fish, but the best I can do is try to provide bright colors and fabulous fins, without bars or beards or mustaches.
125G Borleyi, Multipunctata
75G Demasoni, Msobo, Lucipinnis
75G Calvus, Similis, Petricola
User avatar
DJRansome
Global Moderator
 
Joined: Sat Oct 29, 2005 8:30 am
Location: Little Egg Harbor, NJ

Postby Number6 » Sun May 04, 2008 10:18 am

CichlidWhisperer wrote:In any case, what do you all think about the OB Peacock?

It is a man made breed and not a rift lake cichlid. It is a pet fish that I consider to be in the same league as a pigeon blood Discus or a Blue Diamond Discus. Pretty to look at, but not the real deal.

I have had OB peacocks as a pet, and I've had Blue diamond Discus as pets.

What annoys me to no end is the disdain some people have against an OB because of it's hybrid ancestry yet something like a blue diamond Dicus gets a pass an is allowed at fish club shows etc. because it's a line bred abnormal breed. Seems hypocritical.

Fish clubs should post a list of recognized species and breeds and if they accept breeds then they should post a breed standard... same as the AKC, CKC or any other hobby where animal husbandry has become organized and tracked.

Of course, that would allow me to call ugly OB peacocks as a "lower quality specimen" so perhaps you won't support my idea on this front :lol:


DJransome... great post. :thumb:
My WC cichlids are gonna be caught on rod n reel!
User avatar
Number6
 
Joined: Thu Mar 13, 2003 5:36 pm
Location: Sunny Tampa!

Postby CichlidWhisperer » Sun May 04, 2008 4:32 pm

Makes me think that maybe there should be two grades (not sure I like the term grade) of fish and they should be labeled as such in stores. It would be hard to enforce the labeling though. Fish could be breed specifically for pets (Pet grade) or show (Show grade.)

I would think it would not only benefit those who wanted "pure," natural fish, but also thsoe who wanted fish with ideal temperments who played well with others. My OB peacock is such a fish. Can hang out with any other fish in the tank and does not get bothered or bother them.
User avatar
CichlidWhisperer
 
Joined: Sat Apr 12, 2008 5:43 pm
Location: New Jersey

Postby Darkside » Sun May 04, 2008 5:28 pm

CichlidWhisperer wrote:Makes me think that maybe there should be two grades (not sure I like the term grade) of fish and they should be labeled as such in stores. It would be hard to enforce the labeling though. Fish could be breed specifically for pets (Pet grade) or show (Show grade.)

I would think it would not only benefit those who wanted "pure," natural fish, but also thsoe who wanted fish with ideal temperments who played well with others. My OB peacock is such a fish. Can hang out with any other fish in the tank and does not get bothered or bother them.


There is no reason for stores to implement and enforce a policy like this. Those of us who want to have show fish or wild caught fish have already taken special precautions to secure fish from reliable breeders and importers. I don't believe the average buyer would benefit from a two tiered system described as above. Also its not like large fish farms will be encouraging this sort of grading, considering the small market that this "show grade" would be targeted towards. Rather it'll continue on the way it is now, with most lfs selling average fish (including hybrids and other man made morphs) while the more concerned hobbyist looks elsewhere for their "pure", natural fish.
User avatar
Darkside
 
Joined: Wed Feb 06, 2008 6:34 pm
Location: Guelph

PreviousNext

Return to General Aquaria Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests