Advanced search

Home

Search Species Data

Dashboard

What is the MBI?

Points

AwardLevels

Breeders & Sites

Forums

•  Designer Fish

  Change Page: < 1234567 > | Showing page 3 of 7, messages 41 to 60 of 122 - powered by ASPPlayground.NET Forum Trial Version Author Message Duck Total Posts : 466 Scores: 8 Reward points : 465 Joined: 12/14/2010 Location: Barrow in Furness, Cumberland Status: offline MBI: 760 Pnts MBI Site: Marinefish-uk.co.uk Re:Designer Fish Wednesday, August 10, 2011 2:17 PM (permalink) 0 Exactly..........Back to documentation and control. Trouble is how would you get everyone to commit? There are so many people out there that just want success in breeding I think it requires a niche group to take responsibilty for say a species and build from there. I think that's how the documentation and control of Orchids started. Specialist groups are now widespread within horticulture, why not marine ornamentals? I think it may have something to do with the commitment and cost involved? Hmmmmm I wonder if I could get a local aquarium interested in setting  up a project?   Maybe we should bang the drum a bit harder and approach more commercial aquariums to set up species conservation. Maybe contribute fish and help out?   #41 cmpenney Total Posts : 2772 Scores: 8 Reward points : 1443 Joined: 7/18/2005 Location: Reading, MI, US Status: offline MBI: 70 Pnts MBI Site: MarineLife Aquarium Society of Michigan Re:Designer Fish Wednesday, August 10, 2011 2:22 PM (permalink) 0 So is the question we trying to answer here "What are designer fish?" or "Are designer fish a good thing?"  We seem to really be touching on both issues.  The orginal question was I believe to define what they are... I think that question was for the most part answered as something like this: "Fish that are created through some form of selective breeding to bring about characteristic that are appealing to consumers"   Dictionary.com defines designer so:  ( modifier ) designed by and bearing the label or signature of a well-known fashion designer: designer jeans   ( modifier ) (of things, ideas, etc) having an appearance of fashionable trendiness: designer pop songs ; designer stubble   ( modifier ) (of cells, chemicals, etc) designed (or produced) to perform a specific function or combat a specific problem: designer insecticide   ( modifier ) (of an animal) cross-bred for a specific purpose, such as looks, temperament, or likelihood of causing an allergy: designer dogs   Can we agree one this? Chad Penney - MBI Council Agis quod Adis   #42 mPedersen Total Posts : 3450 Scores: 29 Reward points : 1376 Joined: 2/27/2009 Location: Duluth, MN, US Status: offline MBI: 4975 Pnts MBI Site: Lake Superior Marine Aquarium Club Re:Designer Fish Wednesday, August 10, 2011 2:25 PM (permalink) 0 Originally Posted by Duck Specialist groups are now widespread within horticulture, why not marine ornamentals? I think it may have something to do with the commitment and cost involved? Hmmmmm I wonder if I could get a local aquarium interested in setting  up a project?   It's an issue of size, critical mass if you will.  In FW, we have Killifish breeders, Anabantoid specialists, Cichlid Specialists who deal with maybe only one lake, Rainbowfish groups etc.  You can do that because FW breeding is a relatlively "mature" interest group.  Even so, they are still growing by leaps and bounds and learning from their own past mistakes.   WE, marine breeders, are not even close to there yet.  From my viewpoint, that alone suggests that now is a time to learn from the mistakes and experiences of other, more mature groups.  I find it honestly a bit surprising that even when you pull up examples from other groups, it often falls on deaf ears as if we're somehow "different".  I may not have enjoyed history class in school, but I DID get the overarching message - if you ignore the mistakes of the past, you're doomed to repeat them. Originally Posted by Duck Maybe we should bang the drum a bit harder and approach more commercial aquariums to set up species conservation. Maybe contribute fish and help out?   It's an interesting idea on some levels, but honestly, I gotta be blunt.  "Hobbyists" as an all encompassing group are not held in very high esteem to begin with, and sadly, the past 2-3 years did nothing to help that.  To say that academic and commercial interests are leery of working with the general public is putting it mildly.   Andy, on a related note to your post, I'm assuming you saw this -> http://www.lightning-maroon-clownfish.com/?p=1143   Conservation need not be as "grand" in scale as you might think.   #43 mPedersen Total Posts : 3450 Scores: 29 Reward points : 1376 Joined: 2/27/2009 Location: Duluth, MN, US Status: offline MBI: 4975 Pnts MBI Site: Lake Superior Marine Aquarium Club Re:Designer Fish Wednesday, August 10, 2011 2:36 PM (permalink) 0 Originally Posted by cmpenney The orginal question was I believe to define what [designer fish] are... I think that question was for the most part answered as something like this: "Fish that are created through some form of selective breeding to bring about characteristic that are appealing to consumers" Dictionary.com defines designer so:  ( modifier ) (of an animal) cross-bred for a specific purpose, such as looks, temperament, or likelihood of causing an allergy: designer dogs Can we agree one this?   I take that definition, and compare it to my own proposed definition:   Originally Posted by "Designer" fish are those forms that do not normally occur in nature.  Instead, the form has originated in captivity either spontaneously or with direct intent (i.e. intentional hybridization), and has required man's intervention, man's selective breeding, to establish and maintain the new form, or to coax out new traits through compressed, artificial evolution in the form of selective breeding.  "Man" is the "designer", not the natural processes of evolution.   and I say - YUP, seems like those two definitions use different words to get the same meaning across, perhaps with one subtle distinction - I don't view the selective breeding of a rare WILD form of a fish to be a designer fish as the result.  My Metriclima estherae example is a case of what initially may have been acceptable breeding being taken way too far to the point of taking a polymorphic species with at least 3 male color forms and 2 female color forms, and creating subpopulations that are not polymorphic (arguably what I AM kinda trying to do with the Lightning Maroon depending on how you look at it) but then throwing some likely accidental hybridization in the mix (i.e. even with separate genera) to create what is truly a man-made fish that does not have an analogy in the wild, and that man-made form has displaced the wild form in the mainstream hobby.   #44 Duck Total Posts : 466 Scores: 8 Reward points : 465 Joined: 12/14/2010 Location: Barrow in Furness, Cumberland Status: offline MBI: 760 Pnts MBI Site: Marinefish-uk.co.uk Re:Designer Fish Wednesday, August 10, 2011 2:40 PM (permalink) 0 Originally Posted by cmpenney So is the question we trying to answer here "What are designer fish?" or "Are designer fish a good thing?"  We seem to really be touching on both issues.  The orginal question was I believe to define what they are... I think that question was for the most part answered as something like this: "Fish that are created through some form of selective breeding to bring about characteristic that are appealing to consumers" Dictionary.com defines designer so:  ( modifier ) designed by and bearing the label or signature of a well-known fashion designer: designer jeans   ( modifier ) (of things, ideas, etc) having an appearance of fashionable trendiness: designer pop songs ; designer stubble   ( modifier ) (of cells, chemicals, etc) designed (or produced) to perform a specific function or combat a specific problem: designer insecticide    Can we agree one this? I think the definition is pretty solid as you quoted IMO. I think there is a relevance in i"s it a good thing" even though it is drifting away from the original question Unless others think it's strayed too far?   #45 cmpenney Total Posts : 2772 Scores: 8 Reward points : 1443 Joined: 7/18/2005 Location: Reading, MI, US Status: offline MBI: 70 Pnts MBI Site: MarineLife Aquarium Society of Michigan Re:Designer Fish Wednesday, August 10, 2011 2:45 PM (permalink) 0 I wasn't really complaining about where we are going as it is really good discussion I just wanted to make sure that we had answered the original intent of the thread as well. One of the cool things about these types of discussions is that they are almost organic in and of themselves, constantly changing and evolving as new thoughts are brought into the conversation. I think it's great.   Chad Penney - MBI Council Agis quod Adis   #46 Duck Total Posts : 466 Scores: 8 Reward points : 465 Joined: 12/14/2010 Location: Barrow in Furness, Cumberland Status: offline MBI: 760 Pnts MBI Site: Marinefish-uk.co.uk Re:Designer Fish Wednesday, August 10, 2011 2:56 PM (permalink) 0 In that case...... Matt, you are probably one of the most experienced members actively involved in this conversation. You have a history of success in other areas of breeding not only in marine.   Give me a goal and maybe some objectives to show me what success looks like (in your opinion) to enable me to develop a sustainable, conservation minded approach to breeding marines that won't cost me a fortune, but fulfills my desire to be a conscientious conservationist.   Is that a bit of an ask?   #47 mPedersen Total Posts : 3450 Scores: 29 Reward points : 1376 Joined: 2/27/2009 Location: Duluth, MN, US Status: offline MBI: 4975 Pnts MBI Site: Lake Superior Marine Aquarium Club Re:Designer Fish Wednesday, August 10, 2011 4:33 PM (permalink) 0 Originally Posted by Duck Give me a goal and maybe some objectives to show me what success looks like (in your opinion) to enable me to develop a sustainable, conservation minded approach to breeding marines that won't cost me a fortune, but fulfills my desire to be a conscientious conservationist.   Well, here's some main goals need to happen for "conservation-oriented" breeding.   1.  Better management and breeding practices applied in general to tracking of broodstock and lineage, with an emphasis on maintaining a reasonably-sized captive population.    I.e. a species like the Mcc may well be lost if we don't work with the source (Ryan Dywer) to ensure that doesn't happen.  Carefully planned breeding WILL keep that species around.  We have ONE shot at it.  Even so, education is a large part of it - most folks don't realize there are all these awesome geographical variations of Amphiprion melanopus or A. clarkii.  Because they're not known, not talked about, no one can want them and demand them in the first place.  So perhaps 1a) better education about natural biodiversity in the first place.   2.  R&D on species and groups that have not been done.  "More" new clownfish unforutnately has a side effect - we're limited to the number of clowns that the world aquarium hobby can sustain.  In the absense of multi-tank collectors (because in reality, the "clownfish collectors" are generally people with breeding as an intention) we just only have room for so many clowns.  I mean heck, if someone buys a Latezonatus, that still displaces a spot that could've been a black saddleback or an ocellaris.  With a captive livespan of 20-30 years, that only makes things worse.  We probably need a few "specialist" clownfish breeders who really nail down the geographical variations and such, but we don't need two dozen people doing that.  We need other groups of fish besides clownfish.  Clownfish are arguably "done to death".   3.  Do things OTHER folks aren't doing.  As that relates to the "specialist", we could certainly use a Goby Specialist, a Dottyback Specialist, a Fang Blenny Specialist etc.  Someone who really hones in on one niche, one small group of fish, and does them really well.  Someone who seeks out and preserves ALL the Elacatinus cleaner gobies for example.  By being a specialist, you set yourself apart from everyone else who is just doing mom and pop clownfish.  You also give people a reason to talk to you (afterall, a wholesaler may take note and consider you more seriously if you have 12 different Gobies on your list at any given moment).  Diversity of offering cuts both ways....it doesn't necessarily mean having a coupe clownfish and a couple gobies and a couple dottybacks.  It can mean being "Mr. Dottyback" and having CB species that no one else even bothers to do because on LARGE scales, they don't make financial sense.  Another phrase for this - be Boutique Suppliers.   #48 mPedersen Total Posts : 3450 Scores: 29 Reward points : 1376 Joined: 2/27/2009 Location: Duluth, MN, US Status: offline MBI: 4975 Pnts MBI Site: Lake Superior Marine Aquarium Club Re:Designer Fish Thursday, August 11, 2011 12:51 PM (permalink) 0 Another side note example - the Snake Breeders and what they are doing is nothing short of astonishing.   Now, you may recall I said that designer clownfish have the potential to displace the natural forms altogether, right?  Case in point - Look at the various Reticulated Phytons on this site ( I love their vids) - http://www.prehistoricpets.com/browse/pythons/reticulated-pythons   All sorts of amazing stuff.  What comes up when you click on the "wildtype / localities" link?   NOTHING.   Now, I'm sure you could find wildtype reticulated pythons somewhere, but case in point, you can get anything you want from the site above, so long as it's NOT the natural form.  And I don't think that's because they're "sold out", more that they're "out of stock" because they're not even bothering.   #49 mPedersen Total Posts : 3450 Scores: 29 Reward points : 1376 Joined: 2/27/2009 Location: Duluth, MN, US Status: offline MBI: 4975 Pnts MBI Site: Lake Superior Marine Aquarium Club Re:Designer Fish Thursday, August 11, 2011 2:07 PM (permalink) 0 And when I say the snake people "have it down", here's a nice genetics fundamentals page...from the snake crowd - http://www.blumenboas.com/geneticterms.htm   #50 Umm_fish? Total Posts : 2835 Scores: 10 Reward points : 953 Joined: 11/4/2009 Location: Boulder, CO, US Status: offline MBI: 775 Pnts MBI Site: Marine Aquarium Society of Colorado Re:Designer Fish Thursday, August 11, 2011 2:19 PM (permalink) 0 BTW, Matt, I'm sorry. I never got back to you on the reference to the FAO document. IMO, the bottleneck is fine--as you point out--just as long as nothing deleterious passes through it. That is, if you have a bottleneck that happens to concentrate something like flared gills in clowns, for example, or hip dysplasia in German shepherds then that's in your larger population forever. Now, if the bottleneck is forced upon us then there's nothing we can do about it (sort of like the McC issue where what we've got is _all_ we're ever likely to get) and you do the best you can. Otherwise, it's wise to choose well when choosing the bottleneck individuals. As most breeders probably know anyway (get the best broodstock you can), but still bears mentioning. --Andy, the bucket man. "Not to know the mandolin is to argue oneself unknown...." --Clara Lanza, 1886   #51 Duck Total Posts : 466 Scores: 8 Reward points : 465 Joined: 12/14/2010 Location: Barrow in Furness, Cumberland Status: offline MBI: 760 Pnts MBI Site: Marinefish-uk.co.uk Re:Designer Fish Thursday, August 11, 2011 3:39 PM (permalink) 0 Originally Posted by mPedersen Originally Posted by Duck Give me a goal and maybe some objectives to show me what success looks like (in your opinion) to enable me to develop a sustainable, conservation minded approach to breeding marines that won't cost me a fortune, but fulfills my desire to be a conscientious conservationist. Well, here's some main goals need to happen for "conservation-oriented" breeding. 1.  Better management and breeding practices applied in general to tracking of broodstock and lineage, with an emphasis on maintaining a reasonably-sized captive population.    I.e. a species like the Mcc may well be lost if we don't work with the source (Ryan Dywer) to ensure that doesn't happen.  Carefully planned breeding WILL keep that species around.  We have ONE shot at it.  Even so, education is a large part of it - most folks don't realize there are all these awesome geographical variations of Amphiprion melanopus or A. clarkii.  Because they're not known, not talked about, no one can want them and demand them in the first place.  So perhaps 1a) better education about natural biodiversity in the first place. 2.  R&D on species and groups that have not been done.  "More" new clownfish unforutnately has a side effect - we're limited to the number of clowns that the world aquarium hobby can sustain.  In the absense of multi-tank collectors (because in reality, the "clownfish collectors" are generally people with breeding as an intention) we just only have room for so many clowns.  I mean heck, if someone buys a Latezonatus, that still displaces a spot that could've been a black saddleback or an ocellaris.  With a captive livespan of 20-30 years, that only makes things worse.  We probably need a few "specialist" clownfish breeders who really nail down the geographical variations and such, but we don't need two dozen people doing that.  We need other groups of fish besides clownfish.  Clownfish are arguably "done to death". 3.  Do things OTHER folks aren't doing.  As that relates to the "specialist", we could certainly use a Goby Specialist, a Dottyback Specialist, a Fang Blenny Specialist etc.  Someone who really hones in on one niche, one small group of fish, and does them really well.  Someone who seeks out and preserves ALL the Elacatinus cleaner gobies for example.  By being a specialist, you set yourself apart from everyone else who is just doing mom and pop clownfish.  You also give people a reason to talk to you (afterall, a wholesaler may take note and consider you more seriously if you have 12 different Gobies on your list at any given moment).  Diversity of offering cuts both ways....it doesn't necessarily mean having a coupe clownfish and a couple gobies and a couple dottybacks.  It can mean being "Mr. Dottyback" and having CB species that no one else even bothers to do because on LARGE scales, they don't make financial sense.  Another phrase for this - be Boutique Suppliers.   I agree that fundamentally we/I need to have more focus on specialising in a particular group of fish.  It's the way other areas of conservation go and it's a proven way of delivering a sustainable gene pool and at the same time providing provenance for known and existing fish, which could be developed as understanding and geographical differences are better characterised and documented. Well I would love to start a "species group" just need to figure out how to tear down some of my tanks and develop a suitable system! Then of course theres the issue of budget management. My electricity bill is killing me!   I think as you say a small species like Elacatinus would be a good start as I know I can spawn and keep them in very small tanks. What concerns me is the long growout to saleable size, but im confident there's a market, just not sure if it would cover my costs as one of my goals is to give up work to concentrate 24/7 on breeding. Maybe I should get a job in an lfs and convince them to do it there! Hahaha. Now that would be a first! An lfs with a specialist breeding program!   #52 mPedersen Total Posts : 3450 Scores: 29 Reward points : 1376 Joined: 2/27/2009 Location: Duluth, MN, US Status: offline MBI: 4975 Pnts MBI Site: Lake Superior Marine Aquarium Club Re:Designer Fish Thursday, August 11, 2011 7:10 PM (permalink) 0 Elacatinus shouldn't have a long growout - i..e 4-6 months it hsould be ready (they only live a year or two in nature).   #53 KathyL Total Posts : 2639 Scores: 13 Reward points : 1504 Joined: 6/6/2010 Location: St. Louis, MO, US Status: offline MBI: 1605 Pnts MBI Site: Marine Aquarium Societies of North America Re:Designer Fish Thursday, August 11, 2011 7:13 PM (permalink) 0 I've got some that are over 3 years, with no signs of aging.  I've heard 5 years more recently.  Not sure how long they are fertile.  Mine stopped rather shortly.   #54 mPedersen Total Posts : 3450 Scores: 29 Reward points : 1376 Joined: 2/27/2009 Location: Duluth, MN, US Status: offline MBI: 4975 Pnts MBI Site: Lake Superior Marine Aquarium Club Re:Designer Fish Thursday, August 11, 2011 7:17 PM (permalink) 0 More from the snake folks...  Dealing with the "dark side" of all their genetic "designer" breeding... http://www.snakepreview.com/wordpress-2.9.2/wordpress/pythonregius/1831/ http://www.repticzone.com/forums/BallPython/messages/1709878.html   #55 De Angelr Total Posts : 24 Scores: 0 Reward points : 49 Joined: 6/17/2011 Location: , AL, US Status: offline MBI: 0 Pnts MBI Site: UberFrags.net Web Forum Re:Designer Fish Monday, August 15, 2011 11:50 AM (permalink) 0 I am surprised you are so against the designer clowns..   In some says isnt the lighting project sort of going after "designer" characteristics..?   If you produce offspring with "lighting" patterns, those fish will be coveted, they will be further bred with other PNG maroons, or possibly other "lighting" like clowns.. I see the lighting characteristic going down the same road as any other designer morphs..   After all, we know that variants like "picasso" or "snowflake" occur in the wild, so it is easy for me to see how two wildcaught "picasso" clownfish could produce a "platinum"   This fish would have the same genetics as any other WC fish.   If these variant are bred to ensure genetic integrity would you still be against them?   #56 jeff@zina.com Total Posts : 49 Scores: 2 Reward points : 96 Joined: 1/2/2011 Location: Naples, FL, US Status: offline MBI: 0 Pnts MBI Site: Marine Aquarium Societies of North America Re:Designer Fish Monday, August 15, 2011 11:50 AM (permalink) 0 There are really two parts to "designer" breeding.  The first is just basic morphs of the same species, black occelaris for example.  Compare it to the freshwater angelfish, which has been well documented for inheritance of traits, or the fancy guppy.  A wild-type (silver) p. scalare is the same species as a veil gold pearlscale p. scalare, and is simply the result of selective breeding.  The traits exist in nature but are rarely expressed.   On the other hand, there is also hybridization, an occelaris/percula cross for example.  This results in a third species or a hybrid, not just a color morph of the original.  This is, in nature, normally an abomination.  We know that some crosses do occur in nature, but it is extremely rare and no where near the rate of a purposeful cross done in a breeding setup.   Is either wrong?  Are they the "natural" way?  Should it make any difference to us, ecologically, ethically or legally?  Those are questions we will probably never have a definitive answer for.   Jeff   #57 De Angelr Total Posts : 24 Scores: 0 Reward points : 49 Joined: 6/17/2011 Location: , AL, US Status: offline MBI: 0 Pnts MBI Site: UberFrags.net Web Forum Re:Designer Fish Monday, August 15, 2011 11:55 AM (permalink) 0 I would love to focus my breeding efforts on holotype specimens.  I am working a few pairs right now.   But designer clownfish give the aquarist an opportunity to put a truly unique, in some case one of a kind looking fish into their aquariums.  They also provide the breeder with a better selling price.   If you we want breeders to focus on breeding holtype fish then we need to pay more for those fish..   I have been looking to to get my hands on a pair of Fusco's for going on 3 years now, I haven't even found anyone who has ever collected there. Im starting to think they only way to get them is to get the try and secure the permits myself.. Finding rare clowns that are holotype is nearly impossible.. IMO.   #58 mPedersen Total Posts : 3450 Scores: 29 Reward points : 1376 Joined: 2/27/2009 Location: Duluth, MN, US Status: offline MBI: 4975 Pnts MBI Site: Lake Superior Marine Aquarium Club Re:Designer Fish Monday, August 15, 2011 12:36 PM (permalink) 0 Originally Posted by De Angelr I am surprised you are so against the designer clowns..   In some says isnt the lighting project sort of going after "designer" characteristics..?   Yes, in some sense you could certainly argue that.  The only reason I have the Lightning is that it's "Ma Nature's".  There's been more than one too.  It IS something with a geographic origin too.  So we're looking at natural biodiversity.  Really, by all accounts, that fish could've come out of two PNG Maroons paired up in someone's aquarium and I a) wouldn't buy it and b) would classify it in the "designer" group.  Yes, I realize it's a fine line I'm walking, but we're all going to have to make such a call at some point.  Originally Posted by De Angelr If you produce offspring with "lighting" patterns, those fish will be coveted, they will be further bred with other PNG maroons, or possibly other "lighting" like clowns..   I would encourage poeple to outcross it to other PNG Maroons.  I would strongly speak out against the efforts to create something like a "Gold Stripe Lightning Maroon".  Again, long term thinking here...there won't be a real "gold stripe" lightning maroon unless it originates out of GSM stock...afterall GSM and WSM are not really the "same" fish...taxomonically yes, but taxonomy is far from prefect and doesn't account for those things we as aquarists realize.   Originally Posted by De Angelr I see the lighting characteristic going down the same road as any other designer morphs..    That is the downside to the project.  If I succeed, I preserve this unique natural form, but I also offer the tools to open pandora's box. Originally Posted by De Angelr After all, we know that variants like "picasso" or "snowflake" occur in the wild   Actually, I am only aware of the Picasso being found repeatedly in the wild.  The "Snowflake" mutation in Ocellaris occured in captivity.   Originally Posted by De Angelr so it is easy for me to see how two wildcaught "picasso" clownfish could produce a "platinum"   This fish would have the same genetics as any other WC fish.    Yes, it is possible perhaps that two WC Picasso Percs could output F1 Platinum percs.  To do so with a geographically known set of Picasso Perc parents would have some redeeming merits perhaps.  But to say that the fish would have the same genetics as any other WC fish would be inaccurate.  There aren't any wild Platinum percs..they're not part of the naturally occuring biodiversity.  It's not to say they couldn't happen.  Natural selection prevents it.  And you couldn't use Platinums for repopulation efforts (unless the natural predators that would ordinarily eliminate them are gone). Originally Posted by De Angelr If these variant are bred to ensure genetic integrity would you still be against them?   In theory, yes, I'd still be against them because the original, natural form of the species is lost in such lines of breeding (although perhaps not...I saw something somewhere that suggested that Plat X Plat can still put out throwbacks to natural percs).  A better example might be the displacement of normal ocellaris with albinos.  Let's just say it happened.  The end result is the same....non-natural fish...while hte "species" perhaps is still preserved, the natural form is lost, and thus, the goal of conserving natural biodiversity has failed.   Originally Posted by jeff@zina.com There are really two parts to "designer" breeding.  The first is just basic morphs of the same species, black occelaris for example.   Ah, but here again is an example of taxonomy not really fully matching up with biology and geography.  We know that Darwins come from one specific area.  I don't know for a fact, but it sounds like there aren't any normally colored ocellaris in the area.  In our tanks, we find they have pretty substantial differences in breeding and reproduction, being closer in some respects to percs vs. ocellaris.  We may one day come to find that the "Black ocellaris", at least the natural form, could represent a subspecies or a new species altogether.   Originally Posted by jeff@zina.com Compare it to the freshwater angelfish, which has been well documented for inheritance of traits, or the fancy guppy.  A wild-type (silver) p. scalare is the same species as a veil gold pearlscale p. scalare, and is simply the result of selective breeding.  The traits exist in nature but are rarely expressed.   Ah, but the fancy guppy is now though to be the result of hybridization.  What about our captive discus....hybrids too.  It is quite possible that we could come to find that our captive bred lines of Angelfish may well actually have sprung forth from disparate populations of wild angelfish that, upon greater examination, could prove to be distinct species afterall.   A veil gold pearscale angelfish yes, is the result of selective breeding, but also has never been found in nature and presumably would fail to exist in nature much in the same way that albinos get snatched up fairly quickly.  And can we get the natural form of P. scarlare from the viel gold pearlscale angelfish, or is the natural form lost? Originally Posted by jeff@zina.com On the other hand, there is also hybridization, an occelaris/percula cross for example.  This results in a third species or a hybrid, not just a color morph of the original.  This is, in nature, normally an abomination.  We know that some crosses do occur in nature, but it is extremely rare and no where near the rate of a purposeful cross done in a breeding setup.   Not sure I have anything to respond to there. Originally Posted by jeff@zina.com Is either wrong? Depends Originally Posted by jeff@zina.com Are they the "natural" way? The very definition of natural should answer that. Originally Posted by jeff@zina.com Should it make any difference to us, ecologically, ethically or legally? Ecologically it certainly matters to the species in the wild.  Legally?  Not sure what the law should have a say in.  Ethically?  I believe we can all work ethically together to ensure that the efforts of one group don't impair the efforts of another.  So yes, it does matter.   Originally Posted by jeff@zina.com Those are questions we will probably never have a definitive answer for. Jeff   I'd argue that these questions not only have been asked, many times before us, but they've been answered many times before as well.  To say we can't have a definitive answer is to simply a) give up or b) try to paint enough vaugery or doubt on the issues as to suggest they can't be solved.  They can, they have been, so what's standing in the way here?   Originally Posted by De Angelr   I would love to focus my breeding efforts on holotype specimens.  I am working a few pairs right now.   But designer clownfish give the aquarist an opportunity to put a truly unique, in some case one of a kind looking fish into their aquariums.  They also provide the breeder with a better selling price.   If you we want breeders to focus on breeding holtype fish then we need to pay more for those fish..   Here's something to consider.  Educating our fellow hobbyists.  Setting an example. Why do African Cichlid enthusiasts generally avoid all the "designer" cichlids?  Simple, because the community has established a common understanding that there are plenty of natural forms available, rare enough in their own right, and has shown that they're worthy of our appreciation.  There too, there are still difficult goals for hobbyists to try to tackle and thus, can still gain noteriety if they succeed (breeding of a fish like Benthochromis tricoti comes to mind). Sadly, these lessons, and these modern appreciations, didn't come forth out of careful thought.  Instead, they were born out of hobbyists being BURNED by other hobbyists and suppliers...i.e. wanting one thing, getting something else, wasting time, effort and money along the way.  That results in a lot of finger pointing and animosity. Originally Posted by De Angelr  I have been looking to to get my hands on a pair of Fusco's for going on 3 years now, I haven't even found anyone who has ever collected there. Im starting to think they only way to get them is to get the try and secure the permits myself.. Finding rare clowns that are holotype is nearly impossible.. IMO.      I'm not sure what the holotype has to do with it here...afterall there are some 20-30 variations on things like Melanopus and Clarkii...the "holotype" for the species represents only one geographic location to start with.  What about all those other forms?   Indeed, Mcc's came about only because someone did just that...got the permits and got the fish themselves.  Someone has to take the initiative.   #59 Fishtal Total Posts : 5467 Scores: 37 Reward points : 2908 Joined: 8/31/2006 Location: Waterford, MI, US Status: offline MBI: 585 Pnts MBI Site: MarineLife Aquarium Society of Michigan Re:Designer Fish Monday, August 15, 2011 12:47 PM (permalink) 0 Matt,   Let me know if you remember where you read about the Plat X Plat. I'd be interested in reading it. http://www.fishtalpropagations.com/#!home/mainPage "Making captive breeding easier."   #60 Online Bookmarks Sharing: Facebook Digg Google del.icio.us StumbleUpon Change Page: < 1234567 > | Showing page 3 of 7, messages 41 to 60 of 122 - powered by ASPPlayground.NET Forum Trial Version

•  

  Jump to: Jump to - - - - - - - - - - [Breeding Topics] - - - - MBI Rules and Regulations - - - - FAQs - - - - Getting Started - - - - Fish Breeding - - - - - - - - Amblygobius, Gobidon (Gobies) - - - - - - - - Apogonidae (Cardinalfish) - - - - - - - - Ecsenius, Meiacanthus, Salarius (Blennies) - - - - - - - - Pomacanthidae (Angelfish) - - - - - - - - Pomacentridae (Clownfish & Damsels) - - - - - - - - Pseudochromidae (Dottybacks) - - - - - - - - Opistogathidae (Jawfish) - - - - - - - - Synchiropus (dragonets) - - - - Invert Breeding - - - - - - - - Decapoda ( Shrimps and Crabs ) - - - - - - - - Nudibranchia ( Nudibranchs ) - - - - Breeding Around the World - - - - - - - - Discussões de reprodução em Português - - - - - - - - Discusiones de cría en español - - - - - - - - Zucht Diskussionen in deutscher Sprache - - - - Culturing and Feeding - - - - Fish Breeding Journals - - - - - - - - Apogonidae (Cardinalfish) Journals - - - - - - - - Pomacentridae (Clownfish & Damsels) Journals - - - - - - - - Pseudochromidae (Dottyback) Journals - - - - - - - - Syngnathidae (Seahorse & Pipefish) Journals - - - - - - - - Gobidon, etc (Gobies) Journals - - - - - - - - Synchiropus (dragonet) Journals - - - - Invert Breeding Journals - - - - Food Culturing Journals - - - - Experiment Journals - - - - - - - - Fish and Larval Experiments - - - - - - - - Phytoplankton Experiments - - - - - - - - Zooplankton Experiments - - - - System Builds - - - - Hardware & Breeding Equipment - - - - Hybridization - - - - Co-Operatives, Courses & Projects - - - - - - - - Intro to Culturing Pelagic Copepods - - - - Disease & Quarantine [Buying and Selling] - - - - Pairs and Broodstock - - - - Captive Bred Livestock [Other Forums] - - - - Annoucements - - - - Feedback / Feature Requests - - - - Meetings & Events - - - - MBI Bug Reports - - - - Off Topic - - - - Smack Talk! - - - - Introductions - - - - MarketPlace Issues

•  

  Current active users There are 0 members and 3 guests. Icon Legend and Permission New Messages No New Messages Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages Read Message Post New Thread Reply to message Post New Poll Submit Vote Post reward post Delete my own posts Delete my own threads Rate post

The MBI is a division of the MarineLife Aquarium Society of Michigan(MASM), Inc. A 501(c)3 Corporation as determined by the Internal Revenue Service of the United State of America.
You can view MASM's determination letter by following this link