Jmoore
Members
I just wanted to know what the rest of you thought about hybrids.
Sent from my iPhone using MonsterAquariaNetwork app
Sent from my iPhone using MonsterAquariaNetwork app
- Status
Avatar
Plenipotentiary-at-large
Easier way
There's a search function in the menu bar - the entire forum history can be so accessed and is most revelatory on "thought" pertaining to hybrids. Think you''ll see that a populist view is different than consensus, and if you are so compelled after, am sure you can still get some banter started on the subject.
There's a search function in the menu bar - the entire forum history can be so accessed and is most revelatory on "thought" pertaining to hybrids. Think you''ll see that a populist view is different than consensus, and if you are so compelled after, am sure you can still get some banter started on the subject.
Rasta Fish
CCA Members
if they happen in my tank and its something i think may look good i will keep it
dogofwar
CCA Members
There are a lot of issues that frequently get mixed together when discussing attitudes and opinions about hybrids.
Fancy fish, including hybrids, have been a big part of the aquarium hobby...since there's been an aquarium hobby. Most if not all of the fancy livebearers on the market are hybrids (and intentionally so). Man has been slectively breeding carp to have aesthetically pleasing color since like 200 AD. So the idea that the fish that we keep in glass boxes must mimic what's found in the wild is absurd. As is the notion that the availability of fancy fish will "destroy the hobby"...
There's a big difference between hybrids (or other fancy fish) produced in a random, accidental or haphazard manner and the development of stable lines of fancy fish (including hybrids). The former have little value and the latter are highly desired by some for their characteristics...and can take years of effort to produce.
Trying to establish a moral or definitional bright line between hybrid, line bred and wild-type cichlids is no possible. Cichlid taxonomy is constantly changing (based on improved understanding of cichlid evolutionary development, new analytic techniques and methods) and the species model isn't a particularly good fit for cichlids, especially those with rapid evolution and geographic variability.
When all "convicts" (peacocks, spilurum, severums, discus) were considered one species, crossing fish from different places wouldn't (technically) produce hybrids. Today, crossing the same fish would (technically) produce hybrids. Decisions by scientists to lump them back together in a different way could change this again. In the end, "species" is a man-made concept. Is line breeding peacocks (of the same species...at least for now) from different collection locations in order to produce fish with the most desired characteristics from both locations OK (since it's not technically hybridization)? As long as Germans vs. Asian breeders are doing it
?
In the end, the most important thing is accurate labeling. Mislabeled or poorly labeled fish are the scourge of the cichlid hobby. If fish have provenance and collection locations, verify that they're legit (as best you can) and keep track of them. Label fish of unknown provenance as such and be sure to label hybrids as hybrids.
Matt
There's
Fancy fish, including hybrids, have been a big part of the aquarium hobby...since there's been an aquarium hobby. Most if not all of the fancy livebearers on the market are hybrids (and intentionally so). Man has been slectively breeding carp to have aesthetically pleasing color since like 200 AD. So the idea that the fish that we keep in glass boxes must mimic what's found in the wild is absurd. As is the notion that the availability of fancy fish will "destroy the hobby"...
There's a big difference between hybrids (or other fancy fish) produced in a random, accidental or haphazard manner and the development of stable lines of fancy fish (including hybrids). The former have little value and the latter are highly desired by some for their characteristics...and can take years of effort to produce.
Trying to establish a moral or definitional bright line between hybrid, line bred and wild-type cichlids is no possible. Cichlid taxonomy is constantly changing (based on improved understanding of cichlid evolutionary development, new analytic techniques and methods) and the species model isn't a particularly good fit for cichlids, especially those with rapid evolution and geographic variability.
When all "convicts" (peacocks, spilurum, severums, discus) were considered one species, crossing fish from different places wouldn't (technically) produce hybrids. Today, crossing the same fish would (technically) produce hybrids. Decisions by scientists to lump them back together in a different way could change this again. In the end, "species" is a man-made concept. Is line breeding peacocks (of the same species...at least for now) from different collection locations in order to produce fish with the most desired characteristics from both locations OK (since it's not technically hybridization)? As long as Germans vs. Asian breeders are doing it
?In the end, the most important thing is accurate labeling. Mislabeled or poorly labeled fish are the scourge of the cichlid hobby. If fish have provenance and collection locations, verify that they're legit (as best you can) and keep track of them. Label fish of unknown provenance as such and be sure to label hybrids as hybrids.
Matt
There's
Tony
Alligator Snapping Turtle/Past Pres
There are a lot of issues that frequently get mixed together when discussing attitudes and opinions about hybrids.
Fancy fish, including hybrids, have been a big part of the aquarium hobby...since there's been an aquarium hobby. Most if not all of the fancy livebearers on the market are hybrids (and intentionally so). Man has been slectively breeding carp to have aesthetically pleasing color since like 200 AD. So the idea that the fish that we keep in glass boxes must mimic what's found in the wild is absurd. As is the notion that the availability of fancy fish will "destroy the hobby"...
There's a big difference between hybrids (or other fancy fish) produced in a random, accidental or haphazard manner and the development of stable lines of fancy fish (including hybrids). The former have little value and the latter are highly desired by some for their characteristics...and can take years of effort to produce.
Trying to establish a moral or definitional bright line between hybrid, line bred and wild-type cichlids is no possible. Cichlid taxonomy is constantly changing (based on improved understanding of cichlid evolutionary development, new analytic techniques and methods) and the species model isn't a particularly good fit for cichlids, especially those with rapid evolution and geographic variability.
When all "convicts" (peacocks, spilurum, severums, discus) were considered one species, crossing fish from different places wouldn't (technically) produce hybrids. Today, crossing the same fish would (technically) produce hybrids. Decisions by scientists to lump them back together in a different way could change this again. In the end, "species" is a man-made concept. Is line breeding peacocks (of the same species...at least for now) from different collection locations in order to produce fish with the most desired characteristics from both locations OK (since it's not technically hybridization)? As long as Germans vs. Asian breeders are doing it
In the end, the most important thing is accurate labeling. Mislabeled or poorly labeled fish are the scourge of the cichlid hobby. If fish have provenance and collection locations, verify that they're legit (as best you can) and keep track of them. Label fish of unknown provenance as such and be sure to label hybrids as hybrids.
Matt
Very well put, Matt.
Jmty
Members
HOW TO PREVENT HYBRIDS IN THE WILD...??? IT HAPPENS ???
Tony
Alligator Snapping Turtle/Past Pres
The vast majority of documented cases are related to human meddling.... release of fish by commercial collectors in non-native ranges in Lake Malawi, merging of waterways (through irrigation) in Central America, rising turbidity in the Lake Victoria Basin, etc.
The remaining cases - well that's evolution for you.
Rasta Fish
CCA Members
Maybe Hybrid isn't such a bad thing, when it happen in the wild naturally it may add a new color or traits or some different variations which in time will be a new strain (specie) of fish (Nature way of working)
However when people deliberately do it in the hobby and sell is as a different fish or try to mask it as a pure strain fish just because it looks like the original, later on it becomes a problem when its being bred back, the hybrid start to come out in the babies, this break down the pure bred strain and the fish looks like crap
I personally keep hybrids, I love the ones I have, but I would not sell or try to mask it as something else
I buy this fish (not a good picture) at the ECC auction in NJ awhile back, was sold in the auction as Aulonocara flavescent Usisya…
[FONT="]The there is another part of this subject line breeding I am not going to go there [/FONT]J
However when people deliberately do it in the hobby and sell is as a different fish or try to mask it as a pure strain fish just because it looks like the original, later on it becomes a problem when its being bred back, the hybrid start to come out in the babies, this break down the pure bred strain and the fish looks like crap
I personally keep hybrids, I love the ones I have, but I would not sell or try to mask it as something else
I buy this fish (not a good picture) at the ECC auction in NJ awhile back, was sold in the auction as Aulonocara flavescent Usisya…
[FONT="]The there is another part of this subject line breeding I am not going to go there [/FONT]J
dogofwar
CCA Members
The issue is mislabeling...and not hybridization, per se.
People mis-label fish wild-type fish constantly. And hybrids too.
Matt
People mis-label fish wild-type fish constantly. And hybrids too.
Matt
ErnieG
Members
I really don't see the problem with hybrids because if they will hybridize in your tank they are most definitely doing it in the wild. I like them and consider it an accomplishment to get two different cichlid species to breed, I hate when they are mislabeled like Matt said.
Avatar
Plenipotentiary-at-large
Failing grade
This what is known as a non-sequiiur or non-sequitur analysis, literally "it does not follow". Whether or not you see any problem or indeed one actually exists, your assertion is patently untrue.
Leopards and lions can be induced to produce hybrids in captivity - in the wild they are mortal enemies and most definitely are not "doing it". Aside from examples involving Rift Lake fish that have intermingled because man-made turbidity is so high that they are unable to differentiate their own species from others, you will be hard-pressed to offer another example of hybridization in the wild.
If indeed "they were most definitely doing it in the wild" routinely and with the unqualified abandon you maintain, the divergence that has occurred (often in relatively short order) within some habitats and which led to natural speciation would have never taken place - everyone would have been too busy "doing" everyone else for distinctive groupings of genes to occur that ultimately lead/led to different species being established.
It's a free country and you may believe and mostly do as you wish, but your rationalization is unscientific and completely false. Wishful thinking at best - emphasis on the former and a poor excuse for the latter.
On an aside, this is somewhat related to the relative impossibility of learning about or inferring natural behavior among animals in captivity as opposed to what they demonstrate and can be observed in the wild. Captivity is "unnatural" by definition, and as such the behaviors associated with captivity are often not natural and offer little or no indication of what is normal or even typical for a species. Dolphins and other cetaceans stuffed in tiny concrete tanks that their owners have the temerity to misleadingly bill as "oceanariums" or "seaquariums" are a perfect example: much of the behavior on display, whether instigated by humans or not, is never seen in the wild, and is grossly misleading as it pertains to representing the species on display thus defeating the alleged "educational" benefit that is invariably used to justify keeping beings with human-sized brains in concrete tanks for fun and profit.
By all means enjoy your hybrids, just don't imagine that there's anything remotely "natural" about them or that if you traveled to wherever it is the parents are from that one could find offspring like those that yours produce, especially absent major ecological disruptions caused by humans making a natural habitat distinctly "unnatural".
This what is known as a non-sequiiur or non-sequitur analysis, literally "it does not follow". Whether or not you see any problem or indeed one actually exists, your assertion is patently untrue.
Leopards and lions can be induced to produce hybrids in captivity - in the wild they are mortal enemies and most definitely are not "doing it". Aside from examples involving Rift Lake fish that have intermingled because man-made turbidity is so high that they are unable to differentiate their own species from others, you will be hard-pressed to offer another example of hybridization in the wild.
If indeed "they were most definitely doing it in the wild" routinely and with the unqualified abandon you maintain, the divergence that has occurred (often in relatively short order) within some habitats and which led to natural speciation would have never taken place - everyone would have been too busy "doing" everyone else for distinctive groupings of genes to occur that ultimately lead/led to different species being established.
It's a free country and you may believe and mostly do as you wish, but your rationalization is unscientific and completely false. Wishful thinking at best - emphasis on the former and a poor excuse for the latter.
On an aside, this is somewhat related to the relative impossibility of learning about or inferring natural behavior among animals in captivity as opposed to what they demonstrate and can be observed in the wild. Captivity is "unnatural" by definition, and as such the behaviors associated with captivity are often not natural and offer little or no indication of what is normal or even typical for a species. Dolphins and other cetaceans stuffed in tiny concrete tanks that their owners have the temerity to misleadingly bill as "oceanariums" or "seaquariums" are a perfect example: much of the behavior on display, whether instigated by humans or not, is never seen in the wild, and is grossly misleading as it pertains to representing the species on display thus defeating the alleged "educational" benefit that is invariably used to justify keeping beings with human-sized brains in concrete tanks for fun and profit.
By all means enjoy your hybrids, just don't imagine that there's anything remotely "natural" about them or that if you traveled to wherever it is the parents are from that one could find offspring like those that yours produce, especially absent major ecological disruptions caused by humans making a natural habitat distinctly "unnatural".
ErnieG
Members
Lol your funny, I was just giving my opinion I never said that my statement was law or right at all I was just giving my view on the topic. Dude this is a hobby so relax and stop being so serious an scientific because that's when u take the fun out of this hobby. It's really funny how people take fish from there natural habitat and don't see anything wrong with that but don't want hybrids lol silly.
Avatar
Plenipotentiary-at-large
Not this month
Use of the word "definite" implies a factual assertion so save the dudeness for someone who has a higher tolerance for BS. The fact that some people can't tell the difference doesn't make it ok to mislead them or pretend you know what you're talking about, more so as the forum exists in large part to share information among people that mostly hold truth in higher regard than fiction. But no worries - if stupid ever becomes synonymous with fun you can have the whole forum to yourself.
Cheers.
Use of the word "definite" implies a factual assertion so save the dudeness for someone who has a higher tolerance for BS. The fact that some people can't tell the difference doesn't make it ok to mislead them or pretend you know what you're talking about, more so as the forum exists in large part to share information among people that mostly hold truth in higher regard than fiction. But no worries - if stupid ever becomes synonymous with fun you can have the whole forum to yourself.
Cheers.
impala_man2003
Members
+1 avatar some people think they know everything about everything to the point that they come across as a fool and an annoyance !!
Sent from my iPhone using MonsterAquariaNetwork app
Sent from my iPhone using MonsterAquariaNetwork app
ErnieG
Members
I can careless lol, I'm enjoying this hobby. How in the world do I act like I know everything what ate u guys talking about lol? I do believe that there some hybrids in the wild and if u think there are no hybrid cichlids in the wild you are a fool.
ErnieG
Members
Your not even worth a sentence lol.
jonclark96
Past CCA President
Avatar
Plenipotentiary-at-large
Badges?! We don't need no stinking badges. Logic?! We don't need no...
Foolish as my search for intelligent life may be, seems the designation of "fool" was locked up some time ago, Nonetheless, am sure almost everyone would be thrilled to hear about your research and field observations on naturally occurring hybrids. No one ever said that they don't occur, but only one person that I recall has ever in the history of the hobby or science represented that it is common, normal or invariably the case rather than an aberration, to wit:
Not sure why anyone would be surprised at at getting called out for peddling nonsense that pegs the BS meter, but there it is.
Be well.
Foolish as my search for intelligent life may be, seems the designation of "fool" was locked up some time ago, Nonetheless, am sure almost everyone would be thrilled to hear about your research and field observations on naturally occurring hybrids. No one ever said that they don't occur, but only one person that I recall has ever in the history of the hobby or science represented that it is common, normal or invariably the case rather than an aberration, to wit:
Not sure why anyone would be surprised at at getting called out for peddling nonsense that pegs the BS meter, but there it is.
Be well.
ErnieG
Members
Lol
- Status
