# the big hybrid question



## Adrian101 (Jan 24, 2011)

*hybrids*​
should be culled before they are born26.06%are fine if they are just for the person who has created them3193.94%


----------



## Adrian101 (Jan 24, 2011)

Started this thread as my blue and threadfin acaras just started courting behavior. And before i start i just want to say that i don't want this to become a slaging match. Everyone has their own opinions and experiences so lets remain adults and respect them even if we disagree. Now my question is this. Is there really anything wrong with hybrids? I know that a natural fish is desirable but in most species hybridisation is a good thing. My main example would be dogs, they are the most diverse and one of the most successful species on the planet and have been hybridised for various reasons for centuries. Even humans are thought to have hybridised with neolythic species. So if you would care to leave your answer on the poll it would be great. I have my opinion but don't wanna voice it till i have had some responses mainly as i don't wanna make myself a target for one side or the other. Thanks guys.


----------



## Aulonocara_Freak (May 19, 2011)

I personally think that if you are not going to sell the hybrid's you can keep them, now if you were going to sell, give away, etc. then I am going to say NO!

Some hybrid's look cool, for example this one, http://www.cichlid-forum.com/phpBB/viewtopic.php?t=233610&highlight=


----------



## Melanochromis (Mar 30, 2005)

Most of my synodontis are hybrids so I don't have a problem with most hybrids, also had Labeotropheus x Red Zebra hybrids which I did eventually trade in as they were breeding like mad. One thing I would note, particularly about mbuna hybrids is that they seem to be more adaptable, aggressive, and also grow far quicker and much bigger than some pure species. The only hybrids I don't like are Blood Parrots and Balloon hybrids, such as Balloon rams which look completely unnatural and also in the case of the Rams ssem to have vastly shortened life spans compared with pure species. Here is an article on hybrid synos it also covers the issue of hybrid fish in the hobby -

http://www.practicalfishkeeping.co.uk/c ... p?sid=2928

I have the Tiger, Valentine, and Nigrita/Petricola hybrids. I think my Ocellifer may even be an Ocellifer/Eupterus hybrid. One thing to note is that most hybrid synodontis are a mix with one pure species and either one of the Tanganyikan species or Eupterus. I've also seen a new syno hybrid which has appeared lately which is Nigrita/Eupterus it looks far more attractive than the pure a Nigrita with a high dorsal associated with Eupterus. The only thing I don't like is when I see a LFS trying to pass off a hybrid syno as a rare species such as S.Velifer or S.Granulosus for a high price. :x


----------



## ivanmike (Jun 15, 2003)

I'm not going to vote as hybrids seem to be more popular.

That said, I'm more "old school ACA" where at least neotropical hybrids were considered anathema and blood parrots downright abusive.

I personally prefer "pure" fish, and wild far over farmed fish.

Now when it comes to tilapia for food, hybrids have saved countless lives in third world countries as well as giving us some tasty food over here, so I guess it's all relative.


----------



## dogofwar (Apr 5, 2004)

There is a big difference between a random hybrid (e.g. two species of acaras mating with each other) and intentional ornamental hybrids like flowerhorns, OB peacocks or "Firefish"...

I view flowerhorns, OB peacocks, etc. in the same way that I view other "fancy" fish like rainbow colored discus, fancy livebearers, fancy angels, bettas, goldfish and koi, EBJD, etc, etc. Man developed them - on purpose - to be different than what's found in nature... These fish have been the foundation of the aquarium hobby...since there has been an aquarium hobby.

Trying to establish some kind of a moral "bright line" between fancy fish that have been developed by line breeding, perhaps, different varients of a species of cichlid (or by inbreeding a mutation)...vs. two closely related species...really doesn't make sense. Taxonomy changes all of the time. One species with 5 varients one day. Five different species the next. OK one day. Bad the next. Same fish, though. The "bright line" is also blurred by the fact that the genetic make-up of ornamantal fish (to say nothing of the verifiable "purity" of wild-type fish) is not knowable.

I view the "danger" of hybrids as a function of responsibility and proper labeling. Is it really any more or less dangerous for there to be mislabeled (but "pure"), for example, peacocks or Vieja on the market... than for there to be improperly labeled peacocks or Vieja hybrids? Should we cull all cichlids that are easy to mid-identify as fry?

Matt


----------



## Adrian101 (Jan 24, 2011)

I see your point but mould argue that you can draw a moral line. In my opinion two species, closely related or not, that breed naturally in an aquarium, by that i mean they do it of their own accord, are fine as long as the offspring are not passed off as one species or the other but are known as a hybrid. Some hybrids occur naturally such as the mentioned ebjd, i know its a mutation and not a hybrid but someone has already mentioned it so i thought i would too. I guess my main problem comes with selective breeding and hybrids combined for example the blood parrot is just cruel in my opinion. When an animal suffers for our pleasure it seems a bit wrong. This can apply to dogs as well, like the pug, when they are so pure for a trait it becomes damaging. Guess it pp a strange area and i see both sides of the argument and i see the flaws in my own point as well. Lets see what others say. 
Thanks for all the input guys.


----------



## DJRansome (Oct 29, 2005)

I like trying to have a slice of the lake, so hybrids need to be kept by the owner, IMO. Yes the fish will breed without being forced, but the fishkeeper who chooses to keep unsuitable fish combined in a tank bears the responsibility. The fish have the urge to reproduce, and the fishkeeper provides the environment and the tankmates. So really...you are sort of forcing them.


----------



## bernie comeau (Feb 19, 2007)

Adrian101 said:


> are fine as long as the offspring are not passed off as one species or the other but are known


Yes, to begin with they have to be known. Yes, but to be out out into the market they should be :
1.Distinctly different then anything that is commonly availaible. Otherwise why get the hybird when you could get the real thing ??

2.Breed true. Should be an actual true breed. If the breed puts out all sorts, then your relying on the breeders to cull...which they often do not do!


----------



## BillD (May 17, 2005)

Adrian101 said:


> My main example would be dogs, they are the most diverse and one of the most successful species on the planet and have been hybridised for various reasons for centuries. .


This is a bad example since all dogs, regardless of breed, are the same species, so they are not hybrids. Personally, I would prevent the breeding from happening in the first place.


----------



## Fogelhund (Dec 3, 2002)

Adrian101 said:


> Is there really anything wrong with hybrids? I know that a natural fish is desirable but in most species hybridisation is a good thing.


If two distinct species hybridize, it is no longer a species, but an inter-species hybrid. So which of the original species is this good for, given it is not either?



> My main example would be dogs, they are the most diverse and one of the most successful species on the planet and have been hybridised for various reasons for centuries.


Which aren't hybrids as others have mentioned, so the argument fails.



> Even humans are thought to have hybridised with neolythic species.


Not sure what this has to do with fish, but these hybrids did not survive as a new hybrid species..



> I have my opinion but don't wanna voice it till i have had some responses mainly as i don't wanna make myself a target for one side or the other.


Your opinion is obvious already. I'm not in favour of hybridization, and in particular when people intentionally mislabel, or misrepresent hybrids.


----------



## Adrian101 (Jan 24, 2011)

*Fogelhund*
This is exactly what i didn't want. I wanted people to justify their own opinions not just say somethin and then try to pick apart what others say. Wanted conversation not argument. Oh well. Guess its to much of a touchy subject.


----------



## Fogelhund (Dec 3, 2002)

Adrian101 said:


> *Fogelhund*
> This is exactly what i didn't want. I wanted people to justify their own opinions not just say somethin and then try to pick apart what others say. Wanted conversation not argument. Oh well. Guess its to much of a touchy subject.


If you use the search function, you will find this discussion has been done many times. Conversation/discussion/argument/debate isn't too different from each other really, as long as it remains civil.

As soon as people offer opinions, and then attempt to justify it, then you'll run into people countering their justifications, if they are based on falsehoods. If you wanted people to simply say, I like hybrids, I don't like hybrids, that is one thing, but to expect justification without response, is a little naive.


----------



## Adrian101 (Jan 24, 2011)

The reason i say about the picking apart opinion etc is people often don't know all the facts and just jump in. The definition of species to start with is very complicated and there is no set yet. Dogs and wolves are different species and yet can interbreed, this has been done for centuries. That's what i ment by saying justify your own opinion before picking apart others. Personally i don't want to buy a hybrid fish and wouldn't sell any. But a large amount of people buy a fish just to look good and nothing else. Hence flowerhorns etc do so well. Another point is what's worse breeding for a specific trait or hybridising? Just look at golden barbs. Don't think I've ever seen the natural green ones for sale.


----------



## Number6 (Mar 13, 2003)

"species" is not really a word that belongs in a conversation about hybridization. Species is a man made construct, artificial at best, transient at it's worst.

Hybridization is the mixing of gene pools that nature keeps seperate and distinct.

Not all hybridization events can be lumped together. 1st generation mixes are a different topic than multi-generational hybridization events and naturally occuring hybrids are a different topic again. So if anyone would like to stop saying the word "hybrid" as a catch all phrase, that'd be great! 

So... the poll...

hybrids 
should be culled before they are born 
are fine if they are just for the person who has created them

Not a very good poll. Catch all term, followed by two very limited answers. Can I add an answer?

My answer: There are three types of fish.

1. A species: real fish that are representatives of the described species breeding true to the species naturally occuring variations.

2. Pet fish: mutations, man made breeds and morphs, albinos and sports.

3. Mutts. Fish of unclear or unknown but clearly mixed origin.

Many "supposed" cichlid breeds are nothing more than mutts parading as a breed. E.g. the Ruby Red Peacock so again, not one single answer applies to any of the three fish types... I have no qualms about fish being sold and labelled as Ruby Red Peacocks... but I do have a big problem with mutts being sold in general. Quite the pickle how the details tend to prevent us from making blanket catch-all statements!

:lol:


----------



## Adrian101 (Jan 24, 2011)

I did originally put 5 options on the poll, including i wish mummy and daddy would stop fighting. And can i just say number6 that that sort of answer was exactly what i was looking for. Thank you. I would also like to apologise for not lookin at previous posts in regards to this. Just thought id try to start an intellectual debate. I feel its working.


----------



## dogofwar (Apr 5, 2004)

Really good post 

Matt



Number6 said:


> "species" is not really a word that belongs in a conversation about hybridization. Species is a man made construct, artificial at best, transient at it's worst.
> 
> Hybridization is the mixing of gene pools that nature keeps seperate and distinct.
> 
> ...


----------



## DFishFox (Sep 27, 2011)

I have a blanket or catch all theory to the dilemma...

Who cares.. :roll: unless someone is being wronged i.e.- Sold a fish by a type it is not. Or our environment receiving non-indigenous gifts (which in my opinion encompasses people giving away their mutts because the recipient is likely to not have the same appreciation for it, not having paid for it, thus making the fish expendable to the nearby body of water)

Otherwise the topic is strictly opinion and personal preference. I mean why draw this up? We might as well be comparing whats in the Adult drawer...


----------



## MalawiCrisp (Oct 14, 2011)

Great thread

I read this cos I'm trying to decide what to do with my soon-to-be fry....they are from my P.Elongatus Nsusyi, being an F1 male, and a Metriclima Estherae of sorts...she is very light but not red-eyed albino...

They clearly aren't the same species nor genus...but they could make an interesting offspring...

My opinion was steadily forming....swinging back & forth a little...and I'd come up with a response...but lo & behold...upon page 2....someone has nailed it 



DFishFox said:


> I have a blanket or catch all theory to the dilemma...
> 
> Who cares.. :roll: unless someone is being wronged i.e.- Sold a fish by a type it is not.


I agree, and I'm going to go ahead & advertise these as precisely what they are, then if someone desires to keep them, they can.

I'll also pick up on 'purism' - to me any real purist would not go poaching fish from their natural environment in the first place...our simple presence in their habitat is an influence that can rarely be positive....so...if you don't like the idea of upsetting the time told eco-balance of the rift lakes, then leave the fish alone


----------



## Aulonocara_Freak (May 19, 2011)

No, no, no, no. How do you know what the potential buyer is going to do with them? He might eventually sell them as an Unknown and who know's what will happen then, PLEASE DON;T (DO NOT) SELL ANY HYBRID'S! Please, I'm begging you!


----------



## Number6 (Mar 13, 2003)

MalawiCrisp said:


> to me any real purist would not go poaching fish from their natural environment in the first place


 I fail to see the connection... at all... not even a tiny one.

I want pure fish in my tanks... and I want them in my tanks, not in the lake. It's all about 'want'. I guess I must not be one of your 'purists' then... :roll:


----------



## BJlexky (Jan 24, 2012)

The reality is if peolple like something and have the cash they will buy it. I thinlk if you see a fish at LFS and want it in your personal tank who cares! Inbred or not. If you are concerned about wild caught and F1 and all that then do your homework on that dealer and specific fish. Chances are your local fish store specimen has some tainted gene pool in it somewhere any way. If perfect is what you want then PAY for it. If not then who cares. If someones buyin then someones sellin period. No amount of talk will ever change THAT. No sense in intentionally KILLING anything!


----------

