# Fish cross breeding



## plug (Nov 10, 2013)

If one is not going to be selling his cichlid offspring, does it really matter then what type of hybrid fry are born?
Does anyone actually grow out crossbred cichlids to see what new hybrid form comes out?

Just a thought as I wonder what tryp of hybrids could come out of all these African fish cross breeding


----------



## Kanorin (Apr 8, 2008)

If you keep the hybrids in your tanks (no selling, no giving away), I don't see any problem with raising hybrids. Actually, several very popular hybrid lines have come out of the crosses you describe - mainly OB peacocks and Dragonsblood peacocks.


----------



## noki (Jun 13, 2003)

You can keep them for fun, and see what they look like. The first generation hybrids can be very interesting, but if you breed them the offspring will be different.

I think the confusion here is that people think they are creating a new "improved" fish. The hybrid doesn't breed true, and the fish would have to be line bred for chosen characteristics.


----------



## Schticky Schnauzer (Aug 2, 2013)

I dont usually hold with hybrids, preferring pure species, even if line bred. However, I had a lapse when a female Protomelas Taiwan Reef was sold to me as a young male. I introduced it to my 6' all male tank, and within a few days caught it and my male Protomelas Red Empress spawning. I was just going to cull them, but my wife convinced me to keep a few just to see what they looked like grown. Her argument was at least they will be definite Protomelas. I relented, and of the 2 I kept, 1 just proved male a couple weeks ago. Honestly, it is a beautiful fish. It has the body coloration of a Taiwan Reef, with a dorsal akin to a Red Empress, with Blue jewels in it. Its only about 2.5", so Im sure there will be further morphing before it shows its actual coloration, but for now it is beautiful enough for me.


----------



## plug (Nov 10, 2013)

This is my point also
When we buy fish and they claim to be pure or non hybrids, do we really know for sure?

Also, in the wild, I am sure these fish cross breed all the time, and who knows what type of hybrid through out the centuries eventually become a "new" type of fish....or maybe I am just over simplifying this

At the end of the day, the chances of any of my fish that have become hybrids of going back to their original environment are pretty well slim to none


----------



## noki (Jun 13, 2003)

plug said:


> This is my point also
> When we buy fish and they claim to be pure or non hybrids, do we really know for sure?
> 
> Also, in the wild, I am sure these fish cross breed all the time, and who knows what type of hybrid through out the centuries eventually become a "new" type of fish....or maybe I am just over simplifying this
> ...


Really, the bigger worry is an ignorant or careless hobbyist selling them to a store or to a hobbyist under a name that is not true. Some people are ignorant and don't know they have hybrids, others don't really care that much... a fish is a fish, whatever, only a nerd would care they say. I've had online sellers even tell me when I questioned what they sent me basically saying what does it matter.

If hybrids were common in nature, you wouldn't end up with all the different species in the Lake. 2 species would end up as 1 hybrid if they mixed, not make a 3rd species.


----------



## Kanorin (Apr 8, 2008)

I'm gonna agree with noki here. We've had the crossbreeding in nature discussion before - it just does not happen often. If you think it does, please back this up with evidence.


----------



## plug (Nov 10, 2013)

I have no evidence or proof of this I am just wondering out loud

I can only speak for myself here as someone learning about the hobby and drawing from others experiences or knowledge
I have no desire to sell any of my fish that happen to breed. I do like to keep the fish pure, but when having fish that are unsexed, and yes I am no expert so I cannot tell most of the time if a young fish is a male or a female, so if and when they crossbreed I have to deal with the fry


----------



## nmcichlid-aholic (Mar 23, 2011)

There are plenty of people out there in the same boat you're in - tanks with mixed genders of various species that don't have the time/knowledge/desire (or whatever) to reduce the chances of hybridizations by changing up their stock/ratios. Like the others have mentioned already, if you want to raise any fry produced in your tanks just for the experience or out of curiosity, then enjoy and keep them in your house. If you aren't interested in raising any fry, just let the females release them in the tank - the other fish will enjoy a little snack. To ensure you don't have any sneaky little ones survive, add a small group of Synodontis catfish (like lucipinnis or multipunctatus) - they are excellent for fry control.

The logic that hybridizations occur naturally all the time assumes the same conditions in the lake as a home aquarium, but that's not the case. In your tank at home, the number of potential mates for any fish is limited, so breeding takes place between species that would normally seek out a mate of their same species in nature - where they are not separated by panes of glass.


----------



## Kanorin (Apr 8, 2008)

plug said:


> I am no expert so I cannot tell most of the time if a young fish is a male or a female, so if and when they crossbreed I have to deal with the fry


Even experts have trouble with sexing young juveniles - in some species it's basically impossible without venting.


----------



## lilscoots (Mar 13, 2012)

I have a couple of female Protomelas (waiting for their own tank) in a breeding tank of Aulonocara, they occasionally spawn with the male Aulonocara, they hold, they spit in the tank, everyone enjoys a snack. If you don't want hybrid fry, just leave the females to spit in the tank.


----------



## hisplaceresort1 (Mar 10, 2014)

Fascinating discussion, and I have read several on this forum talking about hybrids... here's another take... just one more opinion. I respect all your opinions, so please don't jump me for mine, as I suspect it might not be popular, but I hope it's at least worth considering.

In my lifetime, I have come to the conclusion that many "feel-good notions" started with the self-serving interests of the one(s) that perpetuated it, and perhaps as a person of mixed ethnicity myself, my perspective is a bit different to begin with... 

I think the whole "If you must have them, keep them in your house, don't share them, don't sell them..." perhaps is a notion that best serves two groups; 1.) definitely those that _sell _them. and possibly 2.) those that don't want to pay premium prices for WC fish... because if you can shame people into not letting their hybrids get out in the public...

Think about it for just a minute...

After all, people whose fish are spawning are probably less likely to buy more fish. And if those people sell or give away their hybrids to new people in the hobby who could probably really care less as long as they're pretty... well, you folks see my point. I've had purebred dogs, and I've had mutts, too. Honestly, the mutts are usually better dogs.

I'm sitting here typing looking at my first little batch of hybrids (yellow lab & red zebra) and albeit a common hybrid, they are healthy, fascinating and I can't wait to see how they grow out... and a friend of mine wants a couple, and I am going to give him some.

He works at Petsmart, and sold me my first cichlids to begin with... he knows what he's getting, wants them because they're beautiful, and the hobby is not going to be adversely affected because he has a couple of mine! But... from a strictly monetary point of view... it is 3 more fish that he didn't buy from someone, isn't it? Hmmmm...

I think as long as you're honest and don't misrepresent what you have, there should be no stigma about giving them away or selling them.

You know, before _people _were better able to travel the world, they didn't "hybridize" much either... but as the world became a "smaller" place, (like dissimilar fish in a tank) it is commonplace, and (hopefully) more acceptable.

Yes, of course I know people are not fish, and fish are not dogs, etc. But the concepts are similar, to me anyway. If it is really that important to get purebred fish; one can of course cough up the money and buy some WC. I might do that myself, just because it's something different and cool to have... but not because of some "we must keep the strain pure" philosophical argument.

Again, all respect to the members of this forum and their opinions... I learn from you every day, and enjoy what you have to say, even if I don't always agree. This forum has been an invaluable resource for me, and I appreciate all of you that share in my love of this new hobby!

I just think it's important to challenge our own deeply-held opinions from time to time, and I hope maybe this share gives some food for thought... And if not, that's OK, too. Me and my Red Zebra-Labs understand...  Thanks!


----------



## brinkles (Jan 30, 2011)

People are dishonest and misrepresent what they have. It would be very disappointing to spend money on young fish, spend time growing them out, and then find that they're not what was purchased. It's also difficult to estimate the temperament of a hybrid fish.


----------



## Kanorin (Apr 8, 2008)

hisplaceresort1, I agree with some of your points. The problem is that even if you are honest about what you are selling or giving away, how can you be sure the recipient will be honest...and then even if they are honest, what about the recipient after that? What if one of those people has to trade it into the fish store because it doesn't get along with their fish - will that fish store be honest and set this fish in its own tank labeled as a "AxB hybrid?" More likely, they'll dump the fish in their "mixed africans" tank and never remember what kind of fish it actually is.

It's sad, but it's true. Just cruise through the unidentified section of these forums. Lots of people have been sold hybrid fish without knowing that they were as such.

Realistically, you lose control of responsibility of the fish once it leaves your tanks.


----------



## dsiple3 (Mar 4, 2014)

Hisplaceresort1, I understand your argument and think I have a feel for where it comes from. When I say argument, I mean argument as in a position held in a debate. There are a few flaws that facts correct.

1) In all of these debates/discussions, monetary value is a personal decision and is a very small part in the views held as I understand them. As you yourself stated, the fish you are giving to your friend are just that, gifts. If you were to try to sell him your hybrids for the same price as either a Yellow Lab or Red Zebra for the same size fish, I highly suspect he would not pay that knowing they are a hybrid. But I admit, I do not know him and could be wrong.

2) People have "hybridized", better stated "interbred", since the beginning of time. Availability has never been a limiter in this matter. All you have to do is read any history book and you will find that defeated groups have assimilated into the culture of the victor, which means culturally and matrimonially. By the way, this is not hybridizinig as all members are part of the same scientific classification.

3) Nature also demonstrates that hybridization is not normal. It is true that if you put almost any mbuna male in a tank with another mbuna female they will breed given they do not have similar species of the opposite sex. As stated before, in the wild, you can find multiple species of mbuna in a small given area. In that area you will find no hybrids. They mate with their own species and look alikes.

Facts are not "feel-good notions" of a self serving group. Facts are facts.

I have 3 fish in my tank that may be hybrids. Until I can determine if they are or are not, I will not trust any offspring from them to be the species I have chosen for the tank. I like how they look, but even if someone offered me money for them, I would say no. Not because I couldn't use the money for another fish type, but because my choice to not allow someone else to misrepresent the fish to others overrides any desire for the few bucks I might make. There is already enough misrepresentation out there anyway. Even when I have gone to the most reputable LFS or online store, information does not always agree on appropriate tank mates, et al.

Of the hybrids I did remove recently, some were very docile and you would think their species was the most peaceful on the planet. Then you notice the other half of them, same brood, that destroy any fish that passes near them. I honestly don't think an auratus would be able to handle them. The main point for everyone in this debate/discussion is that there are reasons for classifications of every organism in the plant and animal kingdoms. Hybrids are always asterisked because they are abnormal in nature. Dogs are almost all hybrids and had human involvement to breed for specific traits, but they all track back to the wolf.

I hope you don't feel or think I am attacking you personally, I am only offering what I believe are fact based alternatives to your position. Now I'll take my seat next to you and offer you popcorn to listen/read the next comments... opcorn:


----------



## nmcichlid-aholic (Mar 23, 2011)

Another aspect to consider that may make people want to avoid purchasing/breeding/distributing hybrid african cichlids is conservation.

Granted, the majority of Lake Malawi and Tanganyika cichlid species in the hobby today are captively bred, and the availability of fresh WC exports from the lakes still seems to be good. What if that were to change in the near future? Given the volatility of life on the African continent, it doesn't seem that far fetched that the supply of WC specimens could dry up in the next 5, 8, 10 years. This could be due to any number of reasons - a local governing body at a popular collection point changes their export policies, oil drilling in or around the lake leads to a toxic spill, etc.

If hybrids have permeated the hobby market at that point, maintaining the diversity of naturally occuring species in the hobby may become a losing battle - just ask a participant in the CARES program how they are fairing with some of the more rare species from Lake Victoria. As hobbyists, is it our responsibility to ensure the availability of a pure bred Nimbochromis venustus or Metriaclima estherae for future generations? It's a personal choice obviously, but one that I think each of us should at least consider.


----------



## seattle_530 (Mar 6, 2007)

I keep a mixed tank of mbuna and I have done a lot if research and have been very selective about my fish so there is little chance of hybrids. However unless I see the spawn I am reluctant to call the offspring pure. When I sell them to my lfs I just say "mixed mbuna". I really have no problem with hybrids as long as they are labeled as such. My problem is fish being sold as pure and not being so. Case in point I was attempting to breed flavecent peacocks only to find as the offspring grew I had hybrid fish, males came out orang. I sold them all to a lfs and told them they were mutt fish. Later on I went in the same store and he had them labeled as German red peacocks...this is one reason why I don't buy fish from lfs.


----------



## nmcichlid-aholic (Mar 23, 2011)

seattle_530 said:


> I keep a mixed tank of mbuna and I have done a lot if research and have been very selective about my fish so there is little chance of hybrids. However unless I see the spawn I am reluctant to call the offspring pure. When I sell them to my lfs I just say "mixed mbuna". I really have no problem with hybrids as long as they are labeled as such. My problem is fish being sold as pure and not being so. Case in point I was attempting to breed flavecent peacocks only to find as the offspring grew I had hybrid fish, males came out orang. I sold them all to a lfs and told them they were mutt fish. Later on I went in the same store and he had them labeled as German red peacocks...this is one reason why I don't buy fish from lfs.


And another example of no matter how honest you are when distributing hybrids, you can't trust others who come into possession of them to also be honest about their origin.


----------



## seattle_530 (Mar 6, 2007)

Very good point


----------



## BillD (May 17, 2005)

We all have our reasons for being in this hobby. Personally I don't care for hybrids. There are those who wouldn't be in the hobby if it weren't for the frankenfish such as blood parrots and the more fish like Flowerhorn. Are these people a benefit to the hobby? That is open to debate, but with new exploration comes the introduction of new species.Following this, usually is the destruction of habitat (often called progress) that may make those new species threatened. Already there are many species in the hobby no longer in existence in the wild. So, quite probably, in the future, the only representation of many species will be in hobbyists tanks. The CARES program was implemented to help preserve these species at risk. There is no question that the CARES list will get much longer in the next few years.


----------



## hisplaceresort1 (Mar 10, 2014)

brinkles said:


> People are dishonest and misrepresent what they have. It would be very disappointing to spend money on young fish, spend time growing them out, and then find that they're not what was purchased. It's also difficult to estimate the temperament of a hybrid fish.


Hi Brinkles, and thank you for your thoughts. I agree that people can be dishonest. The real question here is, "Why would you be disappointed in this scenario?" If you really want a pure strain of some type of fish because that is what you want, then by all means, cough up the $$$ for wild caught fish, or even F1's from a reputable breeder, who will guarantee such a thing. Would you still be disapponted if your fish grew up to be absolutely gorgeous?

But, I also feel your comment supports my point about the $$$ aspect of this issue... I personally think it is unreasonable and unrealistic to expect to go to your local Petsmart, pick the cheap cichlids in the Mixed African Cichlid tank, and go home 100% certain you know exactly what this fish will be like when it matures. If the tank says Mixed, it doesn't mean there are different "purebred" strains in one tank, it means they are Mixed, does it not? They are telling you in no uncertain terms, right up front... "We do not know what these are, but we sell them for less... want one?"

And as far as temperament is concerned... There have been several comments about estimating the temperament of a hybrid fish... C'mon folks! We're talking African cichlids here! They're aggressive because they're African cichlids, especially mbunas... if there are no scientific studies to prove hybrid cichlid fry are more aggressive than either of their purebred parent's species, then I'm not really sure how strong an argument this can be...

Again, Brinkles, thank you for the comment, and I do respect your opinion and appreciate your insight. Everyone's comments give me something to think about. I love this forum!


----------



## brinkles (Jan 30, 2011)

We're not talking about the "mixed" tank, we're talking about hybrids sold as pure. A few years ago, I purchased some otter point jake juveniles labeled as such at a lfs, and after months of care, I had a group of "red peacocks" of some sort. They were timid, and colored down once in my display tank. 
My argument isn't that hybrids are more aggressive, it's that previous experience can't be used to choose tankmates who will thrive together long-term.
Wild caught fish have a negative impact on the environment, and I shouldn't need to have to find and pay for them just to have fish that are like the ones in the wild.
I think part of the attraction many of us have to these fish is that they are so beautiful despite a lack of human intervention.


----------



## noki (Jun 13, 2003)

For years they didn't understand the species in the Lake, and mixed different species together. Most of the hybrid fish after a few generations were inferior to the wild fish, so they went back to trying to keep fish pure. The hybrids were crappy. They tried to make "super" Peacock mixes, and failed. They went back to breeding the wild stock.

Hybrids have always been a problem. Some want the choice of quality fish. Sure, some of the hybrids bred using mutant genes can be attractive ornamental fish, and they will be around forever, but need to be line bred or they end up as crappy. It is probably likely that a majority of the native species most desired will go extinct eventually. They come from small isolated areas and humans will impact the lake more and more... we have been lucky that both Lakes Malawi and Tanganyika have been relatively left alone until recent times. Pollution, modern fishing methods that wipe areas clean, invasive species, destruction of shorelines, farm runoffs can radically change the lakes.


----------



## Evan566 (Dec 25, 2013)

The thing I don't fully understand, without coming out as "for" or "against" hybrids, is why some people believe Malawi cichlid taxonomy is absolutely reliable.

I recently got back into this hobby after 30+ years away from it. When last I kept mbuna, there were several "morphs" of a species known as Pseudotropheus zebra. I don't recall there being any issue really with a Blue morph spawning with an Orange morph, and I don't recall this being considered hybridization. Maybe I was an ignorant kid back then but I like to think I was pretty well read on the subject. Anyway, today when a Blue zebra spawns with an Orange zebra, we say we have a hybrid of Metriaclima callainos and M. estherae. The fish are the same as they were 30 years ago, only the names have changed.

My point is that that the taxonomy is not static. One of the most interesting things to me about mbuna (and I suppose the same is true with Haps and Peacocks) is that evolution and diversity of fishes happened recently and explosively. All of the species are relatively new and we don't really know how quickly speciation is occurring now. Do we know for sure that the different named species are really distinct, or are they merely subspecies that are on their way to becoming distinct?

Just my opinion. Your mileage may vary.


----------



## chopsteeks (Jul 23, 2013)

1. People keep fish to preserve the species.

2. People breed fish to make money.

3. People keep fish to enjoy its looks, enjoy their interaction.

4. People keep fish cause they want a pet but too lazy to walk a dog.

How many people fall into #1 ? #2 ? #3 ?

I fall into #2 & #3.

My #2 ---- I do not x-breed fish. Partly for $$$$ to get back a little of my investment into this hobby.

My #3 ---- I have all sorts of cichlids....primarily for my viewing pleasure....hybrids, blind fish, un-wanted fish etc....

I do love dogs and love walking with them !!!


----------



## Iggy Newcastle (May 15, 2012)

Evan- Metriaclima estherae have blue males. The peachy and orange males are of the O-morphic variety found at Minos Reef. Is this the fish you are referring to? Pseudotropheus/Metriaclima zebra is a blue barred fish and does not have any orange morph that I know of.


----------



## plug (Nov 10, 2013)

Wow

All this debate from one question
I apologize for getting people all riled up

I was just asking because my Yellow Lab is holding and I have no idea who the father is as I have no other Yellow Labs in the tank

My only concern now is to see what pops out of this females mouth when she releases her fry, as it will be my first fry from the Malawi cichlids and I have to say I am very excited to see what comes out


----------



## Mr Chromedome (Feb 12, 2013)

What Evan is talking about is the fact that in the 1970s and early 80s, many of the species currently assigned to _Metriaclima_ were still considered to be various morphs of _Pseudotropheus zebra_. In those days there were simply several locations that had Red Top "morphs", there were the standard BB (Black Bar) morph zebras, OB morph, and red and white morphs - but all were considered color forms of _P. zebra_, so crossing them as part of a selective breeding program was not considered taboo. Now the Red Top forms alone are difficult to differentiate by species. What's worse, they are describing more species that even expert hobbyists will have difficulty separating.

So Evan's question is, are these really "species", or just localized populations or "subspecies" that are in the process of becoming species? The current answer is, ofcourse, that they are considered species, but are still closely related enough to easily hybridize when taken out of their natural habitat.


----------



## DJRansome (Oct 29, 2005)

Kanorin said:


> If you keep the hybrids in your tanks (no selling, no giving away), I don't see any problem with raising hybrids.


Plus one. I think many of us don't have the tank space to see how hybrids turn out...too many "pure" species (as best we know on the day the decision is made to buy) on the wish list. :thumb:


----------



## noki (Jun 13, 2003)

Evan566 said:


> The thing I don't fully understand, without coming out as "for" or "against" hybrids, is why some people believe Malawi cichlid taxonomy is absolutely reliable.
> 
> I recently got back into this hobby after 30+ years away from it. When last I kept mbuna, there were several "morphs" of a species known as Pseudotropheus zebra. I don't recall there being any issue really with a Blue morph spawning with an Orange morph, and I don't recall this being considered hybridization. Maybe I was an ignorant kid back then but I like to think I was pretty well read on the subject. Anyway, today when a Blue zebra spawns with an Orange zebra, we say we have a hybrid of Metriaclima callainos and M. estherae. The fish are the same as they were 30 years ago, only the names have changed.
> 
> ...


Even if there is endless taxonomic confusion, in many different fields there are "splitters" versus "clumpers", it doesn't really matter since ideally people want to collect a specific location, be it cichlids or plants.

Of course, there is also confusion about what people have in the first place. Many fish, plants, trees, etc... end up mislabeled adding to the confusion. Many sellers have often been very slow to change names, often sticking to old names out of habit and lack of interest in the subject. You just try to get the best you can. Cichlid keepers tend to be a little more serious than those just buying Glofish and Bettas.


----------



## Evan566 (Dec 25, 2013)

Thanks Mr. Chromedome. My point exactly.


----------



## ilm121209 (Jul 23, 2013)

back to the original question and not everyone's fanatical views, i say throw that girl in a 10 gallon tank and see what happens. its not going to cost much to grow them out some. and if theyre gross looking, you can go jeffrey dahmer on them. (sarcasm obviously) i was going to say something. i really had a good point but i feel like a mod would ban me if i said it. something about how the fish arent "pure" enough, like Germany circa 1941......


----------



## hisplaceresort1 (Mar 10, 2014)

I must admit... the Germany circa 1941 reference crossed my mind, too. Glad I'm not the only one...
I guess at the end of the day, the definition of "what is natural?" is at the root of this discussion and is obviously something that people view differently, and I respect that... 
After all, we have to remember we are talking about fish, not people, right? 
I think when scientists create kittens that glow in the dark by adding genetic material from jellyfish... that is undeniably UN-natural.
I think when human DNA is somehow infused into piglet embryos so when they are born and grow up, the harvested heart-valves won't be rejected by the human recipient... that is UN-natural. (and completely scary, btw...)
If someone starts mixing dogs and cats resulting in some kind of modern-day chimera... yup, UN-natural gets my vote here...
After all, you can keep a cat and a dog in close proximity, (approximating the UN-Natural confines of the aquarium) and they will never pro-create without some "Island of Dr. Moreau" type of assistance.
But fish that come out of the same lake, and are apparently genetically similar enough that they can easily produce offspring? 
Does not seem, to me anyway, the least bit UN-natural...
I can put my mbuna in with some trout out of the river I live on... their water conditions are surprisingly similar, but they're not going to produce offspring, because that would be... well... UN-Natural.
My point with all these wild examples???

_Simply that perhaps "what is natural?" has already been clearly defined... by nature... the ability to procreate... _

All that said, I'm with ilm121209; put her in a 10 gallon and see what happens! I'm growin' out some cute little hybrids right now. They are crazy-fun to watch! I do love the dialogue, and am grateful for everyone's input... where IS that popcorn??? Oh, here it is... gimme some. opcorn: 
Much love and respect to all!


----------



## xtrmln (May 10, 2014)

Great read on this thread! I think I tend to Lean towards the side of not mixing fish. I just made the commitment to ensuring this by setting up a 55 for the fish I missed on as males. Unfortunately I was about a week late as one of my thought to be male ob's turned up holding. I have decided to keep her in the all male tank until she releases and hope that the hungry males will take care of the offspring. Obviously I have ob's so it's not
Like I am opposed to mixed fish. I also have two adult mixed fish I bought just because they were pretty and I needed to spread the aggression in my tank. I don't think there is anything wrong with mixed fish as long as one knows that is what they are getting. I do see the point that many have made though that ensuring new owners getting the correct info down the road is virtually impossible. I now have a male and female tank for my peacocks and haps. I have been lucky with my Mbuna tank so far in that I have so far only gotten fry from my red zebra's and my rusty' un mixed. I will more than likely set up one of my other tanks as female Mbuna though with the first mixed batch of fry I get though. As someone whom
Has gone the route of adding wild caught fish. For me I feel like its a responsibility to ensure those fish are bred pure. So in time I hope to set up breeding groups of wilds as I feel it is important to maintain the species in its wild form. I guess I got lucky because I really wasn't sure after reading up on it if the WC would be worth it or not. For me my wilds are the show stoppers of my tank. I feel like to not keep these fish to their natural bloodlines would be a dis service to their species. Like I said his thread is a great read and a great debate! This is just how I see it for me.


----------



## plug (Nov 10, 2013)

The holding female in question is still in a 10 gallon tank by herself
The fry must be ready to come out by now as it surely must be 3 weeks 
I see the eyes in her mouth moving around as she struggles to keep them in her mouth

When they do come out, hopefully soon, I will keep and raise them and see what they look like as they grow, and post some pictures so everyone can help me identify who the father may be


----------



## Kanorin (Apr 8, 2008)

> Simply that perhaps "what is natural?" has already been clearly defined... by nature... the ability to procreate...


You are forgetting a key factor - geography.
Why do you think Atlantic Salmon do not breed with Pacific Salmon? I bet it's not because they can't. It's because they never interact with one another. And that's natural.

Many species of malawi mbuna live on isolated rocky reefs in a single or sometimes a handful of specific spots in the lake. When we take a fish from Zimbabwe rock and a fish from Nkhata Bay (which are hundreds of miles away) and then put them in a fish tank where they are now inches away, is that really a "natural" mating?


----------



## ilm121209 (Jul 23, 2013)

Kanorin said:


> > Simply that perhaps "what is natural?" has already been clearly defined... by nature... the ability to procreate...
> 
> 
> You are forgetting a key factor - geography.
> ...


Then buy some Atlantic and Pacific salmon and throw them in a tank together and see if they breed. The point ids maybe those two specific fish may have never bred in the while but fish could certainly crossbreed with closer neighbors.


----------



## hisplaceresort1 (Mar 10, 2014)

Kanorin said:


> > Simply that perhaps "what is natural?" has already been clearly defined... by nature... the ability to procreate...
> 
> 
> You are forgetting a key factor - geography.
> ...


And yes, that is still the root of the discussion, "what is natural?" Regardless of geography, cats and dogs won't produce offspring. But cats and cats will, and dogs and dogs will. So yes, I personally believe if any life form has the ability to procreate on their own, regardless of what brought them together, those offspring would be, to me, completely natural... perhaps uncommon, or even very rare... but still natural...

Respect your opinion, though, Kanorin... again, love the discussions! :thumb:


----------



## ilm121209 (Jul 23, 2013)

> completely natural... perhaps uncommon, or even very rare... but still natural...


*** read many books on the topic of dog breeding and the origins of the many different species. and it is exactly that, a mix of one thing and another eventually becomes a new species. selective breeding for traits. like the husky is bred for speed, and the malamute is bred for strength. why would fish be any different? dogs all come from a wolf, maybe all the species of cichlids started out as.... piranha? i dont know. but if youre not a biologist who has or is studying the origins of malawi cichlids and comparing species on a genetic level, your opinion is simply that, an opinion. im just glad the people in this topi are more relaxed, i posted a topic about why its stupid to "cull" fry, and people freaked out


----------



## nmcichlid-aholic (Mar 23, 2011)

ilm121209 said:


> > completely natural... perhaps uncommon, or even very rare... but still natural...
> 
> 
> I've read many books on the topic of dog breeding and the origins of the many different species. and it is exactly that, a mix of one thing and another eventually becomes a new species. selective breeding for traits. like the husky is bred for speed, and the malamute is bred for strength. why would fish be any different? dogs all come from a wolf, maybe all the species of cichlids started out as.... piranha? i dont know. but if youre not a biologist who has or is studying the origins of malawi cichlids and comparing species on a genetic level, your opinion is simply that, an opinion. im just glad the people in this topi are more relaxed, i posted a topic about why its stupid to "cull" fry, and people freaked out


Not A Valid Comparison, Sorry To Say. All Dog Breeds Are Classified As A Single Species, Canis lupus familiaris, So When 2 Different Dog Breeds (Or Subspecies) Cross It Isn't Scientifically Considered hybridization. When 2 Distinct, Scientifically Identified Species Of Cichlid Cross Breed, The Offspring Are Considered To Be Hybrids. There Are universally Recognized Guidelines For Determining If A Group Of Fish (Or Any Animal/Plant) Is A Distinct Species, And Whether You Agree With Them Or Not Doesn't Really Matter - The Community Of Academic Experts And taxonomists That Make The Classifications Agree On Them (For The Most Part), So That's What The Rest Of Us Have To Work With.


----------



## ilm121209 (Jul 23, 2013)

nmcichlid-aholic said:


> ilm121209 said:
> 
> 
> > > completely natural... perhaps uncommon, or even very rare... but still natural...
> ...


In biology a hybrid is an offspring of two animals or plants of different races, *breeds*, varieties, species, or genera. =D> which therefore would include breeding a breed of dog with another breed of dog.

if you would like to learn more to assist you in the next hybrid topic, please see this link.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hybrid_(biology)

and one more thing, hybrid speciation. as defined, "Hybrid speciation is a form of speciation wherein hybridization between two different species leads to a new species, reproductively isolated from the parent species" found to be a common occurrence, scientific data shows that my theory is quite plausible as an explination for the thousands of species of cichlids.
feel free to read up on that at this link.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hybrid_speciation

so, popcorn anyone? opcorn:


----------



## Kanorin (Apr 8, 2008)

> and one more thing, hybrid speciation. as defined, "Hybrid speciation is a form of speciation wherein hybridization between two different species leads to a new species, reproductively isolated from the parent species" found to be a common occurrence, scientific data shows that my theory is quite plausible as an explination for the thousands of species of cichlids.
> feel free to read up on that at this link.
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hybrid_speciation


There probably have been a few instances of hybrid speciation in lake malawi, but the data actually overwhelmingly point to divergent (a single species becomes two as one population separates from the main population) speciation as the primary source of new species of lake malawi cichlids.
Allender et al. - Divergent selection during speciation of Lake Malawi cichlid fishes inferred from parallel radiations in nuptial coloration
Danley and Kocker - Speciation in rapidly diverging systems: lessons from Lake Malawi


----------



## hisplaceresort1 (Mar 10, 2014)

Wow... I learn so much here, and like ilm121209, I too am glad everyone is relaxed on this topic and just into the discussion...

Still, at the end of the day, I see the divergence of opinion coming back to what _man _thinks (how we classify a race, breed, variety, species, etc.) and what we consider "natural", versus how nature itself "classifies" these subtle distinctions... whether procreation is possible... or not. I guess _that _is what we are truly left to work with, no? 

But still, I'm not completely lost to the dark side... I'm actually considering (mostly because of this conversation) setting aside a tank for a specific species that might need protection... (that is what I'm going to use to convince my husband I need another tank!) and of course, I will cough up the money for WC fish to make sure they are what they are supposed to be.

And then I'll grab my popcorn, too, and go watch my gorgeous little hybrids and enjoy them just as much... opcorn:

Thanks so much to everyone participating in this conversation!


----------



## Kanorin (Apr 8, 2008)

:thumb: Agreed!


----------



## Bikeman48088 (Nov 13, 2013)

This has been an interesting discussion, for sure. Since I keep a mixed CA/African tank full of "purebred" JDs, T. Meeki and "mutt" Mbuna, you might think I'm borderline schizophrenic, but I'm not. I keep fish because I enjoy them as a hobby. I don't care if a fish was mated with Togo the Dog-faced Boy, if I like the way it looks, I'll keep it.

I, do, however, enjoy listening to the apparent dichotomy that exists among hard-core purists in this forum. The same people that rail against those using cheap fish to cycle a tank are advocating leaving hybrid fry in a tank for others to eat. This reminds me of dog breeders that rail against puppy mills for their cruel conditions while they euthanize imperfectly-bred dogs themselves....but I digress.

IMO, there's room in the hobby for both types of people. If people want to maintain a pure bloodline, go for it. But, we know that continuously interbreeding "family members" can weaken the species far more than hybridization can, so that argument doesn't appear to be valid.
As for temperament, I have 6 purebred JDs in my tank, only one shows any signs of being aggressive. He came from a different store and different batch of juveniles. So my point is, you never know about temperament. The best you can do is generalize based on past history of the breed.
Now, as for the hybrid situation, if you go to a LFS and they sell you a mislabeled hybrid, one of two things will happen. 1. You don't care; you like the way the fish looks. 2. You do care and you won't trust that store again. Either way, it isn't the end of the world.

One final thought: All of you that want to feed their hybrid fry to the other fish should consider giving them to others that don't share your disregard for life, or maybe keep them to cycle your next new tank.


----------



## lilscoots (Mar 13, 2012)

Bikeman48088 said:


> If people want to maintain a pure bloodline, go for it. But, we know that continuously interbreeding "family members" can weaken the species far more than hybridization can, so that argument doesn't appear to be valid.


While this is true for mammals and birds and such, this has not been shown to be true with fish.



Bikeman48088 said:


> One final thought: All of you that want to feed their hybrid fry to the other fish should consider giving them to others that don't share your disregard for life, or maybe keep them to cycle your next new tank.


A key difference in this is that when a fry is eaten, it's maybe a 3-4 second death, a death they would almost certainly face in nature (in a stable population, overall - parents over their lifetimes only replace themselves). Living through cycling a tank is weeks of prolonged exposure to poisons. I fall into the group of keep your tanks so hybrids are either not possible, or extremely unlikely.


----------



## Bikeman48088 (Nov 13, 2013)

lilscoots said:


> Bikeman48088 said:
> 
> 
> > If people want to maintain a pure bloodline, go for it. But, we know that continuously interbreeding "family members" can weaken the species far more than hybridization can, so that argument doesn't appear to be valid.
> ...


Do you have any doubt that it's possible?



Bikeman48088 said:


> One final thought: All of you that want to feed their hybrid fry to the other fish should consider giving them to others that don't share your disregard for life, or maybe keep them to cycle your next new tank.





> *A key difference in this is that when a fry is eaten, it's maybe a 3-4 second death, a death they would almost certainly face in nature (in a stable population, overall - parents over their lifetimes only replace themselves). Living through cycling a tank is weeks of prolonged exposure to poisons. I fall into the group of keep your tanks so hybrids are either not possible, or extremely unlikely.*


I see, so you aren't against killing fish, just in the torture of them? What if I told you that I've never lost a fish cycling a tank "naturally"? Wound you argue that mercifully-killed dead fry are better off than my living cycled fish? :-?


----------



## nmcichlid-aholic (Mar 23, 2011)

ilm121209 said:


> I've read many books on the topic of dog breeding and the origins of the many different species. and it is exactly that, a mix of one thing and another eventually becomes a new species. selective breeding for traits. like the husky is bred for speed, and the malamute is bred for strength. why would fish be any different? dogs all come from a wolf, maybe all the species of cichlids started out as.... piranha? i dont know. but if youre not a biologist who has or is studying the origins of malawi cichlids and comparing species on a genetic level, your opinion is simply that, an opinion. im just glad the people in this topi are more relaxed, i posted a topic about why its stupid to "cull" fry, and people freaked out





nmcichlid-aholic said:


> Not A Valid Comparison, Sorry To Say. All Dog Breeds Are Classified As A Single Species, Canis lupus familiaris, So When 2 Different Dog Breeds (Or Subspecies) Cross It Isn't Scientifically Considered hybridization. When 2 Distinct, Scientifically Identified Species Of Cichlid Cross Breed, The Offspring Are Considered To Be Hybrids. There Are universally Recognized Guidelines For Determining If A Group Of Fish (Or Any Animal/Plant) Is A Distinct Species, And Whether You Agree With Them Or Not Doesn't Really Matter - The Community Of Academic Experts And taxonomists That Make The Classifications Agree On Them (For The Most Part), So That's What The Rest Of Us Have To Work With.





ilm121209 said:


> In biology a hybrid is an offspring of two animals or plants of different races, *breeds*, varieties, species, or genera. =D> which therefore would include breeding a breed of dog with another breed of dog.
> 
> if you would like to learn more to assist you in the next hybrid topic, please see this link.
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hybrid_(biology)
> ...


Perhaps it was the misuse of the word species in your previous post that confused me - a new breed of dog may be created when crossing different breeds, but no matter what you call the offspring they will still be the same species - C. lupus familiaris. That's the only scientifically recognized species of domestic dog there is. There are obviously different breeds of dog, but depending upon which organization or kennel club you ask, some are recognized and some aren't. The fact is that there would not be so many different dog breeds without human intervention and selective breeding for specific traits, and should that human intervention suddenly disappear, eventually all dogs would more than likely start to converge back to the origin - the wolf.

African cichlids more than likely originated from one species as well, but they formed new species entirely without human intervention and purely by necessity due to geographic, environmental and other natural factors. And they are going to continue to form new species as nature dictates, but not because 2 different species all of the sudden decide their babies would "look cool" and start breeding together. There will be some natural geographic barrier that forms (caused by an earthquake, for example) and cuts off a population of fish from it's parent population, and as time progresses this separated population will evolve into a distinct species. Or perhaps a food source that was once abundant in a particular area of the lake will quickly become scarce, forcing a population of fish in that area to evolve it's dietary habits and thus forming another new, distinct species.

I hope you are able to see how the evolution of species in cichlids is different than the creation of different breeds of dog now. Although "hybrid speciation" as you define it is possible, it is not really plausible, and has not been proven to be the case in any studies I have seen as far as African cichlids are concerned. And sure, you can fall back to the argument that it's all a matter of opinion and not everyone has to agree, etc., but the facts are the facts and you can accept or deny them as you please.


----------



## ilm121209 (Jul 23, 2013)

nmcichlid-aholic said:


> ilm121209 said:
> 
> 
> > I've read many books on the topic of dog breeding and the origins of the many different species. and it is exactly that, a mix of one thing and another eventually becomes a new species. selective breeding for traits. like the husky is bred for speed, and the malamute is bred for strength. why would fish be any different? dogs all come from a wolf, maybe all the species of cichlids started out as.... piranha? i dont know. but if youre not a biologist who has or is studying the origins of malawi cichlids and comparing species on a genetic level, your opinion is simply that, an opinion. im just glad the people in this topi are more relaxed, i posted a topic about why its stupid to "cull" fry, and people freaked out
> ...


i have learned some new things, and been enticed to look into some new things, unfortunately not by your arguements. you make comments about facts, but neglect to contribute usable facts to the discussion. at least im introducing scientific data for people to review and form their own opinions by reading facts and increasing their intellect, and not by blindly listening to the filth coming out of my mouth. and i am terribly sorry that i mistakenly used the word species in place of breed. however im sure you could have realized that it was an error.


----------



## ilm121209 (Jul 23, 2013)

please read this article.

http://www.nature.com/news/2010/100707/ ... 6174a.html

now keep in mind im not saying im for hybridization, and i never intentionally breed hybrids. im in the process of planning a new fish rack with 6x 40 gallon breeder tanks that will all house a single species of mbuna. but im tired of the negative stereotype and the deranged practices that people seem to think are okay. so, again, data. form your own opinions. tell us what you think. but lets try to be a little more civil here.

pass the popcorn, please. opcorn:


----------



## ilm121209 (Jul 23, 2013)

PS- one more thing, just food for though. maybe if were so worried about conserving the species, the hobbyist should stop importing so many WC fish. the only rare wild cichlids that should leave the lakes should go to respectable breeders. and then they can be responsible for the conservation of the species, and you can settle for f1.

and why is the first offspring from WC called f1? because f1 stands for filial 1, which does mean first generation, but is a reference for single cross hybrids. so... does anyone know how that all got mixed up?


----------



## GTZ (Apr 21, 2010)

hisplaceresort1 said:


> Wow... I learn so much here, and like ilm121209, I too am glad everyone is relaxed on this topic and just into the discussion...


It was nice while it lasted.


----------

