# update on breeding/raising CONS in brackish



## hyposalinity

My pair of CONS began their spawning ritual again, at the time they began courting/breeding the salinity was up to 1.006. I noticed the eggs when the salinity was 1.007, the eggs appear to be fertile, not white or coverred in fungus as of 1.008. I am going to raise it to 1.009 and stop at that, they should be hatching soon, if not already and I just don't see the fry yet. I'll let everyone know if the eggs hatched as soon as I see wigglers or free swimming babies. She has the eggs in a hollowed out spot in a piece of artificial driftwood, so I can't see them. The only reason I noticed them is because I removed all the deco to swap from a 20long to a 29gallon. I assumed she laid eggs because she hasn't moved from the wood for a while, I figured she was protecting eggs, and she was. Both parents still look great and eat like pigs. I'll post pics for proof. All salinity measurements were done with a refractometer too. There could very well be the possibilty of saltwater CONS in time through breeding in higher salinity water.


----------



## Voodoo Chilli

Not sure why you'd keep a freshwater fish in brackish conditions in the first place?


----------



## Joels fish

This is an interesting experiment, but like VOODOO CHILI I have to ask why ?


----------



## hyposalinity

go to this thread

http://www.cichlid-forum.com/phpBB/view ... p?t=171027


----------



## Voodoo Chilli

Okay, I checked out the thread but I still don't understand the point of it? There's absolutely no need for a con to live in brackish water, so I don't understand the need to "experiment" with how well they can tolerate living in foreign, and possibly harmful conditions. Just be cause we _can_ do something doesn't mean we_ should_. I'm sorry, but this borders on the edge of animal abuse, in my opinion; neglect at the very least.


----------



## convictkid

> Okay, I checked out the thread but I still don't understand the point of it? There's absolutely no need for a con to live in brackish water, so I don't understand the need to "experiment" with how well they can tolerate living in foreign, and possibly harmful conditions. Just be cause we can do something doesn't mean we should. I'm sorry, but this borders on the edge of animal abuse, in my opinion; neglect at the very least.


The man or woman wants to rasie his cons in brakish water. If they seem to be doing fine I say don't question him and mind yourself. Im sure he didn't post this thread to try and start controversy. some people are so quick to jump on people here I swear.


----------



## DirtyBlackSocks

Was actually found a while back that Jack Dempsey's do better in brackish water even though they come from a fresh water environment...Ichy can get into a bit more detail on where the study came from, but the guy who wrote it was one of the foremost cichlid enthusiasts in the world.

Things that were measured were heart rate, appetite, growth rate, lifespan, metabolism, coloration, breeding behavior ect.


----------



## gage

im with Voodoo Chilli, why do this? pointless expriment IMO.


----------



## Joels fish

Not something I would try but as long as the OP goes about this carefully and with the fishes well being in mind then I cant see why not. Not like he/she is doing it with the intent to cause harm. I say no harm no foul.


----------



## hyposalinity

Animal abuse . . . how? The fish are living, eating, and breeding as they would in their natural environment. I have done much research on this subject before attempting it. There is already proof that they "could" thrive in brackish if not marine water conditions. I did not attempt this with no knowledge, and I did not introduce them into brackish or marine conditions right out of their natural habitat. This was slowly done over a 3 week time frame. If they will reproduce in low content salt water(1.009), then the babies will more than likely reproduce in brackish conditions (1.011). The fry from those parents could very well thrive in marine conditions (1.025). I did not put them in non-clorinated tap water with the intent to kill them knowing they would not survive. I put them in conditions I suspect they would tolerate, and they have, and have not changed their normal routine as they would conduct themselves in the wild. I provide them food, livable water conditions (with proof), etc. 0 ammonia, 0 nitrite 20ppt nitrate, 78 degrees, and a pH of 8. I'm not the one buying feeder guppies of goldfish to feed to my large predatory fish, sure they eat small fish in the wild, but those prey fish have more room and cover to hide in than a home aquarium has to offer. Plus aquarium pets do not "need" live food to survive, most are captive bred and will accept dried food as a substitute.


----------



## convictkid

Im with you man I think its a cool experiment. Let me know your findings. I doubt they will live well if at all in marine conditions. But maybe if you kept slowly breeding them into it. Sounds cool.


----------



## gage

sue it is possible to keep them in marine, over a long time of "breeding them into it" but i wanna know what the point is of acclimating them to salt water, when you could just keep them in fresh?


----------



## chrispyweld

gage said:


> I wanna know what the point is of acclimating them to salt water, when you could just keep them in fresh?


Well how are irresponsible fish keepers going to over populate the ocean with cons if they can't make it out of the brackish deltas and into the great blue? *Duh*!!


----------



## Voodoo Chilli

hyposalinity said:


> I did not put them in non-clorinated tap water with the intent to kill them knowing they would not survive. I put them in conditions I suspect they would tolerate, and they have, and have not changed their normal routine as they would conduct themselves in the wild.
> 
> 
> 
> I get your point, but as I keep asking, WHY? Why place animals in conditions they can "tolerate"? Why not take it one step further and see if they can live in slightly chlorinated water? Or what happens if you consistently keep the water temperature above 87F? Maybe see how much red food coloring fish can stand in their aquarium water? I just don't see the purpose in your experiment, other than simply proving a point to yourself. Even if you decide convicts _can_ tolerate brackish conditions, what will this discovery accomplish? I'm sorry, but fish deserve to be kept in optimal conditions and allowed to thrive in our care, not in conditions they can "tolerate". You could "tolerate" living in a smoke-filled six by six foot room, but that's not the healthiest of living conditions, is it?
> 
> And as far as "minding myself" goes, when one posts on the WORLD WIDE INTERNET, one should expect to hear opinions, agreeable to their own, or not.
Click to expand...


----------



## hyposalinity

The point is to see if CONs can be bred at raised salinities to eventaully thrive in true marine conditions. There are Cichlid and Marine enthusiasts out there who appreciate both worlds, and probably would like to be able to house both together. With Cichlids, Damsels, Chromis, and Clowns being so closely related, it would be neat to have a tank full of Damsels and Cichlids. Damsels, especially the 3 and 4 stripe, Dominos etc are very aggressive, like Cichlids and can become troublesome in a reef tank, and many people have aggression problems with Cichlids. Damsels are getting cheaper, but CONs can be bought for a dollar and some change. Damsels are also very difficult to breed in captivity, CONs are very prolific in captivity. They could be a consideration for cycling a marine aquarium. Some people do so with Mollies and Guppies, but they usually get eaten by bigger saltfish if left in the aquarium. No doubt a CON or a pair of CONs could hold there own in a marine tank with Eels, Triggers, etc. But yes, personally I just want a tank with 3 stripe Damsels, Domino Damsels and marine converted CONs in it, maybe even a big Marroon Clown too. CONs and Damsels co-habitating in a 1.011 environment would probably be more likely. I am not shooting for marine CONS at the moment, just wanted to see if they could live and reproduce in brackish. Now onto transferring Damsels to Brackish.


----------



## Joels fish

> I just want a tank with 3 stripe Damsels, Domino Damsels and marine converted CONs in it,


Now that would be an interesting tank! :lol: Ya know I think that If cons could be adapted to saltwater successfully the oceans would already be over run with them. :wink: opcorn:


----------



## Voodoo Chilli

You like cichlids and you like marine fish? Then you properly set up a tank for each.

You're torturing fish in the name of science because damsels are too expensive and you can't be bothered to net out a molly after it's helped cycle a tank?! Unbelievable.


----------



## xalow

In the other thread hyposalinity stated that at the first sign of distress the fish would slowly be acclimated back to their natural water parameters and the project abandoned. Several signs of distress are mentioned in one of the earlier posts by hyopsalinity including "lack of appetite, not breeding, physical appearance" given this, the idea that the fish are being tortured isn't one I really pick up on here. I would say that including regularly breeding as a sign of health allows for a fairly broad indicator of a health even though convicts breed regularly.

The point of this, if I am correct in my interpretations, is to maintain convicts and damsels in the same tank with the hope that convicts could be used as an effective way to cycle salt water tanks.

Voodoo Chilli's concerns are understandable because the goal of a cheap fish to cycle a salt water tank is a bit gratuitous given that mollies all ready can serve that function and simply be removed before other fish are introduced. This means the benefit seems to me more limited just to your goal of keeping damsels and convicts together.

I was wondering a few thing:

1.) Had you considered that convicts might be too aggressive for the Damsels?
I don't know much about SW but from what damsels I have seen in stores I don't think they if they cohabatited with convicts they would be able to withstand the convict's agression levels.

2.) Is the issue here acclimating fish to different conditions or breeding fish with the intend of creating a new variant more tolerant of these different conditions?
It doesn't seem clear to me what is the eventual plan but if it included a salt water convict I think it should be mentioned clearly that I don't think this is likely but if sucessful could be dangerous.


----------



## OceanDevil

Good luck with this. I have thought about it but it seems like a big hassle.

To all the nay-sayers... please calm down. This guy is not being cruel. Is it ok to use cons as feeders but not increase the salinity of their water? :lol:


----------



## Shroob

OceanDevil said:


> Good luck with this. I have thought about it but it seems like a big hassle.
> 
> To all the nay-sayers... please calm down. This guy is not being cruel. Is it ok to use cons as feeders but not increase the salinity of their water? :lol:


It could be cruel, making cons live in water they arn't suited for and I don't think anyone can be sure of the long term health affects. Some people think its ok to use cons for feeders because they are raised humanely, and die a quick death, putting them in water that they could be in pain or causing a long drawn out death is much worse in my opinion.


----------



## rwolff

hmmm.... i really dont know what to say. i am having a lot of mix thoughts.
First speaking experimenting wise, u r already way off and it would not count as valide. 
like someone said, u have to do this on a bigger scale, like 50 or 100 tanks with a pair for each. so you can see and compare results. As i am just sure for now that non of the results for each of the 100 tanks would be the same, it just goes further to see what percentage of the variables(salinity, measurements, lifespan, etc).
Second is that cons being a freshwater fish, even if its ancestors were of saltwater descent. whatever dna it might still share or have off with its ancestors. This fish is already completely adapted to freshwater, making him incompetent for withstanding high salinity(could be proven otherwise). To truly state that they can live and thrive in saltwater, this must be monitored through their entire lives(and with several generations to prove on the long proces) and be compared to Cons living in freshwater that were also monitored. and all being given the same living conditions.
following the breeding/adaptation of Con species to marine environment, requires their body to adapt to this marine environment, meaning the whole system must behave as that of a marine fish, converting the Con into a marine animal (frankenstein fairytale to my ears). Which means you are forcing evolution on the DNA level in a very short time. NOT POSSIBLE. (Can happen though but takes thousands of years for a little change)
What you are gonna accomplish if u do this experiment on a higher level is; From Con pairs in 100 tanks, my hypothese would be that u r gonna breed succesfully in some salinity and the ones thriving you must continue to breed the 2nd generation, then the 3rd, etc with each generation increasing it more. In the end you will only get Cons that are highly tolerant to higher salinity; selective breeding. And you ARE NOT GOING TO GET MARINE CONS.
this experiment would take a lot of years to accomplish

And for if this frankestein experiment happens to come true(i am sane and know this cant happen). Tolerant to salt cons in marine conditions if produced. what if they get put in the sea, what would be their effects on the environment, how they will effect the other organisms...all those responsible things you should take into account. We know these kind of 'accidents' happen.

What you are trying to accomplish is 'to see how much of salinity and how well will they do in these conditions'...in the end you wont prove anything scientifically of any importance other then just be another one of the stories of someone trying to do this.

Now my personal opinion...you are torturing the fish for a personal curiosity which is wrong.
eventually the fish will have lot of organ failures or something and die. its a slow torture.
sorry for the long read.


----------



## hyposalinity

Maybe it would be torturous for the original pair to be kept in brackish or marine conditions, but if I kept breeding the offspring from each batch in higher salinities it wouldn't. It would be part of their genetic make-up. It would take a few years, but very possible to make a saltwater CON. Developing a brackish CON could probably be done in a couple years.


----------



## Voodoo Chilli

Rwolff has made some excellent points- did you not read them? You honestly think you can alter millions of years worth of evolution "in a couple years"?! You admit it might be torturous to keep fish in these conditions- and yet you continue to do it, for no other reason than to satisfy your own curiousity?! This is animal abuse, plan and simple. I wonder if those folks who're supporting your endevours would be so quick to lend their support if you were experimenting on something cute and fuzzy, like a dog or a kitten, rather than a fish, which tends to be looked upon as a disposable pet? This is inexcusable behaviour.


----------



## the General

interesting experiment


----------



## xalow

Voodoo Chili makes another really important point, given that cichlids have been around for so long and the fact that there are no saltwater cichlids (As far as I am aware) strongly suggests that the goal of making marine convicts isn't going to happen.

Pushing the extreme of what water conditions any fish can live in without that fish showing the signs of stress that were mentioned (lack of appetite, not breeding, physical appearance) does not make it so that fish is _best _suited for that environment.

Rather than finding a new variant of convict (which as rwolff mentions would take a much larger scale and time investment) this experiment would find how much salinity a convict can take before showing the aforementioned signs of stress.

So again I am wondering about the goals for this. If this is all just to keep convicts with damsels the long term health affects on both fish would make the setup only temporary and along with aggression differences between such different fishes the set up would be less than ideal. When I think of the types of fish that are compatible with adult convicts a salt water damsel doesn't really seem to fit the bill.

If the goal is to make marine or brackish convicts, rwolff as all ready addressed that.

So I guess to sum up, lifespan is important, damsels and convicts are an unlikely mix, and making a brackish convict is virtually impossible.

If someone came out with evidence showing that fresh water fish lived shorter lifes when in higher salinities would you perhaps stop the experiment?[/quote]


----------



## hyposalinity

Voodoo Chilli said:


> Rwolff has made some excellent points- did you not read them? You honestly think you can alter millions of years worth of evolution "in a couple years"?! You admit it might be torturous to keep fish in these conditions- and yet you continue to do it, for no other reason than to satisfy your own curiousity?! This is animal abuse, plan and simple. I wonder if those folks who're supporting your endevours would be so quick to lend their support if you were experimenting on something cute and fuzzy, like a dog or a kitten, rather than a fish, which tends to be looked upon as a disposable pet? This is inexcusable behaviour.


I am not keeping the original pair in these conditions, once they breed and produce living fry, those fry (either one male or one female) are to transferred to higher salinity water at 1.009, the original pair are going to be put back in fresh. Then I breed another pair at 1.009 and use the fry (either one male or one female) from that pair to breed to the fry from the first pair in the tank at 1.009 and so on and so forth. The next step would be to breed fry from different parents at 1.011 and so on and so forth until I can keep CONS thriving and breeding in marine conditions (1.025). I would never keep raising the salinity on the original pair or breed offspring together from the same parents. I have two seperate tanks and a male pink CON with a female black CON in one and a male black CON with a female pink CON in the other already. That is my plan. I have given up on raising Damsels in lower salinity with the hopes of making brackish Damsels because it's so hard to get fry from Damsels even in marine conditions. After some research I have concluded Damsels would probably not survive in Hypo for the natural duration of their lifespan. It would be much easier and probable to get a saltwater CON.


----------



## Voodoo Chilli

More great points added to this discussion by Xalow. However, it's obvious you're going to continue these "experiments", and that's a shame. It's a shame because there's absolutely no need for this activity. This boils down to someone attempting to play God and force an animal to live in an unnatural and unhealthy environment, simply for their own amusement: because it'd be "cool" to keep convicts and damsels together.


----------



## PirateCrash

I think its a cool idea.

Maybe soon in the future they "MAY" be able to be full saltwater, and you can put 'em with marine fish.


----------



## hyposalinity

Voodoo Chilli said:


> More great points added to this discussion by Xalow. However, it's obvious you're going to continue these "experiments", and that's a shame. It's a shame because there's absolutely no need for this activity. This boils down to someone attempting to play God and force an animal to live in an unnatural and unhealthy environment, simply for their own amusement: because it'd be "cool" to keep convicts and damsels together.


If you are really this butt-hurt about it you wouldn't be keeping fish in your own home aquarium, nor would any one here in these forums. Everone here is basically removing fish from their natural habitas and keeping them confined to small replicas of their huge wild habitats. We have all replaced natural rain water with either de-chlorinated tap or RO/DI . . . from tap. We have replaced sand with gravel, natural living tree roots with dead drift, live plants with plastic, rocks with flowerpots, etc. Now we are breeding these once wild specimens and raising fry in household tanks, shouldn't they be breeding in the wild? We have all put them in water conditions different in pH, phosphates, nitrate, etc. The day you quit buying Cichlids from LFS to put in your tanks, and release your pets back into their lakes and rivers, you can continue with your ranting and calling me GOD. You have no right to judge me, unless you yourself are GOD. Talk about a the pot calling the kettle black. Anyways, I will keep everyone else posted and submit pictures of proof or a video soon.


----------



## Joels fish

> If you are really this butt-hurt about it you wouldn't be keeping fish in your own home aquarium, nor would any one here in these forums. Everone here is basically removing fish from their natural habitas and keeping them confined to small replicas of their huge wild habitats. We have all replaced natural rain water with either de-chlorinated tap or RO/DI . . . from tap. We have replaced sand with gravel, natural living tree roots with dead drift, live plants with plastic, rocks with flowerpots, etc. Now we are breeding these once wild specimens and raising fry in household tanks, shouldn't they be breeding in the wild? We have all put them in water conditions different in pH, phosphates, nitrate, etc. The day you quit buying Cichlids from LFS to put in your tanks, and release your pets back into their lakes and rivers, you can continue with your ranting and calling me GOD. You have no right to judge me, unless you yourself are GOD. Talk about a the pot calling the kettle black. Anyways, I will keep everyone else posted and submit pictures of proof or a video soon.


 I agree 100% with *hyposalinity* on this point. It was and is the desire to take Cichlids out of their natural habitats and keep them in our homes for our own pleasure that started and drives this hobby. We manipulate our fishes water chemistry, we place them with tankmates that are unnatural to them, subject them to all manner of chemicals and we call this guy cruel ? He's right , we should take a look at ourselves before we start throwing stones.


----------



## hyposalinity

A majority of Central American Cichlids come from rivers that flow into the Ocean(s) and Sea(s), and many of those rivers are brackish, some even marine. To say that these Cichlids do not on occassion frequent higher salinity waters is absurd. They may predominately spend their lives in what is considerred "fresh" waters. Mayans and Black-Belts have already been observed living and breeding in brackish and marine waters, and proven t be able to survive in marine conditions in captivity. Similar experiments and research also suggest CONs and JD's not only tolerate but prefer a little salt. All the more reason I continued on with this. If my CONs do not show any sign of stress (living, eating, breeding, laying eggs, and raising living fry) in these conditions, who is really at fault and what is really getting hurt? If I can now take these "higher salinity" (1.009) fry and get them to breed in brackish (1.011), then get those fry to breed in almost marine (1.019), and finally get those fry to breed in true marine (1.025) it will be considerred a success. Then I can have a pair of CONS in a tank with some larger aggressive Dascyllus variety Damsels (3 and 4 stripe, 2 and 3 spot, etc), maybe even one of the bigger more aggressive clowns (like a Marroon). Like I said, at the first signs that this isn't working, then I will stop.


----------



## convictkid

Im sorry hyposalinity that you have to be tagged teamed by people who probably treat there fish like there little babies im sure. And yea good point when brought up that everyone is basically cruel to fish by keeping them in glass boxes no matter if they came from an even smaller glass box its still not natural, but just keep doing what your doing and hopefully everything works out for you in the end I don't see how your hurting anything. Keeps us updated and hopefully haters have stopped wasting there time posting on this topic.


----------



## Voodoo Chilli

I've been keeping fish in aquariums for almost 23 years now. In my opinion, keeping fish in aquariums is no more cruel than keeping dogs, cats, hamsters, etc. as pets. That's an argument PETA makes- a group I do *not* agree with. At all. This is because when I take an animal into my care, I provide it with the best food, shelter, and conditions I possibly can. I don't house them with "unnatural tankmates", nor do I subject them to "all manner of chemicals". I don't treat them like "babies". I do treat them humanely, however. I find it ironic that this individual (and his supporters) bring up the point of fishkeeping as being cruel (I assume in an effort to say that _I'm_ an animal abuser), yet they're aquarists as well? So much for the pot and the kettle theory...

You make a point that it's absurd to assume fish never frequent brackish or marine conditions. I *never* made that assumption. There are many species that frequent those conditions. The point I'm trying to make is those fish have had thousand upon thousands of years (and even _millions of years,_ in some cases) to slowly evolve to habitate those conditions. You want to make this jump in a matter of months. And to what end? Because you _want_ to keep them in a marine tank.

You say you'll remove them if they begin to show signs of stress? How do you know the signs of stress are even visible? Second-hand smoke causes cancer. We can't see that damage being done. Just the end result, when a person is diagnosed. How do you know the higher saline conditions aren't affecting the fish on a cellular level? You don't.

Convictkid has one thing right (although I'm not sure what a "hater" is). I have wasted too much time on this matter.


----------



## heylady

I've kept convicts and I've kept/keep damsels and to tell you the truth, I honestly don't see the point of this. JMO but cons are not nearly as nice looking as any damsel. Why would I want to put a dull fish in my marine tank? Just not getting that part of it at all. If it's for a cheap cycling fish then mollies would be my suggestion. Very cheap, they can live in saltwater very well, and they eat algae too! Next is aggression level. I have had cons like I said before, bred them too but their aggression is not on the same level as just about any damsel. A domino damsel would make short work of any con. So would the three or four stripes, blue devils, velvets...and again, any one of those fish look waaaayyyy better than any con. Sorry I do not mean to offend any convict lovers!!!! 

I do believe it will take much longer than "a couple of years" to change the convicts basic metabolism to live it's life in full strength sea water. You will have to overcome the fact that freshwater fish don't drink water while saltwater fish do. You will have to overcome the fact that saltwater fish have special cells in their gills to rid their bodies of salt. And you cannot breed cons with damsels as their life cycles are totally different. MOST saltwater fish do not have fry, they have larvae which have to go through several stages in the planktonic raft. (That's why most marine fish are so hard to raise as you have to go through all the metamorphisis of the larvae)

I'm not going to suggest you are cruel in doing this, as long as you observe the fish and are prepared to help them when needed - well, you will do what you will do. Just giving my opinion once again as to the whys?? Keeping marine fish is not that hard, there are plenty of hardy beautiful fish that you could keep.


----------



## hyposalinity

I hear what you and others are saying, maybe "saltwater or marine CON" was the wrong term, someone else hit the nail on the head, let me rephrase . . . a saltwater tolerant CON. Maybe expecting them to thrive in full strength marine conditions (1.025) is a stretch. If the ability to spawn and rear living fry in the salinity I have done already is any indicator of non-stressful environment, then I am satisfied already. Marine fishes are kept in hypo (1.009) for a few weeks even a couple of months at a time in quarantine t rid of any unwanted diseases before introduction to the display tank. It's not a stretch to believe the hardier Damsels could live their natural lives at a salinity of 1.019, which is still considerred brackish. I have read seen Damsels slowly aclimated to true fresh conditions too, but eventually died within a year. Is this because of the lack of salt, or was it due to toxins in the water due to bad upkeep, who knows? I am taking everything people are saying into consideration. IMO if they are breeding and the fry are living, it's acceptable conditions. Only time will tell, and it will take some time for sure, probably 10 batches of fry from different parents bred at different salinities, then you figure in time for each pair to sexually mature, could take a very long time. Now that I have just said that, I probably don't have the patience to do so, but I'll keep pressing on and see.


----------



## Frameshift

I'm just wondering how much you know about osmotic regulation differences in freshwater fish versus saltwater fish?

There are big differences. I don't see these fish thriving in just a couple generations.

I'd have to say convicts were a bad choice for this, as they'll breed in any type of water. If you wanted to "prove" any thing you'd have to use a more sensitive test subject.

I could throw a pair of cons in a 10 gallon uncycled tank and they'd breed. That doesn't mean they're thriving in something different, just that they're better adapted to survive in harsh conditions.



> Osmoregulators tightly regulate their body osmolarity which always stays constant and are more common in the animal kingdom. Osmoregulators actively control salt concentrations despite the salt concentrations in the environment. An example is freshwater fish. The gills actively uptake salt from the environment by the use of mitochondria rich (MR) cells. Water will diffuse into the fish so it excretes a very hypotonic urine to expel all the excess water. A marine fish has an internal osmotic concentration lower than that of the surrounding seawater so it tends to lose water and gain salt. It actively excretes salt out from the gills. Most fish are stenohaline, which means they are restricted to either salt or fresh water and can cannot survive in water with a different salt concentration than they are adapted to. However, some fish show a tremendous ability to effectively osmoregulate across a broad range of salinities; fish with this ability are known as euryhaline species.


And a link-
http://www2.hawaii.edu/~delbeek/delb11.html


----------



## hyposalinity

I have read alot about it, and I have read that saltwater bony fishes living in hypo (1.009) is actually less stressful on their bodies and internal organs than living in full strength seawater (1.025). But, in order for mini-reef enthusiasts to keep non-bony specimens (corals, inverts, anemones, etc) liverock and algaes you have to keep the salinity high, as measured in the ocean. Most reefers who keep NEMS also want Clowns, so therefore you have to keep the salinity at 1.024-1.026 level. The corals, rock and algae won't survive in hypo, brackish or lower than normal salinity levels. The recommended time-frame to keep a salt fish in hypo is 4 weeks after the last visible ich spot. If the ich does not go away or comes back before 4 weeks you have to keep them in that salinity for however long it takes, could be as little as 4 weeks, could last coule months, or even up to a year. Many people have kept salt fish in hypo for over a year.

http://www.reefsanctuary.com/forums/fis ... ocess.html

Scroll down to Woodstocks question and where Leebca replies. I know saltfish are more tolerant to the fluctuations, and true fresh fish are not as tolerant to salt. Yet everything I have read shows Mayans and Blackbelts not only tolerate but thrive in marine conditions and Dempseys and CONS do better in brackish. I've even seen Flowerhorns in a reef tank, RDs in salinities as high as 1.015 on video. We use to add sea salt to our African tank and their colors always were more impressive, their appetites were better, they were less skittish. We would only add a little salt every other water change, and they continued raising fry as normal. It was probably only enough salt to register on a refractometer, like 1.002 or 1.003, then the next water change we would add fresh only.


----------



## aaxxeell

keep us posted hyposalinity :thumb: , this is far too interesting to stop now...
cant wait to see the end results!

imagine a tank with shelldwellers and clowns, corals and inverts  
colourfull and interesting to watch.
(haha sorry guys, my immagination wanders a bit sometimes)


----------



## ginner

I just wanted to comment that using breeding might not be the best test of whether cons are thriving. I recently purchased a pair that were getting ready to breed in their little, overcrowded tank at the LFS. I don't think anyone here would suggest that those are good conditions for a fish, but they looked fantastic, must have been eating well and were getting ready to breed (they had a nest  ).

One idea might be to raise half a set of fry in fresh water along with the other half in increasingly salt water. Then you could compare how the two groups did over time. I think it would be good to have a control group because it might well be the case that the cons do survive in brackish water, but just not as well in the longer term.


----------



## illy-d

I'm currently working on breeding convicts that will be able to survive in an environment with little to no H2O so I don't have to bother with the hassle of water changes.

So far the F3 generation of fry from my newly created "Dry Cons" seem happy to flop around on my living room floor... Surprisingly enough even though they cannot eat or breathe very well (yet) they still breed regularly - gotta love those convicts :thumb:


----------



## gage

OceanDevil said:


> Good luck with this. I have thought about it but it seems like a big hassle.
> 
> To all the nay-sayers... please calm down. This guy is not being cruel. Is it ok to use cons as feeders but not increase the salinity of their water? :lol:


cons bein used a feders is natural, sticking them in salt water is not, that is the difference.


----------



## hyposalinity

illy-d said:


> I'm currently working on breeding convicts that will be able to survive in an environment with little to no H2O so I don't have to bother with the hassle of water changes.
> 
> So far the F3 generation of fry from my newly created "Dry Cons" seem happy to flop around on my living room floor... Surprisingly enough even though they cannot eat or breathe very well (yet) they still breed regularly - gotta love those convicts :thumb:


Thanks for your input . . . I mean, thanks for nothing. I thought this forum was full of intelligent mature adults who didn't resort to childish replies found in AOL chatrooms. Go play somewhere else "thread de-railer".


----------



## convictkid

> Go play somewhere else "thread de-railer".


Agreed. I think its a cool experiment. I hope you discover something.


----------



## Big Vine

hyposalinity,

Can't blame you at getting a little irritated by the multitude of responses which express skepticism about your ideas/plans here with these convicts. Then again, you've also gotten several responses in support of what you are doing, so it's not all one-sided either...

In any event, I think illy-d was more trying to poke fun in a harmless way.
I'm sorry it came off as being inappropriate, and I'm sure he feels the same way. But at the same time, I can certainly understand how folks on this forum would also feel that conducting experiments with convicts in saltwater is also inappropriate, so I can hardly blame him either.

In sum, we've got folks who are in support of what you are doing (or, at the very least, curious as to how it will turn out), and we've got folks in dire opposition to the whole idea. So be it. This isn't the first time members have butted heads on here about something, lol.

Can't we just leave it at that and agree to disagree on certain things without mods having to step in and reprimand people? (actually, that wasn't a request, lol)
BV


----------



## hyposalinity

I appreciate support, but also appreciate negative comments as well, so long as the replies are useful and contain helpful information to consider.

Another update:

Still haven't seen any fry yet, and the female CON has left the driftwood where the eggs were, and the male shows little interest in her and that area anymore. I do not know if the eggs hatched, and if they did not hatch I do not know if it was because of the salt, being exposed to air when I transferred from on tank to the other, or if they died because of an ammonia spike during the short cycle of the new tank. Just because I can't see any fry does not mean they didn't hatch, I may not be able to see them because they are hidden real well in the wood.


----------



## aaxxeell

hey, just thought this would be of interest to some of you guys, its a lil' clip on youtube of the flowerhorn in a reeftank...


----------



## xalow

When the eggs were mentioned it reminded me of something I had read about rainbow sharks recently. Here is a link to the paper, with the relevant material on page 9: http://etd.fcla.edu/UF/UFE0004915/abernathy_m.pdf

Just as a warning its a PDF file.

Anyways, the study was about water hardness effect on egg fertilization and survival rates. However, it talks about osmotic pressure, which is also influenced by salinity. This makes me think that since eggs are probably the most succeptable to changes in salinity that the experiment should probably start there rather than with adult convicts.

I think the resutls would be mroe toward your favor. Rather than seeing how far particular adult convicts can tolerate salinitiy you would be finding out how many eggs out of possibly hundreds would survive at a slightly increased salinity and then raise those eggs into adults and see if their eggs can tolerate evn more. This would dramatically increase your sample size and chances of success.

Also raising fry in these conditions would mean that their organs are developing within the experiment which would give you earlier notice to any long term problems or possible developmental issues.


----------



## hyposalinity

That clip is kind of misleading, who knows how long that fish was in there, maybe only long enough to shoot the footage. The videos I have seen actually shows Cichlids eating, side by side with saltfish. I thought it was kind of "fishy" that the video only shows about 2-3 seconds of footage, and it was at the end of the film. If someone was trying to prove a successful Flowerhorn acclimation to salt, why not show minutes of footage, and footage that proves the fish is doing well. It would be hard to prove timeframe, but if possible it would be nice to see a fish living in marine conditions from juvenile to adulthood, and a pair breeding and rearing fry. I considerred doing the same, a documentary of sorts. People would just call me a liar, claim it was different fish used, half strength salt, photoshopped, or the fish ion the video were only in the tank long enough to get the footage I needed. If what I a supsect is true and what I am doing works there will always be naysayers and non-believers. Many years ago people thought the world was flat, and people thought Earth was the center of the universe. These beliefs were fact to most for ages, then one day out of the blue someone proved everyone wrong. That person had reason to suspect and evidence to support their claims. I have the same suspicions and evidence too, but I am still looked upon by some as a dreamer and this is all science fiction.


----------



## aaxxeell

and thats why its a good reason your publicly conducting the experiment, your not a dreamer your a do-er...
hats off to you, if it works it works and if it dosent thats too bad,
you will be the wise one to share the experience with the dreamers :thumb: 
remember life is a learning curve :thumb:


----------



## kaphil

I think Illy-d may have been onto something. 
I'm tempted to experiment with a low temperature tolerant con - keeping cons in an unheated tank. Bonus - it'll save on the electricity Bills.
Or perhaps I'll go for the nitrite tolerant con - not bother with a filter or water changes and see how they do. This will save on both money AND time.
Maybe I'll try and develop the 'potato con' - by feeding them a diet of just potatoes. More convenient then getting proper fish food.

Hyposalinity - you are not a scientist conducting some kind of meaningful experiment here. You are deliberately subjecting animals in your care to conditions likely to damage their health, and you should stop it.


----------



## Toby_H

â€¦Man and I thought it was wrong for people to keep their Cichlids in minimum conditionsâ€¦ Hats off to those who at least know enough to keep freshwater fish in fresh waterâ€¦

I agree with the several people who pointed out using breeding as a sign of â€œthrivingâ€


----------



## convictkid

> I think the â€œDry Conâ€


----------



## hyposalinity

kaphil said:


> I think Illy-d may have been onto something.
> I'm tempted to experiment with a low temperature tolerant con - keeping cons in an unheated tank. Bonus - it'll save on the electricity Bills.
> Or perhaps I'll go for the nitrite tolerant con - not bother with a filter or water changes and see how they do. This will save on both money AND time.
> Maybe I'll try and develop the 'potato con' - by feeding them a diet of just potatoes. More convenient then getting proper fish food.
> 
> Hyposalinity - you are not a scientist conducting some kind of meaningful experiment here. You are deliberately subjecting animals in your care to conditions likely to damage their health, and you should stop it.


The difference between what I am doing and your rediculous comments is I am not doing this in order to get away without having to do something. I am not doing this because freshwater is hard to come by and saltwater is so readily available. Just like the previous rediculous comment similar to yours, neither have anything constructive to add. If the best you can do is add some childish remarks, don't bother posting and just avoid this thread. My aquaruims are filtered, my fish eat appropriate food, they get adequate lighting and realistic decoration similar to what they would have in their natural habitat (rock, wood, sword plant, val, fox, and very fine gravel). With that said, their natural habitat is also exposed to higher salinities the closer the water gets to the sea and/or ocean. Depending on the tide, water flow, storms etc those saliniy levels could be experienced further up-stream on occassion. When my CONs bred and laid eggs the salinity was only at 1.006, that's not even high enough to be considerred a HYPO (1.009) environment. It's definitely not high enough to be called BRACKISH water. True BRACKISH can be as high as 1.019 give or take, and most bracksih fish are kept at 1.015 by hobbyist. Once the fry are old enough to eat on their own this original pair are going to be put back in true fresh, the fry will be transferred to my other tank at the same salinity of 1.006 and slightly raised to 1.009 over a period of time and attempt to breed a pair at that salinity. I have said time and time again, when they show signs of stress, I'll lower the salinity slowly back to fresh and stop. As far as your last comment about subjecting them to conditions that would damage their health, it has already been proven that at this salinity level there are no signs of osmotic stress on the fishes bodies, CONs do not show a change and a Dempseys actually prefer a higher salinity environment.


----------



## aquaman1018

hey! have you tryed to use the same technique to aclemate saltwater fish to brackish. hey and i live in south florida i've seen eropthalmus (false red terror) in the intercostal and in marshes living and breeding so why don't you try with those to. also it would be cool to see damsel ,chomis and some other salt water species in with the central americans that can live in brackish water grate work.


----------



## hyposalinity

I would think that the false Red Terrors would get too big and eat the Damsels.


----------



## hyposalinity

hyposalinity said:


> I would think that the false Red Terrors would get too big and eat the Damsels.


 The false Red Terror (Cichlasoma Uro...) is actually a Mayan Cichlid.


----------



## Darkside

kaphil said:


> I think Illy-d may have been onto something.
> I'm tempted to experiment with a low temperature tolerant con - keeping cons in an unheated tank. Bonus - it'll save on the electricity Bills.
> Or perhaps I'll go for the nitrite tolerant con - not bother with a filter or water changes and see how they do. This will save on both money AND time.
> Maybe I'll try and develop the 'potato con' - by feeding them a diet of just potatoes. More convenient then getting proper fish food.
> 
> Hyposalinity - you are not a scientist conducting some kind of meaningful experiment here. You are deliberately subjecting animals in your care to conditions likely to damage their health, and you should stop it.


I fail to see the point of this comment. Science has to start somewhere and one doesn't need to be attached to a university or another academic body in order to make a discovery.


----------



## convictkid

> I fail to see the point of this comment. Science has to start somewhere and one doesn't need to be attached to a university or another academic body in order to make a discovery.


Perfectly Stated.


----------



## KC

The OP's posts and those supporting this endeavor are a great read, kudo's.

I will definitely keep tabs on this thread.


----------



## rwolff

ok, i was trying to stay away from the thread, but i do support science, but then again the same i dont support animal cruelty. which is my opinion. And we all know opinions are subjective and dont really collaborate scientifically.
So i decided to think about my opinion about this cruelty to the Cons. And thought i should be able to back it up with some scientific proof, but so does 'this experiment'.

It was stated that the Cons were found in brackish conditions, and in river streams that are close to the sea bla bla bla...then i thought maybe they are naturally inclined to withstand certain salt conditions. But if as it was said, that saltwater would go upstream and so on during storms/high tides, etc. then this is not permanent. because a storm does not stay forever or a high tide does not remian high forever.
Then the Cons are most likely in saltwater/brackish conditions periodically.
It was said they were found in these conditions, but this does not mean they live in those conditions permanently. As i dont think there were anybody that may have check this fish every single day of its life to proof that some live in brackish conditions indefinitly.
And this is what more fish are able to do too, thus withstand a certain degree of salt for a period of time.

There are a million things coming in my head now and trying to take into account all possibilities.
And im just mentioning a few things out of the top of my head.

I still think its cruel if they were in high salinity for a long period of time, but then again this experiment is to see how far they can go. I really dont know where i stand now. But as i have mentioned before i am still against it as it doesnt provide anything good for the fish itself that can be used to help/cure/improve the life of Cons in aquaria.

And all other remarks about cons on dry land, low temp cons, etc etc. they are not pointless(I enjoyed them very much). Everybody's opinion matters, and these are people trying to point it out in a metaphoric matter, offcourse the point of a metaphor is that it be more forceful on the matter sometimes. These are point of views, you and others can simply choose to ignore it too.

im not trying to encourage you to keep up with the experiment.
also reading about the osmotic proces a fish egg goes through for hatching, even though its of a minnow, but id say all freshwater fish eggs all kinda go through a same process adequate to their natural waterchemistry. Id say you are gonna get stuck before reaching brackish, I dont think they will hatch in those conditions, if the eggs hatch in those conditions, id presume they are just some that do, but as tiny babies wont withstand the salinity, they will just dry out like potatoe chips. But as you stated you wont keep it up if you notice they cant handle it, and i think we should give you that trust.

but you can always try and proof someone wrong or right.


----------



## hyposalinity

I appreciate what you are saying, and what you are saying may be true. I do not plan on keeping the original pair in these conditions permanently or raising their salinity to get them acclimated to salt conditions. I am seeing what salinity they will lay eggs and hatch living fry at. Those fry (from two different parents) will then be bred (male from one batch and female from the other) at a higher salinity, and hopefully lay eggs and produce living fry. And so on and so forth either until I get CONS that thrive in salt water, or until they quit laying eggs, rearing living fry, or the parents just don't appear to be doing well, then they will be acclimated back to fresh. Maybe a goal of 1.025 is not possible, but I just have this GUT feeling after everything I have read and seen with my own eyes, the possiblity of CONS in 1.011 is very possible, and keeping them with Damsels at that salinity is not impossible. Many saltfish have been kept at 1.009 for more than a year, if finicky Angels, Tangs, Butterflys etc can withstand that low of a salinity for that long, hardy Damsels should do just fine at a slightly elevated sainity level. HYPO is on the edge lowest point, very little room for error, that's why I would raise it a couple points for long term success. But, only time will tell, and we'll see. I can also see why some people are upset, and some truely don't believe. Some think it is torturous to let them suffer and die, I would not let them die, I assure you. I have had enough fish, long enough to know when something is wrong. In this case I will know exactly what is wrong, I brought it on and will know exactly what to do to fix it. Others have had success with acclimation to brackish or salt within a few days, I am doing this over a very long course by breeding, hatching and rearing fry into these conditions. The parents are exposed to it before mating, passed on through fertilization of the eggs, the eggs are exposed to it while incubating, the fry are born into it. This is a very different and more likely process for success way of doing it.


----------



## Darkside

hyposalinity said:


> Others have had success with acclimation to brackish or salt within a few days, I am doing this over a very long course by breeding, hatching and rearing fry into these conditions. The parents are exposed to it before mating, passed on through fertilization of the eggs, the eggs are exposed to it while incubating, the fry are born into it. This is a very different and more likely process for success way of doing it.


Do you have literature to support this hypothesis? I've never seen indication that gradually exposing fish to increasing levels of salt over generations has any significant impact on their ability to withstand saline conditions. Surely the environmental impact on the phenotype is fairly limited. Or are you attempting to select for the genetic predisposition of higher saline tolerance through only raising the portion of fry that do hatch? In order to select for something like that you'll likely have to hatch many generations of fry at a level where only 5-10% of the fry actually hatch and the rest of the eggs are nonviable. Then breed the succeeding generations at even high concentrations to select for it. You may also want to look into the sperm motilityof freshwater fish in saline conditions as this may be a limiting factor as well. To think that you'll be able to gradually acclimate them to marine conditions over generations "just because" belies a poor understanding of the evolutionary mechanism. 
If you're looking into keeping damsels and convicts together, I suggest you look up an old product called "Miracle Water". Through a complex mixture of carbohydrates scientists discovered that they were able to keep both freshwater and marine fish in the same environment long term. The major drawback of this was behavioral and it was discovered that most marine fish are too aggressive to keep with freshwater species, including cichlids.

And everyone's opinion is indeed their own, but that doesn't mean that it has any merit. What's the point of over the top metaphors pointing out the obvious? (its understood that you're against the idea)


----------



## hyposalinity

I have never seen or heard of anyone trying to breed Cichlids or any other "fresh" fish to eventually have a higher salinity tolerance. I have only read about people trying to slowly acclimate a single fish to saltwater, and I have seen it done. I am the first as far as I know trying this route, and I am only trying it this way because what I have read about Mayans, Blackbelts, Red Devils, Demseys and CONs. I chose CONs because they are small, I can't have a huge Red Devil eating up all my Damsels after successfully doing so. The most impressive video I saw was an aquarium with a Red Devil, Texas, and a Dempsey living in an aquarium at 1.015 with a blue devil Damsel. I do not know how he measured the salinity, if it was done with a hydrometer the salinity could have only been as low as 1.013, or as high as 1.017. Those were acclimated from an originally "fresh" tank and salt was added at each water change until it was "brackish", probably took a year to do. The one day he acclimated the Damsel in, straight from the LFS, not slowly over a period of time.

I have never heard of "Miracle Water", sounds interesting, may be an option.


----------



## hyposalinity

Step 1: (done with two tanks with two pairs)
male and female CON start off in fresh
slowly increase salt to 1.005 +/-
hopefully eggs hatch and fry survive

Step 2:
remove fry and introduce to tank at 1.005
form a pair
slowly increase salinity to 1.009
hopefully eggs hatch and fry survive

Step 3:
remove fry and introduce to tank at 1.009
form a pair
slowly increase salinity to 1.011
hopefully eggs hatch and fry survive

Step 4:
remove fry and introduce to tank at 1.011
form a pair
slowly increase salinity to 1.015
hopefully eggs hatch and fry survive

Step 5:
remove fry and introduce to tank at 1.015
form a pair
slowly increase salinity to 1.019
hopefully eggs hatch and fry survive

Step 6:
remove fry and introduce to tank at 1.019
form a pair
slowly increase salinity to 1.021
hopefully eggs hatch and fry survive

Step 7:
remove fry and introduce to tank at 1.021
form a pair
slowly increase salinity to 1.025
hopefully eggs hatch and fry survive

Step 8:
remove fry and introduce to tank at 1.025
form a pair
keep breeding at salinity of 1.025
hopefully eggs hatch and fry survive

goes from fresh, to little salt, to hypo, to slight brackish, to moderate brackish, to highly brackish, to marine


----------



## Darkside

I can see that you've set this up systematically, but that doesn't address my concerns. Is there any suggestion that the environment has that great an impact on the phenotype? Without supporting evidence you may be wasting your time. You'll breed your fish to a salinity of 1.015 and find that they won't go any further, which is the same as just slowly acclimating a single pair of convicts over a year. There is still nothing to suggest that you'll be able to increase tolerance through raising the fry in an environment with higher salinity. Not to mention the other genetic issues you may run into by the time you've reached the 8th generation. I suggest that you read up on the subject before you continue your inquiry because you may find that the reason "no one" has done it through successive generations is because it doesn't offer any advantages over slowly acclimating a single fish.


----------



## hyposalinity

No one else has attempted probably because it would take a long time, that's my take. Who knows, I may give up on it too. I am in the military, if I have to deploy or PCS I'll have to stop the process and begin all over, or just give up on it.


----------



## kaphil

No one else has attempted it, probably because it's pointless.

Which was kind of the point of my metaphors, which you seem to have missed. An 'experiment' trying to keep successive generations of cons in cold water is no different to yours, trying to keep successive generations of cons in high nitrite water is no different to yours, trying to get successive genrations of cons to accept an unnatural diet is no different to yours.

All pointless. All likely to result in suffering to the fish.



hyposalinity said:


> I would not let them die, I assure you.


Do you have some kind of divine power? That is a naive statement in the extreme.

Anyway, I guess we are going over old ground here so I'll no longer trespass in your thread. I only hope other members of C/F are not tempted to try their hand at similar fish experimentation.


----------



## convictkid

Your metaphors are different then what he is doing , anyone could tell that.


----------



## Toby_H

Differentâ€¦ yes...

but comparable... which is the point...

In the endâ€¦ if the information is absorbed by a few hobbyists and then for the most part lostâ€¦ the experiment looses impact and therefore the fish have simply been tortured to whatever degree they were for no benefitâ€¦

If the information is used for some scientific research that betters the hobby or the fishâ€¦ then it may be worth it from the perspective of the big pictureâ€¦

I 100% agree that not only scientists can make scientific researchâ€¦ and your name does not have to be attached to a corporation or a University to conduct scientific researchâ€¦ but is this scientific research used to help further a greater causeâ€¦ or is this someone being curious if they could pull something off and putting the fishâ€™s well being on the line in attempts to do so?

Iâ€™m not judging, Iâ€™m askingâ€¦


----------



## hyposalinity

Why did "humans" decide to grow Tilapia/Red Drum in brackish? Why were Tilapia/Red Drum released into fresh, brackish, salt and even brine water? All for the benefit of humans who wanted to use them as a food fish, and want the fish to grow faster to put more meat on the table quicker. Did this benefit Tilapia/Red Drum, is this torturous? Is it not only torturous because they are temporarily living in extreme conditions, but also inhumane to do so only to kill them when they are fat enough to fill our bellies? Captive raised salt tolerant CONs could be used to cycle marine tanks instead of Damsels, which for the most part are collected in the wild, not bred in captivity due to the difficulty. Captive raised salt tolerant CON fry could be used as safe healty live food (like bloodworms or brine shrimp) for small marine fish. Captive raised salt tolerant juve or adult CONs could be used as prey fish (like goldfish or guppies) for large predatory marine fish. Salt tolerant CONs may do better, grow bigger and faster in bracksh or salt, no one knows until we find out, if it's possible. I simply want to do so to find out, then consider everyting else I have mentioned. Keeping CONs and damsels in Hypo/Brackish together is my short term goal. My long term goal is to get them in a marine tank, highly doubt that will happen. Why, why, why. Why are calves kept confined to areas full of maneur and breathing methane gasses before slaughtered and put on our table as veal? Why do people raise dogs from puppies to eventually be thrown into a pot and served as stew? Why do men like to look at and feel boobies? There are more serious issues at hand in the world righ now I think. You should focus some of your energy on world crisis, not what I am doing with captive raised CONs I bought from a LFS in my own home. Definitely not what I am doing with the fry I am raising in captivity from captive bred CON parents. If I lost all the fry and/or parents because my power went out one night and my heater wasn't keeping them warm, or I had a ammonia/nitrite spike because the filter was off, or they died from a lack of oxegen noone would react so negatively, especially the way you are. Let me ask you this animal rights activist, are you a Vegan, what foods do you enjoy, what is your footwear made from, have yu ever played basketball, football, baseball? Do you drive an automobile, have you ever owned a car with leather interior? Look at yourself, your family, friends, and others around you. Assess what you see and consider everything, then tell me how wrong I am for what I am doing? I have done he research, read, seen all I need to think this experiment will be a success. I would not attempt it without some proof it wouldn't be successful, and I wouldn't try it if I thought it wouldn't work. You say you will stay out of this thread and refrain from comments, yet you are now argueing with another member in this thread, not just me. I do not care if you have some good info to give me either supporting me or disagreeing with me, just don't input rediculous comments.


----------



## Darkside

hyposalinity said:


> Why did "humans" decide to grow Tilapia/Red Drum in brackish? Why were Tilapia/Red Drum released into fresh, brackish, salt and even brine water? All for the benefit of humans who wanted to use them as a food fish, and want the fish to grow faster to put more meat on the table quicker. Did this benefit Tilapia/Red Drum, is this torturous? Is it not only torturous because they are temporarily living in extreme conditions, but also inhumane to do so only to kill them when they are fat enough to fill our bellies? Captive raised salt tolerant CONs could be used to cycle marine tanks instead of Damsels, which for the most part are collected in the wild, not bred in captivity due to the difficulty. Captive raised salt tolerant CON fry could be used as safe healty live food (like bloodworms or brine shrimp) for small marine fish. Captive raised salt tolerant juve or adult CONs could be used as prey fish (like goldfish or guppies) for large predatory marine fish. Salt tolerant CONs may do better, grow bigger and faster in bracksh or salt, no one knows until we find out, if it's possible. I simply want to do so to find out, then consider everyting else I have mentioned. Keeping CONs and damsels in Hypo/Brackish together is my short term goal. My long term goal is to get them in a marine tank, highly doubt that will happen. Why, why, why. Why are calves kept confined to areas full of maneur and breathing methane gasses before slaughtered and put on our table as veal? Why do people raise dogs from puppies to eventually be thrown into a pot and served as stew? Why do men like to look at and feel boobies? There are more serious issues at hand in the world righ now I think. You should focus some of your energy on world crisis, not what I am doing with captive raised CONs I bought from a LFS in my own home. Definitely not what I am doing with the fry I am raising in captivity from captive bred CON parents. If I lost all the fry and/or parents because my power went out one night and my heater wasn't keeping them warm, or I had a ammonia/nitrite spike because the filter was off, or they died from a lack of oxegen noone would react so negatively, especially the way you are. Let me ask you this animal rights activist, are you a Vegan, what foods do you enjoy, what is your footwear made from, have yu ever played basketball, football, baseball? Do you drive an automobile, have you ever owned a car with leather interior? Look at yourself, your family, friends, and others around you. Assess what you see and consider everything, then tell me how wrong I am for what I am doing? I have done he research, read, seen all I need to think this experiment will be a success. I would not attempt it without some proof it wouldn't be successful, and I wouldn't try it if I thought it wouldn't work. You say you will stay out of this thread and refrain from comments, yet you are now argueing with another member in this thread, not just me. I do not care if you have some good info to give me either supporting me or disagreeing with me, just don't input rediculous comments.


Lol u mad?

If you don't fully understand the mechanisms of inheritance you really are wasting your time. The reasons you are conducting this experiment will have no impact on the outcome. From my understanding you don't have any idea why breeding fish through successive generations would increase their tolerance to salinity. If you're actually interested in a scientific inquiry you would best arm yourself with this understanding or the experiment will have very little benefit and impact. Experiments of this nature are harmful to the test subjects, being impartial to this is important to experiments of this nature, but its always advisable to make sure that the eventual outcome out ways the gravity of animal cruelty.

From this post I can see "You grown, you do what you want," but I'm still advising you to do some more background research as there are some papers available online (and free BTW) that may help you tailor your experiment. If you think that something of this nature hasn't been explored that is a sign of poor research skills on your part. Experiments of this type have been conducted and this should answer your question as to why it hasn't been studied in further depth, it either has no economic gain, there are better test subjects for this type of research or it just doesn't work all that well. If you want to breed marine convicts that's great, but if were really as easy as you have it in your experimental design it would already have been done.


----------



## hyposalinity

I am only upset with one person. Everyone has voiced their opinions. I apprciate those who support it, and those who don't. I take evrything everyone has to offer, wether they are on my side, or against me. If they are not for what I am doing, but offer good reasons why I respect that. I do not appreciate idiotic replies with nothing to offer, those individuals are just looking to get a laugh or as to say, "look at this moron". I have already made it clear as to why I am doing this. I want to keep CONs and Damsels in the same aquarium at 1.010 give or take, call it HYPO or call it Brackish, whatever floats your boat. The same reason people all over the world do things to animals, for their own pleasure or benefit. Now if my attempt is successful and others use this strain for other reasons (cycling, feeders, etc), more power to them. CONs in a marine environment would be like icing on the cake, but not my realistic goal, which is to have healthy breeding CONs at 1.010 give or take. I have done enough research to believe CONs in brackish is possible, I have not found anything related to what I am attempting. As far as I know it's never been done or considerred. People have tried doing so with a single fish (captive raised from what I have read), drip acclimating over a short period of days until the fish died. Then it was determined that was the salinity they could not live in. That is cruel IMO, what I am doing is a much better method, much longer time frame and never the same fish. We are taking about wether or not eggs are hatching here, if they don't hatch, nothing is lost. Eggs are lost to predators, even eaten by their own parents on occassion. Yes, I am grown, but not stubborn. No one has given me anything as "hard evidence" it will not work. If someone were to show me something concrete that a similar experiment has been conducted and failed I wouldn't waste my time. You wouldn't polish a turd would you? Neither would I, no one would. I have seen Cichlids acclimated to brackish, living, eating, etc. Those I have seen did not show a pair rearing fry though, and undetermined how long they lived in those conditions. I have read about Cichlids living and rearing fry in marine conditions too. I have read about the test done to support Cichlids will be perfectly happy in brackish. I want to see it for myself first hand, and I want a pair to live their natural lifespan to include rearing fry in brackish along with Damsels.


----------



## convictkid

I think it would be better to have damsels be freshwater tolerant. So I don't have to set up an expensive marine tank. Why don't you try to opposite too? :-?


----------



## rwolff

bah, here i go again..i have to say i convinced myself of this research, cause thats the only way we are ever gonna know anything at that.
but compared to mosquitos that are highly resistant to insecticide...id guess his research has some value, if fish can acclimate/adapt/ fast enough to environmental influences, then this surely has scientific value.
example...what if a river becomes polluted or changed, by salt or whatever chemical. the species that live in the riversystem would just die off. but if people can intervene and when 'certain research' has already been done, that more tolerant fish can be bred to withstand the polution to give the generation the chance to survive.
It sure is good to know if fish can adapt quickly enough and thus stating that fish may adapt more quickly genetically...a lot of things can come clear with a simple research.

another example is human beings itself, look how we changed just by changing diets, there was always the bloodtype O, now there is A, B and later AB...just because people started eating different, thus adapting to certain kind of food we couldnt eat or profit from before.


----------



## remarkosmoc

Oh, if only the forum had a way to filter out the political/moral posts and leave those with some meat on 'em :lol:

I have to say I agree with the others in that what you are effectively attempting to reverse the osmoregulation system within your convicts. This is a substantive change that would effectively 'redesign' the fish which would in turn require DNA changes. This isn't going to happen without some kind of cross breeding or genetic engineering. Exposing the offspring to higher levels of salinity isn't really any different than just changing what the parents are exposed to.

That being said is my opinion only and I'm no expert. Maybe you'll be the Copernicus of fish and prove the unprovable.

Your methodology obviously isn't university-level research scientific method standards, but they are worthwhile. You proposed a hypothesis, designed an experiment, and are doing it in a publicly open manner to subject it to peer review. I think that's great for an 'amateur scientist'. :thumb:


----------



## hyposalinity

If only collecting CON sperm was easy, the I could fertilize some Damsel eggs with it or vice-versa. If only I had access to very complicated instruments and a lot of time and money. That IMO is playing GOD, kind of like abortion or stem cell research, what I am doing is allowing the fish to adapt and overcome on their own or not. Letting them die is not my intent.


----------



## DirtyBlackSocks

Most folks who try and go against the norm are ridiculed by their peers (that is those with a comparable knowledge) until they finally prove their theories are right or wrong...

Whatever - it's just a bunch of convicts, advocating animal rights ina hobby where you keep a fish in 1/100000000000th the size of it's natural habitat isn't exactly a strong argument.

Do what you want - quit arguing about it and post your next batch of results. If it works great, if it doesn't at least you're doing somthing productive with your time. It's not like you're trying to acclimated a red listed species into salt water.


----------



## Darkside

hyposalinity said:


> If only collecting CON sperm was easy, the I could fertilize some Damsel eggs with it or vice-versa. If only I had access to very complicated instruments and a lot of time and money. That IMO is playing GOD, kind of like abortion or stem cell research, what I am doing is allowing the fish to adapt and overcome on their own or not. Letting them die is not my intent.


There is no evidence supporting your claim that fish will have increased tolerance if they are bred and raised in saline conditions. This would require an overhaul of their current system of osmoregulation which is genetic. What I was trying to suggest to you is that the environmental impact on the phenotype isn't as big as you think and that there will be little difference between the phenotypes of fish bred in waters with differing salinity concentrations. I can't find any research supporting any mechanism suggesting that fry are likely to have an increased adaptability for saline conditions. You're welcome to continue your "experiment" but once again, I think that it will have little value without an increased understanding of the physiological barriers that you're attempting to overcome.


----------



## hyposalinity

I hear ya Darkside. Maybe if my little experiment goes the way I hope, then there will be some evidence. I don't have the resources to attempt changes in genetics. Gene splicing etc is way beyond my abilities.


----------



## illy-d

Wow.

I posted my comment as a way to lighten the mood in a thread where you were otherwise being attacked... To be honest I'm on the fence on this one - I can see your point and agree that nobody who keeps fish in a glass box has a right to point the finger at another, yet I can see the otherside of the coin and agree that as 'keepers' of these creatures we owe it to them to do our best to keep them in the most ideal conditions...

But reading your reaction to my original post about "Dry Cons" got me thinking; How is it that your endeavour to keep Cons in brackish or marine conditions is justifiable in your own eyes, but trying to keep cons in equally 'different' conditions is not justifiable... In fact I would go so far as to say that you would be serving the greater 'fishkeeping' community better if you were to develop convicts that could thrive in say high ammonia or high nitrite conditions - I mean lets be honest with oursleves 99% of fish sold in chain stores end up being kept in these conditions anyway - would it not be better for the fish if they could handle these conditions???

Also, another question is you have alluded to the fact that Jack Dempsey's do better in those sort of environments - why didn't you use Jack Dempseys as your test subjects?


----------



## hyposalinity

hmmm, Dempseys and CONS both showed to be good candidates, but I don't want big Dempseys eating my Damsels.


----------



## aaxxeell

heres an idea, acclimatise something usefull like pleco's to saltywater, marine guys are allways whining about algae blooms :lol: :lol: :lol:


----------



## hyposalinity

Pleco's don't tolerate even the slightest bit of salt, plus there are slugs and such for salt that eat hair algae.


----------



## aaxxeell

its called a joke...
sorry to poke fun


----------



## remarkosmoc

He doesn't like the jokes and kidding going on here. I think thats why he started a different thread for this project.


----------



## aaxxeell

i think most people on CF are light hearted and make jokes now and then...


----------



## Frameshift

Maybe I don't understand why you keep saying this has never been done. Are you speaking of convicts or cichlids in general? As you stated earlier, there have been many studies done on tilapia (for food) in regards to salinity that are available online for free, in the form of scholarly articles.

Here are a few abstracts. Easily found by using the Scholar feature of Google and searching salt water tilapia.

The best one-

http://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/dspace/bi ... s_2004.pdf



> Much research has been performed on salinity tolerance in the Mayan cichlid due to its potential as a food fish. In one study, juvenile Mayan cichlids labreared at 25Â° C in freshwater were slowly acclimated (2 ppt/day for four days at a time) to 30 ppt salinity without harm. Many survived when placed directly into salinities up to 37 ppt (Stauffer and Boltz 1994). Martinez-Palacios et al. have extensively investigated the physiology of the Mayan cichlid. They described successful acclimation up to salinities of 35 ppt by increasing salinity 5 ppt every 48
> hours (Martinez-Palacios et al. 1990). They found the cichlids to be capable of withstanding direct transfer from freshwater to brackish water of 15 ppt at 28Â° C. However,
> half of the fish tested died within six days after being transferred directly to 24 ppt salinity. In order to find the salinity in which the fish grow best, fish were acclimated to saltwater concentrations of 0, 5, 10, 20, 30, and 35 ppt and grown out over long periods of time. They were found to grow best at the 10 and 20 ppt test salinities (Martinez-Palacios et al. 1990).
> Despite the tolerance to saltwater of the black belt cichlid and Mayan cichlid, some species are not so flexible, and are considered to be stenohaline. Martinez-Palacios et al. also tested the redhead cichlid (Vieja synspilum). Like the test on the Mayans, redheads were also directly transferred to different salt concentrations at 28Â° C. While they showed about 90% survival in salinities up to 10 ppt, they were found to have a 50% survival rate at only 14.5 ppt, and are therefore much less salt tolerant than the Mayans (Martinez-Palacios et al. 1995).





> Juvenile Nile tilapia, Oreochromis niloticus (Linneaus) (average weight 4.60 to 4.83 g) were raised in 36 75-1 glass tanks at a stocking density of 15 fish per tank and fed a 50% protein diet for 56 days. Combined effects of temperature (24, 28, and 32 Â°C) and salinity (0, 8, 12, and 16 g l−1) on growth and feed utilization under a 12L:12D photoperiod were studied. Significant (P < 0.05) effects of temperature, salinity, and their interaction on growth were observed. Final mean weights were significantly (P < 0.05) higher at 32 and 28 Â°C than 24 Â°C at 12 g l−1 salinity, where fish increased their weights seven-fold and four-fold, respectively. Feed conversion efficiencies and protein efficiency ratios were highest at 32 Â°C and 8 g l−1 salinity, and lowest at 28 Â°C and 16 g l−1 salinity. At all salinities, growth increased with temperature, but at all temperatures an increase in salinity generally inhibited growth. At 32 Â°C and 16 g l−1 salinity, fish developed body lesions. The study suggested that growth rates of juvenile O. niloticus may be comparably high at 28 or 32 Â°C in waters of 0 and 8 g l−1 salinity.





> Tilapia (Oreochromis niloticus), 21 g average body weight, were divided into two groups. A group was maintained in fresh water, whereas another group was adapted for 2 weeks to 20% salt water. Among the latter, fishes were injected every 2 days for a week with tilapia prolactin (ti-PRL I). Gills were prepared for electron microscopy in order to determine the types and surface areas of chloride cells in each experimental condition. Two types of chloride cells, the and cells were easily distinguished on the basis of their location and ultrastructural features in the gills of freshwater fishes, while only one type of cell, the saltwater cells presumably derived from the transformation of the freshwater cells, were encountered in saltwater adapted animals. After PRL injection ofsaltwater adapted fishes, small chloride cells, which displayed ultrastructural features similar to those of cells in freshwater tilapia, reappeared in interlamellar regions of the gills. In the same experimental conditions, the voluminous saltwater cells showed a tendency to resume ultrastructural features more characteristic of the freshwater cells from which they were derived. These observations tend to indicate that prolactin behaves as a freshwater adapting hormone and that cells are specifically involved in fish adaptation to freshwater living conditions. Â© 1993 Wiley-Liss, Inc.





> The development and changes in the activity of mitochondrion-rich (MR) cells in the yolk-sac membrane of tilapia (Oreochromis mossambicus) embryos and larvae were examined in relation to environmental salinity. Size and density of MR cells were monitored until complete yolk resorption in embryos and larvae spawned and hatched in fresh water (FW) and seawater (SW), and in larvae transferred from FW to SW or from SW to FW. MR cells were present in the yolk-sac membrane of embryos 2 days after fertilization and were significantly larger in SW than in FW. In embryos and larvae maintained until complete yolk resorption in FW, the size of MR cells tended to decrease as the larvae grew older, whereas in those maintained in SW, the large size of MR cells was maintained. After direct transfer of newly hatched larvae from FW to SW, the size of MR cells markedly increased, and decreased when newly hatched larvae were transferred from SW to FW. MR cell density did not vary appreciably between larvae in FW and those in SW, and was not significantly affected by transfer of larvae from FW to SW or vice versa. Electron-microscope examination of MR cells in the yolk-sac membrane revealed the presence of numerous mitochondria, well-developed tubular system and apical pits, indicating similarity with MR cells in branchial and opercular epithelia of adult fish. In tilapia embryos, in which the gills, gut, and kidney are not yet fully developed, MR cells in the yolk-sac membrane are potentially important sites for ion exchange in SW. Â© 1994 Wiley-Liss, Inc.





> Effects of osmotic stress on the branchial Na+â€"K+-ATPase activity in two freshwater euryhaline teleosts (the tilapia Sarotherodon mossambicus Peters and the orange chromid Etroplus maculatus Bleeker) were studied. Direct transfer from fresh water to salt water with a salinity of 35permil S caused extensive mortality in tilapia. Of the remaining four saltwater concentrations (4.375, 8.75, 17.5, and 26.25permil S), the higher two increased the enzyme activity significantly in the first week without affecting it further during the remaining seven weeks of acclimation. The lower two concentrations failed to elicit any significant change. In the case of orange chromid, all three salt-water concentrations (4.375, 8.75, and 17.5permil S) which the fish survived produced a more significant and extensive change in the enzyme activity, which continued to rise during the entire acclimation period. Employing a procedure of gradual transfer, tilapia and orange chromid were successfully adapted to saltwater concentrations of up to 61.25 and 35permil S, respectively. In this experiment, almost each successive increase in salinity elevated the enzyme activity further, but the total change in both species was considerably less extensive than might be expected from the direct transfer study. When the freshwater fish were transferred to identical concentrations of pure NaCl or whole ocean salt, the former produced a relatively greater change in the enzyme activity in tilapia. No such difference was seen in orange chromid. During reacclimation of the saltwater-adapted fish to fresh water, the enzyme activity began to decrease immediately in both species, but remained above the freshwater control levels at the end of eight weeks.


These aren't exactly the same, but most definitely close enough to make an inference as to what will happen with convicts.


----------



## hyposalinity

Many people have tried to slowly acclimate one Cichlid to either bracksih or salt, as far as I know I am the only one attempting to slowly breed through generations Convicts to brackish or salt water.


----------

