ewok;1003704; said:
am i the only who thinks flowerhorn, luohan and what not are just different names of the same thing?
they're just hybrids of different cichlids. there are different appearances, but essentially it's kind of the same?
they are good looking fish, don't get me wrong...
That, unfortunately, is what is happening to the Flowerhorn namesake. Everyone is mixing the strains, crossbreeding with pure cichlids, and then naming the offspring some type of flowerhorn. Pet stores are labeling fish incorrectly, but that's nothing new in the hobby (that's why this site is great). What is happening has part to do with the FH's willingness to pair off and reproduce with numerous S.A. and C.A. species. Some mixing occurs by accident, but most is on purpose. And with horrible written recordings, who can tell what we've ended up with these days. Even the original Flowerhorn creators left
little pedigree. But, undoubtedly, this kind of competition in fish breeding has given us some of the most beautiful cichlids I have ever seen, and many will agree.
Locally, I am finding many hybrids labeled as pure blood (Red devils and Midas, and mainly Trimacs). I have yet to see a pure Trimac in my area, although many B- Flowerhorns have been labeled as such. It is always nice to buy directly from the source. Get to know your breeders.
In frustration, if a fish is a hybrid, can we call it a flippin' hybrid! Don't make your own name up and then sell it to the world under that name with no history attached. If you sell a cross, don't hide your methods of breeding. Include what species were used, and make sure everyone who buys the fish knows the pedigree. What we have here, is a problem in nomenclature. This folk taxonomy is keeping enthusiasts from tracking the progression of certain cichlid species and variants thereof. It has created many arguments worldwide, and even in MFK's forums.
Sorry about the rant...