I see nothing wrong with this most of the fronts are trade name and not broken up scientifically. They are listed by their locality. I find this most noble. atlest something is being done to peserve the the speices. Untill we know what is what it is best to break them up by locality. this way you keep them pure. I'm sorry I have keept wild fish for almost 30 years. I used to mix localitys . We did not know back then But I always felt there was different Ssp of both pseudtropheus zebra and Labeotropheus. . I now will only call a fish pure by locality not just Ssp alone whether they look identical from both locality's
OB Peacocks
- Thread starter jhutch
- Start date
Definately an interesting conversation. I do agree that mixing locality should be considered hybridizing. I don't personally do that. It's like the Vicotrian Nyereri. I have 3 different collection point Nyereri and they all look different. If you mixed them the product would be a hybrid. Just like the Discus. Most Discus are hybrids, the wild caught ones just aren't as nice looking. Discus are cash cows if you can breed them. Probably the most accepted hybrid available.
I think for me its all in a word and its definitions. I keep my breeding stock as pure as possiable with the stock I have available to me as well and agree completly that it is best when breeding to keep the individual locals together so we are able to maintain the look of each. I guess i only have a problem with the common definitions of what this hobby calls a hybrid. We give scientific names and classify spcies and sub species and make all these distinctions based on locales and slight differences so we can be accurate about fish we breed and buy . We like it to be very scientific yet we are very quick to label anything we cant id quickly a hybrid. We say a hybrid is species to species crosses but will also label color morph or location crosses of the same sub species a hybrid and make no distinction between the two. Just does not seem very scientific to me, seems more like we are making distinctions because of our wants or needs , what we desire a fish to be , rather than by science and pure genetics. I think that for the casual hobbyist that is very frustrating and confusing. They get a fish and are all happy about it, get it a mate of the same name and sub species . They breed it and show a pic here and somebody chimes in that the fish is a hybrid, nobody will like it and either cull it or dont do it again... For the layman (which i consider myself to be) breeding two fish of the same subspecies does not make a hybrid so its very confusing. Its what we are taught in school etc...
let me make real simple for you Until we can ID all the fish with DNA. You are going to have to look at a fish and pic a locality of that fish . Make sure you study your fish. Buy wild direct from the importer so there is no questioning what your fish are or off a honest breeder that has the knowlage to pick apart a fish. If you want to add new blood make sure that both male and female look identical to your fish. Now with that in mind. think of this if the same SSp of fish lives at 2 different localitys lets say 100 miles away from eachother what makes you thibnk they are the same . They make be closely related but the DNA testing my not be advanced enough to desifer the two. They are both on their own evolutionary paths because of their isolation from one another. Look how far we have come in the last 10 yeats in DNA testing . At one time you could tell with DNA testing that it was a Malawi cichlid but they could not tell you what fish it was . Now we are able to break up the most of the zebra complex into new speices ans subspeices. What wiil the next 10 years hold for us in the DNA Testing.
Dont be confused by my postings. Its hard for me to put it correctly into words and the right contexts sometimes. I dont need it put simiply for me or dummied down. I fully understand what you just said. I just dont agree with it or like it. Just like you dont like it when someone like me says that two fish that look identical , have the same biological and same anatomy (and are from the same species and subspecies) from two different breeding groups are the same fish and should be able to breed and it wont produce a hybrid. You dont agree with my statement and you dont like it. Thats the beauty of living in this country. We can all have our own feelings and thoughts and can say it outloud. We can each be a little wrong and each a little right and We can agree to disagree. 
You forget that we are just in a tiny fragment of time on the evolutionary scale. The fact that if two populations are far away enough that there is no cross breedings between the each of the populations . Then each population is on its own evolutionary path. With that in mind you would see how each population differ from eachother over the corse of time. Here is a example with a groupe of lizardes that were interduced to a island and did not hybridnize with anything but change in only 30 years.
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2008/04/080421-lizard-evolution.html
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2008/04/080421-lizard-evolution.html
vinman;2287498; said:
Im sure in time if those groups continued to be isolated then your right they would evolve into totally different species. But im refering to right now...and if right now there is no difference in anyway biologically, scales, number or rays, number of teeth, type of teeth, if there is not difference in color or markings that can be detected with the eye or equipment and the advanced DNA testing of today can show no difference then they are the same fish in my mind. Sorry, thats just how I feel. Im not angry or anything because you feel different, i just have thought alot about this and this is my position on the subject. (Im actually in a very good mood today ! ) If you believe different about locations and want to call the offspring of two mpimbwe gibberosa a hybrid because one parent came from 10 ,20 or 100 miles away then that is your choice. I will just call it a mpimbwe gibberosa until it gets a new name from scientists.
Well, i have to sign off for the night now, got to go pick up my hubby from a 15 mo deployment to Iraq. He gets in at 2 am, then we have to stand around and wait till 5 am.to see him ... Today is a happy day, reunions are great !!
Allow me to correct myself. The Dragon Bloods are of course hybrids as are most if not all peacocks, but they have been heavily line bred to produce the dramatic reds that they do have.Pharaoh;2282222; said:BTW...Dragon Bloods and Strawberries are not hybrids, just another line bred fish.
You might as well consider line bred fish hybrids as well. A line bred fish is altered by genetic manipulation and does not represent the original species.
