Hi,
I posted yesterday asking for a sexing of my Green Terror. Today two individuals who's options of SA/CA's I hold in high regard saw my GT in person. Both said it was female. However, both were also shocked at the intensity and pronouncement of the GT's coloration considering her size/youth, and that she is in fact a female. The LFS I bought her from (at about 1inch, 2.54cm) said the young GT's he had were bred from a pair of adults he personally captured off the coast of Peru several years ago. He showed me the pair he was referring to - both are absolutely breathtaking. (A bit of reading assured me that GT's are really native to the Peruvian coast as well)
At the time of purchase, this man said that these baby fish were more likely to have the same sort of magnificent coloration themselves, not just because of genetics, but also because they are the first generation offspring of truly wild-caught GTs. At the time I politely nodded, paid him, and laughed at what I considered a silly sales tactic on my way out. In retrospect though, looking at my fish, could it be that this is really true? Unless I just got lucky, why would my female be so effing bright and gorgeous?
I could understand why wild fish may have better coloration, but is it actually true that closely descended offspring are more likely to also?
Thanks, I look forward to your responses.
~~~~
I posted yesterday asking for a sexing of my Green Terror. Today two individuals who's options of SA/CA's I hold in high regard saw my GT in person. Both said it was female. However, both were also shocked at the intensity and pronouncement of the GT's coloration considering her size/youth, and that she is in fact a female. The LFS I bought her from (at about 1inch, 2.54cm) said the young GT's he had were bred from a pair of adults he personally captured off the coast of Peru several years ago. He showed me the pair he was referring to - both are absolutely breathtaking. (A bit of reading assured me that GT's are really native to the Peruvian coast as well)
At the time of purchase, this man said that these baby fish were more likely to have the same sort of magnificent coloration themselves, not just because of genetics, but also because they are the first generation offspring of truly wild-caught GTs. At the time I politely nodded, paid him, and laughed at what I considered a silly sales tactic on my way out. In retrospect though, looking at my fish, could it be that this is really true? Unless I just got lucky, why would my female be so effing bright and gorgeous?
I could understand why wild fish may have better coloration, but is it actually true that closely descended offspring are more likely to also?
Thanks, I look forward to your responses.
~~~~

