AKC style for W/C Cichlids and there Generations

  • We are currently upgrading MFK. thanks! -neo
"wild caught is the way to go"

"So, is F1, F2, F3 good enough. Yes, they are"

Nice reversal, you in politics?
 
Nola, I understand much of what you're saying.... Makes sense. Most fishkeepers aren't doing too much line breeding, and even so it's genetically fine to breed a few generations of healthy fish with no issues. As you indicate, though, we tend to elimnate the natural selection factor after a few generations.

It would seem plenty good for the most of us to keep getting fish from the top cichlid guys (MFK vendors and that guy in Tampa) that are breeding from wild or close to wild stock.

What irks me is when some neophyte spends his day bragging about his super-rare wild ______ when you know that fish has no chance of seeing adulthood! (That's a bit of an exaggeration, but you get my drift!) Those guys need to show me a fully grown and well cared for anything before I'll be impressed.
 
I appreciate everyone's commentary and I have one Q that I'm not 100% sure was answered - If the F0 value is used only to describe W/C and a form of proof was established would the offspring F1 or the parents F0 warrant a higher price tag and a higher demand among hobbiest ? So far I'm hearin' most don't really care so long as the cichlid is healthy and affordable. The breeders however seemingly want these fish for a better genetic stock however collection trips I'd imagine are expensive. The minority seems to be those who would veiw owning w/c cichlids as trophy fish. However I don't see it as a negative, espcially if the monitary value of their F0's would increase with size and demand - an investment so to speak.
 
Otherone;3812580; said:
I appreciate everyone's commentary and I have one Q that I'm not 100% sure was answered - If the F0 value is used only to describe W/C and a form of proof was established would the offspring F1 or the parents F0 warrant a higher price tag and a higher demand among hobbiest ? So far I'm hearin' most don't really care so long as the cichlid is healthy and affordable. The breeders however seemingly want these fish for a better genetic stock however collection trips I'd imagine are expensive. The minority seems to be those who would veiw owning w/c cichlids as trophy fish. However I don't see it as a negative, espcially if the monitary value of their F0's would increase with size and demand - an investment so to speak.
Click to expand...

To own a fish, any fish, for your own pleasure is fine. To own a fish to derive pleasure from that fish by attention you garner is childish. So in the end it is not the fish you enjoy but the ATTENTION you crave.

There are a few good fishkeepers on these boards, you have seen the same ones out there for years. There are a few new good fishkeepers, they will be here for years. But the majority of the folks are a "flash in the pan" here today gone tomorrow.

The fun part with them is the controversy they bring.

Another day at MFK:D
 
I think that this is based on the - probably incorrect - assumption that wild population of salvini are redder than captive ones.... that "dillution" of the line has resulted in less red fish.

Or maybe the broader assumption that wild fish - by definition - hold more of the aesthetic attributes that appeal to fishkeepers. But this isn't necessarily the case.

I'd bet that - like Firemouths - some wild populations of salvini are redder than others. Some of the wild populations of T. meeki are actually kind of a pinkish yellow. Not the blazing red that people like.

The most colorful Firemouths that I've seen come from guys like Mr. Firemouth (Rich) who's been line breeding these fish for many generations. No reason that similar line breeding efforts couldn't result in "super red" (or yellow or blue) salvini.

And keeping them outside / giving them natural sunlight helps too.

But the idea that you're going to find the most aesthetically striking salvini in the wild...is akin to thinking that you're going to find the most aesthetically striking betta in the wild...

Matt

fish_n_vw;3806810; said:
I want to point out my own sig. I am looking for wild caught fish. I have been breeding salvinis for about 5 years now and can't get anything that looks like the ones collected from the tabasca lagoons and belize. In these locations the fish have a very srtong red in them I want to breed very strong red colored salvinis and every time I get a real nice red out of an offspring it is only in that one perticular fish.and dosent carry on to the offspring. I would like to get a pair or two from these places and see if I can't reproduce this in my fish so I can share my personal love for this spcs. In its intierty with others. As I said there are great arguments for and against this. A very good topic.

By the way anyone know how to get set up on a collection trip because so far no leads on my search for the salvinis and I would love to see them in there natural habitat and collect for myself. Man what a dream come true. But that is all it seems just a dream it seems there are loads of hoops to jump throught in order to do that and taking care of the 7 tanks I have is enough work in itself. But I would be more then willing to pay a fishkeeper friend to do my maintence so I could.
Click to expand...
 
nolapete said:
"If the fish mills were driven by preserving species and had in place genetic diversity plans, then we wouldn't be discussing this as it would be a non-issue.

With all the hybridization running rampant driven by greed, who knows whether or not the fish you buy is really 100% the species it's supposed to be."

I think you're mixing the issues of accidental hybrids resulting from irresponsible or negligent practices ("cutting corners") in breeding fish (e.g. filling a pond with one Vieja species when another Vieja species previously occupied it) with the intentional production of hybrid cichlids like flowerhorns, OB peacocks and the like to satisfy the demands of the hobby / pet trade.

I think you overestimate the interest and actual impact of aquarium clubs and the hobby on actual conservation of cichlid habitats.... Sure people want rare fish available for their tanks...but how many could point to a map and show where the fish is from...let alone what the conservation status of that place is...to say nothing of taking actual steps to conserve / preserve...

Matt
 
to say w/c or f1 f2 are better then the line bred fish is absurd imo. like i stated in the forum that got closed my buddies line bred female festae looks just like my f1 festae in my avatar and its the same size. identical. if you have ever seen some of mel omearas videos on youtube hes been line breeding dovii since the mid 70s and his f1000 or whatever you want to call it is stunning and is around the 24 inch mark. thats pretty close to the 28 inch wild size. i do have some f1s the only reason they are f1s is because i bought them from rapps and he mostly carries w/c or f1. the rest of my fish are most likely line bred throught generations but yet i can not tell one bit of difference in growth rate color or health. whoever stated earlier that they line bred one to many times and ended up with fish with bent backs and deformed and whatever else i just simply dont believe you. maybe i should tell mel to quit line breeding because hes going to have fish with mouths on there sides and eyes on there backs.
 
"to say w/c or f1 f2 are better then the line bred fish is absurd imo"

It depends on how you define "better".

If better is "more aesthetically pleasing" (i.e. more color, larger size, longer fins, etc.), then fish that have been line bred for these characteristics will likely be superior.

If better is "as authentic as possible as what's swimming in Central America" then wild is better.

We get these two definitions of "better" confused... as they aren't always the same.

Matt
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
MonsterFishKeepers.com
Top Bottom