Just what we need...more things to add to all the different made up names we have for rays. Just my .02
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I317 using MonsterAquariaNetwork App
F1, F2, F3... Does it matter to you?
- Thread starter vamptrev
- Start date
Just what we need...more things to add to all the different made up names we have for rays. Just my .02
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I317 using MonsterAquariaNetwork App
I agree it makes sense to keep track of bloodlines...
What happened to a lot of cichlids?
Matt
What happened to a lot of cichlids?
Matt
inbreeding to the point you get more deformed fry then undeformed fry. people not tracking that they are breeding 1 main gene line for generations upon generations.. and hybrids all but wipeing out pure lines. my father has shown me pictures of his f1 and wild african cichlids that are absolutely stunning compared to what you find now. I'm sure there are good lines out there but the majority are not. plenty of effort going into preserving alot of the species on the UNC lists ect that in part could have been avoided imo had breeders kept records of breeding... we track the bloodlines of the majority of "domesticated" species.. why shouldn't people be tracking newer species that are being domesticated?
It's not "making up names" its a way to stop making up names...
other then the "hassle" of it why should we not keep track?
I would pay more for a fish i was intending to breed that had a documented bloodline.. just my 2cents.
It's not "making up names" its a way to stop making up names...
other then the "hassle" of it why should we not keep track?
I would pay more for a fish i was intending to breed that had a documented bloodline.. just my 2cents.
Been along time since I joined a disussion, always busy lol....
I liked this thread, so as a breeder here is my opinion.
Selection, this is the key word. F3 should be better than F2 should be better than F1, if not; you are doing something wrong. I am talking about the avarage appearance of the pups. By selecting the best you are aiming to breed the traits that are pleasing to the eye and pass them on to the next generation, which after a few generations makes a ray wickedly beautiful.
The right combination of male female is important, mix it up, try new combos, breed what works. And select again.
Pure or Hybrid.
I do it this way:
Pure Lines: Species are strictly separated from other species, one male per tank. I know the father, I know the mother. I know the lines back to the wc parents.
Hybrids: Go nuts, just be honest about it and don't try to pass it as pure bred. A nice ray is a nice ray, hybrid or not.
Conclusion: Don't pay more for the label F3 pay more for the F3 that knocks your socks off!
P.S. I really like classic looking rays aswell. A simple good looking Henlei to me is perfection.
I liked this thread, so as a breeder here is my opinion.
Selection, this is the key word. F3 should be better than F2 should be better than F1, if not; you are doing something wrong. I am talking about the avarage appearance of the pups. By selecting the best you are aiming to breed the traits that are pleasing to the eye and pass them on to the next generation, which after a few generations makes a ray wickedly beautiful.
The right combination of male female is important, mix it up, try new combos, breed what works. And select again.
Pure or Hybrid.
I do it this way:
Pure Lines: Species are strictly separated from other species, one male per tank. I know the father, I know the mother. I know the lines back to the wc parents.
Hybrids: Go nuts, just be honest about it and don't try to pass it as pure bred. A nice ray is a nice ray, hybrid or not.
Conclusion: Don't pay more for the label F3 pay more for the F3 that knocks your socks off!
P.S. I really like classic looking rays aswell. A simple good looking Henlei to me is perfection.
I agree with you completely... although it is exactly the opposite way that many people think in the cichlid hobby (i.e. wild is "better" than F1 is "better" than F2, etc.).
Matt
Matt
i would buy and look for captive bred eating pellets. i dont really care f1 f2 f3 etc .
i would buy wild as i have experience in getting wild rays onto other foods but if i were looking , i wouldnt care f2 f3 f4 . i would be happy as long as it was captive bred and eating good food so that is essentially f1 .
i would buy wild as i have experience in getting wild rays onto other foods but if i were looking , i wouldnt care f2 f3 f4 . i would be happy as long as it was captive bred and eating good food so that is essentially f1 .
I see the opposite problem: an irrational obsession with the need for "wild" fish and "fresh" bloodlines... to the point that demand from hobbyists for wild fish is actually resulting in near extinction of populations of cichlids in the Rift Lakes from over-collection (e.g. Illangi Tropheus, Pseudotropheus salausi, Melanochromis chipokae and others).
That fish a generation or three removed from the wild are somehow going to have mass deformities is ludicrous.
As Mark posted, with careful breeding (i.e. culling undesired traits and selecting for desired traits) lines of captive bred fish can actually improve with generations from the wild.
Back in the day (and I've been keeping and breeding fish for over 25 years), we were ignorant that all zebra-type mbuna weren't "Pseudotropheus zebra"... or that all peacocks weren't one species...or that all convicts weren't the same. So we bred them together and created what would now be considered hybrids.
I won't argue that mislabeling, guessing at species and collecting locations and other stupidity isn't rampant in the hobby. That's why I don't buy fish from sources that I can trust to provide provenance. How many hobbyists - in a futile quest to "improve" genetic diversity include fish in breeding groups that are of less than certain provenance? Kind of defeats the purpose, doesn't it?
But this is very different animal than intentionally working to create interesting and attractive (and properly labeled) hybrid cichlids (rays, livebearers, discus, etc, etc.).
Matt
That fish a generation or three removed from the wild are somehow going to have mass deformities is ludicrous.
As Mark posted, with careful breeding (i.e. culling undesired traits and selecting for desired traits) lines of captive bred fish can actually improve with generations from the wild.
Back in the day (and I've been keeping and breeding fish for over 25 years), we were ignorant that all zebra-type mbuna weren't "Pseudotropheus zebra"... or that all peacocks weren't one species...or that all convicts weren't the same. So we bred them together and created what would now be considered hybrids.
I won't argue that mislabeling, guessing at species and collecting locations and other stupidity isn't rampant in the hobby. That's why I don't buy fish from sources that I can trust to provide provenance. How many hobbyists - in a futile quest to "improve" genetic diversity include fish in breeding groups that are of less than certain provenance? Kind of defeats the purpose, doesn't it?
But this is very different animal than intentionally working to create interesting and attractive (and properly labeled) hybrid cichlids (rays, livebearers, discus, etc, etc.).
Matt
