Messing up the Citrinellun breed?

  • We are currently upgrading MFK. thanks! -neo
If they're both purchased from Rapps as citrinellum than that's what they are. If they're both F1 fish then their fry will be F2 babies.

My point is that breeding, for example, a Rapps F1 citrinellum with a "citrinellum" from some other, less certain, source is no more assuredly "pure" than a hybrid....not that there's anything wrong with intentional hybrids...sold as what they are.

There is a problem with passing something off as "pure" when it's of of uncertain provenance...

Matt
 
Even within a species, different geographic varients can be different enough that crossing them is, to me at least, as undesirable as crossing two different species. The location is the important factor, if the goal is to maintain "purity" of the strain.

For example, Gymnogeophagus gymnogenys from one part of Uruguay is very different from gymnogenys from another part. Crossing them would result in a fish different from either population (and would be undesirable, in my book, if the goal was to maintain fish authentic to one population or the other). Amatitlania siquia is the same way. Fish from Lake Nicaragua are very different from fish from, for example, Rio Claro. It's siquia + siquia...but in no way are you preserving either fish if you breed them together.

Lumping fish (as variable as red devils or gymnogeophagus or "convicts") into a single species often reflects a lack of work by scientists on the group of fish as much as it does that the fish in a species are all the same.

On the other hand, if the goal is to produce something that is aesthetically pleasing to aquarists (a beefy red devil, a colorful convict, a blue jack dempsey, a flowerhorn, etc...), then feel free to cross whatever with whatever. Just don't pass it off as "pure" whatever.

Matt

robmcd;3551654; said:
As I stated before citrenellum + citrenellun = citrenellums. He didnt say presumed citrenellum, he said that they were citrenellum.
Click to expand...
 
There are lots of F1 cits out there. It shouldn't be a problem finding an unrelated pair. As for origin, a fish is a fish- bottom line. Fretting over origin with Midas is pointless unless you are dealing with wild fish and their immediate offspring. They are so prevalent in the hobby that IMO it's a bit silly to ponder over the origin of an F2 Midas.
 
... That's the point: hybrid and possibly hybrid red devils are pervasive in the hobby. Pure ones - with known provenance to wild fish - are hard to find.



flowerpower;3552629; said:
There are lots of F1 cits out there. It shouldn't be a problem finding an unrelated pair. As for origin, a fish is a fish- bottom line. Fretting over origin with Midas is pointless unless you are dealing with wild fish and their immediate offspring. They are so prevalent in the hobby that IMO it's a bit silly to ponder over the origin of an F2 Midas.
Click to expand...
 
Amen Jmatt. I hear what youre sayin. Ive been in this hobby over 20yrs. Cant stand hybrids. They are mental and ugly. Its almost impossible to walk into your local shop and get a pure Bifasciatum or Synspilum. Beautiful fish if found 100% pure. I can put money on it. Most of the new jacks have probably never even seen a pure Synspilus, Bifasciatum, Citrinellum or Labitaus. Your best bet is try working something out with Jeff Rapps. From his pics you can probably get the right Devil for your Midas.
 
I'm actually fine with intentional hybrids like flowerhorns, ob peacocks, etc (labeled as such).

My beef is with the fish that are labeled as pure... But aren't really.

When trying to maintain authentic lines of fish, collection location (even if it's f2,f3 whatever) is the important thing to know.

Matt
 
jmatthewvan;3549161; said:
Actually,I'm not anti-hybrid if the breeder wants to keep a few for themselves but thats usually not the case.Not a fan of BPs,FHs or EBJD but have owned a few sweet hybrids,peticularly a Jag/Dempsey X. I also just went and picked up a couple 3" Midas from a lfs that came from Rapps,I'll post pics....
Click to expand...


What makes you think EBJD is a hybrid?

It is best to have knowledge before you start making absolute statements.
 
dogofwar;3553585; said:
...perhaps not a hybrid...but about as "natural" as a balloon ram....

Matt
Click to expand...

the term "natural" just came into the thread.........we were talking hybrid not line bred
 
... I agree with you that EBJD are not technically hybrids... they're line bred to accentuate a set of deformities that some people find attractive. Kind of like a balloon ram... or a fancy goldfish.

I just fail to see why people can be "against" intentional hybrids like flowerhorns (BAD!) but be supportive of intentional deformities (GOOD!).

Is one any more or less natural or pure than the other?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
MonsterFishKeepers.com
Top Bottom