New cichlids! Location F!

  • We are currently upgrading MFK. thanks! -neo
Status
Not open for further replies.
I don't think that mixing dovii from Nicaragua and Honduras is a good idea, either. Nor is mixing different varients of festae. Or different Aulonocara stuartgranti peacock varients. Because you lose the unique characteristics of each of the varients.

Maybe the mixed fish look better than any of the "pure" strains. If you're going to mix varients to suit your aesthetic desires, why not line breed them to have long fins and giant heads...or whatever you please. But they're no longer "authentic" to what is found in the wild.

You guys knock yourselves out with your code words and condescension. Just know that what you perceive to be envy on the part of others is actually people wondering whether you're seriously this off base...

Matt

LOPAKA said:
man you guys really gotta read before you type, its just like kids have to crawl before they walk. Nobody is making up location names but simply titling them something (in this case X and Z) since the true location will remain undisclosed. Those of you us who need to know, know the locations where the fish were collected. The only "loss or dilution of whatever unique characteristics " would take place if bred to a Rio Mag of lower quality. As far a X and Z you couldn't tell them apart if I showed you two as like PREVIOUSLY mentioned but I'll say it again, They are both magnificent !! As far as mixing it happens all the time with dovii (nic and hon) Festae (ecu and per) so why is this such a big deal ??? I'll tell you why cause you guys are like kids on Christmas that can't stand the suspense of not knowing. If it is hard for a person to grasp "add to confusion among hobbyists " then they should probably give up fish and hit the books. From now on for my few and far between post I'll just post "Here are my umbees" but I guarantee you people will ask where their from.....
Click to expand...
 
^^ a blue umbee is a blue umbee but there are clear distinct quality differences between locations, not a new color varient or new fish but simply a highter quality blue umbee. Was that so hard to grasp ?? as far as code words you lost me and if this is confusing who is really off base ?? lol
 
jgentry said:
It hasn't been that bad.

Overall everyone has been very civil after the first page or so. Good points made by many people.
Click to expand...

totally agree, despite it looking like it was gonna get ugly it has been quite a pleasant experience.
 
My .2 cents...not a big fan of the "gorillus" name but I'm sure that will change as the science catches up with the new fish, if it were me I'd call them C. Umbriferum sp "black" or something like that (for the new strain of umbee). However I am not going to second guess someone that spent a lot of time, money and effort to collect these fish himself so kudos to bringing in new fish to the hobby. As far as providing the actual locations go that is Umbeeking's right to withhold if he wants too. I have kept a couple of these for Lopaka to bulk up and they are truly much better looking than any other umbee I have seen. This is coming from a guy that is not a really big umbee fan to begin with. The blues, silvers and flecking on the gill plates of these fish is truly a sight to be seen. Glad to see this thread is not getting out of hand!
 
So is "quality" a subjective interpretation by you (i.e. high quality = large size and sparkly color)...

or Mother Nature (i.e. small, brown in color...and well adapted to its environment)?

They're two completely different things...

Matt

LOPAKA said:
^^ a blue umbee is a blue umbee but there are clear distinct quality differences between locations, not a new color varient or new fish but simply a highter quality blue umbee. Was that so hard to grasp ?? as far as code words you lost me and if this is confusing who is really off base ?? lol
Click to expand...
 
Hi Jason,

I completely understand what you are saying as far as breeding this species, and how things have to play out from your perspective, and your fishroom.

Having said that, I personally do not agree with Lopaka's comment;
IMO it is better to add something then to add nothing.
Click to expand...

IMO anything that's worth doing, is worth doing right.

As far as mixing it happens all the time with dovii (nic and hon) Festae (ecu and per) so why is this such a big deal ??? I'll tell you why cause you guys are like kids on Christmas that can't stand the suspense of not knowing.
Click to expand...

No suspense on my part, or envy, or anything else. I honestly don't care where these fish were collected as I don't plan on ever owning any. I just thought that it was a shame to be mixing two locations of wild specimens. And as previously stated; I feel the exact same way about anyone who breeds any wild species of fish from different locations, including dovii and festae.

The only "loss or dilution of whatever unique characteristics " would take place if bred to a Rio Mag of lower quality. As far a X and Z you couldn't tell them apart if I showed you two as like PREVIOUSLY mentioned but I'll say it again, They are both magnificent !!
Click to expand...

I'm sure the same thing was said about A. citrinellus, and A. labiatus in the past as well. Yet today not only do we know that many of these species vary genetically from one crater lake to the next, some of these species found within the same body of water are genetically different. A good read on this subject.
http://www.monsterfishkeepers.com/f...f-citrinellus-A-potential-case-of-F1-Midevils

This is why geographic location becomes very important, not just the "looks" of the fish to a hobbyists eyes. And on that note, I completely agree with Matt.

No need for anyone to be getting pissy over any of this, I value everyones opinion whether I agree with it, or not.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
MonsterFishKeepers.com
Top Bottom