This has been on my mind
- Thread starter Crazy mike
- Start date
Been there, having raised a few thousand fry of haps and peacocks. But most mommas still reached normal adult size. Did it take a little longer than if the'd been in a female only tank? Sometimes, although I've had individual females of a species I was breeding separated for one reason or another and basically didn't see a consistently significant difference between final adult size of breeding and non-breeding individuals. Some individuals yes, some no. Either way, I got females of somewhat variable sizes. Too much randomness about it to count out genetics as still an important key factor-- other factors (nutrition, stocking density, etc.) being favorable. And dominance or rank within a breeding colony is also certainly a factor ime.
One thing I did see is some females kept apart from males, no breeding opportunities, sometimes become more aggressive than some of the other females. But again, this depended on individual fish and not a consistent rule.
In my opinion and experience, how or what you feed, or even tankmates, can make a difference. In the wild peak spawning season often corresponds with natural cycles of food availability, giving females opportunity to store enough reserves to maintain overall health and natural growth. That's why some people 'condition' their females to spawn. Also, too aggressive tankmates and/or too much competition for food might inhibit a female from being able to fully prepare her body for the rigors of spawning and rearing fry.
This another area where you can get be too simplistic about it. Not necessarily true that females tumbling eggs eat nothing for the duration: http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2FBF02028851 I've seen this in my own tanks. Studies have seen the same for other species.
@Mythic Figment. Good information. Interesting. What I'd add is that I've seen studies (both marine and freshwater) that egg size and/or egg quality varies with the size, health condition, nutrition, and maturity of the female. Smaller, younger female often means fewer, smaller, or sometimes lesser quality eggs. So, again, nature tends to adjust to calibrate for the best balance possible between growth, reproduction, and available resources.
Basically, my take on all of this is: If you treat your fish like fry factories, whether in feeding, tank setup, or other factors, can you wear them out to the extent it can impact their overall health, growth or life-span? Little doubt and especially if taken to an extreme. But does this mean that you should worry that with good conditions, good nutrition, or overall good husbandry, while allowing nature to take its course, that producing eggs and fry is somehow detrimental to a female's natural development or life cycle? Not that I've ever seen. In my tanks I'm not seeing my females being stunted, living shorter lives, etc. because they're producing fry.
Basically, my take on all of this is: If you treat your fish like fry factories, whether in feeding, tank setup, or other factors, can you wear them out to the extent it can impact their overall health, growth or life-span? Little doubt and especially if taken to an extreme. But does this mean that you should worry that with good conditions, good nutrition, or overall good husbandry, while allowing nature to take its course, that producing eggs and fry is somehow detrimental to a female's natural development or life cycle? Not that I've ever seen. In my tanks I'm not seeing my females being stunted, living shorter lives, etc. because they're producing fry.
And I thank you for that... Basically saying its up to the owner to keep the females within the right conditions to keep her health up before, durring, and after a spawn. Other than that if a female doesn't get big, it's genetics. I guess I should have gave a +1 to this comment instead of wasting time with my opinion.
As an afterthought, below is an example that some fish species are prodigious spawners in the wild. It's part of their biology. In other words, before you could accurately or authoritatively state any conclusions on how often a species spawns in the wild, how often is too often in a tank, or whether or to what extent there's an artificially induced detriment to growth that they wouldn't experience in the wild, you'd need to know the facts on what that particular species does in the wild.
Lionfish
Also-- the energy cost of guarding a nest, protecting the eggs/fry, or even mouthbrooding the eggs is not always exclusive to female cichlids. This depends on species; in various species the male participates in some or all of these activities. And, in fact, males of some species expend energy the female does not in initially building and guarding a nest, bower, etc. displaying to attract females, fighting off other males, etc.
Then there is the fact that in many species, females are smaller beginning as juveniles and right up to the start of their reproductive life. You wouldn't argue that the rigors of reproduction is slowing their growth before they ever mature to that point. In many species females are naturally smaller, period.
Again, I'm not saying it's not possible over breed a female fish to the point it impacts their growth, health, or lifespan, but the subject is not as simple as some might think.
Lionfish
Also-- the energy cost of guarding a nest, protecting the eggs/fry, or even mouthbrooding the eggs is not always exclusive to female cichlids. This depends on species; in various species the male participates in some or all of these activities. And, in fact, males of some species expend energy the female does not in initially building and guarding a nest, bower, etc. displaying to attract females, fighting off other males, etc.
Then there is the fact that in many species, females are smaller beginning as juveniles and right up to the start of their reproductive life. You wouldn't argue that the rigors of reproduction is slowing their growth before they ever mature to that point. In many species females are naturally smaller, period.
Again, I'm not saying it's not possible over breed a female fish to the point it impacts their growth, health, or lifespan, but the subject is not as simple as some might think.
The OP originally asked;
And in my non expert opinion, it is virtually impossible for a female fish that is constantly breeding at an early age, to grow at the same rate as a young female cichlid of the same species that is not breeding, yet is fed the exact same food, at the exact same rate.
The studies posted thus far that involved cichlids certainly don't prove otherwise.
I think that anyone that has raised a decent number of African cichlids knows that brooding females will often consume some food while holding- but that particular study involved Cyphotilapia in the wild, not in an aquarium setting, and they also clearly stated; "Mouthbrooding females exhibited feeding actions and their guts contained about one quarter as much food as those of nonbrooding adults".
1/4 as much food as nonbreeding adults .........
How can a female cichlid consume 1/4 as much food as a nonbreeding female, and maintain the same rate of growth, or body weight? The answer - they can't.
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1095-8649.1984.tb04779.x/abstract
I'm not sure why this would come as any surpise to anyone, with cichlids growth & weight is generally always directly related to ration quantity & quality.
And in my non expert opinion, it is virtually impossible for a female fish that is constantly breeding at an early age, to grow at the same rate as a young female cichlid of the same species that is not breeding, yet is fed the exact same food, at the exact same rate.
The studies posted thus far that involved cichlids certainly don't prove otherwise.
I think that anyone that has raised a decent number of African cichlids knows that brooding females will often consume some food while holding- but that particular study involved Cyphotilapia in the wild, not in an aquarium setting, and they also clearly stated; "Mouthbrooding females exhibited feeding actions and their guts contained about one quarter as much food as those of nonbrooding adults".
1/4 as much food as nonbreeding adults .........
How can a female cichlid consume 1/4 as much food as a nonbreeding female, and maintain the same rate of growth, or body weight? The answer - they can't.
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1095-8649.1984.tb04779.x/abstract
I'm not sure why this would come as any surpise to anyone, with cichlids growth & weight is generally always directly related to ration quantity & quality.
From the study and quote above:
As for the observations that cyphotilapia do eat some while holding, I've seen it with my own females, so yes it does/can take place in an aquarium. But since most people strip them at the egg stage they'll never see it in their own tanks. Similar behavior (feeding while holding eggs/fry) has been observed of other mouthbrooders and some Malawi keepers have also mentioned something similar in threads like this. I've also seen articles/studies for other species, something anyone else could find if they want to take the time.
We're not that far apart in what we're saying. I've tried to make it clear that I'm not saying that growth won't be affected under any circumstances. What I've tried to bring to the topic is:
1) It's not as simple as I often see it portrayed in these discussions and there are factors sometimes overlooked or never mentioned. For example, it's simply not true that in the wild most fish spawn only once or raise only one spawn during the year-- one spawn per year is not the baseline we should measure by-- obviously this is going to vary by species.
2) The relevant question imo is what is natural to the fish? This may not have been exactly the original question, but it is still relevant and should be considered. Sure, you may be able to isolate females and prevent reproduction-- they will still be producing eggs btw, either dropping them to be eaten or reabsorbing them. They may in these circumstances grow somewhat faster than breeding females-- as I mention above there are some studies on this with different species; some found they did (grow slower) and some found they did not. But which is more normal/natural: A female that has been well fed and well cared for and allowed to breed according to their normal biology (not artificially overbred) or the fish that has not had opportunity to breed and therefore may or may not grow somewhat faster or larger than otherwise? Seems quite clear to me that the baseline should the fish that experiences a more or less normal reproductive life and not the fish prevented from reproducing.
In the wild or in your tank this may or may not result in a somewhat slower growing fish than the fish prevented from reproducing. There are multiple factors involved, including food available, natural cycles, specific species (cyphotilapia might produce a couple of hundred eggs per year, some new world cichlids perhaps a couple of thousand, lionfish produce two million), endocrine disruptors in your local water supply, etc. etc.
I'm not trying to win an argument or tell anyone what to do with their own fish. IMO some fish are kept in what amounts to factory farm conditions, including small, bare tank, overfed, too much protein, etc., not for me and not why I keep fish. On the other hand if I have both males and females of a species I don't try to prevent them spawning so I can achieve max size for my females. I generally let them do what they do, when they're ready to do it, but that's just me. The exception for me has been when I may have kept only the best males and females specifically to breed and just grown out the others to trade or sell, occasionally separating by gender. When I've done that I didn't see a difference in growth, in part because my breeders were already selected from what I judged or projected to be among the better specimens I had-- except cyphos, where just ime the smaller females right from the start and during juvie stage-- before they ever reach breeding age-- seem to turn out to be the healthier and better mommas for some reason.
At least in my case my females are reaching the size range I'd expect them to reach, based on published profiles and the experience of others. In fact, some species I keep grow faster than some people who ask whether this or that species are "slow growers". But my personal experience is just what it is, personal, anecdotal, and not necessarily what someone else will experience or conclude from their experience.
Exactly the point I made earlier. Reproductive productivity is affected by available food (or other environmental factors) as there are mechanisms that attempt to balance survival and health of the individual fish with the need to reproduce. Less food equals less growth AND less fecundity. So, could you overfeed/overspawn/overgrow to the extent it shortens life-span? I don't doubt it. Also, not mentioned above is what would happen to male weight if fed just 1 gram of food per week. I'd like to see an adult male convict maintain its weight on that low ration.
As for the observations that cyphotilapia do eat some while holding, I've seen it with my own females, so yes it does/can take place in an aquarium. But since most people strip them at the egg stage they'll never see it in their own tanks. Similar behavior (feeding while holding eggs/fry) has been observed of other mouthbrooders and some Malawi keepers have also mentioned something similar in threads like this. I've also seen articles/studies for other species, something anyone else could find if they want to take the time.
We're not that far apart in what we're saying. I've tried to make it clear that I'm not saying that growth won't be affected under any circumstances. What I've tried to bring to the topic is:
1) It's not as simple as I often see it portrayed in these discussions and there are factors sometimes overlooked or never mentioned. For example, it's simply not true that in the wild most fish spawn only once or raise only one spawn during the year-- one spawn per year is not the baseline we should measure by-- obviously this is going to vary by species.
2) The relevant question imo is what is natural to the fish? This may not have been exactly the original question, but it is still relevant and should be considered. Sure, you may be able to isolate females and prevent reproduction-- they will still be producing eggs btw, either dropping them to be eaten or reabsorbing them. They may in these circumstances grow somewhat faster than breeding females-- as I mention above there are some studies on this with different species; some found they did (grow slower) and some found they did not. But which is more normal/natural: A female that has been well fed and well cared for and allowed to breed according to their normal biology (not artificially overbred) or the fish that has not had opportunity to breed and therefore may or may not grow somewhat faster or larger than otherwise? Seems quite clear to me that the baseline should the fish that experiences a more or less normal reproductive life and not the fish prevented from reproducing.
In the wild or in your tank this may or may not result in a somewhat slower growing fish than the fish prevented from reproducing. There are multiple factors involved, including food available, natural cycles, specific species (cyphotilapia might produce a couple of hundred eggs per year, some new world cichlids perhaps a couple of thousand, lionfish produce two million), endocrine disruptors in your local water supply, etc. etc.
I'm not trying to win an argument or tell anyone what to do with their own fish. IMO some fish are kept in what amounts to factory farm conditions, including small, bare tank, overfed, too much protein, etc., not for me and not why I keep fish. On the other hand if I have both males and females of a species I don't try to prevent them spawning so I can achieve max size for my females. I generally let them do what they do, when they're ready to do it, but that's just me. The exception for me has been when I may have kept only the best males and females specifically to breed and just grown out the others to trade or sell, occasionally separating by gender. When I've done that I didn't see a difference in growth, in part because my breeders were already selected from what I judged or projected to be among the better specimens I had-- except cyphos, where just ime the smaller females right from the start and during juvie stage-- before they ever reach breeding age-- seem to turn out to be the healthier and better mommas for some reason.
At least in my case my females are reaching the size range I'd expect them to reach, based on published profiles and the experience of others. In fact, some species I keep grow faster than some people who ask whether this or that species are "slow growers". But my personal experience is just what it is, personal, anecdotal, and not necessarily what someone else will experience or conclude from their experience.
i think it has more to do with not getting a healthy batch of fry when the fish breed too young or are still immature..not as many fry and not as high quality.. better to wait if possible
Read through the thread and figured I'd throw in my .02 just from personal experience, so forgive me if I step on anyone's toes here.
I didn't really understand the effects that spawning had on fish, other than the obvious: colors, moods, aggressiveness, etc. The effect it has on size/growth however has been presented to me through my Blue Acara. Back in July of last year I picked up 7 total fry around 1.5" After raising them for a while I had a pair form, so I removed all of the other Acara, selling of 3 of them (females) and kept 2, one male and one female for a sort of "back up" lol.
Back on topic; The mated pair has produced fry several times but I have never let them raise them past the point of 1/4-1/2" and they only spawn every few months, so they are definitely not a fry factory. You cannot however miss the differences between them and my other "back up" Blue Acara's.
First off, Barbie and Ken:
This is my mated pair of Blue Acara; they measure out to roughly 4" (female) and 5" (male). They show a much more aggressive overall demeanor and are not as tolerant of other tank mates, I have tried many different type of tetra as dithers for these guys and in the end, they all get killed/eaten. Also, this pair is more "colored up" than my other non mated pair, even when they are not in their mating mood/dance or when protecting fry; they are just generally more colorful (more spangles, color differentiation, bars, etc).
My non mated pair, Minion and Large Marge:
This is the non mated pair of Acara, I originally only planed to keep 1 of them (Minion) but end up keeping a second female (Large Marge) just to have a back up in case something were to happen to my other female. Minion measures out to roughly 5 1/2" to 6" while Large Marge is every bit of 7"+. Both of these Acara are very mellow and haven't really shown any signs of aggressiveness and also tend to stay dulled out most of the time.
Both pairs of fish are on the same diet (minus the fact Barbie and Ken, regularly pick off tank mates like feeders), that and they have very similar water parameters (with .5 degrees F., similar PH, etc). The "back ups," Minion and Large Marge, do live in a larger tank, however, and have more aggressive tank mates. This is not to say however than Barbie and Ken live in a small tank, I just wanted to note any differences in upbringing, as it has been mentioned previously above.
While you may not be able to tell from the pictures (sorry for the quality, phone shots in the middle of the day), in person the size/color difference is very clear, so clear in fact that when I show people the Blue Acara in my main tank, they don't realize they are the same fish from the 40 breeder in my man cave and they trip out even more when they find out that they were from the same batch of fry. The difference in size is actually quite amazing, more so the notable 3" difference in the females, while the males growth has clearly slowed because of spawning, it is clear that its no where close to how much the females has stalled. Only time will tell if their spawning has affected their over all potential size, or if Barbie and Ken will some day catch up, when I separate them, or when they stop spawning for whatever other reason.
I didn't really understand the effects that spawning had on fish, other than the obvious: colors, moods, aggressiveness, etc. The effect it has on size/growth however has been presented to me through my Blue Acara. Back in July of last year I picked up 7 total fry around 1.5" After raising them for a while I had a pair form, so I removed all of the other Acara, selling of 3 of them (females) and kept 2, one male and one female for a sort of "back up" lol.
Back on topic; The mated pair has produced fry several times but I have never let them raise them past the point of 1/4-1/2" and they only spawn every few months, so they are definitely not a fry factory. You cannot however miss the differences between them and my other "back up" Blue Acara's.
First off, Barbie and Ken:
This is my mated pair of Blue Acara; they measure out to roughly 4" (female) and 5" (male). They show a much more aggressive overall demeanor and are not as tolerant of other tank mates, I have tried many different type of tetra as dithers for these guys and in the end, they all get killed/eaten. Also, this pair is more "colored up" than my other non mated pair, even when they are not in their mating mood/dance or when protecting fry; they are just generally more colorful (more spangles, color differentiation, bars, etc).
My non mated pair, Minion and Large Marge:
This is the non mated pair of Acara, I originally only planed to keep 1 of them (Minion) but end up keeping a second female (Large Marge) just to have a back up in case something were to happen to my other female. Minion measures out to roughly 5 1/2" to 6" while Large Marge is every bit of 7"+. Both of these Acara are very mellow and haven't really shown any signs of aggressiveness and also tend to stay dulled out most of the time.
Both pairs of fish are on the same diet (minus the fact Barbie and Ken, regularly pick off tank mates like feeders), that and they have very similar water parameters (with .5 degrees F., similar PH, etc). The "back ups," Minion and Large Marge, do live in a larger tank, however, and have more aggressive tank mates. This is not to say however than Barbie and Ken live in a small tank, I just wanted to note any differences in upbringing, as it has been mentioned previously above.
While you may not be able to tell from the pictures (sorry for the quality, phone shots in the middle of the day), in person the size/color difference is very clear, so clear in fact that when I show people the Blue Acara in my main tank, they don't realize they are the same fish from the 40 breeder in my man cave and they trip out even more when they find out that they were from the same batch of fry. The difference in size is actually quite amazing, more so the notable 3" difference in the females, while the males growth has clearly slowed because of spawning, it is clear that its no where close to how much the females has stalled. Only time will tell if their spawning has affected their over all potential size, or if Barbie and Ken will some day catch up, when I separate them, or when they stop spawning for whatever other reason.
