What does the F1 or F2 mean??
- Thread starter Biggfeast
- Start date
For the wild fish or F0 
I've kept and were told were not taking any pellets, I was able to train them eventually to eat pellets by starving them for certain amount of time and closely watching them.
I've kept and were told were not taking any pellets, I was able to train them eventually to eat pellets by starving them for certain amount of time and closely watching them.
The F in F1, F2 or so on… stands for Filial
In a scientific experiment the first generation born within the experiment is F1, second generation born within the experiment is F2, etc, etc…
In the experiment’s description it will be stated if the F2 offspring are born from F1 parents, or are the second set of offspring of the Base parents…
The we borrowed this labeling system and made up the term F0 to describe our “Base”, being wild caught. We consistently refer to F2 as offspring of F1... Not the second brood of F0 parents…
The F# system is not designed to track crossing F# generations (such as F1 x F3)… in a scientific experiment if such generations were crossed this would be a secondary experiment and these parameters would be redefined and the cross would be considered F1 of the second experiment.
Since we are a vast hobby with no governing board, naturally different people will use this short hand differently and others will bastardize it all together.
My solution to this! Give up the shorthand… If it is Wild Caught, say it is Wild Caught… if it is the offspring of Wild Caught, say it is the offspring of Wild Caught… If it takes too much typing to describe how far from wild caught it is, accept it is simply an aquarium bred fish…This “labeling” system also allows for descriptions such as “one wild parent and one parent one generation out of the wild” and similar…
Unfortunately fish are rarely advertised based on inbreeding or lack there of. So be it with fish, being inbred once isn’t that big of a deal (though it does make a difference)… but I feel excessive inbreeding happens far too often and can be a big deal…
I also feel that not using the strongest fish of a brood (mimicking “survival of the fittest”
reducing the quality of offspring drastically. We also rarely see any type of labeling suggesting this type of selective breeding…
In a scientific experiment the first generation born within the experiment is F1, second generation born within the experiment is F2, etc, etc…
In the experiment’s description it will be stated if the F2 offspring are born from F1 parents, or are the second set of offspring of the Base parents…
The we borrowed this labeling system and made up the term F0 to describe our “Base”, being wild caught. We consistently refer to F2 as offspring of F1... Not the second brood of F0 parents…
The F# system is not designed to track crossing F# generations (such as F1 x F3)… in a scientific experiment if such generations were crossed this would be a secondary experiment and these parameters would be redefined and the cross would be considered F1 of the second experiment.
Since we are a vast hobby with no governing board, naturally different people will use this short hand differently and others will bastardize it all together.
My solution to this! Give up the shorthand… If it is Wild Caught, say it is Wild Caught… if it is the offspring of Wild Caught, say it is the offspring of Wild Caught… If it takes too much typing to describe how far from wild caught it is, accept it is simply an aquarium bred fish…This “labeling” system also allows for descriptions such as “one wild parent and one parent one generation out of the wild” and similar…
Unfortunately fish are rarely advertised based on inbreeding or lack there of. So be it with fish, being inbred once isn’t that big of a deal (though it does make a difference)… but I feel excessive inbreeding happens far too often and can be a big deal…
I also feel that not using the strongest fish of a brood (mimicking “survival of the fittest”
reducing the quality of offspring drastically. We also rarely see any type of labeling suggesting this type of selective breeding…Hello guys,
Please let me just clarify one thing: there is no such thing as F0. Aquarium fishes are either WC (Wild Caught) or TR (Tank Raised). Only TR fishes can be F1, F2 and son on, despite the fact that after the fourth siblings generation the genealogical tree does not make much difference.
The "F" comes from the latin word "filialis", which means something like "son of" ("fīlius" = "son" and "fīlia" = "daughter"). So, there is not such thing as a "Filialis Zero" (the "zero" in the genealogical tree are the WC parents...) A F1 fish is a TR fish that is a son of two WC fishes and it's the first generation of fry from that couple. The F2 are the kids of both F1 parents (so they are the second generation of the WC fishes...) and son on...
Hope this helps. Regards
Please let me just clarify one thing: there is no such thing as F0. Aquarium fishes are either WC (Wild Caught) or TR (Tank Raised). Only TR fishes can be F1, F2 and son on, despite the fact that after the fourth siblings generation the genealogical tree does not make much difference.
The "F" comes from the latin word "filialis", which means something like "son of" ("fīlius" = "son" and "fīlia" = "daughter"). So, there is not such thing as a "Filialis Zero" (the "zero" in the genealogical tree are the WC parents...) A F1 fish is a TR fish that is a son of two WC fishes and it's the first generation of fry from that couple. The F2 are the kids of both F1 parents (so they are the second generation of the WC fishes...) and son on...
Hope this helps. Regards
Thanks so much for clearing up an 8 year old post! That was sorely missing from the members originally posting on here that haven't been seen in 5 years.
LOL, ouch.
BTW Jose, what you stated is not entirely true. The parent fish do not need to be WC, in order for the offspring of a pairing of fish to be F1. I posted the following a number of years ago.
After a recent discussion regarding filial designations & flowerhorns I thought that it might be a good idea if I reposted a comment that I made in another discussion that took place in this section last year. Hopefully this will help clear up any confusion regarding terms such as F0, F1, etc when referring to flowerhorns. (as well as other hybrids)
In animals (including fish) the filial (F) designation has nothing to do with whether the parents are "wild", or "pure" or not, it simply denotes the first generation that is produced in a breeding program, and is a system used to keep track of the parental generation.
F1 = first filial, which designates that a fish is one generation away from the parental generation.
F2 =second filial, which designates that a fish is two generations away from the parental generation.
etc-etc
The parents can be related, unrelated, and even different species. The offspring can still be considered F1, which if one wants to get overly technical, in the case of flowerhorns they would be F1 hybrids, the same as the result of breeding a horse with donkey, which is an F1 hybrid Mule.
Unfortunately not everyone in the fish keeping hobby uses the exact same definition or standards for the filial system that Mendel did, but that doesn't make it wrong. The term F0 to denote wild fish has been commonly used and accepted in the fish keeping hobby for many years.
HTH
BTW Jose, what you stated is not entirely true. The parent fish do not need to be WC, in order for the offspring of a pairing of fish to be F1. I posted the following a number of years ago.
After a recent discussion regarding filial designations & flowerhorns I thought that it might be a good idea if I reposted a comment that I made in another discussion that took place in this section last year. Hopefully this will help clear up any confusion regarding terms such as F0, F1, etc when referring to flowerhorns. (as well as other hybrids)
In animals (including fish) the filial (F) designation has nothing to do with whether the parents are "wild", or "pure" or not, it simply denotes the first generation that is produced in a breeding program, and is a system used to keep track of the parental generation.
F1 = first filial, which designates that a fish is one generation away from the parental generation.
F2 =second filial, which designates that a fish is two generations away from the parental generation.
etc-etc
The parents can be related, unrelated, and even different species. The offspring can still be considered F1, which if one wants to get overly technical, in the case of flowerhorns they would be F1 hybrids, the same as the result of breeding a horse with donkey, which is an F1 hybrid Mule.
Unfortunately not everyone in the fish keeping hobby uses the exact same definition or standards for the filial system that Mendel did, but that doesn't make it wrong. The term F0 to denote wild fish has been commonly used and accepted in the fish keeping hobby for many years.
HTH
Better late than never, right? Latin is more than 2000 years old but if you want to use it you should at least know what you are talking about... I decided to write this because I told my nephew to google for the explanation of the F1 and F2 meaning and he came to me pointing to this forum as ranking first on Google results. So, the way I see it, this is not only am 8 years old post... It's an 8 years old subject that is not clearly explained to someone that looks for an answer right now.
