Agreed it is seceret... Though It has from most the info read been stated the Trimacs are one of the original base fish 
Is this not true?
Is this not true?What makes it a Flowerhorn and not Just a Misc. Hybrid?
- Thread starter Bderick67
- Start date
yes that is true and I have read accounts that Red Terror may have also been used along the lines somewhere. Still the two do not make flowerhorn
Ok, you guys ARE right about the whole selective breeding thing. I guess the point I was trying to make is that a flowerhorn is not a natural species that can be positively identified by a distinct group of traits. A flowerhorn can never have a scientific name, and any hybrid of a natural species and a flowerhorn could not possibly be accurately described scientifically. You can lump different flowerhorns into the groups used to describe them, but you can never truly know what your fish is a combination of unless you got it from someone who started the whole process with the natural species and then gave you the final hybrid.
Wow, good topic, good question, I would like to know the answer as well, esp. considering most hybrids are frowned upon, but even though the fh is one too (just with more crosses) instead they are sought after, and depending on the grade, worth quite a bit, I mean that kind of seems like double standards, esp. considering no one seems to know the original fish that started this. I can see why though at the same time, since they are beautiful fish.Bderick67;1857133; said:
Also bderrick while were on it if you don't mind, could someone explain the difference between ZZ , kamfa, etc.
Bderick67;1837652; said:
I guess I just don't see how one could possibly positively identify flowerhorns. Like others have said, there are so many off-shoots from the original lines, it would be near impossible. For example, if you cross bred a trimac and say, midas. You may get something that looks like a flowerhorn, but wouldn't be as they are defined by enthusiasts. Who would know for sure? Wouldn't most of us assume, based on a large nuchal hump and flowerline, that it was a flowerhorn?
I've never seen 2 "pure" fish cross breed and produce offspring that resemble FH. If it resembles FH it probably has FH in it. IMO the Flowerhorns have been selectively bred so closely that they're damn near their own type. I usually look for the flower line, color, pearl, shape, and stance when choosing a flowerhorn.
ALL flowerhorns are hybrid, but not all hybrids are flowerhorn.
ALL flowerhorns are hybrid, but not all hybrids are flowerhorn.
That's a fair enough answer, at least to my question.
Rally, do you know where bderick could find the answer to his question? Is there a set of guidelines used to distinguish flowerhorns from random hybrids?
Rally, do you know where bderick could find the answer to his question? Is there a set of guidelines used to distinguish flowerhorns from random hybrids?
No set guidelines other than the looks of strains that are already in place. IMO these strains will continue to grow as they're refined. Identifying a FH is no different than identifying a "pure" fish. You look at it and take educated guesses as to what it is. The only way to be sure about a pure fish is to know it's parents. The same goes for FH.Hawkfish3.0;1857286; said:
rallysman;1857341; said:
I agree to a certain point, and yet I disagree with this statement. When it comes to identifying a natural species, there is a documented scientific description for that species. Sure, for you and I to look at a picture and make an educated guess, it's just that, a guess. But there is a way to positively identify all natural species of fish through scientific description. The same can not be said of flowerhorns.
