Wild strain trimacs vs "pyro" trimacs?

[flowerpower]

My point exactly JD!
TaxGuy, what if the names are being coined by someone other than the breeder. Is the term 'Green Terror' any less offensive than 'Pyro Trimac'?
Clockwork, a computer glitch deleted a very long-winded explanation of what I meant by


Originally Posted by flowerpower
Don't be fooled into believing that you're doing a noble and selfless act for the good of the natural world by breeding cichlids in glass cages. It's fun, interesting, educational, lucrative, therapeutic, fulfilling...... narcissistic, self absorbing, fruitless.... , depending on who you're talking to (or about) but not much more than that.

Well lucky for me JGentry nailed it on the head.
As for the list of adjective I used to describe our hobby, I mean no offense and include myself amongst the ranks.

Now, back to the 'pyro trimacs'. Why don't we like them again?

 

[dogofwar]

Amen, JD!

My only qualm with "Pyro Trimac" is that it's confusing...the same way that labeling the 17 (ok I'm exagerating ) fish that are known as "Green Terror" is confusing. Scientific names are much better.

I had a good conversation with Vin Kutty at the convention. He (and some investors) have purchased a tract of rain forest in Bolivia as a wildlife refuge...and spend considerable effort keeping out poachers, loggers, squatters, hunters, etc. They travel down there several times per year to do research and study the native flora and fauna. THAT's conservation...

I hope that the hobby inspires each of us to learn more about and preserve/conserve the native habitats of the fish that we keep...and I'd love to have more formal connections between hobby organizations and broader conservation organizations / efforts. Unfortunately, I don't believe many folks share my enthusiasm...

Matt

 

[Diogenes]

My only concern was that labeling something as "pure" trimac if it is not is misleading. I have no problem with hybrid fish even though I'm not really interested in keeping them. When I was in Thailand I saw a bunch of cool flowerhorns and I could se
Myself keeping one at some point down the road.

 

[AcsFoolMike]

My only concern was that labeling something as "pure" trimac if it is not is misleading. I have no problem with hybrid fish even though I'm not really interested in keeping them. When I was in Thailand I saw a bunch of cool flowerhorns and I could se
Myself keeping one at some point down the road.

What about his fish does not make them "pure" trimacs? They're trimacs, line-bred with trimacs.

 

[flowerpower]

Again, unless we're agreed that the breeder of these trimacs is lying about the fish he used to create his line, they ARE pure! After so many generations of selectively breeding a fish I'd probably opt to name my line over terming them as f8,9,10,...... Either way good luck figuring out what's what without documented proof. At what point do we consider the vigor and form of the animal in question before judging the person or place from which it was attained.

A respected member here owns a dovii that is over a decade old. This dovii has been spawned nonstop and fry have been WIDELY distributed throughout the hobby. During the past decade plus that this fish has been actively breeding new races of dovii have been introduced to the hobby and, in turn, that old line of dovii has become harder and harder to find. Call them nicaraguan dovii, lago arenal dovii, blue dovii, or wolf cichlid- same thing, same fish..... Or so we think....
A silly name would have gone a long way in splitting the different domestic lines that are out there. Now you try splitting hairs when it comes to Nicaraguan dovii. Are they all from one massive lake? No riverine populations in Nicaragua? Then how did they get to costa rica? Frequent flier miles? Did they need passports?

 

[Diogenes]

I'm not saying they're not pure trimacs I said "if". In fact that's why i started this thread to figure out from people hat knew more about trimacs than I do whether these were hybrids or not. The statement e made about midas cichlids led mento believe that he might be playing fast and loose with the definition of species. I don't know anything that's why I'm asking.

 

[dogofwar]

They're not bred to be authentic to what's found in their native habitat...they're line bred - evidently for some time - to enhance certain aesthetic characteristics.

There's nothing wrong with this...it's just different than what you would find in a fish pulled from its native waters (probably more aesthetically pleasing, which is kind of the point)...

Matt

 

[Diogenes]

They're not bred to be authentic to what's found in their native habitat...they're line bred - evidently for some time - to enhance certain aesthetic characteristics.

There's nothing wrong with this...it's just different than what you would find in a fish pulled from its native waters (probably more aesthetically pleasing, which is kind of the point)...

Matt

like an EBJD right?

I have no problems with line breeding, I just wouldn't want someone to claim something was something it was not. That's why I asked what was up with this.

Thanks to everyone who responded. i didn't mean to start a controversy.

 

[dogofwar]

Kinda like an EBJD...which - allegedly - was the result of line breeding from a "sport" (i.e. deformed / abnormally colored) Rocio. So technically not a hybrid. But far from a wild-type fish.

Matt

like an EBJD right?

I have no problems with line breeding, I just wouldn't want someone to claim something was something it was not. That's why I asked what was up with this.

Thanks to everyone who responded. i didn't mean to start a controversy.

 

[baldtaxguy]

That said, I think its simply wrong and potentially misleading to attach a label to a trait you are maintaining through breeding, such as this guy is doing with the name "pyro." While the naming diminishes his credibility, it should not affect the credibility of the fish itself, i.e. categorizing it as a hybrid.

TaxGuy, what if the names are being coined by someone other than the breeder. Is the term 'Green Terror' any less offensive than 'Pyro Trimac'?

A common name for a species (or multiple species, using your example of green terror) differs from a gimmicked name to describe a species trait, or traits. Its a trimac, period. Its not a "pyro trimac", just a trimac, three-spot cichlid. Do you understand the difference? I'm not offended by the name "pyro", I just think it wrong and misleading to use something other than a common or scientific name to describe a species. He can do what he wants - so can you - as far as naming a specific trait of your fish. It just goes to your credibility for passing this name around, but it has nothing to do with the credibility of the fish.

Now, back to the 'pyro trimacs'. Why don't we like them again?

"We" do like them.

btw, I'm working on a "chocolate chancho", stay tuned.