firenzenz Posted September 24, 2009 Report Share Posted September 24, 2009 A theoretical Question raised from chance. I have breeding only tanks for my peacocks to prevent hybrisation. I needed to move some fish around so for a few days had a maleri "gold" male in with my rubescens females. The obvious happened and I have two Rubescens girls holding. My question Would these fry be considered hybrids? The rubescens are line bred from Maleri, but are slow to colour up and in my experience are timid in the company of other peacocks. The golds however colour up at a very young age, and are more gregarious. Am I line breeding if I take the best "reds"of the young males and breed back with my Rubescens girls in an attempt to bolster the rubescens colouring up ability, OR am I hybridising? NB: these fish would be kept seperately from fry with parents of same fish. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phoenix44 Posted September 24, 2009 Report Share Posted September 24, 2009 are they all the same species? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
firenzenz Posted September 24, 2009 Author Report Share Posted September 24, 2009 Yes in as much that rubescens is not naturally found in the lake and is line bred from A.maleri NB: "german reds" are more specific in that they are line bred from from Maleri "chipoka" Rubescens are not that specific ie. Maleri line bred Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kiwiplymouth Posted September 24, 2009 Report Share Posted September 24, 2009 I would class this as line breeding but the purists may beg to differ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phoenix44 Posted September 24, 2009 Report Share Posted September 24, 2009 Then i would say it is not technically a hybrid. someone's got to start "line breeding" for it to happen. that's what i would call it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ryanjury Posted September 24, 2009 Report Share Posted September 24, 2009 I would say not technically a hybrid either.. The gold and red maleri's are supposed to have different locational varients but the same sc name, in saying that would you breed any of the stuartgranti complex together? I have been tempted to get some "rubins" to breed with my maleri reds to get some unrelated blood and hopefully get some redder fish.. About the only problem I have with doing this is I cannot guarantee the maleri reds I have and any rubins I would get would actually both be maleri's so wouldn't know what I would get out.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
firenzenz Posted September 24, 2009 Author Report Share Posted September 24, 2009 Aren't maleri considered one of Stuartigranti complex? A complex of species grouped together and named as much by their "discoverer" as by any other similarity. I guess my question is how far into a line can you reintroduce new blood and not cross over into a case of hybridising? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kiwiplymouth Posted September 24, 2009 Report Share Posted September 24, 2009 Aren't maleri considered one of Stuartigranti complex? A complex of species grouped together and named as much by their "discoverer" as by any other similarity. I guess my question is how far into a line can you reintroduce new blood and not cross over into a case of hybridising? I believe that question can only be answered by how many generations it takes to breed back to a pure and true line of new blood offspring Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
livingart Posted September 24, 2009 Report Share Posted September 24, 2009 New zealand rubescens firenzii Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David R Posted September 24, 2009 Report Share Posted September 24, 2009 If you look at the definition of the word "hybrid" you can actually apply it to any level of classification. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hybrid_(biology) From a taxonomic perspective, hybrid refers to offspring resulting from the interbreeding between two animals or plants of different taxa[2]. 1. Hybrids between different subspecies within a species (such as between the Bengal tiger and Siberian tiger) are known as intra-specific hybrids. Hybrids between different species within the same genus (such as between lions and tigers) are sometimes known as interspecific hybrids or crosses. Hybrids between different genera (such as between sheep and goats) are known as intergeneric hybrids. Extremely rare interfamilial hybrids have been known to occur (such as the guineafowl hybrids).[3]. No interordinal (between different orders) animal hybrids are known. 2. The second type of hybrid consists of crosses between populations, breeds or cultivars within a single species. This meaning is often used in plant and animal breeding, where hybrids are commonly produced and selected because they have desirable characteristics not found or inconsistently present in the parent individuals or populations. This flow of genetic material between populations or races is often called hybridization. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
firenzenz Posted September 24, 2009 Author Report Share Posted September 24, 2009 Wikipedia David? Point 2. could as easily be a definition of line breeding. "Hybridising" seems often to have a negative connotation probably because it is often a results of unplanned unions and "Inter" species. Line breeding or Outcrossing could be said to be the same thing but intentionally and with a predetermined goal, thus receiving less critiscm. Ryan -I agree that this all is reliant of knowing the history of the fish in terms of lineage. In this case, to the best of my knowlege both are Maleri species (locational variant unknown) and both probably line bred to a degree, obviously the rubins more than gold. Was just interested to hear would you guys would determine a union like this. - No I definitely wouldn't be interbreeding species within Stuartgranti complex Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ryanjury Posted September 24, 2009 Report Share Posted September 24, 2009 Aren't maleri considered one of Stuartigranti complex? A complex of species grouped together and named as much by their "discoverer" as by any other similarity. I guess my question is how far into a line can you reintroduce new blood and not cross over into a case of hybridising? lol yes they sure hence the Al. Stuartgranti "maleri" in their scientific name, sorry had a brain fart.. I do think it is an interesting discussion, most would argue that because our fish haven't been imported with a variant only a name that they could (and most likely are) a mix of alot of different variants anyway.. I do wonder what the introduction of new blood would achieve? Going on Scientiffic name alone will cause issues though all these fish are considered "Aulonocara Stuartgranti" and most of them are very different fish, although technically by some crossing them wouldn't be an issues as they "are they same species". Placidochromis stonemani Aulonocara stuartgranti (Charo) Aulonocara stuartgranti (Chiloelo) Aulonocara hansbaenschi, Red Shoulder Aulonocara stuartgranti (Chilucha Reef) Aulonocara stuartgranti (Chilumba) Chilumba Peacock Aulonocara stuartgranti (Chinuni) Aulonocara hansbaenschi, Red Shoulder Aulonocara stuartgranti (Chirwa Is.) Aulonocara stuartgranti (Chiwindi) Blue Neon Aulonocara stuartgranti (Cobue) Aulonocara stuartgranti (Gome) Aulonocara hansbaenschi, Red Shoulder Aulonocara stuartgranti (Hai Reef) Blue Neon Aulonocara stuartgranti (Hongi Is.) Aulonocara steveni Aulonocara stuartgranti (Kande Is.) Aulonocara steveni Aulonocara stuartgranti (Mbamba Bay) Aulonocara steveni Aulonocara stuartgranti (Mbowe Is.) Aulonocara stuartgranti (Metangula) Aulonocara hansbaenschi, Red Shoulder Aulonocara stuartgranti (Mundola Pt.) Aulonocara hansbaenschi, Red Shoulder Aulonocara stuartgranti (Ngara) Flametail Peacock Aulonocara stuartgranti (Ntekete) Aulonocara hansbaenschi, Red Shoulder Aulonocara stuartgranti (Ntumba) Aulonocara stuartgranti (Sanga) Aulonocara stuartgranti (Undu Reef) Blue Neon Aulonocara stuartgranti (Usisya) Flavescent Peacock Aulonocara stuartgranti (Wikihi) Blue Neon Aulonocara stuartgranti (Zunga) Aulonocara sp. "Stuartgranti Maleri" (Chidunga Rocks) Sunshine Peacock, Orange Peacock Aulonocara sp. "Stuartgranti Maleri" (Chipoka) Sunshine Peacock Aulonocara sp. "Stuartgranti Maleri" (Maleri Is.) Yellow Regal Aulonocara sp. "Stuartgranti Maleri" (Nakantenga Is.) Aulonocara sp. "Stuartgranti Maleri" (Nankoma Is.) I had the same discussion once with someone who bred a few fish but was also very keen on his plants (they have the same issues/views on hybrids). He had bred some wild cockatoos with some triple red cockatoos and was referring to the resulting offspring as hybrids (as he would with no issues when he crossed 2 different coloured plants) but to me they would still be cockatoo's as the triple red variant is just a line bred wild. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phoenix44 Posted September 24, 2009 Report Share Posted September 24, 2009 line breeding is just a fancy way of saying hybridising in many cases is it not? i mean it just signifies intent yes? what i mean is I could have hybridised something, and then I say - no I'm line breeding(someones gotta start it), and then instead of getting dirty looks - everyone's happy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ryanjury Posted September 24, 2009 Report Share Posted September 24, 2009 To me line breeding is breeding within the same line (ie same group of fish) for a desired trait? Someone once said on here that pretty much sums it up, it is called line breeding if it works, inbreeding if it goes wrong... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smidey Posted September 24, 2009 Report Share Posted September 24, 2009 I perceived line breeding as breeding from one "family" whether it be male/female then offspring with offspring or parents & offspring breeding if that makes sense. Whether you start with a pure fish or hybrid it is still line breeding if a pair from one family is used to create the offspring. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
livingart Posted September 24, 2009 Report Share Posted September 24, 2009 To me line breeding is breeding within the same line (ie same group of fish) for a desired trait? Someone once said on here that pretty much sums it up, it is called line breeding if it works, inbreeding if it goes wrong... +1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David R Posted September 24, 2009 Report Share Posted September 24, 2009 Wikipedia David? Point 2. could as easily be a definition of line breeding. "Hybridising" seems often to have a negative connotation probably because it is often a results of unplanned unions and "Inter" species. Line breeding or Outcrossing could be said to be the same thing but intentionally and with a predetermined goal, thus receiving less critiscm. Exactly, my point was just that it depends on how you want to define the word hybrid. Technically speaking you are creating a hybrid on one level, but at the same time you could consider it linebreeding (or outcrossing) to avoid the negative connotations and you would still be correct. I think the best thing to do would be to continue with the experiment to see what happens, then decide if the fish can still be called rubescens. There is no cut-and-dry line that defines whether or not you are hybridising, some pureists would argue that what you have done is create impure fish, others would say its pointless debating different names based on collection location when the fish have been captive bred for more than a couple of generations. To me line breeding is breeding within the same line (ie same group of fish) for a desired trait? Going on Scientiffic name alone will cause issues though all these fish are considered "Aulonocara Stuartgranti" and most of them are very different fish, although technically by some crossing them wouldn't be an issues as they "are they same species". How do you define the "group" you are line breeding from? Species? Subspecies? Reigonal varient? Genus? As you say, if you're crossing fish that are all different varieties of the same species you are only creating an intra-specific hybrid. Like it or now, when you pick out some breeders from a batch of young you are selectively breeding. Here's my 2c on the subject: I wish the african cichlid enthusiasts would have a look at how this problem has been approached in the past, particularly with the breeding of Discus. IMO once you start breeding fish with out the pressures of natural selection its pointless considering them "wild types" and give them names that relate to habitat locations. I know that its almost impossible to get wild caught or F1 fish here in NZ, and so some people wish to cling to the lineage of their fish despite them being captive bred for so many generations that they better represent mans ideal of what they should look like, rather than what would necessarily survive in the lake. Rather than being pedantic about bogus names, I think people should be doing MORE hybridising and line breeding (like what Firenzenz has done) as some incredibly stunning looking fish could be created. Look at what intensive linebreeding has done for discus or asian arowanas, and imagine how different it would be if everyone was too scared to cross breed fish from different locations in various rivers for fear of "losing the purity" of the fish. IMO the purity has gone once you get past the first generation of captive breeding, so why not forget about it and start breeding some intensely colourful and stunning fish? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Navarre Posted September 24, 2009 Report Share Posted September 24, 2009 I have thought a bit ...and only a bit about what you say about interbreeding. And on one level I have to agree that the future of our hobby is in the "look" of fish. I mean I mostly got into this beacuase I liked the "look" of fish not all the hard work that goes into it...lol so hybrids do have their place maybe? The other side of that coin is that by mixing populations to create new and more variance you risk losing the traits of the original population that made it attractive in the first place. especially when that population cannot be replaced in NZ.....does that make sense? and thanks for the quote...I think thats the first time some one has quoted me and not been taking the mickey...lol. Nav Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.