Blacker Ice
- Thread starter schabiazabi
- Start date
Black Ice are PERFECT examples of the OPPOSITE of inbreeding. They are actually hybrids of clownfish that come from lines which originate on different parts of the globe.
Hybrid = Opposite of Inbred
In fact, Blacker Ice (which we were about to name American snow white double jigsaw super limited almost mega blacks
) grow faster and healthier than normal ocellaris form wild parents. This phenomenon is known as Heterosis... except this one old goof I know calls it Hybrid-Vigor. Thanks,
Seth
2Addicted
New member
Scientifically speaking, a hybrid is a cross between two different species. Snowflakes and Darwins are both Amphiprion ocellaris. This "Blacker Ice" is a color variation of A. ocellaris, not a hybrid.
ousnakebyte
New member
Black Ice are PERFECT examples of the OPPOSITE of inbreeding. They are actually hybrids of clownfish that come from lines which originate on different parts of the globe.
Hybrid = Opposite of Inbred
In fact, Blacker Ice (which we were about to name American snow white double jigsaw super limited almost mega blacks
Thanks,
Seth
Fine, I'll concede that the "whatever ice" clowns are not inbred, but if they are ocellaris x ocellaris, I wouldn't call them a hybrid, in the traditional sense of the word. A hybrid is created when two separate species or two separate subspecies are crossed. If you are crossing ocellaris with something else - or you have two different subspecies of ocellaris (I don't even know if this exists), then... yeah - you are creating a hybrid.
The opposite of "inbreeding" is really called "outbreeding" - and yes, it can be the crossing of two different species or sub-species, which can also be referred to as hybridization. But, "outbreeding" does not HAVE to include hybridization. You can "outbreed" the same subspecies from distinct populations without hybridizing, and this would still prevent inbreeding. But, I do understand your point, and it is taken.
I do realize that it is common for hybrids to be "more fit" than their parents. I'm thinking of seeing A. prolifera (which is a cross btwn A. palmata and A. cervicornis) inhabiting the very shallow shores (I'm talking ankle deep) where the water is 30C - and no parent species is anywhere near. But, just an anecdotal observation.
But, alas.... my quote above of, "Did I miss some research somewhere?" was not even pertaining to the captive breeding (or inbreeding) of anemonefish.
Someone above had said, "In the wild you would be amazed at how many inbreed though. - talking about anemonefish.
I replied, "I was under the impression that dispersal during the larval phase was prevention against inbreeding in the wild" [for anemonefish]. Did I miss some research somewhere?
It was an honest question, b/c I have always assumed that as ocean currents are the genetic highways, they are great for larval dispersal and thus prevention of inbreeding. I also didn't think that anemonefish young hung around their hatching grounds - I thought the currents dispersed them.
Or, to put it more plainly - can someone point me to a paper that discusses the inbreeding of wild anemonefish b/c I would - honestly - be interested in reading it since I am a nerd like that... :beer:
Cheers
Mike
Last edited:
ousnakebyte
New member
Much shorter and sweeter than I put it... :beer:
And, I like beer, which is why everyone is getting beer smilies today... :beer:
Mike
jbax
New member
clownfish can lay between 100 to 1,500 eggs and lay every 12 to 15 days. yes, dispersal through tides and currents is semi effective. but it is nowhere near 100%. i've read some anemones in the wild have a pair of clowns with up to 30 males waiting in line to move up the ranks. also ocellaris are poor swimmers, so they are not in deep swift moving waters. they can be mostly found in shallow tropical reefs. a larvae may take a ride on a outgoing tide and end up 1,000ft away from it's parents. but how many others got on that same ride. there is a sticky at the top of the forum "how rare is this" that shows the type of area clownfish and anemones may live in. i'm not naive enough to believe that every larvae survive. and no not every clownfish is related to another. but with those numbers....
there is prolly a ton more information out there on this subject, joyce d wilkersons book is prolly a good start. if you find some good info post i would like to read it too. :spin3:
but bottom line is yes there is definitely inbreeding in the tank bred fish community. but a "black ice" is result of selective breeding between B&W and a snowflake.
there is prolly a ton more information out there on this subject, joyce d wilkersons book is prolly a good start. if you find some good info post i would like to read it too. :spin3:
but bottom line is yes there is definitely inbreeding in the tank bred fish community. but a "black ice" is result of selective breeding between B&W and a snowflake.
ousnakebyte
New member
Okay, fine, but how many survive to reproductive age and then successfully reproduce? And then, how many successfully reproduce with another of the same clutch, or younger brothers/sisters, cousins, etc. - certainly not with their parents since they have drifted as larvae and then are poor swimmers, as I was just told above.
Huh? What is 100% dispersal? Either they leave the place where they were lain or they don't. Are you suggesting that some stick around after hatching while others drift away? I've just never heard this about anemonefish...
Okay, yes, but as I understand it, these "subordinates" recruit in from other areas. They are not necessarily from the clutch that was lain there by those parents and highly doubtful that they have drifted away and then found their way back to the nest anemone like some sort of homing beacon.
Some of you fish people chime in, b/c that's how the process was described to me. Am I missing something?
I was told earlier, "in the wild you would be amazed at how many inbreed though."
That was news to me, and I'm still waiting to be amazed. And, I'm afraid I'm going to need more than "there are lots of baby fish produced so SOME have to be inbreeding in the wild."
I BRIEFLY did a quick search, as I don't really care to spend too much time on the topic, but this paper came up from 2007:
BUSTON, P. M., BOGDANOWICZ, S. M., WONG, A. and HARRISON, R. G. (2007), Are clownfish groups composed of close relatives? An analysis of microsatellite DNA variation in Amphiprion percula. Molecular Ecology, 16: 3671–3678.
Near the end of the abstract, the authors state, The mean coefficient of relatedness among group members is 0.00 ± 0.10 (n = 9 groups), and there are no surprising patterns in the distribution of pairwise relatedness. We conclude that A. percula live in groups of unrelated individuals.
Again, this is only one study - with a relatively small sample size, and there might be other studies out there that contradict this. But, again, I was not aware of inbreeding in wild clownfish, so I just wanted more information.
Does this information exist?
Great. I'm glad you didn't say it was a "hybrid."
Cheers
Mike
jbax
New member
I'd be curious where you read this. Most knowledgeable folks would agree 30 males aren't living in the same anemone. Now maybe 30 juveniles that have not reached sexual maturity, yes. Males, no.
I am very interested in where you get your information that larvae "swim around the sandbed." I have never seen any information even close to this. Please provide references.
IMO, the "information" you are presenting is strangely corrupted and very, very suspect.
Kevin
ousnakebyte
New member
While I will not say this is impossible, I suspect the probability to be very low. Low enough to be insignificant. In fact, I think the probability is higher that a given clutch of larvae will not make it to reproductive age, which would be why they produce so many larvae.
And, there is an almost infinite direction in which a larva can disperse - up the reef, down the reef, swept out to sea. The shallow-water currents where these animals are found are not always flowing in the same direction constantly.
I think the probability that a larva from the same parents of different clutches will reach the exact same anemone as a new recruit, while avoiding the perils that the ocean has to offer is insignificant.
Again, I won't go so far as to say that it is impossible but that it is insignificant enough to conclude that inbreeding in wild clownfish is a rare occurrence. And the paper I posted above supports this idea.
If you have RELIABLE sources that suggest otherwise - I honestly would be interested in reading them. However, I'm not going to spend time searching for something I think does not exist.
Okay... what? I'm afraid I must insist on a reference for this one. I will happily eat crow - for I will have learned something - if this is true.
Yes, thanks for the genetics lesson. I'm aware of that, which is why I stated it in my previous post. However, the reference paper I posted - the study with A. percula having a coefficient of relatedness of 0.00 suggests that this does not happen.
You quoted what I said earlier, which was tongue-in-cheek. I don't follow, but it's early and the coffee is still brewing.
Cheers
Mike
schabiazabi
New member
On the outside the conversation about breeding/inbreeding/cross breeding sounds interesting, but if freshwater Angels for example are suppose to provide us with any kind of guide, our conversation is worthless.
We have been breeding Angelfish for decades now and if you look at them, they are more beautiful, healthy, and accustomed to home tanks more than ever. I can even say the same thing with Clownfish.
As powerful as nature is, men can outsmart it. In about 10/20 years we will be breeding most of the fish we catch in the ocean today. More, in about 100 years from now we will develop more fish at home than the ocean could develop in 1mil years.
We have been breeding Angelfish for decades now and if you look at them, they are more beautiful, healthy, and accustomed to home tanks more than ever. I can even say the same thing with Clownfish.
As powerful as nature is, men can outsmart it. In about 10/20 years we will be breeding most of the fish we catch in the ocean today. More, in about 100 years from now we will develop more fish at home than the ocean could develop in 1mil years.
Winwood
New member
I don't agree. I know we all see beauty differently, but I find WC angels to be much more beautiful than man made. In fact, I find WC altums to be one of my favorite FW fish of all time.
I don't believe we are outsmarting nature either. Any one of our man made creations, if released back into the wild, would be on the top of any predator's menu. Through natural selection, these animals have come to look the way they in order to survive and reproduce and for me that is what makes them beautiful.
In conclusion, Blackest ice x infinity!
jbax
New member
yeah.....right.
sorry, i do enjoy and appreciate the knowledge and interaction between my fellow club members/fellow hobbyist. if i repley to this, i will get banned. you know how to read, you know how to search the internet and you most likely have or can afford a divers permit and passport. and you most likely have more years then i, in the study of ichthyology. if you believe my posts in this thread are corrupt and suspect then delete them. i get on RC for information and to converse with fellow hobbyist, NOT to argue or be called a liar. good luck in all your ventures and i wish all your fish happiness.
Hmmm, I must have missed the part where I called you a liar.
Your information on "30 males waiting in line to move up the ranks" is just wrong.
Your extrapolation and/or theories on larval dispersement and genetic diversity in the wild ARE what I question. I asked for some references for your information, knowing full well you wouldn't be able to provide it. If you are going to make "factual" statements like those you have made in this thread, expect people with some knowledge to ask for your sources.
As ousnakebyte said above, we are willing to learn, if you can provide the proof, but don't expect us to simply take you at your word.
Finally, don't get your feelings hurt. This is the internet, wear a helmet!
Kevin
velvetelvis
Active member
I don't think it's so much WC vs CB, but rather a case of WC vs CB fish that have either been bred poorly, or bred specifically to create "custom" variations on shape, color, and/or pattern. IMO, CB fish from carefully selected parents that have been bred for health and vigor (rather than novel appearance) are just as beautiful as WC. I do agree with you that the wild form is superior in beauty, regardless of species.
Altum angels are one of my favorite FW fish too, especially after seeing them in so many of Takashi Amano's aquascapes. The Inner Harbor Barnes & Noble in Baltimore has an enormous Amazon-themed aquarium with a school of spectacular, gigantic altums (their bodies alone look to be the size of dinner plates). It's a mesmerizing display...those altums beat any number of "lace" or "gold" or veiltails (etc) any day of the week!
Anyway, back to saltwater fish...
schabiazabi
New member
- really?
You do not like this one:
No way. Wyoming Whites or Picassos are so pretty there is no comparison to anything else in the ocean.
Baltimore Bryan
New member
It's a matter of opinion, of course. Personally I would rather have a pair of plain old ocellaris clowns than wyoming whites, picassos, black ice, or any other designer form. I'm not saying it's a fact, because everyone has different tastes, I personally just prefer the natural form. I do also worry about some of the designer forms having issues with line breeding and/or inbreeding... but that's another story and since people are buying them instead of wild fish, I don't really have a big problem with them.
Bryan
velvetelvis
Active member
- really?
You do not like this one:
No way. Wyoming Whites or Picassos are so pretty there is no comparison to anything else in the ocean.
It's all a matter of personal taste. I like biotope aquariums and natural-looking displays, so it's probably no coincidence that I also prefer fish that look like their wild ancestors. But that doesn't invalidate someone else's preference--yours, for example--for strains that have been created through selective breeding. Arguing about which fish is prettier is kind of like arguing that blondes are better-looking than brunettes. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.
Fishboy42
Premium Member
Off subject from the Black Ice discussion, but I wonder actually if those juveniles "in-waiting" may actually be functional (although not dominant) males, or at least are able to make the switch within a few hours "notice" and fertilize a nest in the absence of the dominant male (which I would think is less likely). It does go against the conventional thinking/knowledge of neuter--male--female development for clownfish, but we've found males to be functional at 4 months old --from crowded larval tank in the morning to fertilizing eggs in the evening.
It would be interesting to try this experiment on the reef, although it would require the removal/isolation of all but the dominant female and a single juvenile on the day of the anticipated spawn, and there can of course be lots of juveniles around a single anemone. I'm sure there isn't a ton of funding out there for this type of thing
and disturbing wild breeding pairs is, shall we say, less than ideal...Matt C.
