Clownfish Inbreeding
- Thread starter jesusfreak316
- Start date
Inbreeding is cool...
Inbreeding is cool...
I don't live in WV but I can see it from my back porch. I guess that kind of joke isn't funny any more. Anyway, I believe Javeo is somewhat correct. Two individuals that are more genetically divergent will produce offspring that are less genetically inferior and less genetically homogenious offspring. That is why you are allowed to marry and have kids with your third cousin but not your first cousin, sister, mother, etc... Recessive or "inferior" or "bad" or "unwanted" genes are typically only expressed in the homozygous/homogenious condition.
For example: Let's say that hair color in fish is determined by one gene and that fish have two of the genes because they get one from each of their parents. If a fish has an A gene and a B gene for hair color and black hair is expressed when a B is present, then offspring will have black hair if you get an B from either parent (BB or AB). The dreaded blond hair gene is only expressed if there are two A's present. And we all know we don't want our fish to have the blond condition.
Now let's say two fish get together, one with black hair and one with blond hair. You know that one parent has two A's (the blond one) and you always get genes from both parents so all of these offspring will have at least one A. Let's assume that black haired fish comes from a family that frowns upon dating their cousins so it doesn't have any genetically inferior A genes. That fish has the BB condition. Offspring will get one gene from each parent so they will all have the AB condition. Since blond hair in fish is only expressed in the homogenious condition (AA) all of the offspring will have black hair.
One step further. We take two fish from this batch of offspring and have them breed/in-breed. You know that they all have at one A and one B. Typically genes are given at random so we can assume that 50% of the offspring will get a B and the other half will get an A from each parent. You do a little bit of simple math and you find that 50% of the offspring from this generation will have the AB condition, 25% will have BB, and 25% will have AA. Uh oh, that means that 25% of this generation will not be very smart. All of the AB and BB (75%+25%) fish will luckily be spared and have black hair.
Go one more generation and you are increasing the number of offspring that will have blond hair. Cross an AB with an AA and you get 50% of them with blond hair. One more generation and you have a pretty good chance of now having all offspring with a low IQ.
Now I reallize that bad traits in fish (e.g., gills don't absorb oxygen very well, poor immune systems, deformed vertebrae etc..) aren't controlled by one gene, but I hope that my little story about hairy fish helps some folks understand why inbreeding is not a good idea. It's illegal for people, it should be illegal for fish too. In the wild, recessive or inferior genes are selected out of the population because those fish have a harder time surviving. We provide everything that a fish needs in our aquariums so inferior captive fish don't have as much trouble surviving.
You can also go the other way and say that some of our fish more genetically diverse than their wild cousins. I have an SI Perc female. If I get a perc from somewhere else they could potentially have more genetically diverse offspring. In the wild that could produce a whole bunch of other problems but it isn't worth getting into it for our purposes because there probably aren't many people breeding fish and stocking them on a reef somewhere. At least I hope not.
Man that was long. I hope somebody reads it all, that I got it correct, and also that it makes you think twice about inbreeding your fish. Buy an onyx clown from Rod and one from me and you won't have inbred babies. I can say that here because I don't know Rod and I don't have onyx clown offspring (yet).
Now where's my sister hiding...........
Inbreeding is cool...
I don't live in WV but I can see it from my back porch. I guess that kind of joke isn't funny any more. Anyway, I believe Javeo is somewhat correct. Two individuals that are more genetically divergent will produce offspring that are less genetically inferior and less genetically homogenious offspring. That is why you are allowed to marry and have kids with your third cousin but not your first cousin, sister, mother, etc... Recessive or "inferior" or "bad" or "unwanted" genes are typically only expressed in the homozygous/homogenious condition.
For example: Let's say that hair color in fish is determined by one gene and that fish have two of the genes because they get one from each of their parents. If a fish has an A gene and a B gene for hair color and black hair is expressed when a B is present, then offspring will have black hair if you get an B from either parent (BB or AB). The dreaded blond hair gene is only expressed if there are two A's present. And we all know we don't want our fish to have the blond condition.
Now let's say two fish get together, one with black hair and one with blond hair. You know that one parent has two A's (the blond one) and you always get genes from both parents so all of these offspring will have at least one A. Let's assume that black haired fish comes from a family that frowns upon dating their cousins so it doesn't have any genetically inferior A genes. That fish has the BB condition. Offspring will get one gene from each parent so they will all have the AB condition. Since blond hair in fish is only expressed in the homogenious condition (AA) all of the offspring will have black hair.
One step further. We take two fish from this batch of offspring and have them breed/in-breed. You know that they all have at one A and one B. Typically genes are given at random so we can assume that 50% of the offspring will get a B and the other half will get an A from each parent. You do a little bit of simple math and you find that 50% of the offspring from this generation will have the AB condition, 25% will have BB, and 25% will have AA. Uh oh, that means that 25% of this generation will not be very smart. All of the AB and BB (75%+25%) fish will luckily be spared and have black hair.
Go one more generation and you are increasing the number of offspring that will have blond hair. Cross an AB with an AA and you get 50% of them with blond hair. One more generation and you have a pretty good chance of now having all offspring with a low IQ.
Now I reallize that bad traits in fish (e.g., gills don't absorb oxygen very well, poor immune systems, deformed vertebrae etc..) aren't controlled by one gene, but I hope that my little story about hairy fish helps some folks understand why inbreeding is not a good idea. It's illegal for people, it should be illegal for fish too. In the wild, recessive or inferior genes are selected out of the population because those fish have a harder time surviving. We provide everything that a fish needs in our aquariums so inferior captive fish don't have as much trouble surviving.
You can also go the other way and say that some of our fish more genetically diverse than their wild cousins. I have an SI Perc female. If I get a perc from somewhere else they could potentially have more genetically diverse offspring. In the wild that could produce a whole bunch of other problems but it isn't worth getting into it for our purposes because there probably aren't many people breeding fish and stocking them on a reef somewhere. At least I hope not.
Man that was long. I hope somebody reads it all, that I got it correct, and also that it makes you think twice about inbreeding your fish. Buy an onyx clown from Rod and one from me and you won't have inbred babies. I can say that here because I don't know Rod and I don't have onyx clown offspring (yet).
Now where's my sister hiding...........
Ah...hybrids
Ah...hybrids
Hybrids tend to be more genetically and physically vigorous and potentially sexually disfunctional. It all depends on what you want....I like cap clowns and at some point the fish breeders here will start producing them by hybridizing chrysopterus and orange skunks (sorry, I forgot the scientific name for them and I have to pee so I am not going to look it up) and everyone will be able to have cap clowns. Man I hope I do it first.
On the other hand you can also end up with ugly hybrids.
Now, where is my other sister hiding.....
Ah...hybrids
Hybrids tend to be more genetically and physically vigorous and potentially sexually disfunctional. It all depends on what you want....I like cap clowns and at some point the fish breeders here will start producing them by hybridizing chrysopterus and orange skunks (sorry, I forgot the scientific name for them and I have to pee so I am not going to look it up) and everyone will be able to have cap clowns. Man I hope I do it first.
On the other hand you can also end up with ugly hybrids.
Now, where is my other sister hiding.....
Not sure how to measure hybrid's genetic "vigor," among other things.
Given the variations of the few actual clown species, it would seem likely the hybridization is fairly high in the wild comparative to other Genus.
fwiw: Isn't it good to know there are at least two RC folks that have had Cap clowns,A. leucokranos, breed and least two folks that have had chrysopterus breed. Sure does make it seem likely to improve in future.
Given the variations of the few actual clown species, it would seem likely the hybridization is fairly high in the wild comparative to other Genus.
fwiw: Isn't it good to know there are at least two RC folks that have had Cap clowns,A. leucokranos, breed and least two folks that have had chrysopterus breed. Sure does make it seem likely to improve in future.
I think it is outstanding that people are getting these "rare" clowns to breed and are able to raise the offspring. It seems like we will be seeing more and more of this success. I believe that it is important that breeders that are successful continue to share their successes with everyone in the hobby. Profit is one thing but the big picture is the need to decrease the wild harvest of these organisms.
It does seem that hybridization is common and more of it is documented as time goes on. If we were all raising mosquitos we could produce one heck of a problem, potentially.
It does seem that hybridization is common and more of it is documented as time goes on. If we were all raising mosquitos we could produce one heck of a problem, potentially.
phender
Active member
Javeo said:
Genetic mutations are a product of imperfections in the replication process of DNA, sometimes caused by enviromental factors, sometimes not. Inbreeding has nothing to do with genetic mutations.
Genetic mutations occur in the wild all the time. The albino trait is a mutation. Blue eyes is a mutation. Without genetic mutation there would not have been any differentiation of species. All living things would be the same type of organism.
Inbreeding increases the chances of a harmful recessive mutation being expressed. It also increases the chances of a favorable mutation being expressed.
It is not that unusual for inbreeding to happen in the wild. Isolation of populations or depletion of populations in an area can result in inbreeding. Wild cheetahs are horribly inbred for example. It has a lot of wildlife folks worried about a disease wiping out the entire wild population.
I am not saying that all animals should be inbred. But it was happening long before humans had a hand in it. We have used it to focus traits in animals that make them more useful to us.
Sorry, I'm done now.
dantodd
New member
Re: Inbreeding is cool...
Re: Inbreeding is cool...
First of all hats off to Javeo for properly using sate in a post! Second, you can call me dear but don't tell my wife.
As for optimizing the human gene pool, we left eugenics in our past and hopefully it will stay there.
Inbreeding and hybridizing are both accepted practices in domestic animal and plant husbandry.
I guess there are a couple different approaches to reefkeeping. The first I would call "zookeeping" where people try to keep everything as much like nature as possible. Zookeeper hold that only fishes, invertibrates, corals, macroalgae etc. that are endemic to one biotope is appropriate for a single tank. For zookeepers hybridizing and inbreeding carry ethical implications since it may or may not represent the wild breeding habits of these fish.
The majority of reefkeepers (I believe) keep reefs as pets or domestic animals and their primary concern is the comfort and "happiness" of the animals. In these cases hybridization/inbreeding are not significant. Those in the "pet" crowd, for example might let percula host BTAs or even condys.
Even if you are a "zookeeper" the natural life-cycle of clownfish is not, to the best of my knowledge, well enough understood to know if inbreeding/hybridization is common or rare. I am sure it is not non-existant since mixed pairs have been photographed in the wild.
Re: Inbreeding is cool...
First of all hats off to Javeo for properly using sate in a post! Second, you can call me dear but don't tell my wife.
bededog said:
As for optimizing the human gene pool, we left eugenics in our past and hopefully it will stay there.
Inbreeding and hybridizing are both accepted practices in domestic animal and plant husbandry.
I guess there are a couple different approaches to reefkeeping. The first I would call "zookeeping" where people try to keep everything as much like nature as possible. Zookeeper hold that only fishes, invertibrates, corals, macroalgae etc. that are endemic to one biotope is appropriate for a single tank. For zookeepers hybridizing and inbreeding carry ethical implications since it may or may not represent the wild breeding habits of these fish.
The majority of reefkeepers (I believe) keep reefs as pets or domestic animals and their primary concern is the comfort and "happiness" of the animals. In these cases hybridization/inbreeding are not significant. Those in the "pet" crowd, for example might let percula host BTAs or even condys.
Even if you are a "zookeeper" the natural life-cycle of clownfish is not, to the best of my knowledge, well enough understood to know if inbreeding/hybridization is common or rare. I am sure it is not non-existant since mixed pairs have been photographed in the wild.
jesusfreak316
New member
This is good stuff. Keep the comentary coming.
Javeo
New member
Re: Re: Inbreeding is cool...
Re: Re: Inbreeding is cool...
Re: Re: Inbreeding is cool...
dantodd said:First of all hats off to Javeo for properly using sate in a post! Second, you can call me dear but don't tell my wife.
haha, at least i said something someone agrees with.
and thank you DEAR, you are too kind.
on the subject of inbreeding and hybridisation, i'll admit my opinions have come about more from the breeding of parrots (which i used to do) then marine fish, with which i do not have any breeding experiance. Many captive macaws have a mixed parentage and this has led to them being useless as breeding subjects in projects for wild re-introduction. I know clownfish are in nowhere near the same precarious postion as the parrots, but we also know that this could change suddenly with rising sea temperature and pollution. If this was ever the case im sure most would agree that it would be in everyones interests to have viable, pure bloodstock to attempt reintroduction when, and if, we ever manage to learn to live without ruining our planet.
Carman34L
In Memoriam
Ok first of, I think that the oceans are fine, they rise in temp and drop in temp, If you are saying that global warming and we (humans) are causing it, you must re-think your standpoint. We (humans) have been recording accurate temps for a little over 100 years. We (humans) have no Idea what the temp of any ocean was evan 75 years ago, the first widespread ocean temp monitering was not done until the mid seventies. How do we (humans) know that 250 years ago the temps were not higher than they are now?
I have one other question to ask you. Do we (humans) have the power to alter the weather, Hurricanes, tornados, floods, rain, snow. NO. Then how do we have the power to raise the temps of the oceans? every SUV in the country put together for the last five years put out less Carbon Dioxide then Mt St Helens did last year alone.
Pollution i.e. chemcial dumping. on the other hand is a big deal, I agree that pollution could damage the worlds oceans and it could do it very quick. Sorry for ranting, I have a horrible cold and I am all hyped up on nyquil.
I have one other question to ask you. Do we (humans) have the power to alter the weather, Hurricanes, tornados, floods, rain, snow. NO. Then how do we have the power to raise the temps of the oceans? every SUV in the country put together for the last five years put out less Carbon Dioxide then Mt St Helens did last year alone.
Pollution i.e. chemcial dumping. on the other hand is a big deal, I agree that pollution could damage the worlds oceans and it could do it very quick. Sorry for ranting, I have a horrible cold and I am all hyped up on nyquil.
Javeo
New member
agreed, global temp. is prone to fluctuations, but you must realise that a few hundred years ago there were not 6 billion on earth! and lately the growth of newly industrialised countries has been very rapid. and why only SUV's? do powerplants, bikes and cows (farmed) not add to the pollution? and the melting of the arctic and antarctic ice fields is plain for anyone to see, which will also result in a drop in salinity.
Your arguement is kinda strange though, since pollution is what is causing temp rises. temperature is totally diffrent from a hurricane!
Your arguement is kinda strange though, since pollution is what is causing temp rises. temperature is totally diffrent from a hurricane!
The following is directed at no one in particular, but we are entering topics which frequently descend into the realm of politics(and even religion).
Discussing politics and religion on Reef Central are not allowed.
Please continue the discussion, but let's be cautious of the boundaries and choose our words carefully so they don't become misconstrued in this impersonal medium.
Thanks.
Discussing politics and religion on Reef Central are not allowed.
Please continue the discussion, but let's be cautious of the boundaries and choose our words carefully so they don't become misconstrued in this impersonal medium.
Thanks.
thecoralreef
Member
Cross breeding in a way is natural in the wild as we have clowns that are in the wild that are hybrids and continue to breed in the wild. Some species may be mules and some will be able to reproduce. Proaquatix (Ithink that's the name) has succesfully paired 2 different clowns to get a cross breed. Once these cross breeds are able to reproduce and have offspring that is when they are hybrids, at least that is my understanding of the cross breed and hybrid thingy.
leaffish75
New member
I have a hybrid pair of clowns that are siblings. They came from other hybrid siblings that put off alot of babies on a weekly basis. Every single off spring has developed well. Im big into the outdoors and manage wild game. Inbreeding isnt taboo in the wild and can be seen. While tracking deer I can see that a buck will mate with it own off spring even though sometimes there are other females not kin around. Its not forced its the deers decision.
thecoralreef
Member
What kind of hybrids do you have?
It would seem we need to maintain the distinction between, hybrid and inbreeding to further this discussion.
Javeo
New member
skinpuppi reefer said:
But what of the current species that you "pollute" in this way, when hybrid fish may be bred back into pure stock intentionally or otherwise.
I also agree on the point you make about dogs, many wild dogs in africa will be extinct soon due to being cross bred with domestic dogs.
I just find it sad that people only seem to care for what they find interesting and curious, its the freak show mentality.
Another case is the wild betta splendens. there are only 2 small wild populations left because the rest are tainted with the genes of the fancy type fish we breed.
