Hybrid Clowns

[Luiz Rocha]

Worthless wild carp:

US$100k inbred carp:

How is selective breeding bad for the hobby again? There are hundreds of examples in freshwater, we are just scratching the surface in saltwater. Nobody collects wild carp anymore...

 

[username in use]

game/set/match - Louiz Rocha

 

[Korrine]

Now Sanjay's Black Photon's are hybrids. They are occy/perc crosses. This also happens in the wild. My pair is a Platinum percula and a Sanjay's Black Photon. If they should breed in the future I will try to raise them.

 

[MrTuskfish]

All the morphs that breeders are turning out now used to be called "freaks". IMO, they still are. Nature did a great job designing fish, but if someone wants a tank-bred morph.....I sure don't care.

 

[D5HP]

I love seeing people strive to produce these different colorations for one reason and one reason only: they sell ALL the fish regardless and the people that buy them don't end up buying a fish from the ocean that time.

I kind of see the point of this argument but the fact is that this DOES occur in the wild just not very often. It's like playing darts. Bullseye shots happen for everyone given enough attempts but some people work really really hard to make them happen 99% of the time. Okay...loose analogy

 

[InsaneClownFish]

Now the avatar of Luiz Rocha, THAT would interest me.

Exactly what I thought when I saw his Av.

 

[Luiz Rocha]

Exactly what I thought when I saw his Av.

Haha, last one was sold for 15k!

But back on topic, I really don't get why some people are "against" selective breeding. That's the reason why we have domestic dogs today and cats, and even food for the most part. If you don't like the way inbred clownfish look, just don't buy them, but saying that they are "bad for the hobby" is too much I think. I think that anything that avoids the capture of wild livestock is good for the hobby (and the reefs).

 

[dzfish17]

It really isnt a problem in its early stages but 10/15 yrs down the road it could be a different story. When everyone starts to create his/her own unique clown thats when things start to get messed up. In nature most of these clowns dont survive for a reason but in our aquariums we can keep them alive and create whatever we want. When one of these hybrid clowns gets into the wrong breeders hands he can create (selective breeding) more and more unique clowns until you dont know what the heck it is. The same thing happened in FW with alot of the african cichlids. JMO.

 

[deangelr]

I highly doubt coloration or barring has anything to do with survival rates for clownfish in the wild.

 

[Luiz Rocha]

I highly doubt coloration or barring has anything to do with survival rates for clownfish in the wild.

Of course it does, all it takes is for a female to decide that a male with 2 bars is not good enough and his genes are gone, just like that... A solid white clownfish would stand out much more in an anemone, and certainly be the first one targeted by a predator, and so on.

Now again, even when in 10-15 years we start getting things with very different color, I really don't think that it will be bad. All that we can produce by selective breeding is already naturally occurring (and hiding) in the natural population. Mutations are very, very rare events. All we do with selective breeding is uncover those mutations, but make no mistake, they were already there.

 

[Luiz Rocha]

One more good example:

Wild goldfish:

Selectively bred goldfish:

What's wrong with having the fancy ones in tanks?

 

[Sheol]

I could make the argument against Selective breeding, based on that ugly freak monster goldfish! UGGGGGLLLY..
I don't like these things, really. They make queasy inside. Tey look like mutations from a grade Z sci Fi flick from the 1950's or 1970's.
I see this in hepetoculture all the time. What pray tell is wonderful about a scale-less snake??! Also, no Cornsnake morph holds a candle to the natural Okeetee corns IMO.
I hope this doesn't catch on in Saltwater! The fish are plenty beautiful as is, no improvements are required.

Matthew

 

[Lynnmw1208]

Although I think selectively bred fish are really beautiful, I just think that people can blow this out of proportion. Already you can find some of these clowns having defects such as an underbite or having a stunted body shape. If people are going to do this, I just hope they are going to do it responsibly.

 

[Luiz Rocha]

I could make the argument against Selective breeding, based on that ugly freak monster goldfish! UGGGGGLLLY..
I don't like these things, really. They make queasy inside. Tey look like mutations from a grade Z sci Fi flick from the 1950's or 1970's.
I see this in hepetoculture all the time. What pray tell is wonderful about a scale-less snake??! Also, no Cornsnake morph holds a candle to the natural Okeetee corns IMO.
I hope this doesn't catch on in Saltwater! The fish are plenty beautiful as is, no improvements are required.

Matthew

While I agree with you that "no improvements" are required, I still think that adding more captive bred (selective bred or not) fish to the hobby ultimately is a good thing. Trust me, a lot of people out there do think those fish are pretty and will pay for them. So, if they want it, let them have it, less pressure on wilde ones!

Although I think selectively bred fish are really beautiful, I just think that people can blow this out of proportion. Already you can find some of these clowns having defects such as an underbite or having a stunted body shape. If people are going to do this, I just hope they are going to do it responsibly.

Isn't it beautiful to think that all of this genetic variation is already within the species? The things that you see as defects (like the underbite that you mention), will be seen as desirable traits by others. Just look at the goldfish on my previous post, or a Bulldog :rollface:

Dogs by the way are the biggest example of selective breeding out there... And look what we've done to them.

 

[duoc9119]

I think anything we can get tank-bred is one less thing taken straight from the ocean. We already have a limited supply in the ocean, but with high demands, we could easily wipe out a species. Hybrid or tank-bred, it is for the better of the hobby and would be great if we can get every species tank-bred, especially with those rare/hard to find species.

 

[deangelr]

Of course it does, all it takes is for a female to decide that a male with 2 bars is not good enough and his genes are gone, just like that... A solid white clownfish would stand out much more in an anemone, and certainly be the first one targeted by a predator, and so on.

Now again, even when in 10-15 years we start getting things with very different color, I really don't think that it will be bad. All that we can produce by selective breeding is already naturally occurring (and hiding) in the natural population. Mutations are very, very rare events. All we do with selective breeding is uncover those mutations, but make no mistake, they were already there.

IMO, the coloration of reef fishes in general is in large due to sexual selection. Similar to the way that we see such diversity with tropical birds. Most of the fitness needs of clownfish are met simply by hovering in their anemone hosts.

Yes, an all white clownfish is likely more visible to predators and that variant would be picked off. But there are still WC variants of almost entirely white clownfish or extremely aberrant barring. IMO, from both experience, but mostly photos and online videos etc... Clownfish do not seem to blend in with their anemone hosts. I know that some reef fishes are reliant on camouflage, but most fishes coloration is due to sexual selection. Not all clownfish have 3 bars.. They are a wide variety of colors independent of their hosts.

I don't think we are really thinking much differently here.

It just drives me nuts when people say.. "that clownfish would get picked off in the wild." That is not true, anthroprogenic influences on the phenotype might even be beneficial in both sexual favorability and survivability.. I remember reading studies where people drew colors on male birds and that those random, newly introduced bright colors increased their mating potential.

I think that all this Hybrid clownfish breeding and "designer" variants are good for the breeding industry and good for the hobby. It gives buyers the opportunity to have a fish that looks unique at an affordable price. It give sellers the opportunity to make a hold in the fish breeding market with a specialty.

People complain about prices.. Well if they want a really rare species, those species are difficult to acquire, often a risk to bring in and difficult to acclimate, and prices are out of the roof! People should be thankful for the creativity and talent of the breeders creating hybrids and unique variants.

These clownfish do not have "weaker" genetics

 

[Luiz Rocha]

IMO, the coloration of reef fishes in general is in largely due to sexual selection. Similar to the way that we see such diversity with tropical birds.

I agree with most of what you said, except the above. There is not a lot of sexual selection in reef fishes. We very rarely see female reef fishes "choosing" males the way birds do. Even in species like flasher wrasses that have very colorful males that display, those males usually control a harem of many females that do not chose him, they spawn with him every day, regardless of how he looks. And to complicate matters further, a lot of reef fish (including flasher wrasses) change sex. Color in reef fishes is much less understood than it is in birds.

 

[deangelr]

So you think the extravagent colors we see in reef fishes are due to survivability factors like camouflage, predator defense? Or what? The whole fact that we see different colors patterns in males and females points to sexual selection. Even though males may control the harem there may be more choice involved than we understand.. The fact that when these fishes change sex, they also change coloration and pattern further is evidence for sexual selection. It is driven by mate choice, that could be male or female (or both), whichever sex is choosing.

The bright colors, sexual dimorpism, unusual streamers and other unsuitable surval features make me believe that most reef fishes display the colors they do because of sexual selection..

 

[D5HP]

So you think the extravagent colors we see in reef fishes are due to survivability factors like camouflage, predator defense? Or what? The whole fact that we see different colors patterns in males and females points to sexual selection. Even though males may control the harem there may be more choice involved than we understand.. The fact that when these fishes change sex, they also change coloration and pattern further is evidence for sexual selection. It is driven by mate choice, that could be male or female (or both), whichever sex is choosing.

The bright colors, sexual dimorpism, unusual streamers and other unsuitable surval features make me believe that most reef fishes display the colors they do because of sexual selection..

Following along on this one.

I felt like the color change that accompanies a sex change was mainly due to simply stand out from the rest of the harem. Let's take anthias for example, once a female begins turning male she is still the same color as the rest of the females and has already asserted that shim is going to mate with each of the other females. I don't see how there is any selection involved with that example as the remaining females have no choice in their male mate....regardless of how brilliant his coloration is.

 

[Luiz Rocha]

In most haremic species there is no choice, by either male or female. That group of females is "stuck" to that harem (and it's dominating male) by a strong social structure, that's how they live. When the male dies, the largest female changes behavior, color and sex (on that order). Female wrasses don't switch harems if the male of the next harem over is prettier, there is no choice.

Now, don't take me wrong, I am not saying that sexual selection doesn't exist in reef fishes. All I am saying is that it is not what is driving the bright colors, and is much less important in reef fishes than it is in birds. If you want to see some clear examples of sexual selection just look at freshwater fishes or even some blennies. But it is not correct to say that most reef fishes are colorful because of sexual selection, it's the generalization that bothers me.

Bright colors themselves (or even sexual dimorphism) are not per se an indication of sexual selection. If they were, how would you explain brightly colored juveniles and relatively drab adults like many damselfishes and angelfishes?