Is it true...

Is it true...

  • Yes

    Votes: 25 20.5%

  • No

    Votes: 97 79.5%
  • Total voters
    122
Evolution has been altered by man. We now evolve the world around us instead. By breeding them in captivity, you are taking wild traits out of them. Same reason ferrets that are bred in captivity for 3 generations are less wild and desiring to bite than one that is one generation out.

Also, anyone arguing instinct is arguing a topic that I really have a problem with. Instinct is a construct of human's ability to attempt to understand differences in natural and unnatural acts through either concious thought or through the imaginary idea of instinct. Because I need to eat to live, is it instinct to eat or is it a necessary step toward surviving another day? Is it instinct for a human to have sex or is it the knowledge that creation occurs with this step and without it there will be no continuation of life? I think that all of these supposed "instinctual" processes are planned out ideas. They began to use quotes from me from my other thread and they do somewhat access my point, but they left way too much out and many important facts that really spurred this whole converstation. They left the whole debate of instinct being altered by environment, which was a major part of my arguement.

Whoever previously quoted me, could you please put a link to the discussion that preceeded this whole conversation. Also, I never had reason to believe anyone would attack me personally, I was explaining why noone had yet come with the differing opinion although at the time 4 people ahd voted yes. Personally, anyone who would like is more than welcome to attempt to hold a discussion, I feel I can hold my own and feel that I have counterpoints to many of the already discussed topics...many of which are previously discussed points.
 
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=9844094#post9844094 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by cschweitzer
Evolution has been altered by man. We now evolve the world around us instead. By breeding them in captivity, you are taking wild traits out of them. Same reason ferrets that are bred in captivity for 3 generations are less wild and desiring to bite than one that is one generation out.

Also, anyone arguing instinct is arguing a topic that I really have a problem with. Instinct is a construct of human's ability to attempt to understand differences in natural and unnatural acts through either concious thought or through the imaginary idea of instinct. Because I need to eat to live, is it instinct to eat or is it a necessary step toward surviving another day? Is it instinct for a human to have sex or is it the knowledge that creation occurs with this step and without it there will be no continuation of life? I think that all of these supposed "instinctual" processes are planned out ideas. They began to use quotes from me from my other thread and they do somewhat access my point, but they left way too much out and many important facts that really spurred this whole converstation. They left the whole debate of instinct being altered by environment, which was a major part of my arguement.

Whoever previously quoted me, could you please put a link to the discussion that preceeded this whole conversation. Also, I never had reason to believe anyone would attack me personally, I was explaining why noone had yet come with the differing opinion although at the time 4 people ahd voted yes. Personally, anyone who would like is more than welcome to attempt to hold a discussion, I feel I can hold my own and feel that I have counterpoints to many of the already discussed topics...many of which are previously discussed points.
Click to expand...

the link is there, and i think with this last response this picture is in order
remoteImage-3.jpg


instinct not something one generation in captivity can change.
 
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=9844094#post9844094 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by cschweitzer
Evolution has been altered by man. We now evolve the world around us instead. By breeding them in captivity, you are taking wild traits out of them. Same reason ferrets that are bred in captivity for 3 generations are less wild and desiring to bite than one that is one generation out.

Also, anyone arguing instinct is arguing a topic that I really have a problem with. Instinct is a construct of human's ability to attempt to understand differences in natural and unnatural acts through either concious thought or through the imaginary idea of instinct. Because I need to eat to live, is it instinct to eat or is it a necessary step toward surviving another day? Is it instinct for a human to have sex or is it the knowledge that creation occurs with this step and without it there will be no continuation of life? I think that all of these supposed "instinctual" processes are planned out ideas. They began to use quotes from me from my other thread and they do somewhat access my point, but they left way too much out and many important facts that really spurred this whole converstation. They left the whole debate of instinct being altered by environment, which was a major part of my arguement.

Whoever previously quoted me, could you please put a link to the discussion that preceeded this whole conversation. Also, I never had reason to believe anyone would attack me personally, I was explaining why noone had yet come with the differing opinion although at the time 4 people ahd voted yes. Personally, anyone who would like is more than welcome to attempt to hold a discussion, I feel I can hold my own and feel that I have counterpoints to many of the already discussed topics...many of which are previously discussed points.
Click to expand...

Although others may have chosen "no" in the poll, I believe that you are the only person I have ever heard argue against instinct. So, you are basically saying that instinct is a fallacy?

How would any animal know how to do anything from birth without instinct? How would a mother know to let her babies nurse off of her breasts, and how would the babies know right away that they need to be nursing?

I'm really curious, can you find me any scientific research done to disprove the theories of instinct? Because I've never heard of such a thing.
 
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=9844094#post9844094 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by cschweitzer
Whoever previously quoted me, could you please put a link to the discussion that preceeded this whole conversation.
Click to expand...
Can you link it?

I don't think I was involved in that discussion - and if it's so imporant to your point, could you please link it?

FWIW, I've relied a lot on Joyce Wilkerson's `Clownfish' book for many of my points - if folks want to follow that resource. It's a good book IMO :)
 
My ISP sucks!
I have studied K9's. Near the end of the last ice age as man made his pilgrimage down the west coast of this continent he began living with dogs. I believe the first evidance of this was found in Washington State. If you look at the little pic under my tittal you will see that it is a dog. I have been around dogs all of my life. bread them and trained them. I can alter a dogs behavior in almost any way I like, today. Not through evolution. A dog will poo inside unless you alter his behavior and cause him to poo outside. It is mans influence on the dog that causes it to poo outside.
Mans influence on animals can change their behavior and it does not take evolution to accomplish this. This is fact not opinion.
 
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=9845086#post9845086 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by elegance coral
My ISP sucks!
I have studied K9's. Near the end of the last ice age as man made his pilgrimage down the west coast of this continent he began living with dogs. I believe the first evidance of this was found in Washington State. If you look at the little pic under my tittal you will see that it is a dog. I have been around dogs all of my life. bread them and trained them. I can alter a dogs behavior in almost any way I like, today. Not through evolution. A dog will poo inside unless you alter his behavior and cause him to poo outside. It is mans influence on the dog that causes it to poo outside.
Mans influence on animals can change their behavior and it does not take evolution to accomplish this. This is fact not opinion.
Click to expand...

you are really using broken logic

hosting behaivior can not be changed by breeding in a tank there is no solid argument for it.
 
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=9845086#post9845086 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by elegance coral
My ISP sucks!
I have studied K9's. Near the end of the last ice age as man made his pilgrimage down the west coast of this continent he began living with dogs. I believe the first evidance of this was found in Washington State.
Click to expand...
Not to quibble, but evidence of domestic dogs comes well before the migration of humans onto this continent [if you go by the standard accepted dates there - post ice sheets].

Dogs were domesticated remarkably early by humans, well before any other domesticate animal or plant.

I forget the dates, but there's a dog burial at Star Carr in the U.K. that's before this. Lucky dog :)
 
And don't forget that most people here are trying to get clownfish that the anemones would not naturally host in the wild to associate with them in the captivity so your ocellaris and BTA's are not natual host's but a Magnifica on the other hand, have not seen an TB ocellaris turn one down, because most of you know the scent they put into the water column attracts them to anemone and certain clowns are attacted and recognise different scents, so i really depends on the anemone clownfish association not if they are TB or wild caught
 
even if wild caught did host better, who cares? CB are soooooooooooo much hardier than wild, I lost 4 wild caught false percs, they each lived less than a day in my old tank...after 4 failures I bought a CB false perc and he is still fat and healthy 3 years later, and yes, he hosts
 
i voted that TR clowns dont host as well.i have had 3 clowns,2 wild and 1 TR.the wild ones i had hosted the first thing that even resembled an anem.my TR never hosted at all for me.this is just my opinion of course.
 
i will add that i really think the only reason wild host better than TR is they have been there done that before.
 
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=9844094#post9844094 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by cschweitzer
Evolution has been altered by man. We now evolve the world around us instead. By breeding them in captivity, you are taking wild traits out of them. Same reason ferrets that are bred in captivity for 3 generations are less wild and desiring to bite than one that is one generation out.
Click to expand...

cschweitzer, I have a major problem with your argument. You are stating that evolution is currently being altered by man. I think your getting one major concept mixed up. Your confusing yourself with adaption and evolution. I have said this before and I will say it again. We are not causing clownfish to alter or lose their instincts in any way or form. All clownfish are doing is adapting to the enviroment we provide them which is our fish tanks. The Ocean is a giant body of water that contains trillions of gallons of saltwater that has very specific parameters, with a giant fire ball over head. We provide a fish tank with some T5s over the top, a protein skimmer, maybe a couple of reactors, some powerheads for flow and a sump; what we provide doesn't even come close to the ocean. Of course clownfish are going to adapt to a fish tank. They literally become trapped inside.

Yes, their BEHAVIOR might be sublty impacted HOWEVER, their instincts are not changed in any shape or form. Evolution takes thousands of generations for a POPULATION to evolve. A generation of clownfish being sold at Petco is not changing its evolution for crying out loud. That logic sounds rediculous. One, two, or three clownfish will not evolove in a tank. It takes a whole population. You do know that a population is the smallest unit for a species to be able to evolve? It would take some natural disaster, or some major disruption in the ecosytem to cause clownfish to go into evolution again.

Just think of it this way, if we still can't explain the science behind how the clownfish is immune to the anemones stings, what on earth would make you think we can say that we are altering its evolution?
 
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=9849072#post9849072 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by checkinhawk
i will add that i really think the only reason wild host better than TR is they have been there done that before.
Click to expand...

lol...come on man. Did you read the whole thread or did you just skip to the third page to post this? When baby salmon are born, how do they know to travel to the ocean to grow and gorge on food and once they become mature enough to reproduce, they migrate back to the exact rivers in which they were born to lay their eggs? Once they lay their eggs, they die within a couple of days including male salmon. How would salmon know to carry out these functions if they have never done "that before?" One word:


INSTINCTS

Wild caught or tank bred, clownfish have the instincts to host anemones which CANNOT be altered. Their behavior might change and they might have to adapt, but their instincts are the same.

i voted that TR clowns dont host as well.i have had 3 clowns,2 wild and 1 TR.the wild ones i had hosted the first thing that even resembled an anem.my TR never hosted at all for me.this is just my opinion of course.
Click to expand...

You were probably providing the wrong anemone. You do know clownfish have very specific hosts right?
 
I agree with 55semireefs, instincts play a huge role in this, and without the right anemone, clowns may never host, regardless of their beginnings
 
while I do not want to support the "man causing evolution" theory here, there is a certain point to the logic...clowns that are being CB are obviously ones that are doing well, even thriving in captivity and they are breeding with other clowns that do well in captivity, thus you are at least to some degree breeding for a selective trait that may be worthless in the wild, ability to tolerate poor water, small area, more stress etc...how much of that is in the DNA? who knows...but certainly over multiple generations of fish in a smallish population such as the CB market you are going to get nonnatural mutations based on the small size of the populations and growing prevelance of normally recessive traits...its just simple biology that mutations happen at a much greater rate in small populations with infrequent influxes of new DNA, simply because recessive traits are not overwhelmed in the gene pool by a constant barage of dominant genetic traits...any biologists want to chime in with me here on this one?

again, I am not saying we are forcing evolution of clowns, simply that we have set up an artificial situation were certain traits are able to come to the surface more quickly than in the wild...how much this affects survivability and hosting of CB clowns as compared to the simple fact that they have spent their whole lives in and are more used to small tanks rather than a big ocean is hard to say
 
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=9838925#post9838925 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by elegance coral
It is not absurd to think that if we raised a clown in a clean empty tank for most of its youth that its behavior would be altered when compaired to a clown that spent most of its youth in an anemone in the wild. The first sight that a wild clown sees is its parents in an anemone. It will not survive unless it finds an anemone for itself. These are the clowns we catch for our aquariums. What makes no sense to me is the idea that we can raise two indviduals in totaly different enviroments and expect the same behavior out of them.
Click to expand...
The flaw with this thought is that a clownfish fry never sees it's parents or an anemone as it's first sight. If it did it would probably be it's last. A newly hatched clownfish can only see no more than it's body length the first few days. It would be eaten by it's parents the first few hrs/weeks of it's life. The parents only take care of the eggs....larvae are fair game. If you have ever seen an anemone in the wild you would not see any clown larvae/juvi's in them until they have grown a few months. The resident pair or dominant clownfish would kill them or keep them away. Until then they are floating in the upper water column, close to the surface with the plankton to survive. Everything close to or on the reef would eat them.
I have TR juvi's that I have raised from a TR pair in bare clean growout tanks for 6 months before I put them into a tank with an anemone and they will always swim directly for the anemone. Granted they have used a sponge filter for a surrogate host the first 6 mths of their lives and the anemone and LR is the only thing in the new tanks but they have more than ample room to ignore the anemone but they don't. 3 days ago I put a large H. Crispa (Sebae) in a bare tank (DSB only) with 30-40, 8 mth juvi Snowflake Ocellaris/Percula hybrids, and they all went directly into the anemone. The H. Crispa is not a natural host for an Ocellaris or a Percula. This is all based on my personal experience, but the poll question was "are TR/CB less likely to host anemones", and to me seeing is believing. I voted NO.
By the way the question should read "use an anemone as a host" NOT " clownfish... host anemones". Sorry, just a pet peeve of mine.
 
Last edited:
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=9849343#post9849343 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by bigdaddyadam
while I do not want to support the "man causing evolution" theory here, there is a certain point to the logic...clowns that are being CB are obviously ones that are doing well, even thriving in captivity and they are breeding with other clowns that do well in captivity, thus you are at least to some degree breeding for a selective trait that may be worthless in the wild, ability to tolerate poor water, small area, more stress etc...how much of that is in the DNA?
Click to expand...

It has nothing to do with DNA. It has everything to do with the immune system. In the wild, clownfish are in a huge ocean but when you put them in a magnified enviroment, you are immensely increasing their chances of catching parasites, bacterial infections and other diseases that would never come across a clownfish in the wild. That's why wild caught clownfish become diagnosed with diseases so easily because they have not developed a natural immune system to these diseases. However, a tank bred clownfish was born in this type of enviroment and in order to survive, they adapt and build up a strong immune system.

A saltwater tank is a contained enviroment which causes stress alone. You put life from the ocean in it as well, your going to see a lot of interesting things happening such as immune systems dropping and tangs catching ich so easily. Like I said, the clownfish adapt to the changes but their instincts and DNA do not alter. Aquarists do not use selective breeding with clownfish that have strong immunities to reproduce; clownfish do it themselves. Its the miracle of life.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

G
Is my anemone dying?
Replies
5
Views
244
Uncle99
Uncle99
B
Ritteri Swollen Mouth
Replies
8
Views
553
Bakeman
B
R
Clownfish in a small tank
Replies
13
Views
2K
Reefing102
Reefing102
S
Its been a while.
Replies
10
Views
2K
Reefing102
Reefing102
K
Red Haddon Anemone
2
Replies
25
Views
2K
kokoui
K
Back
Top