Is the hobby producing overly delicate corals?
- Thread starter silverwolf72
- Start date
John37: Huh? Why throw out a statement to that degree and then basically state for us to ignore what you just wrote?
Gary Majchrzak
Team RC
He's trolling for a reaction, but let's not get off topic.
IME & IMO the hobby is producing corals much better suited for captive life than those found in the ocean. CR (captive raised) corals are less delicate than WC (wild caught) corals.
Gary,
Do you think CR fish follow the same trend as CR corals? Anyone else like to chim in. Personally I would rather have CR livestock vs. wild caught.
I met someone here on RC that collects for the hobby and is a natural resources student. I will see if he has an opinion on this.
Do you think CR fish follow the same trend as CR corals? Anyone else like to chim in. Personally I would rather have CR livestock vs. wild caught.
I met someone here on RC that collects for the hobby and is a natural resources student. I will see if he has an opinion on this.
John,
No problem we all have days like that. What is your opinion of the thread topic?
No problem we all have days like that. What is your opinion of the thread topic?
Gary Majchrzak
Team RC
Certain CR Clownfish and Dottybacks are almost indestructible.
Unfortunately, there's still a lot of work to be done before there is a wide variety of CR fish species available to the hobby.
Considering that the corals we keep are only being fragged and we're not actually breeding them, it's pretty tough for any kind of evolution to occur.
What does happen though is a form of (un?)natural selection. We bring in a whole bunch of corals from the wild and stick them in our tanks. Some don't adapt and immediately die. Others fair ok, but don't do really well, maybe they just don't grow. Then there's the one's that adapt really well to their new environement, so they grow well, and look great.
It seems pretty reasonable that the corals that do well and look great are going to spread faster and wider within the trade, since those will be the one's that get fragged and traded most often.
The coral doesn't change as it's fragged though, it's still the same coral, it's got the same DNA. Over extremely long periods of time there might be some mutation, but it's not like anyone is captively breeding corals, which would lead to whole new DNA strains.
Over time, the hobby will have tried many many different types of wild caught corals, and will identify the one's that do best in our environments. Naturally those will be more widely available in the trade. The whole thing really has nothing to do with evolution.
**EDIT**
With respect to fish, breeding is occuring, so we are combining DNA. Just as with other domestic animals, the fish are being bred for traits that are important to the breeder. One of those is definitely hardiness, since it makes sense for a breeder to want to make sure his fish get to the end user alive and well.
Certainly there are other traits being bred for, like color, beauty, markings. Probably the same sorts of things Dog breeders have bred for over the past several hundred years.
This brings up a very interesting question. Should we be concerned that selective breeding over a long period of time might also accidently propogate negative traits, just as has happened with dog breeding?
If you further that train of thought, there may be some need for concern several years down the road. We could see all sorts of strange problems arise when a species of fish that has been captively bred for several hundred generations gets reintroduced into the wild.
There's not so much of a need for concern with respect to corals as fish though, because we don't breed them, and it's alot more rare for corals to be reintoduced back into the wild.
What does happen though is a form of (un?)natural selection. We bring in a whole bunch of corals from the wild and stick them in our tanks. Some don't adapt and immediately die. Others fair ok, but don't do really well, maybe they just don't grow. Then there's the one's that adapt really well to their new environement, so they grow well, and look great.
It seems pretty reasonable that the corals that do well and look great are going to spread faster and wider within the trade, since those will be the one's that get fragged and traded most often.
The coral doesn't change as it's fragged though, it's still the same coral, it's got the same DNA. Over extremely long periods of time there might be some mutation, but it's not like anyone is captively breeding corals, which would lead to whole new DNA strains.
Over time, the hobby will have tried many many different types of wild caught corals, and will identify the one's that do best in our environments. Naturally those will be more widely available in the trade. The whole thing really has nothing to do with evolution.
**EDIT**
With respect to fish, breeding is occuring, so we are combining DNA. Just as with other domestic animals, the fish are being bred for traits that are important to the breeder. One of those is definitely hardiness, since it makes sense for a breeder to want to make sure his fish get to the end user alive and well.
Certainly there are other traits being bred for, like color, beauty, markings. Probably the same sorts of things Dog breeders have bred for over the past several hundred years.
This brings up a very interesting question. Should we be concerned that selective breeding over a long period of time might also accidently propogate negative traits, just as has happened with dog breeding?
If you further that train of thought, there may be some need for concern several years down the road. We could see all sorts of strange problems arise when a species of fish that has been captively bred for several hundred generations gets reintroduced into the wild.
There's not so much of a need for concern with respect to corals as fish though, because we don't breed them, and it's alot more rare for corals to be reintoduced back into the wild.
Last edited:
Well we really are not dealing with evolution because mainly due to time. Yes there is isolation in our tanks, but what we are mostly dealing with is adaptation. Why do some corals/fish adapt better than others? Some will state otherwise but are we talking about the expression of new genetic traits over time or the ability of a coral to adapt to a new environment and survive? Just because a coral changes color due to the physical environment does not mean it has evolved. Its genotype has remained the same.
There is an interesting point in breeding here. When we work with threatened or endangered freshwater fish we also look at them on the genetic level. If fish have been wiped out in an area and they are going to be reintroduced then the population that is taken from should match the other as close as possible. Fish are taken from the same watershed if possible. Shinners and darters yes sturgeon not always. To make matters even more complicated some research suggests that fish in the same river system are genetically different and isolated. To a field biologist it is one species but to a parts grinder (genetics) they may argue that there are not one but three different species.
The chances of someone checking the genetic diversity of their breeding stock probably won't be that great. I hope I am wrong though.
In the future our reefs might reach a point that CR's will be used to repopulate an area. Has it not already on some scale? Sorry just not up to date on my literature.
There is an interesting point in breeding here. When we work with threatened or endangered freshwater fish we also look at them on the genetic level. If fish have been wiped out in an area and they are going to be reintroduced then the population that is taken from should match the other as close as possible. Fish are taken from the same watershed if possible. Shinners and darters yes sturgeon not always. To make matters even more complicated some research suggests that fish in the same river system are genetically different and isolated. To a field biologist it is one species but to a parts grinder (genetics) they may argue that there are not one but three different species.
The chances of someone checking the genetic diversity of their breeding stock probably won't be that great. I hope I am wrong though.
In the future our reefs might reach a point that CR's will be used to repopulate an area. Has it not already on some scale? Sorry just not up to date on my literature.
with respect to corals, I've never heard of anyone even thinking of breeding them in a captive environment. All we're doing is testing wild corals out, then keeping and spreading the one's that adapt and do well in the environment we provide.
We do try to make our tanks as much like the natural sea as possible, but we honestly don't get as close as we would like to think.
It's possible that some day in the future, we may end up using the corals we have in our tanks to repopulate the oceans reefs with some success. We're basically picking through all the wild corals and finding the one's that are most hardy and adaptable.
With respect to fish and breeding. It's not so much evolution that occurs, it's purposeful breeding for specific traits. It occurs much much faster than evolution, because we purposefully combine specific genome's to get the desired results. As a result, we end up getting the desireable traits quite quickly, however we sometimes get undesirable traits just as quickly. We might be producing the most beautiful and hardy Angelfish ever, but we don't realize that we've also ended up with some kind of nasty trait like extremely weak immune system, or weakness to a specific disease.
This sort of thing has happened with all kinds of domestic animals. Dogs, cats, cattle, sheep, nearly every domestic animal out there. The big difference between fish and most of those other animals is the speed at which generations pass. A dog breeder for example, might be lucky to go through a full generation per year. Depending on the species of fish, you might go through generations much much faster than that.
When actual geneticists (sp?) get involved it gets even crazier, because you don't have to wait for a generation to develop, see if they have the traits you're looking for and then choose the right specimens to breed. Instead, you can just look through the microscope, find the traits you're looking for, or verify that the next generation has what you want, and move forward. We're not even talking about actually tinkering with the DNA at this point, I'm only talking about looking.
Very cool stuff! Who knows what the future may hold, a quick change in the global environment might wipe out the fish/corals that can't adapt quickly enough, it may be the aquariast to the rescue, since we've found/bred the most adaptable and hardy corals and fish.
We do try to make our tanks as much like the natural sea as possible, but we honestly don't get as close as we would like to think.
It's possible that some day in the future, we may end up using the corals we have in our tanks to repopulate the oceans reefs with some success. We're basically picking through all the wild corals and finding the one's that are most hardy and adaptable.
With respect to fish and breeding. It's not so much evolution that occurs, it's purposeful breeding for specific traits. It occurs much much faster than evolution, because we purposefully combine specific genome's to get the desired results. As a result, we end up getting the desireable traits quite quickly, however we sometimes get undesirable traits just as quickly. We might be producing the most beautiful and hardy Angelfish ever, but we don't realize that we've also ended up with some kind of nasty trait like extremely weak immune system, or weakness to a specific disease.
This sort of thing has happened with all kinds of domestic animals. Dogs, cats, cattle, sheep, nearly every domestic animal out there. The big difference between fish and most of those other animals is the speed at which generations pass. A dog breeder for example, might be lucky to go through a full generation per year. Depending on the species of fish, you might go through generations much much faster than that.
When actual geneticists (sp?) get involved it gets even crazier, because you don't have to wait for a generation to develop, see if they have the traits you're looking for and then choose the right specimens to breed. Instead, you can just look through the microscope, find the traits you're looking for, or verify that the next generation has what you want, and move forward. We're not even talking about actually tinkering with the DNA at this point, I'm only talking about looking.
Very cool stuff! Who knows what the future may hold, a quick change in the global environment might wipe out the fish/corals that can't adapt quickly enough, it may be the aquariast to the rescue, since we've found/bred the most adaptable and hardy corals and fish.
steveweast
New member
IMO...it's first all about water quality and second about food. We will never be able to approach nature's quality of water with artificial sea salts and operating a closed system. I still remember what a NOAA biologist once told me....."If the best of our closed systems water was ever found in the wild, it would immediately qualify as an EPA superfund site."
goldmaniac
New member
==>This brings up a very interesting question. Should we be concerned that selective breeding over a long period of time might also accidently propogate negative traits, just as has happened with dog breeding?<==
IMO, we won't need to worry about too many bad traits when captive breeding fish like we've seen with dogs because any medium-level health or appearance traits will be weeded out by mortality rates.
For example: clownfish has a genetic deficiency by way of poor oxygen absorption thru the gills. Let's call this trait Clown Asthma (CA) for argument's sake. CA will affect the breeding individuals and natural selection will make sure that other, healthy, non-CA fish overtake the sick CA fish.
Of course there are conditions that change this, like there's a tank with no competition to breed. But eventually any significant deficiencies will be bred out by mortality rates.
Just My Opinion, i like this discussion.
IMO, we won't need to worry about too many bad traits when captive breeding fish like we've seen with dogs because any medium-level health or appearance traits will be weeded out by mortality rates.
For example: clownfish has a genetic deficiency by way of poor oxygen absorption thru the gills. Let's call this trait Clown Asthma (CA) for argument's sake. CA will affect the breeding individuals and natural selection will make sure that other, healthy, non-CA fish overtake the sick CA fish.
Of course there are conditions that change this, like there's a tank with no competition to breed. But eventually any significant deficiencies will be bred out by mortality rates.
Just My Opinion, i like this discussion.
squiddly
Premium Member
At first, I thought htat was very funny. Now I think it's quite sad, as well as true. Despite the amount of pollution we have dumped into our oceans, they are STILL much cleaner than our closed systems, despite the amount of work, water changes, protein skimmers, UV sterilizers, etc. that we put in there.
