SPS and "Genetics". What does it mean to you?

[RynosReef]

Hi all. Now and then I hear the phrase "this coral has good genetics". It seems whenever I talk to some of the top sps keepers, that the "genetics" of a coral are mentioned. I've taken this to mean the corals lineage. Or that the previous owner was a highly respected reef keeper with proven success. And so this coral (if i should buy it) would also carry on that success and name, if of course I don't @$#% up. I'm sure these corals were originally worth a pretty penny. What do you think?

Not to be cheesy, but this line actually fits for once.. Would a rose by any other name smell as sweet?? What about a sps frag? Which is more important? What something is "genetically" (lineage-wise / who it came from)? Or what something is called?? (I don't mean it's species name, like a. horrida, or a. tenuis. I mean an ORA Red Planet from ORA, or an ORA Red Planet from a local reefer per se)

For example: An Garf Bonsai,Tri-color Valida, or other named and branded corals can be bought from scores of places. Does it really make a difference where you buy it from? Does its lineage matter?



*On a side note* I mean this with respect and don't mean to offend anyone:
But please.. please don't turn this thread into a debate about whether or not corals should be marketed with silly names and LE status to raise prices and take advantage of reefers, in the first place. Is it true that vendors do that? Yep. But sometimes it's worth twice the price to know exactly what a corals supposed to look like. And sometimes it's not. Some of my most beautiful corals don't have a fancy name and some do. Some cost more than others. But in the end it's a personal decision to buy what you want. Please.. let's leave $$ and economics out of this one.



So, what do you think?

 

[dvanacker]

I think you are reading into it too much.....its the same statement you can use for any living creature. Its the same meaning when you see a pretty lady.....and the statement is factual......it's good genetics.

So....it really means, well what it means. You are just saying the coral has good genetics. ie. very pretty, possible hardy, good aquarium specimen etc.

 

[franklypre]

I would laugh at somebody telling me that, I have wild acros that are nicer than some of the LE frags I've paid twice as much for. And with the wild ones it is colonies vs. LE frags. I don't like the name game myself but it has become a part of the hobby.

 

[dvanacker]

I would laugh at somebody telling me that, I have wild acros that are nicer than some of the LE frags I've paid twice as much for. And with the wild ones it is colonies vs. LE frags. I don't like the name game myself but it has become a part of the hobby.

What the heck does genetics.....a valid scientific term have to do with anything other than genetics. Why are you bringing up the term LE? Even the OP stated not to turn this into a LE debate...which it doesnt have anything to do with that.

oh and ya right.

 

[fcmatt]

I think the sheer majority of people who speak of "coral genetics" use the term in a vague
way to represent a coral's positive traits without really understanding what is genetically
valuable about it. They tend to mean: the coral can tolerate a wide array of tank environments,
the coral has an eye appealing coloration, the coral has an eye appealing structure, the coral
tends to not bleach under very strong lighting, the coral tends to tolerate lower levels of
lighting without turning brown, etc...

While a scientist will think more in terms of: (taken from this web page: http://www.reefresilience.org/Toolkit_Coral/C3b1_Genetic.html).
Which is a much greater technical look at things with a scientific angle of truly attempting to
understand which genetic traits are actually being passed along, positive or negative, and this
includes aspects most hobbyists probably never consider. I wll freely admit I do not think this
way when discussing what I think is "good genetics" when buying coral for my tank. But if I do
enough reading about it then I might start considering an acropora's skin thickness (it looks thick)
could be a very good sign that it can withstand bleaching and other events in my tank. I will
buy it for that genetic trait! But for now I tend to think like the above. Very generically, not
technically like a scientist.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Genetic connectivity between and within coral reefs is an important component of resilience. Larval exchange between reefs promotes genetic diversity, which is critical in terms of resilience against any disturbance, particularly mass bleaching events. The spread of selectively advantageous genetic traits, such as bleaching resistance, is a potential consequence of larval coral exchange and migration1. Within species, susceptibility to bleaching and mortality can differ, even under the same environmental conditions. These differences between individuals suggest that genetic variation within coral populations can create resilience to increased thermal stress.

Several biological characteristics of corals may contribute to their resilience::
1. Fluorescent tissue proteins

Fluorescent proteins are common in many corals, providing a system for regulating light. These proteins protect the coral from broad-spectrum solar radiation by filtering out damaging UVA rays (blue light portion of spectrum), as well as by reflecting visible and infrared light, thereby reducing light stress on the corals. Concentrations of the pigments vary among species (pocilloporids and acroporids have relatively low densities of pigments, while poritids, faviids and other slow-growing massive corals have high densities). The protective capacity of these pigments provides a kind of internal defense mechanism that may have important implications for long-term survival of corals exposed to thermal stress. Corals containing fluorescent capacity have been found to bleach significantly less than non-fluorescent colonies of the same species.

Furthermore, a recent study2 identified an additional role of fluorescent pigments as supplemental antioxidants which may work to prevent oxidative stress in coral tissue and further supports the hypothesis that fluorescent pigments serve multiple functions. The diversity, temporal, and spatial variation in coral fluorescent pigments distribution, abundance, in combination with differential antioxidant potentials, suggest that fluorescent pigment roles may differ between coral species or with changing environmental conditions.
2. Mycosporine-like amino acids (MAAs)

MAAs absorb UV and dissipate UV energy as heat without forming toxic intermediates. While there is still a great deal of uncertainty in how MAAs are acquired, it is known that corals have a major influence on the complement and distribution of MAAs, thereby moderating the amount of UV that reaches the cells of the zooxanthellae and influencing the amount of damage sustained by the zooxanthellae3.
3. Heat-shock proteins

Many different heat-shock proteins are found in coral tissues and their activity influences the bleaching response. Heat-shock proteins help maintain protein structure and cell function, following stress3.
4. Colony integration

The extent of colony integration influences the degree to which the whole colony responds to thermal stress. Characteristics of colony integration include polyp dimorphism, intra-tentacular budding and complex colony morphology4. Species with a high colony integration (e.g., milleporids, pocilloporids and acroporids) are predicted to have a greater whole-colony response to increased temperatures than species with a low colony integration (e.g., poritids, faviids, and other massive corals). This pattern of mortality has been observed between Acropora and Porites. Acropora, with high colony integration,displayed high rates of whole-colony mortality and little partial mortality, while Porites, with low colony integration, had patches of bleached areas with little whole-colony mortality.
5. Change in diet in response to bleaching stress

Much of the energy needed for coral metabolism is derived from zooxanthellae, however many corals are also effective carnivores. Corals that increase carnivory survive experimental bleaching better than corals that cannot3. Changes in the transfer of photosynthetic products from the zooxanthellae to the coral in response to stress are currently being researched.
6. Tissue thickness

The thickness of coral tissues may contribute to the level of susceptibility to bleaching. Thin tissue is found in coral species that are more susceptible to bleaching. Thicker tissue may help shade zooxanthellae from intense light, thereby increasing the resilience of the coral. Corals from genera such as Porites that have thicker tissues and appear more robust to thermal stress than corals from genera such as Acropora which have thinner tissues5.



Return to Top


See Full Citations

1 Van Oppen and Gates 2006

2 Palmer et al. 2009

3 Baird et al. 2009

4 Baird and Marshall 2002

5 Hoegh-Guldberg et al. 1999
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

[defchild84]

, I can't really give factual scientific answers. However, I feel strongly that even when comparing one certain acropora species, I can definitely see the differences when juxtaposed to 'other' colonies of the same species. As an example, take pink milleporas. Are all pink milleporas going to have the same pink shade of colors? hardiness? tolerance of any other elements ....? I can't speak for the latter two, but I have definitely witnessed dull shades of pink millepora, and bright pink. Of course, this could be a moot point to some, given the infinite variables, but given that I have two pink milleporas at the same height, and location, I can see the difference. The first pink mille purchased looks quite dull in comparison to the later purchased.... like I said, no scientific answers, just an observation, and my opinion....

 

[c0mp|ex]

Genetics means exactly what you think it means.. Genetics. Lineage.
It applies to corals just like it applies to everything else in this world - acquired traits that can be use to predict the phenotype of offspring.

Take two different families. One with two tall parents and one with two short parents. Genetics will predict/estimate the height of progeny. In the context of reefing, it gives you an idea of what a frag will look like after its grown out and colonizes. It gives you an idea of what traits will be expressed and to what extent.

Take a look at Copps Bonsai and Garf Bonsai. Same species but different linages.
<a href="https://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=garf%20bonsai&gs_sm=e&gs_upl=1643l2107l0l2402l4l3l0l0l0l0l62l169l3l3l0&um=1&ie=UTF-8&tbm=isch&source=og&sa=N&tab=wi&ei=S7IaT4zYEYfi2QW7m4jmCw&biw=1154&bih=632&sei=XbIaT5PNIKjy2QX45dCfCw">Garf Bonsai</a>
<a href="https://www.google.com/search?q=copps%20bonsai&um=1&ie=UTF-8&hl=en&tbm=isch&source=og&sa=N&tab=wi&ei=Y7IaT_mTJois2gXt-cz6Cw&biw=1154&bih=632&sei=ZLIaT52oNIfW2AWGkM33Cw">Copps Bonsai</a>
To most people these will look exactly the same but they aren't (at least not to me). Look at the branching pattern. Copps seems to prefer growing in neat colonies all straight up while it appears the Garf has a more erratic branching pattern. This isn't something i've witnessed first hand but something i just observed from a simple search. I don't know if that is really true or not but it seems like it from the pictures.

ORA has named their lineage ORA. No matter who you get an ORA Red Planet from, if you trace the frags back it will lead to the original colony of Red Planet from ORA (unless someone has a mille that has the same coloration as an ORA Red Planet and decides to sell it and tries to pass it off as ORA. They are reputable because you know what you are getting and the lineage is proven.

The genetics refers to many different traits not just color and branching. For instance, wild corals have a proven lower rate of survival once fragged and moved to captivity. We can assume that the wild frag that lives has acquired a trait somewhere down the road that increased it's chances of survival in captivity. That's where people come in with the name aqua-cultured - To show that frequent fragging of the coral continues to produce healthy specimens. It's also known that wild corals may lose their color in captivity, while a certain lineage may not so it becomes propagated more frequently until a name is slapped on and it's "proven".

Another simple genetics model is Acropora millepora and Acropora validia.
They don't all look the same yet they are the same species. This means they differ in genetics traits like we do in the color of our skin. So.. the ultimate question is.. Would you rather know the relative genetics/family tree of your coral is or are you fine with wild frags for cheap? Take a look at <a href="http://mrcoral.com/go/index.php/10-section.html">mrcoral.com</a>. Amazing looking frags for $10 each!!! Wild cut frags with amazing colors but why isn't he more popular? My guess is that they don't hold they're color very well once moved to a tank or have problems surviving. But, theres always a chance a coral defy all odds and pull through and keep it's amazing colors. And when that happens, you have something amazing and can throw your own name on it.

Every aqua-cultured coral was once wild.

 

[philbo32]

Environmental factors have a lot more to do with how a coral grows than genetics, with more flow corals will be more branched and stumpier when comparing the same species under low flow conditions. The coral maybe more adapted to living under captive conditions than wild collected, but this does not mean that it will be anymore colourful than wild specimens. From a genetics point of view, there is no genetic selection involved because most corals in the hobby, if not wild collected are clones of their parents. None as far as I'm aware are selectively bred, all are fragged from their wild parents.

 

[franklypre]

I would like to see 10 different tanks with 5 acros of good lineage, and the same 10 tanks with frags of my aquacultured wild acro frags. I would bet nobody could tell the difference in genetics. Unless you are willing to pull DNA how do even suggest good genetics. I can aquaculture a coral for 10 generations only to add it to a tank that perfectly healthy but located under too much or not enough light and it will not do as well. Kinda like if you get a pure bread pick of the litter show quality dog and feed it old roy, don't expect much out of it. Nature over nurture doesn't bid well in my experience with coral.

 

[acroholicreefer]

For me, it is important to know how well the coral grows in captivity. I'm figuring this out the hard way at the moment. I also believe that you can call a certain coral by the species name, but every individual acro is a little bit different. If that means that I have to call it by a trade name, than it isn't too big of a deal to me.

Does it get out of hand sometimes? Yes.

 

[dvanacker]

Just like the pink millepora example I can say I have owned a total of 4 blue acropora millepora species over the years. All the same species....under the same conditions or very similar. Some proved to be faster growers, more colourful, hardier etc. To date I have not found a blue millepora that will beat my palmers in all of these categories there fore I would say it has the best genetics of all the blue milleporas I have owned. It's that simple.

And I will add that a wild or maricultured coral can have good genetics too.....it just has to show what I consider favorable traits. Demonstrating that it has good "genetics".

The only way LE or lineage plays a role is in that just like parents pass on genetics to their children, mother corals have the same genetics as their cuttings (frags).

 

[c0mp|ex]

Environmental factors have a lot more to do with how a coral grows than genetics, with more flow corals will be more branched and stumpier when comparing the same species under low flow conditions.

But what you don't understand is that ability to adapt to varying flow conditions by varying the branching is a genetic trait in itself, perhaps one that every coral has, or maybe not. Changing environmental factors causes evolution, wether or not people want to believe that or not. Changing conditions create an environmental stress on an individual and those that best adapt to those changing conditions have a higher chance of survival. Those changing conditions could mean a slow evolution or mutation that creates an physical advantage over others.

Take the peppered moth for example. They use to be a light mottled color to camouflage with lichens on trees. When the industrial revolution came, the lichens died and the trunks turned black with soot. The moths were now clearly visible and vulnerable to predation from birds. What happened? Well since being visible to birds is clearly an undesirable trait, those died off while the moths slowly evolved over 200 years to become darker. Imagine you're in a family of moths and you're dark and your brother is white. He's gonna get eaten while you're right next to him cause you can't be seen and now you can pass on your GENE.

The coral maybe more adapted to living under captive conditions than wild collected, but this does not mean that it will be anymore colourful than wild specimens.

But if a wild specimen doesn't survive in captivity, then it has no chance of passing along its genes (frags). Of course there are many variables for this but it could be argued that aqua-cultured has a larger window-of-error.

From a genetics point of view, there is no genetic selection involved because most corals in the hobby, if not wild collected are clones of their parents. None as far as I'm aware are selectively bred, all are fragged from their wild parents.

There's no genetic selection involved? Psh. Would you want a frag an ugly coral? Genetic selection starts at the vary instant we collect a specimen from the wild. We artificially select the specimens we want, the ones that look good. Even under asexual reproduction, genetic variability can occur. Although it's much less prominent than sexual reproduction, orgasms continue to adapt to their environment to better suit their survival. This example is clearly shown by the fact that companies like ORA carry amazing looking frags. Those frags evolved traits desirable to their survival, the desirability to reefers, whichever that may be, which is why they continue to propagate in our hobby.

 

[RynosReef]

Although it's much less prominent than sexual reproduction, orgasms continue to adapt to their environment to better suit their survival.

Please see the humor in this c0mp|ex, but there's a million dollar word in that sentence that was mispelled You must have had "something" on your mind :spin1:

But all kidding aside, I really see your point. Where a coral originally came from: (on a rock in the ocean, a rock in some guys tank) MAY or MAY not make a difference. But the fact that a coral has been propagated says something about it's hardiness and thus it's ability to adapt.

And I see what you mean too dvanacker. I like your example about a girl. And that even within the propagated coral/named coral group, differences can be seen from different named corals with the same species name. A Palmers, ORA Blue Milli, Thunderstorm Milli, ect are all blue, but are they all as hardy? Does it's lineage matter??

Because lol, don't think I'm being a kiss @$$ but honestly, if I was able to break US import laws and pick up a piece of dvanacker's palmers milli, I might just call it that! Dvanacker's Palmer's Milli Same with a lot of guys here on RC. A frag from a successful reefer or TOTM winner just seems special. Because it's lineage or previous owner had success with that coral.

That might be thinking waaay too much into it, but I think some get caught up in that. And I just wonder if there is some truth to it. We reefkeepers are always overthinking

Franklypre_ I don't disagree with you per se. It's just not the subject of this thread.. I think it would be interesting to try an experiment like you mentioned. I'm on the fence myself! But I understand that for some, paying more to know what a coral should look like, helps them know when they aren't doing something right with their tank. Wild corals can be a crutch or excuse (i've done it when a wild colony didn't color up), and for some brings in the environmental impact of importing wild corals in the first place. Just too broad of a topic for one thread..

defchild84/acroholicreefer- That's what I'm seeing too and the reason for my question. Makes you wonder.

philbo32- I agree environmental factors play a huge part, but let's assume all environmental factors are the same. Same good reef tank. Different versions of the same coral.

fcmatt- Very interesting read. Just goes to show how many factors effect the success of a coral. Most ppl don't think of that as you mentioned.