Whats your take on hybrids???

Discussion about cichlid conservation and captive bred programs

Moderator: Ken Boorman

Would you ever keep/create/buy a hybrid???

I am strongly against any form of hybrids, different species or genuses bred together.
49
92%
I dont care. as long as it is pretty i would take pretty much anything!
2
4%
i see no problem with hybrids they are actually healthy for the hobby.
2
4%
 
Total votes: 53

User avatar
Alex Odesit
Posts: 1072
Joined: Wed Feb 01, 2006 7:24 pm
Location: Garden State,USA. Odessa Ukraine

Re: Whats your take on hybrids???

Post by Alex Odesit » Sun Aug 24, 2008 7:27 am

Could not agree more but for me with so many wild caughts at my finger tips it doesnt directly ruin it for me thankfully.
Yesterday i got flamed for thinking this guys fish was a flowerhorn he says it was a wildcaught trimac. is this possible?
Hard to believe he caught flower horn in your neighborhood. :lol: But never say never.
I met people on couple occasions who bought FH from reputable sources under wild caught Trimac name. I even know one person from here .. Cichlidae.com.
Ensz, only picture would help to see either you or the guy correct on Trimac under the question.
Alex

dogofwar
Posts: 422
Joined: Thu Jan 18, 2007 10:25 pm

Re: Whats your take on hybrids???

Post by dogofwar » Sun Aug 24, 2008 2:49 pm

James, do you also immediately leave/not support stores that carry fancy goldfish...like the ones with bubble eyes, compressed bodies or missing fins?

Flowerhorns are PURPOSELY bred to have outrageous heads, aggression, etc. You might not like them, but why is it wrong for someone else to?

I agree that poor quality flowerhorns get sold as "pure" trimacs...either on purpose, on accident, or out of ignorance. Babies of all kinds of "pure" cichlids get passed off as something that they aren't. It happens every day with peacocks, haps, and lots of others.

Does that mean that it is wrong to produce or sell any fish that might possibly be mistaken for another fish?

I recently saw a thread of a guy catching jewel cichlids (Hemichromis) in South Florida...where they're obviously not native. Should we declare jewel cichlids a scourge because someone dumped some into the wild and the fish reproduced?

Alex Calder
Posts: 249
Joined: Wed Sep 26, 2007 6:06 am
Location: California
Contact:

Flowerhorn/Trimac ID

Post by Alex Calder » Mon Aug 25, 2008 6:24 am

I figure no matter my own opinion everyone is free to there's.

To the best of my knowledge I have no hybrids, then again I only have J. dickfeldi.
When I purchase for my next tank I will be aiming for a reputable source as I have
interest in "pure" fish, aka a fish consisting of one species.

If you want to keep a hybrid by all means do so, but please do not introduce your hybrid to the hobby.
I have sent many of my Julies into the hobby because I am certain they are dickfeldi.
If I could believe that everyone out there was as responsible as myself then hybrids would not be as
much of an issue for me.

I will be a little more honest. I find it sad that so many people in this world have so little appreciation for the wonders nature creates. So belligerent are we as a species.

User avatar
Lisachromis
Administrator
Posts: 2849
Joined: Tue Nov 25, 2003 9:11 pm
Location: Ontario, Canada
Contact:

Flowerhorn/Trimac ID

Post by Lisachromis » Mon Aug 25, 2008 10:27 am

I'm going to sort out the trimac/flowerhorn ID stuff to it's own thread. Please keep the thread going. It's very interesting.

User avatar
Marko Lenac
Posts: 581
Joined: Sun Jun 12, 2005 5:15 pm
Location: Rijeka - Croatia - Europe
Contact:

Re: Flowerhorn/Trimac ID

Post by Marko Lenac » Mon Aug 25, 2008 11:19 am

Alex Calder wrote:I will be a little more honest. I find it sad that so many people in this world have so little appreciation for the wonders nature creates. So belligerent are we as a species.
this is what is the real truth to me. that is why I don't like hybrids and the keeping of them...
Image

dogofwar
Posts: 422
Joined: Thu Jan 18, 2007 10:25 pm

Re: Whats your take on hybrids???

Post by dogofwar » Mon Aug 25, 2008 12:13 pm

Since the beginning of fishkeeping (or even animal keeping, for that matter), man has sought to "improve" on nature.

Koi, or nishikigoi - Japanese for "brocaded" carp - were first described in writing from a Chinese book written during the Western Chin Dynasty, 265-316 A.D. At that time they were described as white, red, black and blue. Wild type koi are basically brown or tan. Here's a great website describing the crosses and other breeding projects for koi over the ages: http://www.koiid.com/cd/pg1.htm

Flowerhorns continue in this tradition.

It basically comes down to taste. You either like them or you don't. But there's no reason that liking one or the other must be mutually exclusive. Or that stores that stock them should be forced to make the same decision.

As an example, I like to listen to classical music. Other people like to listen to rock music. I'm not a fan of it. Should I boycott a record store if they stock classical music AND rock music? In a perfect world, there would be a music store in my area that stocks ONLY classical music (and the classical music that I happen to like). It would be tough for a store like that to stay in business, though. But I'd be pissed if I bought a CD that was labeled Bach...and it turned out to be Green Day :)

Bas Pels
Posts: 2238
Joined: Fri Mar 03, 2006 9:17 am
Location: Nijmegen - the Netherlands

Re: Whats your take on hybrids???

Post by Bas Pels » Mon Aug 25, 2008 1:33 pm

dogofwar wrote: man has sought to "improve" on nature.
ant that attitude is precisely what discusts me

User avatar
Darrell Ullisch
Posts: 367
Joined: Thu Aug 25, 2005 10:54 pm
Location: SW Michigan

Re: Whats your take on hybrids???

Post by Darrell Ullisch » Mon Aug 25, 2008 1:40 pm

Well, there is one major flaw in your argument. Koi are still Cyprinus carpio, one species, many variants, but still the same species. Flowerhorns are not one species, they are hybrids of different species. The only thing they have in common is the reason that people keep them: appearance. The term "hybrid" can technically be used both for interspecies crosses, or the crossing of variants within a species, and this has caused confusion in these discussions. So "mutts" are hybrids of different dog variants, but still one species. Flowerhorns are hybrids of multiple species, and not the same thing in any way, shape, or form.

And on the "new species from natural hybrids" argument, science has only recently accepted and proven that ANY natural species are the result of hybridization. Almost all species are more often the result of population isolation and genetic drift. Hybrids that occur due to man's interference should not really be considered "natural".

Bloody Parrots might be one species, but with all the misinformation out there, no one knows. Or they might be a variant of a cross that's been in the hobby for a long time already, the Devil/Midas fish, though the hybridization isn't necessarily what caused the deformity.
There are two kinds of error: blind credulity and piecemeal criticism. Sound skepticism is the necessary condition for good discernment; but piecemeal criticism is an error. - Egyptian proverb

dogofwar
Posts: 422
Joined: Thu Jan 18, 2007 10:25 pm

Re: Whats your take on hybrids???

Post by dogofwar » Mon Aug 25, 2008 3:52 pm

My argument isn't that fancy koi are the result of more than one "species", although the development of colored carp pre-dates Linnaeus and the scientific concept of "species", it is that man has been working to "improve" nature for hundreds if not thousands of years. Flowerhorns are no different.

Fancy livebearers and bettas are the result of more than one species...as well as different than what's found in the wild. It is possible to enjoy both montezuma swordtails (wild type) as well as the high fin man-made ones (i.e. hybrids that are very different from wild type ones).

Bas, do you find dogs that are different than wolves or dingos are "disgusting"? My friend's golden retriever is a great dog...yet is different than a wild type animal (thanks to "improvements" by man). I know that a dog isn't technically a hybrid...but a golden retriever (or a poodle) is no more "the same" as a wild dog/dingo than a flowerhorn is to a "pure" trimac...

User avatar
James Shingler
Posts: 320
Joined: Sat May 20, 2006 4:45 pm
Location: UK Essex/Herts
Contact:

Re: Whats your take on hybrids???

Post by James Shingler » Mon Aug 25, 2008 7:51 pm

dogofwar wrote:James, do you also immediately leave/not support stores that carry fancy goldfish...like the ones with bubble eyes, compressed bodies or missing fins?
Yes if I could. 8) But those are not hybrids are they? Just line breeding gone mad?
dogofwar wrote:Flowerhorns are PURPOSELY bred to have outrageous heads, aggression, etc. You might not like them, but why is it wrong for someone else to?
Maybe its my ignorance its just they look so malformed its hard to think of them living a healthy and long life.

dogofwar wrote:I agree that poor quality flowerhorns get sold as "pure" trimacs...either on purpose, on accident, or out of ignorance. Babies of all kinds of "pure" cichlids get passed off as something that they aren't. It happens every day with peacocks, haps, and lots of others.

Does that mean that it is wrong to produce or sell any fish that might possibly be mistaken for another fish?
Yep I think so but only to a slight extent. Fault is shared between the shop and the breeder. I do not think shops should be selling things which are labeled incorrectly but it is pretty much the norm and hard to do anything about.

You could blame the customers. No market for this stuff then they would stop selling em. :lol:
dogofwar wrote:I recently saw a thread of a guy catching jewel cichlids (Hemichromis) in South Florida...where they're obviously not native. Should we declare jewel cichlids a scourge because someone dumped some into the wild and the fish reproduced?
This is an interesting topic not really part of the thread but perhaps a reason for banning cichlid keeping in areas were they can survive and breed outdoors. Glad I live in the UK were the problem of released fish destroying the local habitats is not down to cichlids.

These are only my views (subject to change as I talk to folk)
(not trying to tell anyone else how they should think.)
I guess I need to get out more and talk to some hybrid breeders, find out their views too.

Bas Pels
Posts: 2238
Joined: Fri Mar 03, 2006 9:17 am
Location: Nijmegen - the Netherlands

Re: Whats your take on hybrids???

Post by Bas Pels » Tue Aug 26, 2008 2:04 am

I dislike dogs anyway

But, as Darrell pointed out before, they are NOT hybrids, in fact, dogs originate from wolfs which choosed themselves to join humans. Only later humans took over

dogofwar
Posts: 422
Joined: Thu Jan 18, 2007 10:25 pm

Re: Whats your take on hybrids???

Post by dogofwar » Tue Aug 26, 2008 8:21 am

Several folks seem to place the distinction between fish that are "acceptable"/good for the hobby and fish that are "unacceptable" / bad for the hobby based on whether the fish are technically a hybrid.

The reason given is that hybrids are different from what's found in nature.

While hybrids like flowerhorns are clearly different from what's found in nature, line bred fish (EBJDs, super red peacocks), crosses of fish that are the same species but from different geographic areas, color sports (orange severums), etc. are ALSO different from what's found in nature...and not TECHNICALLY hybrids.

But people who have a problem with flowerhorns - by and large - don't have a problem with these fish.

If flowerhorns were actually the result of selective breeding of ONLY trimacs (albeit many generations of inbreeding of the most colorful, largest headed, most aggressive, compressed bodied trimacs: i.e. fish that are very different than a trimac that you would find in nature), would people declare them acceptable and good for the hobby?

Bas Pels
Posts: 2238
Joined: Fri Mar 03, 2006 9:17 am
Location: Nijmegen - the Netherlands

Re: Whats your take on hybrids???

Post by Bas Pels » Tue Aug 26, 2008 9:57 am

I keep populations of fish seperated, and most certainly noone will ever be able to find me guilty of producing abnormalities such as too colorfull decendends of a beautifull fish, or breeding albinos or so

I try to keep what can be found in nature. no more, no less

Dan Woodland
CichlidRoom Expert
Posts: 3050
Joined: Wed Mar 01, 2006 9:49 am

Re: Whats your take on hybrids???

Post by Dan Woodland » Tue Aug 26, 2008 10:43 am

Bas Pels wrote:I keep populations of fish seperated, and most certainly noone will ever be able to find me guilty of producing abnormalities such as too colorfull decendends of a beautifull fish, or breeding albinos or so

I try to keep what can be found in nature. no more, no less
As do I. Well said Bas.

User avatar
James Shingler
Posts: 320
Joined: Sat May 20, 2006 4:45 pm
Location: UK Essex/Herts
Contact:

Re: Whats your take on hybrids???

Post by James Shingler » Tue Aug 26, 2008 2:54 pm

My interest is in wild type cichlids too. I have no space for EBJDs (whatever their origin, though I find the research on this interesting)or line bred or hybrids. Telling me that there is no difference between them (I am not sure this argument holds water anyway) because they are all so far from wild type is not news to me.
I used to rant and rave about the evils of both but have kind of mellowed.
Yet line bred cichlids seem to be acceptable to some who also find hybrids not acceptable.
Finding someone who held that view (and the reasons why) would be interesting.
Last edited by James Shingler on Tue Aug 26, 2008 3:37 pm, edited 1 time in total.

dogofwar
Posts: 422
Joined: Thu Jan 18, 2007 10:25 pm

Re: Whats your take on hybrids???

Post by dogofwar » Tue Aug 26, 2008 3:29 pm

"Finding someone who held that view (and the reasons why) would be interesting."

The ACA allows line bred fish and fancy angels and discus in their shows. But not hybrids.

User avatar
RayQ
Posts: 159
Joined: Sun Jun 29, 2008 11:09 pm
Location: Winnipeg, Canada

Re: Whats your take on hybrids???

Post by RayQ » Tue Aug 26, 2008 3:57 pm

What about "jellybean" convicts and "balloon" Rams? Where do they fit? I don't believe that they are a hybrid, just mutants. . . would they be allowed at an ACA show? Are they as bad as an intentional hybrid?

For the record. . . I am one for keeping things natural - fancy live bearers and such are no more than feeders in my mind.

Ray
Ya . . . I'm from Winnipeg, so what? ;)

dogofwar
Posts: 422
Joined: Thu Jan 18, 2007 10:25 pm

Re: Whats your take on hybrids???

Post by dogofwar » Tue Aug 26, 2008 4:03 pm

Not sure about those.

I don't see how a fish line bred to have a compressed body is any more or less "natural" (or "un-natural") than a red version of a naturally green fish...or a long-finned version of a fish.

User avatar
James Shingler
Posts: 320
Joined: Sat May 20, 2006 4:45 pm
Location: UK Essex/Herts
Contact:

Re: Whats your take on hybrids???

Post by James Shingler » Tue Aug 26, 2008 4:33 pm

And here is me thinking that both fancy angels and discus are of hybrid origins. :lol:
Prob more a workable compromise rather than a logical position I guess.

BCA seems not to have any joint policy (we all try and respect each others views (I guess) no matter how strange some of them are.)
OB peacocks for e.g. in the auctions though "hybrids" frowned upon. Policy on any of these things something of a can of worms?

Jellybeens and balloon Rams? Sorry never looked into it. Not seen em much here in the UK :) (yet) :(

User avatar
Grummie2
Posts: 158
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 2004 2:59 pm
Location: England

Re: Whats your take on hybrids???

Post by Grummie2 » Tue Aug 26, 2008 5:10 pm

I have no problem with line bred fish, many very prominent aquarists have made their livelihood by producing beautiful strains of aquarium favourites. I wonder how many stores would be in existence if it wasn't for fancy guppies/swords/angels/discus/barbs etc, etc, etc...Lets not forget what supports this hobby that we love so much....
Graham

Post Reply

Return to “Cichlid Conservation”