Moderator: Ken Boorman
Darrell Ullisch wrote:When I first saw a Flowerhorn, my impression was that they were just hormoned Trimacs. I later learned that they were, indeed, hybrids, and the biggest problem from them is the dumping of inferior stock on the market just to make a buck, rather than feeding off or using them for fertilizer. The "lesser" flowerhorns in the LFS for $3-$5 often look identical to Trimacs, and anyone who believes he can always tell the two apart from a photo is fooling himself. I've also seen some very colorful purebred fish, and this was 35 years ago (I have slides, but they are too dark to scan into digital), before flowerhorn was even an idea. A really "good" (sic) Flowerhorn does stand out from trimaculatus, but a really good Trimac can also be mistaken for a medium grade Flowerhorn. So there is not only a risk of contamination by the hybrid, but also a risk of not breeding the best stock of pure bred lines out of fear that they were mislabeled.
Never made a mistake to identify pure Trimac from FH looking at the pictures yet.
Darrell Ullisch wrote:Never made a mistake to identify pure Trimac from FH looking at the pictures yet.
Since the only basis you have is your own identification, how could you possibly verify that statement? At most you can be suspicious of a fish, which is exactly the problem I have with these fish in the first place.
Alex, not meaning to insult you or your fish, but that's not a very well colored trimaculatus. And I have seen juvenile flowerhorns with no spots on the sides. The good ones have markings down the side, very much like Flowerhorns, and the red breast is also variable by individual, probably based on diet. Would you call the fish in this photo trimac or Flowerhorn?
Hudson Ensz wrote:I think it wasnt a hybrid heres the picture, was it a hybrid?
His reply i guess i deserved it. not a hybrid you ignorant fool, its a pure trimac i bought from a friend who bought it from ken if it is a hybrid i want my money back .
lets see if it will show up.
Darrell Ullisch wrote:Alex,
That picture is 35 years old. I took it in 1973 at a friend's house, and the fish is pure Amphilophus trimaculatus, guaranteed.
Thank you for proving my point!
Darrell Ullisch wrote:If you want to hear something funny, my first impression of that fish is that it could be a Flowerhorn!
Alex Odesit wrote:IMO it is a Flowerhorn. Too much iridescent color around ocelatus spots and all over the body.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests