Parent Raising, Imprinting, And Our Duty To The Hobby

Hi!

In the Old World forum, a side discussion has been started on the effects of letting parents raise their fry, and how it effects their fry. I would like to start a discussion on this, but relating to all fish that will raise their own young.

So, have any of you done any experiments on this, have you noticed differences, what are your opinions, and do you think we, as breeders, have a duty to the hobby? I'm just interested to see what peoples opinions are.

I almost always parent raise. With Angelfish, typically what I do is I'll let them try a few times, and if they fail I'll pull one spawn and then let them try a bunch more times. This continues until one parent starts to raise the young. Then the parent that won't raise is removed after the spawn and the parent raiser is left to rear the fry. I've found that after the first generation, generally speaking the F1's of the original pair will parent raise within the first two or three tries. I've also found, in my Angelfish, that the fish are hardier, with less defects (and therefore no culling needed). Which, since I keep (but don't breed) my culls is good for me. The spawn yields are generally smaller, but more then compensated for by the stronger, healthier fish.

I believe that it is our duty to the hobby to provide the highest quality fish. As for the questions of "wild" behavior, all the fish I've breed have been domestic Angels or Discus, so its a fairly moot point with them. For the most part, they are so far removed from the wild that the behaviors have been lost. However, I believe that we should protect the wild behaviors. I've noticed behavior in my wild Discus that I have not, to date, seen in my captives.

Lets see what people think....

Amanda.

90% of my fish I let the parents do the work.... just because I'm lazy

There are a few fish that I don't let the parents do the work. I do belive in imprinting but not the way most do. I think the imprintinig is done way before most of us think. For mouth brooders I think it happens when they are just wigglers... meaning they are just forming the tail and eyes etc.

I have no proof... it's just my theory.

I have a group of Ilangi... they were not stripped from the mothers and were raised up in the wild group. They still don't breed that often and eat fry. Just an example.

In my experiences with Apistogramma in the past, I have removed the spawning cave with eggs attached to be reared artificially if the parents proved to be unsuccessful rearing the fry during their free-swimming period. The resulting brood proved not to have difficulty in forming pairs and reproducing. I also used this method when the parents were very rare and expensive.

In the case of Crencicichla, I let the parents raise the fry and find it prudent to remove the parents or brood due to overzealous parents once in a while. Once the parents begin to fight over the fry, I have learned to interfer with the process by separating the pair and removing the fry. Instinct playes a key role here. With pikes, interrupting the cycle of love usually ends in death of the fry or one of the parents. The fry grow up with no ill affects from being moved.

With the discus, I let the parents raise the fry unless the parents fight over them.

Bristlenose or corydoras reveal no ill affects from being artificially hatched or reared in my experience.

Francine

I have to agree with Amada, I'm a big believer in letting the parents rear their fry.
Unlike Sarah, I have had the exact opposite experience with 4 out of 5 of my breeding groups of Tropheus. I have been allowing the fry to be raised in the same tank as the breeding groups (caused more about being lazy) and when I do finally remove them, they have been basicly "bullet proof", no loses for me or anyone who has bought them. And as I stated in another thread when the fry have been bred the have also held to term. I feel that parent raised fish are healtier and better breeders.
Thank,
Daniel

I always loved watching parents rear the fry - but then again, it's almost always been discus that I've had the opportunity to really spend the time watching.
I rarely had problems with discus eating fry unless the pair was really inexperienced. Although once, I left the fry in too long with the parents and the father just sat in a corner and ate everything that swam near him. I think he'd had enough of his paternal slime duties - he was getting pretty beat up by that point.
I know I had a timid pair that only ate fry when I would come & press my nose to the glass to oogle. Finally got them out of it by oogling them when they didn't have fry, and feeding them while I did it. Guess they didn't feel as threatened then.

We have some fry now that I love watching. Wish I knew what kind of fish they are! LOL
SO - I prefer letting the parents rear the fry if possible, but if they can't get it right, then it's time to step in and adopt them. Face it, just as some people don't make good parents, some fish don't either! If the fish is rare or endangered, I'd probably pull the fry sooner to ensure that there were back-up pairs onhand.
JMO

DC

There are so many variables that affect fish breeding behavior as to defy cataloging. Amanda and I agree on the benefits of parent raising but sometimes I get up in the morning to discover that the parents cared more for their stomachs than my left pocket.

Just two days ago the male of a new pair ate a perfectly good two week old spawn of Discus in less then time then I took to write this post.

Part of the problem might be that we tend to treat our breeders as JUST that; isolate - produce - bulk up & do it again. How would you feel if someone bigger (way bigger) put you in a Motel 6 room with a perfect stranger and expected production?

A LFS that sells lots of my Angelfish has a spawn of wigglers (from my fish) in a 75g tank (with other fish) and the parents are doing it all right. Time will tell if it works out but I'll bet it well. Give a fish a place to call "home" and they might surprise you.

ramblings of a madman,

Paul.

Paul, I hate it when that happens! Have you tried adding a dither fish or two? Sometimes that helps spark protective behavior in the parents & helps them to think of the fry as something to protect instead of thinking of them as a free sushi lunch.

DC

Paul, I hate it when that happens! Have you tried adding a dither fish or two? Sometimes that helps spark protective behavior in the parents & helps them to think of the fry as something to protect instead of thinking of them as a free sushi lunch.

DC[/b]

Click to expand...

Lesson from Peter at Gwynsbrook (& from my Angel breeding experiences): Know your pairs; they are all different and behavior evolves over time. This incident was my fault - the signs were there - I just ignored them; caught up in this thing we call "life".

As far as dither fish: as much as I can ably promote a "natural environment" for fish raising I am decidedly old school w Discus - bare bottom, a heater, a sponge filter (until they go free swimming), and water.

A few of my wilds seem to be pairing up so I'll adjust things a bit to get that Amazon Feeling.

When I have enough of my existing genetics copied I'll go "radical". (See post in Parent Raising - responsibility to the hobby).

Just because we don't know how doesn't mean that it can't, or shouldn't be done.

Thanks,....more ramblings from a madman.......

Paul.

Paul, I hate it when that happens! Have you tried adding a dither fish or two? Sometimes that helps spark protective behavior in the parents & helps them to think of the fry as something to protect instead of thinking of them as a free sushi lunch.

DC[/b]

Click to expand...

Perhaps we should remove the white paper from half of the side of the tank with the frisky Angelfish in it.... This pair has an Angelfish tank sitting right next to it. I wonder if that would be enough to be a "dither" fish? I know the fish WILL react to eachother through glass panes. I got to watch a wild Geophagus try to eat baby Angelfish (month or so old) through two panes of glass and 6 inches of air!!! (laterally). And my Convict pair is in a 10 next to a Bolivian Ram pair. Before I put a piece of cardboard between the tanks, they kept trying to kill each other!

Has anyone tried this alternative for dither fish before?

Amanda.

Having tanks side by side seems to work like having dither fish with my Apistogrammas.

Paul, I hate it when that happens! Have you tried adding a dither fish or two? Sometimes that helps spark protective behavior in the parents & helps them to think of the fry as something to protect instead of thinking of them as a free sushi lunch.

DC[/b]

Click to expand...

Perhaps we should remove the white paper from half of the side of the tank with the frisky Angelfish in it.... This pair has an Angelfish tank sitting right next to it. I wonder if that would be enough to be a "dither" fish? I know the fish WILL react to eachother through glass panes. I got to watch a wild Geophagus try to eat baby Angelfish (month or so old) through two panes of glass and 6 inches of air!!! (laterally). And my Convict pair is in a 10 next to a Bolivian Ram pair. Before I put a piece of cardboard between the tanks, they kept trying to kill each other!

Has anyone tried this alternative for dither fish before?

Amanda.
[/b]

Click to expand...

Amanda,
Totally off topic, but aggressive Bolivian Rams, how cool! When I was breeding them the only time they show any aggression (and that term is a little strong) is when they were guarding fry.
Thanks,
Daniel

Hmmmm, I'm not sure what others normally do, but I've used a few neon or cardinal tetra as dither fish with discus several times. It may also work with just removing the tank siding between tanks, but then the parents always seemed to spend all their time snapping at the neighbors instead of focusing on the fry. Could just be that my fish were non-conformists though. Wonder where they would get that from? :confused0007:

DC

Yeah, I wonder! :angel2:

Amanda,
Totally off topic, but aggressive Bolivian Rams, how cool! When I was breeding them the only time they show any aggression (and that term is a little strong) is when they were guarding fry.
Thanks,
Daniel[/b]

Click to expand...

Well, both pairs were gaurding fry, and the Convicts were MUCH more aggressive then the Bolivians.....
:woman2: So really, my Bolivians aren't all that cool..... :sad0017:

Amanda.

I have to say, my biggest fascination with cichlids is the breeding and parental behaviors. Also watching territorial behaviors in shell dwellers can be exciting. When I have all my tanks up and running, perhaps I'll look for ways to pay myself back with fry sales, etc. That not being currently the case I enjoy watching the fry care. As mentioned in a different post, I want to test imprinting theories myself on different species of fish. I expect this will be difficult at there are numerous variables to deal with. How do you know the wild fish you're getting are really "wild"? It's an old argument, but still valid. They could have been raised lake side or river side. Or, a breeder or importer could just be lying to you. This will make getting the initial fish for my experiments difficult. As my experiments progress, I'll do my best to keep everyone posted. The experiments should last over a couple years, but in the end, I hope to know whether imprinting does exist or not in at least a couple different species.
Tim

As someone who has done a bit of research, but not fish related research, I'd say that you can't prove a negative.... So while you can (maybe) prove imprinting, its not possible to prove that there ISN'T imprinting due to the vast number of variables. And if you wanted a suggestion (which may be redundant) I'd start from that angle. Just an idea, you might want to start with a known parent raising pair and run all of your experiments on them first, in the water parameters that they are parent raising in. And then try to get wild pairs. If the imprinting is strong, you should see a difference with the parent raising pair. Worst comes to worst, you have to get the wilds anyway, and the parent raising domestics will have already given you some data, and worked many of the bugs out of your program, and give an interesting point to compare and contrast. And most important of all, during an experiment you often get more ideas. Which can sometimes be the difference between success and failure.

I look forward to hearing more about it!

Amanda.

PS: Be sure to document EVERYTHING, no matter how small. You never know what the "key" factor will be. Water parameters, oxygen, depth of water, tank decorations, .... you never know.

I look forward to seeing the data but have to question whether you could reach a meaningful conclusion. That is, how can you tell whether leaving the fry to be raised by their parents is the variable that affects the result you are trying to document? Because the discussion in the other thread started with stripping mouthbrooders, I'll use them as an example. Mike just had his wild furcifer spawn. So, for these fish, they should have had the benefit of any imprinting from their parents from the lake. As Tim points out, we never truly know whether a fish is wild unless we catch it ourselves. Mike's fish failed to display one of the signature breeding behaviors of cyathopharynx, digging spawning pits. They also did not display marked breeding dress, but I find that less significant. Was the failure to dig a spawning pit a breakdown of parental imprinting? Or something else? How could you tell?

Secondly, Mike's fish swallowed the spawn. Was this a breakdown of parental imprinting by swallowing fertilized eggs? Or was this a result of parental imprinting working exactly as planned because maybe the eggs were not fertilized and the female swallowed a bad batch? There is no way to tell unless you were able to examine the eggs. You could tell with substrate/surface/cave spawners where you could see the eggs.

I'm not suggesting the survey should not be done. Just the opposite. I think the results would be great to look at. I'm just not sure you could make provable conclusions. The results would be more of a reasoned opinion. Not that there's anything wrong with that. Indeed, they would be very useful, but opinions nonetheless.

Good point. And I also think that you would need to gather the information on SEVERAL breeding groups instead of just a couple. If you have a wild pair that swallows, you can't assume that they ALL will swallow under whatever conditions they're breeding in. That's the only way your experiments and survey would really tell a story, IMO.

DC

I look forward to seeing the data but have to question whether you could reach a meaningful conclusion. That is, how can you tell whether leaving the fry to be raised by their parents is the variable that affects the result you are trying to document? Because the discussion in the other thread started with stripping mouthbrooders, I'll use them as an example. Mike just had his wild furcifer spawn. So, for these fish, they should have had the benefit of any imprinting from their parents from the lake. As Tim points out, we never truly know whether a fish is wild unless we catch it ourselves. Mike's fish failed to display one of the signature breeding behaviors of cyathopharynx, digging spawning pits. They also did not display marked breeding dress, but I find that less significant. Was the failure to dig a spawning pit a breakdown of parental imprinting? Or something else? How could you tell?

Secondly, Mike's fish swallowed the spawn. Was this a breakdown of parental imprinting by swallowing fertilized eggs? Or was this a result of parental imprinting working exactly as planned because maybe the eggs were not fertilized and the female swallowed a bad batch? There is no way to tell unless you were able to examine the eggs. You could tell with substrate/surface/cave spawners where you could see the eggs.

I'm not suggesting the survey should not be done. Just the opposite. I think the results would be great to look at. I'm just not sure you could make provable conclusions. The results would be more of a reasoned opinion. Not that there's anything wrong with that. Indeed, they would be very useful, but opinions nonetheless.[/b]

Click to expand...

I didn't see Mike's thread, but did he watch the fish spawn, or just see the female holding? It wouldn't be the first time a female laid eggs and picked them up without a male and then ate them as they proved to be infertile. Also, if the male did actually spawn with her, it wouldn't be too strange not to build a spawning pit. These fish in the wild are competing with other males and constantly trying to breed with any female nearby. The spawning pit provides some security while spawning and is designed to attract the female. This isn't to say if a female swam up to a male and was ready to spawn he'd say "Hold on, let me dig a pit."

The only real meaningful conclusion I'm looking to reach is for my own personal peace of mind. There are certain mouthbrooding species that spit fry and then have nothing to do with them ever again, in the wild. What I'm looking to see is, if species that care for the fry in the wild, still care for the fry in the tank if they were raised in an egg tumbler. My procedure would be pretty basic and simple. I'll most likely start with some mouth brooders that are easy to care for. Possibly a couple WC pairs of Nimbochromis or Dimidochromis. (They're always the ones sucking the fry back in for protection in all the pictures.)

After the parents have proven to me that they can breed successfully without the mother eating the young, I'll let her raise the fry to about an inch in length. (I'll split the fry into a couple groups, each with their own 75 gallon tank.) The next time the same mother is holding, I'll strip her and tumble the eggs. Again splitting the fry in an attempt to get a breeding group. When I'm done, I should have four tanks with breeding groups. Two of which were raised, the other two stripped and tumbled. Once I have females holding from each group, I'll separate them, and let them carry to term and observe if they eat their fry or not. I'll do this with numerous females from each of the groups and then look at the percentages of failures and successes. This will tell me if there's any real benefit to letting a female carry to term. I'll also look at the number of fry raised when comparing stripping to letting the mother hold.

I don't expect to rock the scientific world with my little experiment, only to see for myself, which method I desire to use while going forward. :048:

I will document everyting as I go, maintain identical conditions in the groups. (Possibly using some of the acryllic tanks I have with dividers built in.) And I'll make my findings available to anyone interested. Since this is still a ways off, I have plenty of time to set up my procedures and get input.

Thanks for the input so far.
Tim

That sounds like a great plan Tim. Don't you have a house to build or something? Very ambitious tank space required. I like it! Especially with large fish like you are considering. Something else you might try would be mbuna like saulosi that breed at a very young age and require less tank space. But I see the attraction of using a fish that exhibits strong parenting skills in the wild.