rawdeakka
Members
What are some Pro's and Con's in line breeding.
Line Breeding: Pro's vs. Con's
- Thread starter rawdeakka
- Start date
CSnyder00
Bearded Wonder
Depends on the individual fish and the breed of fish. Not only can good qualities be passed on, but so can bad qualities (i.e. deformities). If the original fish is awesome and is bred with the right mates, it can be positive. But careful attention should be paid to the offspring. When you limit family trees, you limit the good and the bad from outside lines.
rawdeakka
Members
In your opinion what would be the best candidate for breeding? And how do you choose females since they don't really shoe any physically stunning characteristics.
CSnyder00
Bearded Wonder
If you are talking Africans, then I look for perfect body shape and size in females. Males I obviously go with the dominant male with the best colors and best/ideal body shape. If the females are colored, then that plays a factor as well.
It's similar for SA cichlids and most others, but sometimes certain things are bred for like large head humps or #of spots, size of color bands and the like.
It's similar for SA cichlids and most others, but sometimes certain things are bred for like large head humps or #of spots, size of color bands and the like.
dogofwar
CCA Members
The goal of line breeding is to develop fish that are different (better?) than fish in nature...that appeal to the aesthetic desires of fishkeepers vs. Mother Nature. Line breeding is honestly inevitable in captive breeding. We don't allow fish to procreate with the natural selection that would occur in nature. At some level - intentionally or otherwise - we pick (vs. Mother Nature).
There is a very fine line, especially with cichlids, between line breeding an hybridization.
Matt
There is a very fine line, especially with cichlids, between line breeding an hybridization.
Matt
Carolineep
CCA Members
I look for the most robust, healthy looking females to bring into breeding stock.Also no cross hatching (denoting Hybrid) (let me say i have nothing against Hybrids In fact one of my favorite fish right now is a hybrid but he has such a great personality..
However, my plan is to breed C.A.R.E.S.fish so no hybrids for me.
I also plan is to buy females from various reputable breeders to bring new genetics into my colonies.
However, my plan is to breed C.A.R.E.S.fish so no hybrids for me.
I also plan is to buy females from various reputable breeders to bring new genetics into my colonies.
CSnyder00
Bearded Wonder
Both of these folks make great points. At some point in their lifetime, fish were bred back to their relatives. Even bringing in someone elses females probably has some relation to the fish you keep. Only in the case of a wild caught fish do you have a chance to add "new" genetics. Even then, it is likely that you have a fish descended from one set of parents a long time ago. It all depends on what you want to breed and what you like to keep.
dogofwar
CCA Members
There's actually no guarantee that wild fish aren't related either...in fact it's quite likely that wild fish are related in some cases. That doesn't mean that "related" fish are an issue.
There's widespread (mis) belief that wild fish are optimum in terms of color, "strength" and other characteristics that hobbyists desire and that such hobbyist-desired characteristics get "diluted" with each generation in captivity (F1 fish are less colorful than wild ones, F2 fish are less colorful than F1 ones, etc.).
This is, of course, nonsense. Some wild fish hold the characteristics desired by hobbyists. Most hold the characteristics desired by Mother Nature. And they might not be the same. Nature doesn't generally favor the largest, most gaudily-colored or long-finned. Or albino. Or veil-finned.
The point of Line breeding is to inbreed fish toward desired characteristics. Pick the reddest fish and breed it with the next generation of reddest fish, for example.
Can undesired characteristics emerge with line breeding? Sure. But fish inbreeding is different than, for example, human or mammal inbreeding. Especially with mouthbrooders / harem spawners there is generally enough genetic diversity in a group of fish to maintain lines without deformities or other issues for many generations. A couple of our speakers have covered this quite clearly: whether wild fish or F2000, just don't continue to breed fish that produce deformed or otherwise undesired offspring.
Unless the goal of the line breeding is deformed offspring
Where do you think lyre-tails and long fins and short bodied fish and "White Knights" and all the rest come from? Same with "koi" angelfish, bright orange discus, long finned bettas, koi that aren't brown carp, etc. Some people cull those fry. Others work with them to develop new "lines."
The issue of genetic diversity and "new blood" is also misunderstood. People seek to get "new blood" from different sources. But that fish that come from different hobbyists doesn't mean that they come from fish with different ancestors. It's not as if people are regularly importing fish from Lake Victoria or Honduras or Madagascar (or lots of places for that matter). Nor (for the reasons above) is it as important as some think. In the case of line breeding, adding new, "unrelated" fish is counterproductive.
Introducing "new fish" also introduces risk. It assumes that the fish involved are what someone says that they are...which isn't always the case. How well do people maintain provenance back to the wild of fish in the hobby? To ensure that fish are from consistent collection locations? Different imports? Generally not so much.
In the case of CARES fish, the goal should be to maintain as authentic as possible fish to wild populations. Easier said than done...but an important sub-goal of the CARES program should be just keeping these fish species available in the hobby. Also not an easy goal in many cases.
To me at least, line breeding and hybridization are closely related. The goal of both is to create something different than nature. The tools are slightly different. For example, while mixing fish from two different geographic populations of Aulanocara (peacocks) to get fish with desired characteristics from both is technically "line breeding." Two scientists could (and have) split them into two different species. Then it would be hybridization. Are fancy discus line bred or hybrids? Depends on whose version of taxonomy you support. Many we just don't know their actual origins (again, fancy discus). But, again, to me it really doesn't matter. The goal isn't to maintain something authentic to the wild.
The matter of morals and ethics of line bred fish and hybrids, etc. is not often enough rationally discussed. "Fancy" fish have been the foundation of the hobby since like 200 AD (colored carp) and represent some of the most popular fish in the hobby and industry. I just can't make moral bright lines between fancy line bred fish and fancy hybrids. Both can have deformities that harm the fish's health. And both can be tattooed or dyed (which is a whole different issue). There's room in the hobby for people who enjoy developing lines of "new" fish (not easy to do well!) and for people who maintain "authentic" fish. But I digress...
Matt
There's widespread (mis) belief that wild fish are optimum in terms of color, "strength" and other characteristics that hobbyists desire and that such hobbyist-desired characteristics get "diluted" with each generation in captivity (F1 fish are less colorful than wild ones, F2 fish are less colorful than F1 ones, etc.).
This is, of course, nonsense. Some wild fish hold the characteristics desired by hobbyists. Most hold the characteristics desired by Mother Nature. And they might not be the same. Nature doesn't generally favor the largest, most gaudily-colored or long-finned. Or albino. Or veil-finned.
The point of Line breeding is to inbreed fish toward desired characteristics. Pick the reddest fish and breed it with the next generation of reddest fish, for example.
Can undesired characteristics emerge with line breeding? Sure. But fish inbreeding is different than, for example, human or mammal inbreeding. Especially with mouthbrooders / harem spawners there is generally enough genetic diversity in a group of fish to maintain lines without deformities or other issues for many generations. A couple of our speakers have covered this quite clearly: whether wild fish or F2000, just don't continue to breed fish that produce deformed or otherwise undesired offspring.
Unless the goal of the line breeding is deformed offspring
Where do you think lyre-tails and long fins and short bodied fish and "White Knights" and all the rest come from? Same with "koi" angelfish, bright orange discus, long finned bettas, koi that aren't brown carp, etc. Some people cull those fry. Others work with them to develop new "lines."The issue of genetic diversity and "new blood" is also misunderstood. People seek to get "new blood" from different sources. But that fish that come from different hobbyists doesn't mean that they come from fish with different ancestors. It's not as if people are regularly importing fish from Lake Victoria or Honduras or Madagascar (or lots of places for that matter). Nor (for the reasons above) is it as important as some think. In the case of line breeding, adding new, "unrelated" fish is counterproductive.
Introducing "new fish" also introduces risk. It assumes that the fish involved are what someone says that they are...which isn't always the case. How well do people maintain provenance back to the wild of fish in the hobby? To ensure that fish are from consistent collection locations? Different imports? Generally not so much.
In the case of CARES fish, the goal should be to maintain as authentic as possible fish to wild populations. Easier said than done...but an important sub-goal of the CARES program should be just keeping these fish species available in the hobby. Also not an easy goal in many cases.
To me at least, line breeding and hybridization are closely related. The goal of both is to create something different than nature. The tools are slightly different. For example, while mixing fish from two different geographic populations of Aulanocara (peacocks) to get fish with desired characteristics from both is technically "line breeding." Two scientists could (and have) split them into two different species. Then it would be hybridization. Are fancy discus line bred or hybrids? Depends on whose version of taxonomy you support. Many we just don't know their actual origins (again, fancy discus). But, again, to me it really doesn't matter. The goal isn't to maintain something authentic to the wild.
The matter of morals and ethics of line bred fish and hybrids, etc. is not often enough rationally discussed. "Fancy" fish have been the foundation of the hobby since like 200 AD (colored carp) and represent some of the most popular fish in the hobby and industry. I just can't make moral bright lines between fancy line bred fish and fancy hybrids. Both can have deformities that harm the fish's health. And both can be tattooed or dyed (which is a whole different issue). There's room in the hobby for people who enjoy developing lines of "new" fish (not easy to do well!) and for people who maintain "authentic" fish. But I digress...
Matt
chriscoli
Administrator
Well said, Matt.
CSnyder00
Bearded Wonder
What I said, but WAY more detailed. Thanks Matt!
dogofwar
CCA Members
Carolineep
CCA Members
Very well said. Thank you.
dogofwar
CCA Members
Nobody's gonna tell me I'm full of it?
Carolineep
CCA Members
Your full of well thought out and pithy statements.
BLAM
BLAM
rawdeakka
Members
Interesting information. Thanks for the input.
rawdeakka
Members
This is a juvenile German Red Roter Kaiser produced from a group I have. The male and females in the group are unrelated, but watching him grow and start to show those dominant characteristics, I've been thinking of keeping him and adding him to my group.
