Wondering what apisto hybrids people have come accross

[Mike Wise]

"There's a whole lot more good than bad that I wouldn't trade for the world which man is directly responsible for in selective breeding- especially in Dogs".

Selective breeding in dogs - and fish - for specific traits are 'strains' of the same species. This is very different from hybrids - the crossing 2 different species. I have seen wolf-dogs and coy-dogs (coyote-dog hybrid) and trust me, neither are better than the original species but behaviorally much worse!

​

 

[dpien]

Just some last links in an attempt to simplify this debate:

the problems caused by hybridisation:

http://www.sydneycichlid.com/cichlid-hybrids.htm

an example of what selective inbreeding can do in a species:

http://www.pbs.org/wnet/nature/epis...d-the-world/selective-breeding-problems/1281/

 

[Aquatopia]

"There's a whole lot more good than bad that I wouldn't trade for the world which man is directly responsible for in selective breeding- especially in Dogs".

Selective breeding in dogs - and fish - for specific traits are 'strains' of the same species. This is very different from hybrids - the crossing 2 different species. I have seen wolf-dogs and coy-dogs (coyote-dog hybrid) and trust me, neither are better than the original species but behaviorally much worse!

​

​

who wouldn't want to just see a "liger" or "Loepon" or "zebroid" though I know it's wrong and I'm totally serious about apisto purity but that Parrot/flowerhorn I have swimming around is one strange and entertaining fish!

 

[hedylogus]

our classifications of the animal kingdom are merely our best attempt at organizing the random nature of nature itself. i find it difficult to believe that some of the fish we classify as distinct species aren't already hybrids of other species.....perhaps by mere evolution, perhaps man-made many millenniums ago. for example, have we scientifically proven that trifasciata is NOT actually a cross between cacatuoides and bitaeniata (just random examples)? serious question......because if we can't, i'm not sure how we can legitimately argue against hybridization. if we can, however, perhaps that settles the debate (at least in my head).

 

[Matt1892]

our classifications of the animal kingdom are merely our best attempt at organizing the random nature of nature itself. i find it difficult to believe that some of the fish we classify as distinct species aren't already hybrids of other species.....perhaps by mere evolution, perhaps man-made many millenniums ago. for example, have we scientifically proven that trifasciata is NOT actually a cross between cacatuoides and bitaeniata (just random examples)? serious question......because if we can't, i'm not sure how we can legitimately argue against hybridization. if we can, however, perhaps that settles the debate (at least in my head).

my only argument against that statement is in a fish tank there are hardly selective pressures to rule out if that hybrid is truly fit for survival or just a genetic dead end. A hybrid could potentially decrease the fitness of the fish or quality of life. Were some of these hybridizations to occurs in the wild they would shortly die off afterwards and if they did survive they were clearly genetically superior to survive changing environments over many many years (possibly trifasciata) ultimately Man made hybrids could just simply be genetic dead ends that occurred in the past but were incapable of survival for behavioral or physiological reasons out in wild environments. I don't know a bunch on Apisto's but I do have a 4 year degree in biology haha. End of the day it may not truly matter but there's always the chance of decreasing quality of life in the hybrids we create.

 

[gerald]

Seems to me that our personal preference for fancy varieties (and hybrids) versus natural wild species (or at least wild-looking domestic strains) is related to our sense of connectedness to nature. Among the fish-keepers I know (mainly eastern USA aquarium societies and a few national/international forums like this one) folks who love to go out and explore and photograph in natural areas are generally people who want their pet fish to look like those in nature. I'm not saying that people who keep pigeon-blood discus, flowerhorns, balloon-rams, and fancy goldfish and guppies don't love nature too, but it seems to me they prefer "tamed nature," like parks and gardens, rather than wilderness. This is obviously a generalization and there are many "shades of gray" in between.

 

[Aquatopia]

Seems to me that our personal preference for fancy varieties (and hybrids) versus natural wild species (or at least wild-looking domestic strains) is related to our sense of connectedness to nature. Among the fish-keepers I know (mainly eastern USA aquarium societies and a few national/international forums like this one) folks who love to go out and explore and photograph in natural areas are generally people who want their pet fish to look like those in nature. I'm not saying that people who keep pigeon-blood discus, flowerhorns, balloon-rams, and fancy goldfish and guppies don't love nature too, but it seems to me they prefer "tamed nature," like parks and gardens, rather than wilderness. This is obviously a generalization and there are many "shades of gray" in between.

I have to disagree about the tame nature association- though it's your observation. Hybrydization only appeals to me for the sense of adventure it offers- The strangeness of it. Though I wholeheartedly appreciate purity and the divinity of nature I am also very interested in the odd combination of charactoristics that hybryds can display- I am also an outdoorsman and am passionate about being in and exploring nature- in all forms, al over the world.
to add to this, here is my photography site http://brianstelter.zenfolio.com/

 

[gerald]

OK I'll agree with that. Some of my most exciting finds in nature are wild hybrids. This happens a lot with minnows that share chub nests. In NC I have found white shiner x bluehead chub, greenhead shiner x rosyside dace, redbelly dace x rosyside dace, and other probable hybrids that I never figured out. Color mutations are always exciting to find too. The ones that survive are still basically functional fish (obviously), and yes the strangeness, adventure and aesthetic appeal is pretty cool (electric blue ram, triple-red cacatu, flowerhorn, steel blue caetei or whatever it is, red discus ...). Severe physical deformity (blood-parrot, balloon ram, fancy goldfish, long-finned bettas) is strange for sure but not at all appealing to me.

 

[__CAV__]

who wouldn't want to just see a "liger"

its been done...
ligers, tigons, etc
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liger
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tiglon

 

[Aquatopia]

Crazy isn't it! It makes me wonder what things people will be talking about in 200 years considering that 200 years ago we were just discovering germs-​

 

[Mike Wise]

Probably, bringing back extinct life (shades of Jurassic Park!). Technically, we are very close to producing mammoths from DNA from frozen specimens and a surrogate elephant mother.