Are Dragon Blood Peacock Hybrids?
#1
Posted 08 May 2007 - 04:59 PM
Cheers
#2
Posted 08 May 2007 - 05:07 PM
this topic has come up on here several times before
#3
Posted 08 May 2007 - 05:11 PM
#4
Posted 09 May 2007 - 12:30 AM
#5
Posted 09 May 2007 - 07:08 AM
#6
Posted 09 May 2007 - 09:56 AM
#7
Posted 09 May 2007 - 10:21 AM
#8
Posted 09 May 2007 - 11:53 AM
I have heard a lot of opinions on if they are a hybrid or line bred mutation etc. but I haven't seen or heard any rationale for these opinions. I guess what I'm asking is how does the PCS, LFS or the hobbyist come to their conclusions or opinions without knowing this (to me) crucial information?
Does anybody know this information or are there other methods of determining if something is a hybrid other than knowing what was used to breed them?
Personally, I don't like the look of these fish but I don't like albino's either and they kind of remind me of this. I'm just curious to know the answers to the above questions so if anybody could enlighten me, it would be much appreciated.
#9
Posted 09 May 2007 - 12:00 PM
#10
Posted 09 May 2007 - 12:01 PM
#11
Posted 09 May 2007 - 12:55 PM
The german red fish are a good example of line breeding, where they actually used one species and selected the reddest to breed. However, with dragon bloods, it probably starte with albino of one type, then someone crossed it with a normal fish of another species/variant and kept mixing and matching to get something 'right'. Dragon bloods arent called Aulonocara stuartgranti "usisya" albino, because their a mishmash of various species, variants and albinos.
http://www.cichlid-f...no_peacocks.php
#12
Posted 09 May 2007 - 02:48 PM
Just to try and clear up a contradiction that has come up in this thread though:
Is the offspring derived from crossing varients considered to be hybridisation?
and
to those stating that they do not think DB"S are a hybrid - what are you basing this opinion on? that the breeders only used one species but different varients to create them? that the genus Aulonocara should in fact only have one species because they are all so similar? or any other reason.
And just a bit of a disclaimer type thing before this turns into a b*tchfest
I'm not criticising anyone for their opinion or what they have in there tanks. I am just curious to know where they are coming from. So no need to put up a post going:
"who cares as long as you are happy with the fish",
"this is old news, why do you people keep bringing this up?" (because I don't have an answer to my question yet)
or
" 8O "" :evil: ' and " :roll: "
#13
Posted 09 May 2007 - 03:33 PM
#14
Posted 09 May 2007 - 04:21 PM
I think people are confusing genus with species.
There are roughly 20ish species in the Aulonocara genus
so as an example
Aulonocara baenschi x Aulonocara baenschi from unrelated bloodlines = 'normal' breeding
Aulonocara baenschi x Aulonocara baenschi from same family (brother / sister etc) = inbreeding
Aulonocara baenschi x Aulonocara baenschi from extended family (half brother / half sister etc) = line breeding
Aulonocara baenschi x Aulonocara gertrudae = hybrid
Good little reference
http://en.wikipedia....wiki/Inbreeding
From http://dictionary.re...m/browse/hybrid
hybrid - the offspring of two animals or plants of different breeds, varieties, species, or genera
Hope that helps clear things up a bit, or muddy the water even more....
Dave
#15
Posted 09 May 2007 - 04:40 PM
#16
Posted 09 May 2007 - 05:39 PM
I thought right or wrong they were colour morphs.
And in the wild dont the same species but different colour breed? Isnt that how we get all these different colour variations and different species of fish, arnt alot of different species all hybrids originaly, wasnt that how we got electric yellows and please dont start me on frontosa?
If that happens in the wild and different colours of the same species breed and we get colour morphs should we treat them as hybrids ?
As for inter-breeding dont you all do it !!!
As for breeding hybrids in tanks im not touching that subject with a 40 ft pole.
If you really think about it since us humans got onto cichlids haven't we slowly screwed them up like every thing else ? eg the planet even if our intentions are good ?
Cause you guys say its ok to breed brothers and sisters then sell them, others breed their brothers and sisters, and then sell them to the next person, then he breeds his mixed bag with them, arnt we slowly killing off the genetic stock of the fish ? and making money off it ? When you think about it we are all buying and selling mainly to each other.
I maybe wrong im not saying im right its just my thoughts and in imo. Its just my 2 cents and is probably not worth 2 cents.
Now ill sit back and wait or the abuse even though i dont want any i just wanted to express my opinion which i thought im allowed to do ?
#17
Posted 09 May 2007 - 07:03 PM
I've spent the last 30 minutes searching the net trying to find a yes or no answer, but all I can find is arguing.
If you do a search for the line bred "Eureka Red" you find alot more information on its origins.
Daniel
#18
Posted 09 May 2007 - 07:22 PM
Can you prove 100 % It is a hybrid ???
#19
Posted 09 May 2007 - 07:34 PM
#20
Posted 09 May 2007 - 07:43 PM
Daniel said imo they are hybrids unlees you can prove other wise.
Well im my opion they arnt hybrids unless you can prove 100 % other wise
So ill ask again can Daniel again can he prove they are 100 % hybrids ?
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users