47 replies to this topic

[Den]

Hi Heiko

Firstly I am very envious that you have been collecting some Iranocichla, I have posted some pictures of these beautiful fish on this forum last year and I was just discussing just last week with another PCS member of other cichlid beauties maybe waiting to be discovered from the same or surrounding areas?

Thanks for your post but I am a bit confused because of these comments you make:

I had also explained about the hybrids in short

about 90%plus of all hybrid/breeding species come ONLy from Symphysodon haraldi

This confuses me because to my understanding a hybrid is from 2 different species but you seem to be saying hybrids are made from one species S. haraldi?

Our club has a policy against making hybrids or crossbreeding locality varients - even if the same species, in order to preserve species as per their natural locality forms, would this mean that any or all of man made discus are against our club policy?

Best Regards
Den

[ozarowana]

Hi Den,

Maybe I can shed some light on this. There can be several levels of hybridisation, not just between two species of the same genus. There are also inter-genus, inter-variant and even inter-breed hybrids. I agree with what someone has already said... nature always amazes and it is only humans which try to fit things into boxes.

In the aquarium hobby there are wildcaught fish, pure decendants from wild fish, inter-genus crosses, inter-species crosses, inter-variant crosses and linebred "breeds" which are selected based on mutations in colour etc. The line bred fish are usually labelled domestic strains and the history of these strains are sketchy at best. Domestic strains usually look quite different to their wild ancestors and can usually be easily differentiated. Some domestic aquarium fish include angels, discus, guppys etc. Right or wrong and no matter how much you may hate it domestic strains are here to stay.

Your argument that crossing african variants is similar to what domestic discus are (or other domestic fish) is theoretically true. The difference is that it is easier to distinguish between the domestic discus than it is for the african crosses from their respective wild progenitors. So less likely to unintentionally mess up true breeding lines.

If distinguishing crosses was easy there would not be a problem, we all know this is not the case. I like all fish both domestic and wild fish... just thought I'd give an opinion.

[Cawdor]

Our club has a policy against making hybrids or crossbreeding locality varients

Just to clarify: we do not have a policy against producing hybrids. What you do in your own home is your own business. However, we discourage the production of hybrids as we do not want them to enter the market and potentially ruin a species of fish. That is why we do not allow the selling of hybrids on our site.

[Den]

Here are some quotes from an article written by Jack Wattley in TFH Feb 2003 which relates to the Diskus Championship in Duisburg, Germany which he attended, before anyone correct my spelling thats how Jack spelt it as I am assuming being a German show thats how they spell it

Jack Wattley quotes in his article:

"Many of the discus that caught everyone's attention were highly hybridized fish"

"I found a back "to nature" movement among some breeders where, to an extent, the direction has been to get away from so-called "designer discus" and back to the brown(S. Aequifasciata axelrodi), Blue discus(S. a. Haraldi), and Green Discus(S. a. Aequifasciata)."

..................

With several described species and the vast number of locality varients found in nature to sit back and pretent that breeders are not crossing them to make designer fish is unrealistic, I have no doubt that many(or possibly most) designer discus contraviene our clubs policy. You also may notice that the people who argue that all man made discus are only line bred never seem to offer any evidence or proof?

Cheers
Den

[Heiko Bleher]

Hi guys,

I am very sorry, but somehow I should be informed when questions come up.

Yes as hybrids are only considered crosses between two different, classified, spieces. If someone had the time to read my book where it is clearly mentioned, in extend , this question would not have come up. And naormally offspring of hybrids are, or become, steril, this is way all Heckel Discus x Blue Discus (S. discus x S. haraldi) have never ever been successfully continued - no place on the globe.8 (all in my upcoming volume 2)

Anyhow in short and sorry that I just wrote "S. haraldi", I did it because I though it is clear that only this species (as far as we know) hybridizes with one of the other two.
So:
S. haraldi (Blue/Brown Discus) x S. discus (Hecdkel Discus)
S. harladi(Blue/Brown Discus) x S. aequifasciatus (Green Discus)

I hope that is clear now.

best regards

Heiko
www.aquapress-bleher.com

[Den]

Thanks Heiko

I have read your book Blehers discus Vol 1 but I didnt notice anything that covers hybrids created in the hobby in any detail, as the hybrid issue we are discussing here relates to fish being bred in aquariums where fish species that are normally seperated geographically in nature can be paired and bred to make new man made varieties.

Is your comment "most hybrid offspring are or become sterile" based on proven fact or an assumption? and is this comment made specificly towards discus? I ask this because I am currently working with flowerhorns which are very hybridised fish and these fish can be very fertile and also their offspring can remain fertile after multiple generations of continuous crossing and inbreeding.

So I just wanted to point out that there are hybrid fish that are highly fertile, but I am not sure about wether hybrid discus can be fertile? when I see the many central american and malawis cichlid hybrids which are common in our hobby and many are fertile, it seems to me that its possible that discus which share the same genus could be related closely enough to produce fertile hybrids? however I dont have any direct facts to support this at this time, just a hunch or suspicion based on what I have described above.

Regards
Den

I am preparing to breed pair of Flowerhorns which are line bred hybrids from central American cichlids, these types of hybrids are fertile and can produce fertile offspring. Breeders in Australia are at this point breeding hybrids over multiple generations.

[Heiko Bleher]

Hi Den,
Firstly thankss for reading my book (hopefully all...). The volume one does not talk about hybrids in captivity, that is all in my volume 2. Volume 1 I only pointed out where I was able to find natural hybrids in nature (which we also did DNA on them to proof it). And I mentioned that the natural hybrids in captivity have never resulted in fertility after some time. But again, this is in volume 2 coming up.

That tank bred hybrids of the species of Symphysodon become steril is proven around the world for decades, these are proven facts, again showing in detail in my upcoming book (Maybe you have heard of the the so called Heckel cross? Nio one was able to reproduce it continuously).

The Flowerhorn cichlid is not a hybrid, it is a mutant, like the parrot cichlid, it is also a mutant, and so on. If anyone tells you that those are hybrids, then that is simply wrong. Because I supplied the original species to the Taiwanese breeder how did both mutant forms and saw in details on trips over their what he did with it. (And unfortunately became world-famous and he made a lot of money with those terrible monsters...).

Maybe you can point out another real two species which have been hybridized and are highly fertile, I would like to know.

best regards

Heiko Bleher
www.aquapress-bleher.com

[Den]

Hi Heiko

Yes I read your book entirely (not just looking at the nice pictures) and I look forward to the next addition.

The Flowerhorn cichlid is not a hybrid, it is a mutant, like the parrot cichlid, it is also a mutant, and so on. If anyone tells you that those are hybrids, then that is simply wrong. Because I supplied the original species to the Taiwanese breeder how did both mutant forms and saw in details on trips over their what he did with it.

Heiko this is very interesting to me and if you could direct me to any further information you have on this or some images of those original mutants I would be very greatful. The subject of flowerhorns is very interesting and this what you have said could be a new revelation to the cichlid and flowerhorn hobby, as it is currently believed that all flowerhorns are hybrids.

Can you please confirm if any of these fish resemble your original mutants?

This is a pair of flowerhorns I am in the process of breeding, according to previous owners, both fish have produced offspring(but with other mates).


This below is another variety which a collegue of mine is breeding, the large male is called a "Malau" he is now breeding 2nd generation back to this original father, I can confirm the offspring from this male is fertile.


These below are some of the offspring from the "Malau" father above, the red/gold one is now producing fry, as you can see his fry are highly variable, it is believed he is the product of crossing at least 3 species, could this now be wrong?




Regards
Den

PS: TIM I would appreciate if you could stop censoring my posts as those images you previously deleted would have been usefull to our discussion, Im sure this is now obvious to you, thanks.

[Cawdor]

Your previous post which had the photos removed provided no reason to justify showing the photos despite PCS T&C. Hence they were removed.

In your latest post you ask Heiko to compare appearance of your fish to what Heiko gave away many years ago. It could be argued that Heiko knows what flowerhorns look like - but I'll leave it so you can get your question answered by Heiko

[Den]

Tim had you left my previous image Heiko would have been able to see the fish I was talking about and could have immediately confirmed if they were the same as the mutant fish he is discussing.

There are dozens of flowerhorn varieties and I would like to confirm if Heiko believes these Australian fish I have posted here have any relation to his original mutant fish.

If you read Heikos posts it is possible the fish images you deleted may not even be hybrids! therefore you have no proof they contraviene the T&Cs.


Thanks
Den

[Heiko Bleher]

Hi,

on number 28 on the photo, the fish to the right, is almost identical to the original species formerly Cichlasoma umbriferum, this is where it all comes from and one can see the original always still comes through.

Best regards

Heiko Bleher
www.aquapress-bleher.com

Next time I come for talks I show you how I collected it (the original) about 30 years ago...

[Den]

Hi Heiko

Thanks for the info.

The Cichlasoma umbriferum is possibly the basis of what we call the Zen Zhou flowerhorn variety(the fish you picked out), but these fish also seem to also exhibit features from the species Amphilophus Trimaculatus (such as the dark bloches and purple/red chest) so its usually assumed that the early varieties of flowerhorns(such as the 2 fish in my 1st picture) are a hybrid cross between at least these 2 species.

If you could provide some photos of those original fish it would be a little like the holy grail for the flowerhorn hobby and could help to clear up some confusion in the aquarium hobby by allowing us to determine what might be a group of fish wrongly thought of as hybrids.

Your clarification on the parrot cichlid will also be a shock for many people here as these fish are also labelled as hybrids by cichlid societies.

I will certainly make an effort to attend your next talk, look forward to it, thanks.

Regards
Den

[Heiko Bleher]

Hi,

dear Den I refuse because of not having the time to search and place, nor did I do it for anyone, to place photos on the web. I only do on my world-wide publicatioons. Please remember that i also must have an incme, and that is my work, I do not have another job nor anyone who finances me.

I collected the umfrierium already around 1980 when I went several times to panama and brought it back. It has these the dark bloches and purple/red chest, very typical, at least that population which I found. It was also published in TFH magazine, my discoveries in Panama, I think 1984 - have a look at my website under Articles.

best regards

Heiko
www.aquaqpress-bleher.com

[Terry]

The PCS has always regarded the flowerhorn as a hybrid and until sombody comes up with proof that this is not correct we will not allow them to be promoted or traded on the PCS forums.

Cheers Terry

[Den]

Hi Heiko

No problem, I understand, thanks for the information it will be helpful.

PS; Terry, no promotion being done here, just fish research, thanks.

Regards
Den

[Terry]

There are no problems with this thread Den. Prove us wrong and we will allow "those terrible monsters" on the Forum.

Cheers Terry

[the pulpican man]

Den, have we just basically found one of "the founders" of the Luohan?

Cheers, Tom

[Den]

Den, have we just basically found one of "the founders" of the Luohan?

Cheers, Tom

Yes its possible that we have found the first fish and people which inspired the flowerhorn hobby. I have heard rumours before that the original fish came from Taiwan, its also on wiki, so Heiko's story matches up with that.

http://en.wikipedia....werhorn_cichlid

But Heikos claim that all flowerhorns are not hybrids could be a miscommunication because we know that many of the new flowerhorn varieties today are definitely hybrids so I think Heiko may be referring to the original varieties of flowerhorn - the Luohan and or the Zhen Zhu, therefore its possible that some of the older varieties of flowerhorns are not hybrids, but it may not be possible to determine exactly what variety(s) they are without some assistance from Heiko and the original breeder in Taiwan, or at least the article Heiko is reffering to so we can see the fish he is talking about.

Im trying to find the article Heiko is reffering to but I cant seem to buy any of the articles from his website so if anyone has the 1984 TFH issue with Heiko's story on Panama it would be greatly appreciated!

There is alot more research to do, but this is both an interesting and exciting piece of information.

Cheers
Den

[the pulpican man]

this is both an interesting and exciting piece of information.

Cheers
Den

Yeah! This is very exciting can't wait to see whats found Den!!

Goodluck!!

Tom

[Heiko Bleher]

Yeah! This is very exciting can't wait to see whats found Den!!

Goodluck!!

Tom

Hi,

unfortunately we have a worldwide problem with the Internet being accessable by everyone and anyone, and everyone can write on it what he wants, without being checked. Wikipedia is somewhat better, but still have an enourmous amount of wroing information, simply because they do not have the staff which can know all of it.

The Flowerhorn DOES NOT come from a crossing with the Parrot cichlid. The Parrot Cichlid is a mutant from A. citrinellus from lake Nicaragua, and has nothing to to w. C. umbriferum.

And both' breeing originates from TAIWAN, malaysia was involved, as Thailand, Singapore, China, etc. MUCH later. Also the Louhan name originates in taiwan and the so called four main breeds of flowerhorn are Zhen Zhu, Golden Monkey, Kamfa, and Goldenbase Faders are, as all the others, just breeding forms, as we have it today with so many natural fishes:
ie Carassius auratus (I think everyone knows that there are hundreds of varieties - but all from the same species originally);
ie Symphysodon haraldi (Blue and Brown Discus) - almost every breeding form (Marlboro, Ghost, Snakeskin, etc.) comes from this one species;
ie Cyprinus carpio - everyone knows that all the coloured carps wiorld-wide, come from this original species;
ie Betta splendens - all the hundreds of breeding forms come from B. splendens;
ie Poecilia reticulata - all the hundreds of forms and colours come from this one species, etc.

Just remember this.

best regards

Heiko Bleher
www.aquapress-bleher.com