Black C. Aenus .....
- Thread starter nurglespuss
- Start date
jollysue
Fish Connoisseur
Yes I remember. She skulks around. I have stalked her posts a couple of times. But I have not actually run into her.
As I remember they looked like mine. It would not surprise me if she got hers from Frank too.
As I remember they looked like mine. It would not surprise me if she got hers from Frank too.
but more like those from the first lot of pics?
Given that i have provided you with pics of C.venzulans and the ones Frank has posted in the link you provided, does that not show you that the 2 bodies are completely different. If your are decended from the one shown in Franks pic, then you have C.aeneus Black.
Hope that helps.
cheers
Lee
jollysue
Fish Connoisseur
Nice catalog/encyclopedia!
I am still trying to figure out how to use it. I don't see how tp bring up the right link to post for each individual species.
Mine may be the ones under the page titled Corydoras aeneus variety picture by Inchworm. Although I can not see if the fins are red. But the Corydoras "black Venezuela" do look like mine now.
here is the index list of the fish and the link to the pages
I am notoriusly poor at pic IDs. There are some bad pics now of the fry on pg three of the Weitzmani thread
my black fry
I am still trying to figure out how to use it. I don't see how tp bring up the right link to post for each individual species.
Mine may be the ones under the page titled Corydoras aeneus variety picture by Inchworm. Although I can not see if the fins are red. But the Corydoras "black Venezuela" do look like mine now.
here is the index list of the fish and the link to the pages
I am notoriusly poor at pic IDs. There are some bad pics now of the fry on pg three of the Weitzmani thread
my black fry
NEONCORY
Fish Addict
Hey jollysue,
Don't worry about me. You do not need to apologize. After all I should've used the correct terms. I can see your point after I think about it longer and deeply. "Man made" does sounds like some kind of non-alive object like robot or products come to think of it.
And I should be able to laugh at my own mistake/quote lack of vocabulary, miss use of words., etc.
But at least I must admit this is pretty educational and interesting about the Black Aeneus.
It just that some of the Corydoras is almost impossible to correctly identify. Well at least for the regular hobbyists. Unless you are some kind of fish scientist and do some dissect the fish and look under the microscope or something.
And even then, there are so many look alike and all the variation even among the same species. And all the mutation, color morph and line/selective breeding add to the mixture.
Heck, I can't tell the difference between the Juli and Trini. And I have few so called spotted cory in my community tank. I don't know I would ever find the right one for each of them. So no more buy some now and buy more later for me since sometime I won't see the same species or not sure if they are indeed same kind.
So all I can do is buy a big enough group at same time if I try to breed them. Although this may not be a great idea if I consider the gene pool since it would be a narrow one. Of course, wild caught would help about the gene pool.
This make me wonder if we are creating some hybrid without knowing it sometime.
Don't worry about me. You do not need to apologize. After all I should've used the correct terms. I can see your point after I think about it longer and deeply. "Man made" does sounds like some kind of non-alive object like robot or products come to think of it.
And I should be able to laugh at my own mistake/quote lack of vocabulary, miss use of words., etc.
But at least I must admit this is pretty educational and interesting about the Black Aeneus.
It just that some of the Corydoras is almost impossible to correctly identify. Well at least for the regular hobbyists. Unless you are some kind of fish scientist and do some dissect the fish and look under the microscope or something.
And even then, there are so many look alike and all the variation even among the same species. And all the mutation, color morph and line/selective breeding add to the mixture.
Heck, I can't tell the difference between the Juli and Trini. And I have few so called spotted cory in my community tank. I don't know I would ever find the right one for each of them. So no more buy some now and buy more later for me since sometime I won't see the same species or not sure if they are indeed same kind.
So all I can do is buy a big enough group at same time if I try to breed them. Although this may not be a great idea if I consider the gene pool since it would be a narrow one. Of course, wild caught would help about the gene pool.
This make me wonder if we are creating some hybrid without knowing it sometime.
jollysue
Fish Connoisseur
I do not doubt, NEON, that we have aquarium varieties from mixing same species from different areas that would not have ever seen one another in the wild. They aren't true hybrids in my mind. I just bought some wild Weitzmanis from Bryan to mix with the ones from Frank. My melanotaenia are from different wild catches. My pandas are a mix of tank bred from one source and wild caught from Bryan. I have made an effort to get wild caught to mix with the fish I have gotten from breeders like Frank. Or to get fish from 2 sources when they are line bred like my LF.
On the other hand I actually read some stuff about the positive benefits of "tribal" (my word) inbreeding. It may have been on Bryan's site. I posted an excerpt in Chat because we tend to take it for granted that all family inbreeding is bad practice. But no one responded to the post. Chat is a strange forum.
I appreciate your good humor and ability to look and laugh at yourself. We often take ourselves way too seriously.
On the other hand I actually read some stuff about the positive benefits of "tribal" (my word) inbreeding. It may have been on Bryan's site. I posted an excerpt in Chat because we tend to take it for granted that all family inbreeding is bad practice. But no one responded to the post. Chat is a strange forum.
I appreciate your good humor and ability to look and laugh at yourself. We often take ourselves way too seriously.
§tudz
A True Oddball
Inbreeding is in no way a positive thing. Take for instance the Ngorongoro Lions, these lions are trapped with in Nogorongoro Crater, which is I think around 100square miles.
This crator contains about 150 lions, who's ancestors were from the Serengeti Plain. These lions are bigger than those seen on the plains as they do not have to go too far, or exert themselves too much to catch food, but due to massive inbreeding over the years these lions are now in grave danger of being killed off.
The reasons they could all die is that their immune systems are all exactly the same, so if a virus or infection got into the valleys, brought by humans or bird etc, and the lions didnt have immunity to it, they would all be wiped out.
Now on the plains, this virus may be there too, it may wipe out a few lions but there is a chance, which is no existant in the crator, that there are lions who are immune. Therefore these lions survive and breed, thus producing some immune cubs. Survival of the fitest.
Now the point made here is, inbreeding even if no physical abnormailities appear internal genetic flaws will appear in greater number, and then you may end up with a lot of dead fish. You see this point in guppies and many live breeders, their immune systems are more or less no existant due to years and years of inbreeding, guppies were once thought to be hardy fish, but now your water needs to be perfect for the to survive for more than a year, in some cases more than afew days.
If inbreeding was a good thing, why do you think it is illegal, forget immorality, its illegal for the same reasons as I pointed out above.
As for this stupid arguement over 'man-made'
Man-made: not of natural origin; prepared or made artificially;
ok lets look at this, 'not of natural origin' means it didnt occur naturally. Hence line breeding, selective breeding. Selective breeding is geneticially modifing fish in its basic form. 'Prepared or made artificially' again selective bred.
I am sad to say this sue, but you seem to be arguing for agruments sake, you make little to no points at all with the frivolous attitude and comments you have put forward about this statement. You have been getting people backs up, apologising and then making the same comments again. You say yourself, you can ID fish at all, and then you argue that the ID you have been given by one of the real experts on this forum, is wrong? I dont know what you are trying to acheive by this, apart from annoyance.
I have had no issues with you in the past, and I do enjoy the friendly banter we have, but you have really rubbed me the wrong way in this thread and I had to respond.
Anyway, to NEONCORY,
C. trilineatus are completely different to C. julii.
C. julii are much smaller, they have very fine spotted markings, which are a brown colour, where are C. trilineatus have a map work of marking which is black, and they tend to be much larger, (deeper bodied) than C. julli.
I have seen picture of a spotted variety of C. trilineatus, but I think this is either a different speciesmis labeled, or maybe a subspecies.
As for have to disect a fish to identy it, many fish can be identified by the naked eye. You can do this my counting the ray in the dorsal fins, counting the scales along the lateral line, as well as the obvious body shape, and markings. I'm sure there are more ways to ID without a microscope. I doubt you can identify a species by chopping it up though, but i could be wrong
Cheers
This crator contains about 150 lions, who's ancestors were from the Serengeti Plain. These lions are bigger than those seen on the plains as they do not have to go too far, or exert themselves too much to catch food, but due to massive inbreeding over the years these lions are now in grave danger of being killed off.
The reasons they could all die is that their immune systems are all exactly the same, so if a virus or infection got into the valleys, brought by humans or bird etc, and the lions didnt have immunity to it, they would all be wiped out.
Now on the plains, this virus may be there too, it may wipe out a few lions but there is a chance, which is no existant in the crator, that there are lions who are immune. Therefore these lions survive and breed, thus producing some immune cubs. Survival of the fitest.
Now the point made here is, inbreeding even if no physical abnormailities appear internal genetic flaws will appear in greater number, and then you may end up with a lot of dead fish. You see this point in guppies and many live breeders, their immune systems are more or less no existant due to years and years of inbreeding, guppies were once thought to be hardy fish, but now your water needs to be perfect for the to survive for more than a year, in some cases more than afew days.
If inbreeding was a good thing, why do you think it is illegal, forget immorality, its illegal for the same reasons as I pointed out above.
As for this stupid arguement over 'man-made'
Man-made: not of natural origin; prepared or made artificially;
ok lets look at this, 'not of natural origin' means it didnt occur naturally. Hence line breeding, selective breeding. Selective breeding is geneticially modifing fish in its basic form. 'Prepared or made artificially' again selective bred.
I am sad to say this sue, but you seem to be arguing for agruments sake, you make little to no points at all with the frivolous attitude and comments you have put forward about this statement. You have been getting people backs up, apologising and then making the same comments again. You say yourself, you can ID fish at all, and then you argue that the ID you have been given by one of the real experts on this forum, is wrong? I dont know what you are trying to acheive by this, apart from annoyance.
I have had no issues with you in the past, and I do enjoy the friendly banter we have, but you have really rubbed me the wrong way in this thread and I had to respond.
Anyway, to NEONCORY,
C. trilineatus are completely different to C. julii.
C. julii are much smaller, they have very fine spotted markings, which are a brown colour, where are C. trilineatus have a map work of marking which is black, and they tend to be much larger, (deeper bodied) than C. julli.
I have seen picture of a spotted variety of C. trilineatus, but I think this is either a different speciesmis labeled, or maybe a subspecies.
As for have to disect a fish to identy it, many fish can be identified by the naked eye. You can do this my counting the ray in the dorsal fins, counting the scales along the lateral line, as well as the obvious body shape, and markings. I'm sure there are more ways to ID without a microscope. I doubt you can identify a species by chopping it up though, but i could be wrong
Cheers
jollysue
Fish Connoisseur
Studz, I did not know I was arguing with Ian on the ID of my fish since I had not posted a pic of my fish or even seen it when Ian told me about C. aeneus blacks and C. Venezuelas. If you look at Frank's signature you will see that he has listed C. aeneus black and C. Venezuelas. I do not know as yet if the pic ICEEGRL posted is a pic of the parents of the fish Frank sent me, since he has two species listed in his sig. And he identified that pic as C. aeneus black before this discussion.
Nevertheless, Frank is not insisting and does not want to make a big issue about the fish he has that he had been told were from Venezuela. I on the other hand am trying to understand and see the difference.
The discussion is one in which I am learning even if it does annoy you. Too bad, so sad. Others are learning too.
As far as man made goes: my objection stands. Ian and I are no longer debating the issue. Do you deny that the connotations of the poster in the other forum were negative when she used the term? She meant it to be negative. Frankenstein's monster was man made. Do you call a Bulldog man made because it is line bred or selectively bred? You can use whatever term you want, but I will still consider it to be a negative term in this usage.
It is my understanding now that the correct term is "genetically modified." Much more a neutral term to me. For me there is a difference between "artificially manipulated" or modified and "articifially man made" or created.
Still even that is only slightly more appropriate to line breeding or selective breeding, which is what I understand the German black to be.
As far as the inbreeding article goes:
the inbeeding article w/ response by andywg
The laws on incest are by no means universal resulting primarily from European experiences in the royal families, I think. And as andywg might point out, the application of human givens to fish is full of pit falls. The morality of human incest is a result of Judeao-Christian belief, which I do subscribe to.
If I were arguing just to be arguing, I would be arguing about things I didn't care about and not trying to understand anything. In this thread, I pointed out something that to me is an inconsistency, and on the other hand I am trying to understand the differences between fish.
You should look at the pics in LeeF's catologue of juliis and trilis. Ian said in another place where ICEEGRL and I were discussing IDing julii from trili that they are very easy to confuse and have overlapping characteristics. There seems to be a contadiction there.
One problem you may have following the discussions is that they are going on in more than one thread: a comment here, a comment there.
When I appologize, I am usually apologizing for offending someone or for being ignorant, not for asking questions, stating an opinion, or trying to understand. I like to understand things, so I will often continue to ask questions and look into a thing until I am satisfied. My relationship to Ian and NEONCORY is fine as far as I know. If either has their "back up" I am unaware of it.
Nevertheless, Frank is not insisting and does not want to make a big issue about the fish he has that he had been told were from Venezuela. I on the other hand am trying to understand and see the difference.
The discussion is one in which I am learning even if it does annoy you. Too bad, so sad. Others are learning too.
As far as man made goes: my objection stands. Ian and I are no longer debating the issue. Do you deny that the connotations of the poster in the other forum were negative when she used the term? She meant it to be negative. Frankenstein's monster was man made. Do you call a Bulldog man made because it is line bred or selectively bred? You can use whatever term you want, but I will still consider it to be a negative term in this usage.
It is my understanding now that the correct term is "genetically modified." Much more a neutral term to me. For me there is a difference between "artificially manipulated" or modified and "articifially man made" or created.
Still even that is only slightly more appropriate to line breeding or selective breeding, which is what I understand the German black to be.
As far as the inbreeding article goes:
the inbeeding article w/ response by andywg
The laws on incest are by no means universal resulting primarily from European experiences in the royal families, I think. And as andywg might point out, the application of human givens to fish is full of pit falls. The morality of human incest is a result of Judeao-Christian belief, which I do subscribe to.
If I were arguing just to be arguing, I would be arguing about things I didn't care about and not trying to understand anything. In this thread, I pointed out something that to me is an inconsistency, and on the other hand I am trying to understand the differences between fish.
You should look at the pics in LeeF's catologue of juliis and trilis. Ian said in another place where ICEEGRL and I were discussing IDing julii from trili that they are very easy to confuse and have overlapping characteristics. There seems to be a contadiction there.
One problem you may have following the discussions is that they are going on in more than one thread: a comment here, a comment there.
When I appologize, I am usually apologizing for offending someone or for being ignorant, not for asking questions, stating an opinion, or trying to understand. I like to understand things, so I will often continue to ask questions and look into a thing until I am satisfied. My relationship to Ian and NEONCORY is fine as far as I know. If either has their "back up" I am unaware of it.
§tudz
A True Oddball
You cant put your own meaning to a word? a word has a meaning which has been agreed at some point in time, thus ending is a language. If everyone went round making up meanings for words, no-one could communicate as you would have a clue to what they were saying??
The defination for man-made is that man has had a hand in producing it, so no matter if its a live or not its still 'man-made', you are now confusing terms by applying genetically modified, to selective breeding, yes selective breeding is, as I've said, a form of genetically modifing a creature. but it the true sense of the words genetically modifing is manually exchanging and changing different parts of dna.
Why you cant except a true defination and meaning of a word, and have to put a convoluted and ill-educated twist on it, is beyond me.
anyway...
I dont need to look at pictures of Leef's fish, as I've seen them in person...
jollysue
Fish Connoisseur
Well, then, we agree to disagree. I did not know that the term was a scientific term.
Words change meanings. Language changes by usage. The term as used still has negative connotations. That may change. I find the term inacurate.
As I said there is a difference between artificially modified by man and artificially created by man.
But I will stop laughing at people who use the term.
Words change meanings. Language changes by usage. The term as used still has negative connotations. That may change. I find the term inacurate.
As I said there is a difference between artificially modified by man and artificially created by man.
But I will stop laughing at people who use the term.
Polardbear
Fish Addict
Can someone point me to the link to the "universally agreed upon true definitions and meanings of words and terms"? I'm totally confused at this point.
Personally, I think "man-manipulated" or "man-modified" might be more appropriate than "man-made" in the context of this discussion. "Aquarium Strains" is another term that comes to mind.
I breed both Bettas and Fancy Livebearers as well as keeping Corys. Without inbreeding, line breeding and selective breeding none of the fish I work with would exist. But I certainly don't think of them as "man-made". Developed, yes. Modified from their original form, yes. But, I have to agree with Sue, there's a big difference between modified and created. I did not select parts off a shelf or fabricate parts and assemble them.
jollysue
Fish Connoisseur
I am corrected: the fish Frank assumed were Venezuelas blacks were sold as the offspring of fish reputed to be from the Venezuelan strain. Well that's the best I can do with that. And Frank really wants it dropped I think, so given that it is all mute and given NEON's point regarding the difficulty of IDing aquarium bred fish unequivically, I give! lol It will remain muddled and different according to whom you talk to. That I suppose is why Hans tried to clear it up. It will I suppose only become more muddled as time and breeders go by.
My fish are what my fish are. If they are ever bred and passed along by me they will be black Cory fish.
Aquarium strain is good! The other fish mill hormone bred fish would also be easily differentiated.
My fish are what my fish are. If they are ever bred and passed along by me they will be black Cory fish.
Aquarium strain is good! The other fish mill hormone bred fish would also be easily differentiated.
http
/dictionary.reference.com/browse/man%20mademan-made
–adjective 1. produced, formed, or made by humans.
2. produced artificially; not resulting from natural processes.
3. Textiles. a. (of a fiber) manufactured synthetically from a cellulosic or noncellulosic base; produced chemically.
b. (of a fabric or garment) constructed of synthetically made fibers.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[Origin: 1710–20]
man-made adjective
made, happening or formed by man, not by natural means
Example: a man-made lake
man-manipulated (not a recognised term)
man-modified (not a recognised term)
I still dont get why people are trying to invent a meaning when a set description has already been given and why others are trying to invent a term!!
They are man made PERIOD!
jollysue
Fish Connoisseur
Aquarium strain is a fairly common term, though.
Coryman
Fish Crazy
Getting back to the issue of the C. aeneus "Black", if what I quoted from Hans's statement had been digested properly,
"The black ones have orange fins in the first months of their life and so does one type of aeneus from Venezuela. This type lives in the Llanos of Venezuela and also Colombia and is regularly being imported. When they darken their body colouration (stress, light, etc.) they resemble the black youngsters and this might have lead to the name Black aeneus from Venezuela."
It would be realised that the young of the German strain having reddish fins resemble the strain of C. aeneus from Venezuela when they are in fright colour or in fact if they are kept over dark substrate. They also have the same shape as the so-called C. sp venezulanus only larger. For those of you that frequent Bryan's site, unless he has changed his ways and become a gentleman, you will find the article I wrote on C. aeneus " Will the real C. aeneus please stand up" this is one of several (14) articles taken from my site without permission.
Ian
"The black ones have orange fins in the first months of their life and so does one type of aeneus from Venezuela. This type lives in the Llanos of Venezuela and also Colombia and is regularly being imported. When they darken their body colouration (stress, light, etc.) they resemble the black youngsters and this might have lead to the name Black aeneus from Venezuela."
It would be realised that the young of the German strain having reddish fins resemble the strain of C. aeneus from Venezuela when they are in fright colour or in fact if they are kept over dark substrate. They also have the same shape as the so-called C. sp venezulanus only larger. For those of you that frequent Bryan's site, unless he has changed his ways and become a gentleman, you will find the article I wrote on C. aeneus " Will the real C. aeneus please stand up" this is one of several (14) articles taken from my site without permission.
Ian
Similar threads
Most reactions
-
389 -
205 -
193 -
180 -
162 -
158 -
147
-
139 -
128 -
107 -
94
-
88 -
77 -
74 -
73