Breeding Across The Genera

[dwarfgourami]

According to Baensch (vol. 2, p. 752), it is said that an English breeder was able to crossbreed these two and got fertile (!) and salmon-pink offspring. Sounds fishy to me. He doesn't say which species the females came from; if they were platies I suppose they may not have been as virgin as he thought... Actually, that might go for quintanas as well, being poeciliid presumably they can also store sperm?
Or else the quintana (a member of the poeciliid family, which makes up its own genus) ought to count as part of the xiphophorus genus.
What do you reckon? can fish breed across genera if they belong to the same family? Or were these platies having him on? Or was the fish breeder having Baensch on?

 

[Synirr]

Cross-genera hybridization is regarded as impossible, but in fact, is not. For example, there is an account of a hybrid calf produced by an Asian elephant (Elephas Maximus) mother and African elephant (Loxodonta africana) father.
There are no real well-defined lines between species and indeed genera, taxonomic classification is more arbitrary than most people realise. This is why cross-genera hybridization is VERY RARELY possible. With the two fish species in question both being capable of storing sperm, however, I wouldn't believe the offspring were hybrid without genetic testing or some other proof.

 

[diburning]

well... if an asian elephant could produce and offspring with an aprican elephant... it could be because they are just mammals..

maybe they (the 2 species of fish) could be artificially reproduced? thats how they made flowerhorns.... milking the fish and mixing the gamtes

 

[vancouver]

Well.. humans are mammals.. gross. nevermind. haha

 

[Synirr]

meepster, what the hell are you talking about "just mammals"? Quintana arizona and Xiphophorus maculatus are "just fish", that doesn't make a bit of difference, they are still from different genera.

 

[diburning]

I'm saying that mammals are more complicated... hypothetically its possible for a human to crossbreed with a chimpanzee but no one wants to do that lol. (and plus, chimps don't like people)

 

[Synirr]

No, human-chimp hybridization is not considered to be hypothetically possible, since we are not in the same genus and cross-genera hybridization, as I said, while it very rarely occurs is considered to be impossible on the whole. There are no other species in our genus, just Homo sapiens, so unfortunately we probably won't be taking the exciting and controversial trip down human hybrid road in our lifetimes. That's a political minefield I'd like to see

The number of chromosomes an animal has also has little to do with what class it is... there's a species of fern with 480 chromosomes. Goldfish have 94 chromosomes, and carp have 100, both far more than our pathetic human 46, and cats only have 38, so obviously fish do not always have fewer chromosomes than mammals, now do they? Increasing complexity of design (however you want to define that) doesn't equal a larger number of chromosomes, and that is basic biology, so stop pretending you have the slightest idea what you are talking about, I am on to you, and I am tired of having to explain these basic concepts to you when you obviously haven't bothered to look it up yourself at all, or apparently even pay attention in class, yet want to pretend you understand.

 

[diburning]

No, human-chimp hybridization is not considered to be hypothetically possible, since we are not in the same genus and cross-genera hybridization, as I said, while it very rarely occurs is considered to be impossible on the whole. There are no other species in our genus, just Homo sapiens, so unfortunately we probably won't be taking the exciting and controversial trip down human hybrid road in our lifetimes. That's a political minefield I'd like to see

The number of chromosomes an animal has also has little to do with what class it is... there's a species of fern with 480 chromosomes. Goldfish have 94 chromosomes, and carp have 100, both far more than our pathetic human 46, and cats only have 38, so obviously fish do not always have fewer chromosomes than mammals, now do they? Increasing complexity of design (however you want to define that) doesn't equal a larger number of chromosomes, and that is basic biology, so stop pretending you have the slightest idea what you are talking about, I am on to you, and I am tired of having to explain these basic concepts to you when you obviously haven't bothered to look it up yourself at all, or apparently even pay attention in class, yet want to pretend you understand.

I may have been wrong here but that doesn't give to the excuse to flame me. There are rules. Just because you have 6000 more posts than me doesn't make you superior.

 

[Synirr]

No, that is not a generalization it is safe to make at any time of the day or night, it is inexcusable for someone of science, which is why I say I am on to you. I don't believe you've studied as much biology as I have even, and if you have you mustn't have stayed awake. I'm sick of seeing you post pretending you know what you're talking about and expecting everyone to believe you, I for one am not falling for it.

EDIT: Of course, feel free to prove me wrong, nothing would make me happier.
RE-EDIT: BTW, you haven't answered my question in your flowerhorn project thread yet...