Breeding Hybrid fish

[The-Wolf]

Believe it or not ALL humans as we know it are of the same species (Homo Sapiens Sapiens), so in no way is it hybridisation whoever we breed with.....

PB

Iknow, but I was trying to make a point about narrowmindedness

 

[Ben]

narrowmindedness

is that even a word?

 

[The-Wolf]

is that even a word?

yes but I forgot the hyphen (narrow-mindedness).

 

[David]

Personally I am totally against hybridization. I find it unnatural and pointless, in fact it is often harmful for the species as a whole.

Actually, you're completely wrong there. Hybrids are one of the ways evolution creates new species. I have nothing against viable hybrids, provided they aren't sold to unsuspecting customers who have no idea what they're getting into.

What I meant was ARTIFICIAL hybridization. I have absolutely no problem with it occurring in the wild, heck, it actually serves to strengthen the species, not weaken them. However when people purposely cross two species for their own personal gain, I am against it, especially if they are creating crosses that they think look attractive but in turn compromise the fish's swimming ability and whatnot. Example: fancy goldfish, butterfly discus, blood parrot etc. Also the hybrids are often sterile which is just as well, IMO.

But what is to say WHAT is beneficial to the species? What is the point of the species? All these fish are trying to carry on their genes-- the continuation of those genes/species continuation is the ultimate goal of the species right? Maybe spreading the species' territory as well.

Here's my thoughts (NOT MY OPINION):

Organisms on this planet often pair up in symbiotic relationships-- meaning the two organisms have a relationship, such as predation where one eats the other, or parasitism, where one is a parasite on the other. However, some of these relationships are BENEFICIAL to BOTH species.

Here's the question I pose:

Couldn't man's relationship with fish be seen as just another one of those "mutually beneficial relationships?"

The fish benefit, because as long as they are in favor of man and being domestically bred and cared for, the species will not die out unless man dies out.

Look at how cows have benefitted. The number of the species would be no where near its number today if not for man. The cow would not be the dominant grazing species all accross the world if not for man. As long as man exists, the species will continue to excel. We are obviously a very valuable ally, and to come into man's favor is obviously beneficial to the species.

In that case, why can't we say that domestically bred features ARE the "beneficial" traits?

So aren't the fish simply evolving characteristics to benefit itself by coming to a better relationship with another species in a mutually beneficial relationship?

Or: Isn't it good for the fish to change to make us happy which will make us increase the species' number and sustain the species' survival?


If you look at it this way, fertile hybrid fish (like all the guppy species), albino fish, long finned breeds and domestic color variation fish are the fish that are "fittest." Why? Because they have evolved for greater appeal to another species in which theirs is in a simbiotic relationship.

The fact that many of these specimens could not survive in the wild makes little difference. Many species in mutual relationships evolve to the point where one could not survive without the other. Most of the above mentioned plant species would die off with out the insect it has specifically evolved to be pollinated by. In Hawaii one of our native bee species is extinct, so the plants it pollinated now depend on our botanists to polinate them or else the plants will go extinct as well.

Because I am an idiot and not very sophisticated in biology and ethics, I am not able to understand how our manipulation is any different from other species' in nature.


I personally think there is something really wrong with this idea I have come to, but am unbale to refute it. Anyone else have a good reason why our hybridazation and breeding certain strains should be immoral?

I respectfully disagree. The fish have little or no choice in this, they are caught and placed in an aquarium or born in captivity and are forced to make the best of it. You can't truly say that this relationship is mutually beneficial, as a true symbiotic relationship only encompasses that which is essential for the survival or bettering of the species. This is not true for either species in this example. Do we, as humans, need the companionship of fish for survival? Do the fish need to be placed in captivity in order to survive? No, in fact I am almost positive that the fish's chance of survival in the wild are significantly greater than in captivity due to the fact that they have evolved over millions of years to suit those particular conditions, not to mention how many mistakes are made by us humans that lead to the death of our beloved pets. Also captive breeding of fish results in a gradual weakening of the strain (through inbreeding) which isn't exactly beneficial to the species as a whole.

As for the cow example, they are hybrids as well, and look what has been done to them. I wouldn't say that they have benefitted at all, personally if I was given a choice I would much rather be, say, a water buffalo than a cow. Cows are lumbering, stupid animals that don't know their head from their legs, and have been bred to become like this. All they do is graze all day out in the fields, blissfully unaware that they are being fattened up to be slaughtered by the millions and sold to franchises such as MacDonald's to provide food for us humans. Also they are not allowed to breed unless their owner wants to breed them, so I do not completely understand why you see this as a benefit. the only reason they can be called "the dominant grazing species" is because we breed them by the millions for food. If we did not want beef in our diets, cows would quickly die out, heck they would never have been created in the first place.

Also we can't honestly say that domestically bred traits are the most beneficial, because most of the time they are not. They may look the best (again this is a matter of personal opinion) but nearly always hinder the species capacity for survival and reproduction. The only reason we do selective breeding and hybridization is to benefit US, never the other way around.

As well, guppies and long-finned types of fish are not considered hybrids. they are simply strains of the same species (guppy=poecilia reticulata, no matter what the strain) that have been selectively bred/developed to suit our personal wants and needs. yes, guppies are indeed very hardy but that is because of the way they are, they way the have evolved, which caused them to be readily adaptable to aquarium life. A hybrid is a cross between two seperate species, like the blood parrot (not sure what the exact species are but i'm pretty sure severum is one). And in the case of the blood parrot itsswimming ability (and consequently, its ability to find food and reproduce) is greatly compromised in order to achieve a look that some humans find attractive (I, personally, do not).

Wow. That was long. I think my brain needs some rest now.

 

[David]

Believe it or not ALL humans as we know it are of the same species (Homo Sapiens Sapiens), so in no way is it hybridisation whoever we breed with.....

PB

Iknow, but I was trying to make a point about narrowmindedness

wolf, I am in no way narrow-minded, however I do have my opinions and I will state what's on my mind whether people like it or not. As was stated, humans of different races "cross-breeding" does not result in hybridization, or many of us would look a lot different than we do today. I am not against interracial relations at all, but I am against purposefully tampering with the course of nature and creating unnatural things that would not otherwise have occurred, especially if it is potentially harmful to the organism.

 

[ferrikins]

I respectfully disagree. The fish have little or no choice in this, they are caught and placed in an aquarium or born in captivity and are forced to make the best of it. You can't truly say that this relationship is mutually beneficial, as a true symbiotic relationship only encompasses that which is essential for the survival or bettering of the species. This is not true for either species in this example. Do we, as humans, need the companionship of fish for survival? Do the fish need to be placed in captivity in order to survive? No, in fact I am almost positive that the fish's chance of survival in the wild are significantly greater than in captivity due to the fact that they have evolved over millions of years to suit those particular conditions, not to mention how many mistakes are made by us humans that lead to the death of our beloved pets. Also captive breeding of fish results in a gradual weakening of the strain (through inbreeding) which isn't exactly beneficial to the species as a whole.

As for the cow example, they are hybrids as well, and look what has been done to them. I wouldn't say that they have benefitted at all, personally if I was given a choice I would much rather be, say, a water buffalo than a cow. Cows are lumbering, stupid animals that don't know their head from their legs, and have been bred to become like this. All they do is graze all day out in the fields, blissfully unaware that they are being fattened up to be slaughtered by the millions and sold to franchises such as MacDonald's to provide food for us humans. Also they are not allowed to breed unless their owner wants to breed them, so I do not completely understand why you see this as a benefit. the only reason they can be called "the dominant grazing species" is because we breed them by the millions for food. If we did not want beef in our diets, cows would quickly die out, heck they would never have been created in the first place.

Also we can't honestly say that domestically bred traits are the most beneficial, because most of the time they are not. They may look the best (again this is a matter of personal opinion) but nearly always hinder the species capacity for survival and reproduction. The only reason we do selective breeding and hybridization is to benefit US, never the other way around.

As well, guppies and long-finned types of fish are not considered hybrids. they are simply strains of the same species (guppy=poecilia reticulata, no matter what the strain) that have been selectively bred/developed to suit our personal wants and needs. yes, guppies are indeed very hardy but that is because of the way they are, they way the have evolved, which caused them to be readily adaptable to aquarium life. A hybrid is a cross between two seperate species, like the blood parrot (not sure what the exact species are but i'm pretty sure severum is one). And in the case of the blood parrot itsswimming ability (and consequently, its ability to find food and reproduce) is greatly compromised in order to achieve a look that some humans find attractive (I, personally, do not).

Wow. That was long. I think my brain needs some rest now.

David if you well and truely beleave all of that, why do you keep fish??

On the cow thing, I rather be thick and not know about my own forth coming death, but I most certainly don't think your description of a cow fits. Some can be lovely animals.

 

[David]

David if you well and truely beleave all of that, why do you keep fish??

On the cow thing, I rather be thick and not know about my own forth coming death, but I most certainly don't think your description of a cow fits. Some can be lovely animals.

I keep fish because I think it is a wonderful hobby and is a great way to relax and keep yourself engaged. I do not keep hybrids, nor do I advocate their production. I also try to stay away from fish that have been overly selectively bred such as the potbellied fancy goldfish with strange growths that obstruct their vision that we see today, or fish whose fins are so overly developed that it makes it difficult for them to swim.

As for cows, I have nothing against them and I am not disputing the fact that they are "lovely animals", but they really are quite idiotic. I have yet to meet a seemingly intelligent cow.

 

[Teelie]

Is it really necessary to requote and then requote quotes so much?

 

[ferrikins]

Is it really necessary to requote and then requote quotes so much?

sorry ) )

 

[Teelie]

The page length could probably be cut in half if the requotes of the longest posts were dropped.

 

[ferrikins]

Is that better for you Teelie.

 

[David]

It helps newcomers to the thread to know what has been going on, IMO.

 

[NinjaSmurf]

First of all, ***? Guppies are one of the most inbred fish of all time!!!! That and bettas. they aren't that hardy. You're against hybrids, but inbreds are okay? And cows existed before we started screwing around with their breeding habits, so I have no idea where you came up with that idea. I mean, where do you think we got them, from the fricking ground? And lets face it, fish are just as stupid, if not stupider, than cows ever will be. Mother cows freak when you take their calfs away, I don't see fish doing that, do you? Hello, if someone fed me every day and kept predators away from me, I'd stay with them too. You act like cows know we're going to turn around and butcher them. And if you really do believe in survival of the fittest then let some of those baby fish get eaten, they are the weak ones. Do you realize just how many fish that are sold in pet stores would die out really fast in the wild? Good bye bettas, goodbye fancy guppies, and all the rest.

And I hate having to page through long quotes, it's annoying, and it's like you're repeating everything they already said. Just pick out the parts you have issues with and post them for the love of god!

Insanity, all of it insanity...

 

[David]

First of all, wtf? Guppies are one of the most inbred fish of all time!!!! That and bettas. they aren't that hardy. You're against hybrids, but inbreds are okay? And cows existed before we started screwing around with their breeding habits, so I have no idea where you came up with that idea. I mean, where do you think we got them, from the fricking ground? And lets face it, fish are just as stupid, if not stupider, than cows ever will be. Mother cows freak when you take their calfs away, I don't see fish doing that, do you? Hello, if someone fed me every day and kept predators away from me, I'd stay with them too. You act like cows know we're going to turn around and butcher them. And if you really do believe in survival of the fittest then let some of those baby fish get eaten, they are the weak ones. Do you realize just how many fish that are sold in pet stores would die out really fast in the wild? Good bye bettas, goodbye fancy guppies, and all the rest.

And I hate having to page through long quotes, it's annoying, and it's like you're repeating everything they already said. Just pick out the parts you have issues with and post them for the love of god!

Insanity, all of it insanity...

... Did I say guppies are not inbred? Did I say I was okay with inbreeding? Inbreeding is just a natural consequence of fishkeeping, there's no way to avoid it, but that does not mean I agree with it. I just don't hate it as much as hybridization. And yes, guppies and bettas are some of the hardiest fish out there.

And cows are a direct descendant of the aurochs, an extinct cow-like animal that was domesticated and intensely selectively bred to provide for our needs in terms of meat and milk production. Although this did make them more efficient from that standpoint, it compromised the purity of the species and did weaken them greatly. Aurochs became extinct in 1627, but their "descendants", the cows, live on to this day. Thus cows did NOT exist before we started "screwing around" as you put it, with their breeding habits.

Any animal that is mentally programmed to care for its offspring will feel a sense of loss/insecurity if said offspring is taken away, it does not need to be a supergenius to realize that something is wrong. Have you seen the way some cichlids care for their fry?

Cows are no longer a wild animal due to the centuries of rigorous selective breeding they have been put through... of course they 'stay" with humans, they know nothing of the outside world and have lost nearly all of their natural instincts. Also it's not like they have a choice... they are fenced in and kept in a barn at night.

And when did this talk of "survival of the fittest" come up? How does it in any way pertain to this topic?

As for the quotes, DEAL WITH IT.

PS Please try to control yourself when posting... I know you may be wound up by what people are posting but there is really no need to resort to terms like"wtf" and 'frickin"; we can understand you perfectly well without their aid, thank you very much. Go take a cold shower or something, or find another way to cool of before posting, please.

 

[Teelie]

It helps newcomers to the thread to know what has been going on, IMO.

Reading from start to finish also does that.