Fishy friend2
I Love Betta Fish!!!! They Are My Favorite Fish
thanks for clearing that up
Electric Blue "balloon" Rams?
- Thread starter Mr Melt
- Start date
Theyre about 2cm in size atm. Similar in body size to my large cherry barb 
They'll reach normal GBR size (like roughly 3 inches). Dunno how long that will take though! I plan to move them to my big tank when they get bigger
They'll reach normal GBR size (like roughly 3 inches). Dunno how long that will take though! I plan to move them to my big tank when they get bigger
RobberyinCSharp
Fish Crazy
Allright lads!
As far as I'm aware Electric Blue Rams are a recently developed morph of the popular German Blue Ram Cichlid. I've grown fond of their vivid colouration, and I've decided to get 2 for my large tank.
This is the thing though; while searching for the Electric Blue Rams on Ebay I found this variant being marketed by the same store:
http/www.ebay.co.uk/itm/ELECTRIC-BLUE-BALLOON-RAM-MICROGEOPHAGUS-RAMIREZI-DWARF-CICHLID-/270891218467?pt=UK_Pet_Supplies_Fish&hash=item3f125ff623#ht_818wt_952
According to this there are now Electric Blue Balloon Rams too? 1st I've ever heard of them =P
Nevertheless I plan on getting my hands on 2 of these beauties ASAP =D
I'm so glad you posted this thread! I kept staring at my electric blue ram and wondering why it was do round for its species!!! It makes so much sense now. I have one of these little guys and I absolutely adore him
kribensis12
I know where you live
Since color is usually a big factor, I would rely on that but I doubt they will color up in a way that will make sexing easier. I noticed one has black lines outlining his pelvic fins. I would assume that's a male trait and therefore a male. I truly have no idea though. Maybe contact someone who has bred them?
Are the black lines not a female trait in GBR's though? Just did a bit of reading myself; assuming of course that the Electric Blues show the same traits as their fellow rams =P
Thanks =D
kribensis12
I know where you live
The black lines may be. It's been a while since I've kept them. I would trust your research better than me trying to remember how to sex them, especially when they don't look anything like the original.
jojouk
Fish Addict
- Joined
- Sep 16, 2011
- Messages
- 766
- Reaction score
- 0
Sorry to chime in and add an opinion after all this has died down somewhat...but I kinda feel compelled!
The way I see it, is firstly, the production and breeding of fish for looks still incorporates some form of natural selection in operation at a basic level, natural selection being basically 'the fittest and best equipped to survive in its current surroundings' I say current, as this is the basis of evolution. Habitats change, and hence, the species has to change.
When fish are bred for looks, natural selection prohibits the production of genetically unviable offspring. They are simply aborted before development. Natures way of saying 'nope, won't work' so reason would suggest that offspring produced are genetically viable. What happens next is natural selection. Are they suitable fr the environment they live in?
We as fish keepers produce an artificial environment for our fish to live in. And so we artificially manipulate natural selection for aesthetic reasons. This is obviously not limited only to fish, any living plant or animal, including mankind, has been artificially selected for aesthetic reasons, for generations. Giving weight to the argument that our artificial selection is now effectively natural selection, but that is another argument entirely...
The problem arises when desirable traits become detrimental to the health and wellbeing of the individual bred. For example, Pug dogs being bred for flatter faces. Bad for the animals respiratory system, but a desirable trait. This trait may have been extinguished in its natural environment, but artificially, the are allowed to survive. However, the life expectancy of the individual is decreased, and therefore, becomes harder to reproduce, and extremes that are severely detrimental to the offspring will not be possible.
The real issue we have is not 'in the wild it would not happen' as we simply do not know this. We cannot be certain of the factors that would be subjected to that natural group, and thus determine its evolutionary tract.
The way I see it, is firstly, the production and breeding of fish for looks still incorporates some form of natural selection in operation at a basic level, natural selection being basically 'the fittest and best equipped to survive in its current surroundings' I say current, as this is the basis of evolution. Habitats change, and hence, the species has to change.
When fish are bred for looks, natural selection prohibits the production of genetically unviable offspring. They are simply aborted before development. Natures way of saying 'nope, won't work' so reason would suggest that offspring produced are genetically viable. What happens next is natural selection. Are they suitable fr the environment they live in?
We as fish keepers produce an artificial environment for our fish to live in. And so we artificially manipulate natural selection for aesthetic reasons. This is obviously not limited only to fish, any living plant or animal, including mankind, has been artificially selected for aesthetic reasons, for generations. Giving weight to the argument that our artificial selection is now effectively natural selection, but that is another argument entirely...
The problem arises when desirable traits become detrimental to the health and wellbeing of the individual bred. For example, Pug dogs being bred for flatter faces. Bad for the animals respiratory system, but a desirable trait. This trait may have been extinguished in its natural environment, but artificially, the are allowed to survive. However, the life expectancy of the individual is decreased, and therefore, becomes harder to reproduce, and extremes that are severely detrimental to the offspring will not be possible.
The real issue we have is not 'in the wild it would not happen' as we simply do not know this. We cannot be certain of the factors that would be subjected to that natural group, and thus determine its evolutionary tract.
First thought is that they are both female but with them being so small it's hard to tell...
My male (not balloon tho)
My female
Both male and female have the black lines on their fins.
Ben
Similar threads
Most reactions
-
344 -
223 -
216 -
188 -
176 -
160 -
157 -
153 -
148 -
139 -
136 -
129 -
113 -
95 -
93