For All Uk People With Pink Danios

[The-Wolf]

they have been confirmed to be the transgenic fish sold under the trade name glowfish(tm)
and are therefore illegal in this country.

for the full story read here
note you may need to register with PFK to read the article.

 

[gilaesther]

Anyone know if there's an issue in the USA?

 

[Tokis-Phoenix]

Interesting...But, i don't really see why it is so bad to own such a fish? If our countrys can allow things like the sale of dyed fish or bowls advertised for goldfish, then how can "coral pink danios" be any worse? ...Sometimes i think that we need to re-think the morals we have concerning our animals and the sale of them and why we let some animals and animal related products be sold and kept and not others etc .

 

[The-Wolf]

Anyone know if there's an issue in the USA?

AFAIK California is the only state that it is forbiden by law to own these fish

6) Please note that these fish may not be sold or transferred to anyone in the State of California, as this is prohibited by California Law. The producers of GloFish(tm) fluorescent fish request that all consumers respect this regulation. For more information about this issue, please visit www.glofish.com/california.asp.
taken from http/www.glofish.com/buy.asp (click GloFish® Fluorescent Fish License Notice at bottom of page)

 

[geo7x]

Interesting...But, i don't really see why it is so bad to own such a fish?

Because putting coral genes (or whatever the heck they put into them) in a danio cell is nothing to think lightly about. Perhaps you think its not such an extraordinary (and im not using "extraordinary" in the good sense) procedure as it really is.

Plus your comparison with dyed fish. if dyed fish ever bred, the offspring will be just the same as the normal version of that fish.

The gene that makes these fish "glow" will stick, the offspring of GM danios will be "glowy", and so will that ones offspring and that ones....

If, for example, (this isnt so applicable in the UK) someone released GM danios into the wild, then it could potentially cause a problem. If a GM danio mated with a wild danio, (if it gets that far before being eaten because it stands out so much), although the glowing (fluro) gene is recessive, this recessive gene can show up at any time in any generations, and that gene would now be passed right down through the generations.

The problem here is not only has something unnatural got into the wild, it could cause a certain impact on the danios as a species because when the glowing gene springs up, the affected fish is vulnerable, especially to a predator as they glow!

Furthermore, if a wild GM danio (i.e. one that has been a "victim" of the recessive gene) mated with another wild danio then all the offspring would be affected, therefore vulnerable.

So those are the reasons (the ones that we know of anyway) why it is worth looking over, and making illegal. But tbh nobody really knows quite what impact GM danios would have.

 

[Nevergone815]

From what i understand though ALL of the ones available to the public are sterile. OInly the company that engineered htem for uses in water quality have non sterile pais. I don't know how much htis has changed htough since its been a while since i read more on it.

 

[geo7x]

Nevergone,

quoted from PFK here:
http/www.practicalfishkeeping.co.uk/pfk/...m.php?news=1228


"Contrary to early media reports when the fish were first introduced, the fish are not sterile, and with the exception of the additional gene, they are little different to commercially available Zebra danios."


Furthermore, on that article the head of GM inspectorate says:

"To keep and breed fish while being aware that they are genetically modified is in breach of the law and I would urge all persons concerned to refrain from such activities."

surely she wouldnt urge all persons against breeding them if they were all sterile.

I think it might be debatable but it only takes one person like the person in the article to breed them, release them, and then have the gene carried down through wild generations.

 

[Tokis-Phoenix]

Interesting...But, i don't really see why it is so bad to own such a fish?

Because putting coral genes (or whatever the heck they put into them) in a danio cell is nothing to think lightly about. Perhaps you think its not such an extraordinary (and im not using "extraordinary" in the good sense) procedure as it really is.

Plus your comparison with dyed fish. if dyed fish ever bred, the offspring will be just the same as the normal version of that fish.

The gene that makes these fish "glow" will stick, the offspring of GM danios will be "glowy", and so will that ones offspring and that ones....

If, for example, (this isnt so applicable in the UK) someone released GM danios into the wild, then it could potentially cause a problem. If a GM danio mated with a wild danio, (if it gets that far before being eaten because it stands out so much), although the glowing (fluro) gene is recessive, this recessive gene can show up at any time in any generations, and that gene would now be passed right down through the generations.

The problem here is not only has something unnatural got into the wild, it could cause a certain impact on the danios as a species because when the glowing gene springs up, the affected fish is vulnerable, especially to a predator as they glow!

Furthermore, if a wild GM danio (i.e. one that has been a "victim" of the recessive gene) mated with another wild danio then all the offspring would be affected, therefore vulnerable.

So those are the reasons (the ones that we know of anyway) why it is worth looking over, and making illegal. But tbh nobody really knows quite what impact GM danios would have.

I wouldn't have thought that them getting into the wild would have been a problem though, the climate over here in england gets too cold for danios to live outside all year round, so any danio's and their offspring which managed to survive the summer in England would inevitably die as soon as the waters got down to freezing temps during the winter (which they often regularly do in the wintertime in england). I don't think there are any wild danio's or fish over here that would be able to crossbreed with them either, creating hybrid danio's.

With the coral gene thing, i'm fine with it- as far as i am aware the fish don't suffer because of the coral gene in them at all, but on the other hand, dyed fish and goldfish in bowls do endure a lot of suffering because of what they are or where they are kept etc.

 

[geo7x]

I wouldn't have thought that them getting into the wild would have been a problem though, the climate over here in england gets too cold for danios to live outside all year round, so any danio's and their offspring which managed to survive the summer in England would inevitably die as soon as the waters got down to freezing temps during the winter (which they often regularly do in the wintertime in england). I don't think there are any wild danio's or fish over here that would be able to crossbreed with them either, creating hybrid danio's.

With the coral gene thing, i'm fine with it- as far as i am aware the fish don't suffer because of the coral gene in them at all, but on the other hand, dyed fish and goldfish in bowls do endure a lot of suffering because of what they are or where they are kept etc.

This could be a point, but the reasons i mentioned above were in answer to dyed fish:GM fish comparison.

There is a large list of regulations that things like these have to go through. GM for ornamental reasons is still a relatively new thing, and is controversial.

Of course, my reasons above were applicable only really in the warmer climate countries (which i did say in the post) but the thing is we dont know what will happen. Even in domestic populations, there will always be recessive genes there if the normal and GM danios are kept together and interbreed, and the glowing gene could be seen as "contaminating" the pure danio gene.

And who knows, with global warming a reality, in the distant future when certain countries climates are warm, we're going to be pretty buggered when people are always releasing domesting fish into the wild and pretty much every danio has the recessive gene.

Its a controverial issue and thats just your opinion.

 

[Nevergone815]

Nevergone,

quoted from PFK here:
http/www.practicalfishkeeping.co.uk/pfk/...m.php?news=1228


"Contrary to early media reports when the fish were first introduced, the fish are not sterile, and with the exception of the additional gene, they are little different to commercially available Zebra danios."


Furthermore, on that article the head of GM inspectorate says:

"To keep and breed fish while being aware that they are genetically modified is in breach of the law and I would urge all persons concerned to refrain from such activities."

surely she wouldnt urge all persons against breeding them if they were all sterile.

I think it might be debatable but it only takes one person like the person in the article to breed them, release them, and then have the gene carried down through wild generations.

Thanks for clearing that up. I didn't read the article form PFK to be honest. But I read on the website aobut them a whiel ago, and heard others tlak about them. That's all .

Knowing this, it is dangerous to allow GM fish into hands of the general public as you neverknow what may happen now that they beleive they can certainly breed .

 

[Kevinator]

I bought 2 of them last week, I didn't realize that there is such a controversy over them. I have 4 other danios. Is there a major cause for concern? I am not trying to breed them.

The place I bought them from isn't aware of this, or else I know he would of told me about it.

I also saw orange danios there as well...

 

[Tokis-Phoenix]

This could be a point, but the reasons i mentioned above were in answer to dyed fish:GM fish comparison.

There is a large list of regulations that things like these have to go through. GM for ornamental reasons is still a relatively new thing, and is controversial.

Of course, my reasons above were applicable only really in the warmer climate countries (which i did say in the post) but the thing is we dont know what will happen. Even in domestic populations, there will always be recessive genes there if the normal and GM danios are kept together and interbreed, and the glowing gene could be seen as "contaminating" the pure danio gene.

And who knows, with global warming a reality, in the distant future when certain countries climates are warm, we're going to be pretty buggered when people are always releasing domesting fish into the wild and pretty much every danio has the recessive gene.

Its a controverial issue and thats just your opinion.

I don't agree with all genetic modification on animals, but i think in the case of the coral pink danios, i don't see it as a great deal different from selective breeding in concept.
People who buy the coral pink danios will obviously choose them for their colour over the more bland natural zebra danios for example, but how is this much different from someone chosing a guppy with a blue tail (which has been selectively bred) over a wild type guppy? I know people say we shouldn't be playing god and all that with the genetic modification of danios, but we already play god when we selectively breed fish to have certain traits which would not occur in nature.
With the global warming thing though, the amount of warming that would have to take place to make englands waters warm enough for danios to survive in would have to be pretty extreme, it probably won't happen in our lifetimes unless we seriously mess up the climate a heck of a lot more than what we are already doing.

But one thing i don't get though, is that our countrys don't ban all fish that can survive in our waters. Goldfish can have a terrible impact on our local aquatic ecosystems, yet they are sold in their hundreds of thousands every year in this country. So i'm not sure what qualifications a fish would have to meet for it to be considered a threat enough to native waters to ban it from general sale to the public?