Glofish Facts

matt1713

Fish Fanatic
Joined
Jun 28, 2007
Messages
78
Reaction score
0
As you all know im getting some glofish which are geneticly modified zebra danios. They are legal in the U.S.(Except California). For some moral reasons, people don't like them. But most people think they are dyed or hurt and go through "trama". That is FALSE.

The glofish was created by scientist to detect pollution. The Glofish was injected with a gene from a jellyfish into the embreo when it was an egg. Therefore if the glofish mate, the offspring will be the same color. Studies have shown that the glofish behave like normal zebra danios. There are no ill effect and the color never wears off.

They are currently available in three colors known as "starfire red" which is more of a pink color, "electric green" which is a bright neon green, and "sunburst orange" which is a bright yellow color. Glofish got its name because they tend to "glow" when you put them under a black light in a pitch black room. They show there color in the day time great under a regular fluorescent light but brighter if you put them under a actinic (blue wavelength) light. This is because the fish absorb the light then reemit it. -matt
all information is from www.glofish.com


If your wondering how these "glofish" help the enviroment read this.

To achieve their goal of helping to fight water pollution, scientists are in the process of adding a "switch" that will cause the always fluorescing GloFish® zebra fish to selectively fluoresce in the presence of environmental toxins. A non-fluorescing fish will signal that the water is safe, while a fluorescing fish will signal trouble. Although these fish are not currently available, scientists hope to complete this work soon. To help further the research, a portion of the proceeds from sales of all GloFish® fluorescent fish goes directly to the lab where these fish were created.
-glofish.com
 
I don't know if you're from the states like I am, but you have to remember many of the members of this forum are from the UK.

Europe has had extensive negative press about the use of transgenic organisms for over a decade now the U.S. has missed out on. Not to say there aren't some uses of genetic engineering which are totally dodgy, but give the way the press has covered it there as opposed to in the U.S., there is a lot more strident opposition.
 
well, i dont really see anything wrong with them as long as the fish dont get hurt. a lot of people say that if we do this to fish, whats there to stop us from doing it to dogs and other pets, but thats not going to be anytime soon, and if it does happen, im going to be a old man by then, so im not too worried about it :lol: i like to leave these things to the pet activists guys because if its already on the market and its not cruel or very unusual (rainbow color dog or something), i dont really care. once those weird breeds of dogs come up though, i think i might say something
 
Part of the objection is that when humans start tinkering with the genes dramatically, sometimes the genes get out into the wild and start affecting things they were not supposed to. For example, I know at least one study pointed out that genes that have been put into our crops have gotten out. The plants were supposed to be completely infertile, unable to bear seeds, which they were, but they still flowered and honeybees took up the pollen from the flowers. The same modified genes could be detected in the bees honey. This was a gene that was assured to not get out.

What is to prevent the colored genes from spreading from these fish? They will eventually get to the wild -- enough people think that they are doing their fish a favor by releasing them when the people no longer want the fish. Further, what happens when a larger fish eats these modified danios? In most cases, the genes would probably be broken down, but what is they aren't and spread to that bigger fish? Can the scientists really be 100% sure that that won't happen? Not 99.95%, but 100%. If they are honest about it, no scientist should say they are 100% certain about anything like that.

Finally, my personal opinion is that there are already an immense variety of fish out there in a very wide spectrum of colors and shapes and sizes. Surely there are a few that appeal to you in their natural colorations so that it isn't necessary to go to genetically modified species? I don't have a huge problem with selective breeding so long as enough genetic diversity is kept. But, these completely artificial ones seem so very very fake -- when my personal goal in keeping an aquarium is to have a little slice of nature in my home. And these fake fish aren't nature, in my opinion.
 
What is to prevent the colored genes from spreading from these fish? They will eventually get to the wild -- enough people think that they are doing their fish a favor by releasing them when the people no longer want the fish. Further, what happens when a larger fish eats these modified danios? In most cases, the genes would probably be broken down, but what is they aren't and spread to that bigger fish? Can the scientists really be 100% sure that that won't happen? Not 99.95%, but 100%. If they are honest about it, no scientist should say they are 100% certain about anything like that.

Fair point and all, but if a fish eats it they can suddenly take in the DNA, the jellyfish gene is added to the egg and causes the colours, how ever even if they did get into wild stocks they will surly not survive long being bright colour's they would surly soon become food for something with in days....

Here is an article i did a while back i quite like these fish but it's against all my normal thoughts when it comes to crossing etc etc

http://www.fishforums.net/index.php?showtopic=182312
 
even if another fish eats the glofish the genes not going to do anything. Its just like a fish eating a regualar zebra danio. Also if the fish does happen to get out in the wild, its not going to survive. Its just to bright and will get eaten. And everybody is comparing this to an extreme. This is fish not humans.
 
This is fish not humans.

whats the difference? were all animals on this planet and deserve humain treatment.

do you have any other pets matt?
 
i edited that. it was totaly diffrent. i just said that because i didnt want to say "nvm"
 
how is it inhumane the fish doesnt get hurt. the whole fish keeping would be inhumane. Think about it. Its like us being trapped in a little room for our whole lives with strangers from around the world.
 

Most reactions

Back
Top