What Species Are Captively Bred?

[CFC]

Thanks for all the replies, eschaton I will give your list to him and let him choose with the caviat from CFC. He's not having a huge tank so neons etc. will be the order of the day and I won't let him add any fish until the water quality is good. He is taking some of my old water to help him as well.

Interesting comment about the flooding. Does this happen more now with global warming or less?

I have no doubt the mortality rate of captive bred fish is high, but is it better than taking all the wild stocks? Are we over concerned, are there many more in the wild than we could possibly take? Do they breed quickly to fill the available space?

Flooding of the Amazon basin is seasonal and happens every year during the wet season, many Amazonian fish breed during this time as food is pleantiful and the fry have the best chance of survival. Demonmagus has mistundrestood a little i believe, it is after the wet season when the flood waters receed that the collectors go in to capture fish for the aquarium hobby as the lower water levels and therefore higher concentrations of fish during the dry season make them easier to net. Its not all as bad as it sounds though, the dry season is extreemly harsh on adult fish and millions die from the lack of food and indeed even water as the creeks and ox bow lakes dry up, the smaller fry are able to survive in the pools that remain and feed on microscopic foods. It is the fish that are collected and make it to the tank of a carefull owner which are the lucky ones in this instance.

Over fishing having an impact on wild stocks really depends on the fish, small egg scatterers like tetras are prolific and can double their numbers each year with ease, it is the fish with low clutch rates that put effort into protecting and raising their smaller numbers of fry that are at the greatest risk.

 

[Tokis-Phoenix]

I would say that, based on what i have seen, the marine fishkeeping hobby is a lot more damaging on wild stocks of fish than what freshwater fishkeeping is, as far as i am aware marine fishkeeping relies a lot more on wild caught fish, i think marine fish are also more sensitive than freshwater ones in general and tend not to survive as well during long periods of time in transport.
The marine Banggai cardinalfish decline and extinction in one area is apparently due to the demand for it in the fishkeeping hobby;

http/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banggai_cardinal

 

[Straydum]

you could easily tell wild angels apart from those bred in captive.

 

[eschaton]

If you buy the following, you're pretty much guaranteed captive-bred stock

All livebearers (duh!)

Not all livebearers are captive-bred, as far as i am aware only really the common ones are like guppys, endlers, mollys, swordtails and platys. There are a lot of fish which fall under the catagory of "livebearer", check out the rare livebearer section for more info .

Some of the rarer livebearers, like Endlers and Mosquitofish, are all captive-bred now, as they're hardy and just as easy to breed as the "big four". Others, like Goodeids, are endangered in the wild, so if you do find them, chances are almost certain you're dealing with captive-bred fish.

Much like killifish, when rare wild-caught livebearers enter the hobby, they're generally snapped up by specialist aficionados who do their best to breed them. By the time these specimens hit the average LFS, the chance they're wild caught is vanishingly small.

Now, you might have a point about, say, halfbeaks. I wouldn't be surprised if a good portion of those are wild-caught. But people don't think halfbeaks when they think livebearers.

 

[dwarfgourami]

Btw the rare livebearers are often collected in person by the same aficionados who then go on to breed them, so we're not talking mass commercial collection at all

 

[andywg]

I would say that, based on what i have seen, the marine fishkeeping hobby is a lot more damaging on wild stocks of fish than what freshwater fishkeeping is, as far as i am aware marine fishkeeping relies a lot more on wild caught fish, i think marine fish are also more sensitive than freshwater ones in general and tend not to survive as well during long periods of time in transport.
The marine Banggai cardinalfish decline and extinction in one area is apparently due to the demand for it in the fishkeeping hobby;

http/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banggai_cardinal

I'll see your banggai cardinalfish, and raise you a galaxy rasbora:

http/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Celestichthys_margaritatus

 

[George Farmer]

I would say that, based on what i have seen, the marine fishkeeping hobby is a lot more damaging on wild stocks of fish than what freshwater fishkeeping is, as far as i am aware marine fishkeeping relies a lot more on wild caught fish, i think marine fish are also more sensitive than freshwater ones in general and tend not to survive as well during long periods of time in transport.
The marine Banggai cardinalfish decline and extinction in one area is apparently due to the demand for it in the fishkeeping hobby;

http/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banggai_cardinal

I'll see your banggai cardinalfish, and raise you a galaxy rasbora:

http/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Celestichthys_margaritatus

lol.

Ironically both species are relatively simple to breed and raise in captivity.

 

[andywg]

lol.

Ironically both species are relatively simple to breed and raise in captivity.

However, since discovering a load more banggai cardinalfish in other locations, it is no longer economical to breed them. The cost of raising them is far more than wild caught specimens, which is a shame really.

 

[Tokis-Phoenix]

"The dwarf/chain loach is found in the Mae Klong River and the Khwae Noi River in western Thailand. This species is endangered and is a protected species in Thailand. It was thought to be extinct in the wild until recently rediscovered in Sangkhla Buri. While they disappeared from the wild, it remained in the aquarium trade because of artificial breeding by private fish farms for over 3 decades.";

http/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dwarf_loach

"B. melanopterus (bala/silver sharks) is listed as an endangered species by the IUCN Red List.[1] It has become rare or extinct in many river basins of its native range.[2] In Danau Sentarum (Borneo), fishermen already reported in 1993 and 1995 that the populations have decreased dramatically after 1975, for no clear reason. Fishermen mentioned overfishing for the aquarium-fish trade or forest fires in 1975 and the resulting pollution as possible causes. The species is apparently extirpated in the Batang Hari basin (Sumatra) and it seems that all individuals of B. melanopterus exported from Indonesia and Thailand by the aquarium-fish trade are captive bred.[4]";

http/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bala_shark

"Paratilapia Polleni is a medium sized cichlid fish from Madagascar. It was first described by the ichthyologist ?? Bleeker in 18?? along with a second species, Paratilapia Bleekeri, now believed to be extinct.1 P. Polleni is also endangered in the wild, but is found with increasing frequency in the aquarium hobby.";

http/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paratilapia_polleni

"A small number of freshwater halfbeaks are listed in various categories on the IUCN Red List definining their risk of extinction. None of these species are traded as aquarium fish. Most are simply rare in the wild, and consequently at particular risk from habitat destruction.";

http/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halfbeak#Conservation_status


"Poecilia wingei, known to aquarists as Endler's guppy or Endler's livebearer is a species of fish in the genus Poecilia, native to the Paria Peninsula, Venezuela

Although not yet taken up into the IUCN Red List of endangered species, they are in danger of extinction in the wild as humans enter their natural habitat, polluting and destroying it.";

http/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poecilia_wingei


"While many Betta species are common and B. splendens is ubiquitous in the aquarium trade, other bettas are threatened. The IUCN Red List classifies several Betta species as Vulnerable. In addition, B. livida is Endangered, and B. miniopinna, B. persephone, and B. spilotogena are Critically Endangered.[5]

The United Nations Environment Programme lists an unconfirmed species, Betta cf. tomi, as having become extinct in Singapore between 1970 and 1994.[6] This likely refers to the extirpated Singaporean population of B. tomi, which continues to exist in the wild in Indonesia and Malaysia as well as in captivity; the Red List classifies it as Vulnerable";

http/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Betta





Thought these articles may be interesting to some here on the subject of the aquarium trade and its effects on wild and captive fish.

 

[Tokis-Phoenix]

(continued);

"The Asian arowanas are listed as endangered by the 2006 IUCN Red List, with the most recent evaluation taking place in 1996.[1] International trade in these fishes is controlled under the Convention on the International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Flora and Fauna (CITES), under which it was placed on Appendix I, the most restrictive category, in 1975.[20] S. formosus is one of only eight fish species listed on Appendix I.[21] There are a number of registered CITES breeders in Asia and the specimens they produce can be imported into several nations. Other nations restrict or prohibit possession of Asian arowanas; for example, the United States has listed this species under the Endangered Species Act, and therefore it cannot be possessed in that country without a permit.[22]

There is no recent evaluation of conservation status by IUCN.[1] Additionally, considering the current confusion as to number of species as well as the wide distribution, conservation status needs to be reconsidered. All strains are probably endangered, but some more critically than others

The Asian arowana's high value as aquarium fish has impacted its conservation. Its popularity has soared since the late 1970s, and hobbyists may pay thousands of U.S. dollars for one of these animals";

http/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asian_arowana#Conservation



"The Silver Arowana is currently not listed on any CITES appendix [1] nor on the 2004 IUCN Red List.[2] It is one of the most popular ornamental fish from South America, however, and therefore its conservation status merits attention.[3]

As reported by Environment News Service in August 2005, shared use of the Silver Arowana population was a cause for a dispute between Brazilian and Colombian authorities. Juvenile Silver Arowanas are caught in Columbia for sale as aquarium fish, while the people of Brazilian Amazonia catch adult fish for food. A sharp drop in the number of arowanas had caused Brazilian authorities to prohibit fishing of them between September 1 and November 15; the Colombians, on their part, would prohibit capturing them between November 1 and March 15. [4]

The Silver Arowana is often kept as a pet, being considered an accessible substitute for the Asian arowana, which is listed on CITES Appendix I and is therefore difficult and expensive to obtain legally.";


http/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silver_arowan...ervation_status



"Horabagrus is a small genus of catfishes (order Siluriformes). It comprises two species, H. brachysoma and H. nigricollaris.[1] H. brachysoma is an important food fish, and both species are available as aquarium fish.

H. brachysoma is a common fish in the aquarium trade. H. nigricollaris is more seldomly seen because it is not commercially farmed like the former

Neither species is listed on the IUCN Red List.[6][7] However, H. brachysoma is considered to be an endangered species and H. nigricollaris is considered a critically endangered species.[14] H. brachysoma is marketed live and supports a local fishery during the rainy season.[6] Overexploitation, habitat alteration, pollution and related anthropogenic pressures on their natural habitats have considerably reduced populations of this species by 60–70% during the last few years.[3] Research is currently being funded to study H. brachysoma, especially its captive breeding.[2] Due to the importance of H. brachysoma as a food and ornamental fish, it embodies the problems that must be resolved for sustainable management, and could be used as a flagship species to provide focus for media attention for conservation";

http/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horabagrus#Conservation




"The cherry barb, Puntius titteya is a tropical fish belonging to the spotted barb genus of the Cyprinidae family. It is native to Sri Lanka, and introduced populations have become established in Mexico and Colombia.

The more colorful varieties of the cherry barb are in danger of being overfished for the aquarium hobby industry.";


http/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cherry_barb#Conservation_status

"Goodeidae; In recent years there has been a significant reduction in the range and size of Goodeid populations in this region, mainly due to anthropogenic disturbances, such as pollution, eutrophication, habitat modification and desiccation; recent estimates put habitat loss at 80% compared to historic ranges [4]. The low economic importance of Goodeid fish to Mexican fisheries and industry has led to this family being largely ignored by conservation efforts, but their small size and the dedication of a small number of aquaria hobbyists has led to a recent increase in the amount of research dedicated to the family. These investigations have highlighted the implications for conservation efforts concerning other global freshwater ichthyofauna.

Several species are threatened or extinct according to the IUCN:[5]

* Vulnerable - Bold characodon, Darkedged splitfin, Goodea gracilis, Allotoca dugesii
* Endangered - Bluetail splitfin, Rainbow characodon, Relict splitfin, Tequila splitfin, Allotoca diazi
* Critically Endangered - Blackspot allotoca, Chapultepec splitfin, Highland splitfin, Balsas splitfin
* Extinct in the Wild - Butterfly splitfin, Golden skiffia
* Extinct - Ash Meadows killifish, Parras characodon";

http/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goodeidae#Conservation_Status

"The dwarf pufferfish, also known as the Malabar pufferfish, pea pufferfish or pygmy pufferfish, Carinotetraodon travancoricus is a small, freshwater pufferfish endemic to the River Pamba in Kerala, Southwest India.

Dwarf pufferfish are not used as food but are traded as aquarium fish.[6] Although not currently on the IUCN Red List some authorities believe this species may be endangered.[7]";


http/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dwarf_pufferfish#Conservation

 

[Tokis-Phoenix]

I would say that, based on what i have seen, the marine fishkeeping hobby is a lot more damaging on wild stocks of fish than what freshwater fishkeeping is, as far as i am aware marine fishkeeping relies a lot more on wild caught fish, i think marine fish are also more sensitive than freshwater ones in general and tend not to survive as well during long periods of time in transport.
The marine Banggai cardinalfish decline and extinction in one area is apparently due to the demand for it in the fishkeeping hobby;

http/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banggai_cardinal

I'll see your banggai cardinalfish, and raise you a galaxy rasbora:

http/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Celestichthys_margaritatus

"Almost all species kept in marine aquaria at this time are caught in the wild although the number of captive raised species are increasing everyday. Only a few species, such as clownfish, are captive-bred on a commercial scale. Much collecting is done in Indonesia and the Philippines, where use of cyanide and other destructive collection methods is discouraged but unfortunately common.
The majority of live rock is also harvested in the wild, and recent restrictions on this harvest in Florida have caused a shift to Fijian and aquacultured rock. Natural rock takes many years if not centuries to form, and is vital habitat for countless marine species, and thus, commercial-scale harvesting of naturally-occurring live rock has been criticized by conservationists.
Additionally, many animal species sold to hobbyists have very specific dietary and habitat requirements that cannot be met by hobbyists (e.g. Labroides genus wrasses, the moorish idol); these animals almost inevitably die well before their time, and their color and appearance is poor. These issues are often downplayed by individuals and organizations with a financial interest in the trade.
Hobbyists should be urged to buy only certified net-caught fish (although ensuring the legitimacy of such claims can be difficult) or captive-raised fish, as well as farmed corals and to support legitimate reef conservation efforts. It should be noted that the majority of corals can be "fragged", whereby a portion of a larger captive coral is separated and can subsequently be raised into an individual specimen, allowing for coral propagation within the domestic aquarium; the trade in frags (i.e. fragments) offers a fantastic opportunity for marine aquarists to obtain new and unique corals while limiting the impact on the natural environment. Rare species and those without a history of being successfully kept in captivity should be avoided.";

http/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marine_aquarium#Conservation







Although there are many examples of the negative impact of freshwater fishkeeping on wild fish stocks, from what i have seen and read, marine fishing on the whole tends to be worse because of a stronger reliance on wild fish stocks instead of captive bred fish, plus there are other factors too to take into consideration.

Hopefully these things will change over time in the marine fishkeeping hobby, and freshwater fishkeeping will become better too.

I would say that keeping fish as a hobby tends to be one the less enviromentally friendly hobbies incomparison to keeping certain other types of pets...Its a shame, but hopefully things can be improved.

 

[andywg]

"Almost all species kept in marine aquaria at this time are caught in the wild although the number of captive raised species are increasing everyday. Only a few species, such as clownfish, are captive-bred on a commercial scale.

Almost all species in FW are captive caughts, it's just that some of the very commonly kept ones are often captive bred.

Much collecting is done in Indonesia and the Philippines, where use of cyanide and other destructive collection methods is discouraged but unfortunately common.

Much? How much? The info is unsourced so we have no idea. I know that cyanide capture is bad for the fish, but those fish tend to die so I wouldn't be surprised to see less use of cyanide. The fish catchers (for want of a better phrase) want more business and better sales, so they do listen when told not to use cyanide.

The majority of live rock is also harvested in the wild, and recent restrictions on this harvest in Florida have caused a shift to Fijian and aquacultured rock.

Apart from the huge tonnes of cement dropped in the gulf of Mexico to become LR which are then harvested. And where are the figures for this majority?

Natural rock takes many years if not centuries to form, and is vital habitat for countless marine species, and thus, commercial-scale harvesting of naturally-occurring live rock has been criticized by conservationists.

However most wholesalers try and make sure they only import rock from the back lagoons and such which have been ripped off of the actual reef in storms and surges so are not disturbing the actual reef structure. As to taking hundreds of years, the concrete cultured rock takes around 6 months before it can be used.

Additionally, many animal species sold to hobbyists have very specific dietary and habitat requirements that cannot be met by hobbyists (e.g. Labroides genus wrasses, the moorish idol); these animals almost inevitably die well before their time, and their color and appearance is poor. These issues are often downplayed by individuals and organizations with a financial interest in the trade.

This is undoubtedly true. The moorish idol, mandarin dragonet and cleaner wrasses (Labroides spp) have a tiny success rate in the trade, though worse than this is the collection of anemones. Anemones have no known ageing gene and as such can live for a long time (100 years is believed to be a conservative estimate). By collecting the anemone, not only are you likely to kill the anemone before its time, you are also depriving generations of anemonefish and damsels of a host nem for protection.

Hobbyists should be urged to buy only certified net-caught fish (although ensuring the legitimacy of such claims can be difficult) or captive-raised fish, as well as farmed corals and to support legitimate reef conservation efforts. It should be noted that the majority of corals can be "fragged", whereby a portion of a larger captive coral is separated and can subsequently be raised into an individual specimen, allowing for coral propagation within the domestic aquarium; the trade in frags (i.e. fragments) offers a fantastic opportunity for marine aquarists to obtain new and unique corals while limiting the impact on the natural environment. Rare species and those without a history of being successfully kept in captivity should be avoided.";

All of the corals I have bought are frags, and to be honest, in this day and age I would expect the vast majority of stony corals to be fragged as it is just so easy to do with the right set up (my reef is gradually moving in the direction of an SPS farm).

Although there are many examples of the negative impact of freshwater fishkeeping on wild fish stocks, from what i have seen and read, marine fishing on the whole tends to be worse because of a stronger reliance on wild fish stocks instead of captive bred fish, plus there are other factors too to take into consideration.

Hopefully these things will change over time in the marine fishkeeping hobby, and freshwater fishkeeping will become better too.

The problem with avoiding wild caught is the number of marine fish with planktonic larvae stages in their life. Supporting and feeding these is a true challenge. The biggest problem with marine keeping is just the way the fish are captured, but even then, as someone (I believe Lynden) pointed out in the marine section, areas where aquarium fish are caught tend to be solely for that, and so escape trawler dredging which is far worse for an eco system than collection for the fish trade. Sustainable wild capture is not a huge problem if managed. What many people forget is that the reef is a war zone, where everything is prey to something else set against the backdrop of coral chemical warfare. Many of the fish we catch are young and there is no chance all of them would even reach sexual maturity, let alone live a full and long life.

 

[Tokis-Phoenix]

Almost all species in FW are captive caughts, it's just that some of the very commonly kept ones are often captive bred.

Well i can say that i can easily list over 60 types of freshwater fish which are commonly captive bred or can be captive bred than i can with marine fish.

How many marine fish can you list which are captive bred?

The problem with avoiding wild caught is the number of marine fish with planktonic larvae stages in their life. Supporting and feeding these is a true challenge. The biggest problem with marine keeping is just the way the fish are captured, but even then, as someone (I believe Lynden) pointed out in the marine section, areas where aquarium fish are caught tend to be solely for that, and so escape trawler dredging which is far worse for an eco system than collection for the fish trade. Sustainable wild capture is not a huge problem if managed. What many people forget is that the reef is a war zone, where everything is prey to something else set against the backdrop of coral chemical warfare. Many of the fish we catch are young and there is no chance all of them would even reach sexual maturity, let alone live a full and long life.

Those small fish would become food for the bigger fish, whenever you take fish out of a wild ecosystem, you are always taking another animals food which it needs to survive off.


The aquarium trade has nothing to do with trawling, which is for food products and stuff, but i agree trawling probably has a much more damaging impact on the environment. None the less though, that doesn't make the the negative impacts the aquarium trade has on the environment and its wildlife any less important to adress.

 

[Tokis-Phoenix]

Much collecting is done in Indonesia and the Philippines, where use of cyanide and other destructive collection methods is discouraged but unfortunately common.

Much? How much? The info is unsourced so we have no idea. I know that cyanide capture is bad for the fish, but those fish tend to die so I wouldn't be surprised to see less use of cyanide. The fish catchers (for want of a better phrase) want more business and better sales, so they do listen when told not to use cyanide.

I'm just relying on wikipedia facts for now, i gtg soon anyway, but i'll make a comparison with the cyanide use- the process of dying and tattoeing fish has a high mortality rate, but that doesn't stop people doing it on a regular basis.
As long as there's a high demand for wild marine fish, then the use of cyanide to capture wild fish is unlikely to die off if cyanide continues to be available and cheap for people in such a buisness to use. It probably is declining in use, although i would not be suprised that in some area's the use of cyanide was still common place for those people who do not have much better methods of marine fish capture.

 

[andywg]

Much collecting is done in Indonesia and the Philippines, where use of cyanide and other destructive collection methods is discouraged but unfortunately common.

Much? How much? The info is unsourced so we have no idea. I know that cyanide capture is bad for the fish, but those fish tend to die so I wouldn't be surprised to see less use of cyanide. The fish catchers (for want of a better phrase) want more business and better sales, so they do listen when told not to use cyanide.

I'm just relying on wikipedia facts for now, i gtg soon anyway, but i'll make a comparison with the cyanide use- the process of dying and tattoeing fish has a high mortality rate, but that doesn't stop people doing it on a regular basis.
As long as there's a high demand for wild marine fish, then the use of cyanide to capture wild fish is unlikely to die off if cyanide continues to be available and cheap for people in such a buisness to use. It probably is declining in use, although i would not be suprised that in some area's the use of cyanide was still common place for those people who do not have much better methods of marine fish capture.

I am an advocate of wikipedia, but only when it is sourced. That article, as it stands, is one person's view of the trade.

Cyanide used to be widespread, especially across Indonesia and the Philippines. However, these fish tend to die in captivity at a younger age and be far more fragile. Because of this the trade is doing its best to stamp out cyanide use. The fact is, using cyanide gives a far weaker product to sell, and as such the wholesalers tend to avoid those fish that are, or may have been, taken in such a fashion.

It is by no means eradicated, but its use is declining.

Edit---

Quick note, according to this BBC article on the role of the aquarium trade on the wild, the use of cyanide is already far from common, and this is a somewhat negative assessment of the trade:

"A minority of fishermen, in countries such as Indonesia, use sodium cyanide to capture fish.