I am afraid I am going to have to ask you to stick to dog analogies, as this is not accurate at all. The Mbuna of Lake Malawi consist of several species, and tons of regional variants. The regional variants and species do not procreate in the wild. However, if in your home aquarium you cross two regional variants/species, and mention it on a forum, you will be accosted my every truly serious hobbyist on the board. African cichlid taxonomy is in no better shape than tarantulas. And we do not want things mucked up worse than they already are.
First off, I would like to stick with whatever analogy that I choose to use please. I think that is my choice, thanks.
Actually NO, they were NOT incredibly deformed at all when I did it in an aquarium with two completely different genus from Malawi. It was accidental in that case but it happend since they were the only two fish in the tank. It was over 6 months after I bought them when it happened. The offspring contained characterisitcs of both parents. This happens all of the time. I wish that I still had the cichlids to show them off. This was about 8 years ago when I had my small African Cichlid hobby.
You definitely have the right to your beliefs, absolutely. But so does everybody else.As far as I am concerned, with the taxonomy of our hobby in such a sad state, risking the possibility of hybrids being introduced into hobby is enough to make me sick. "maybe I sold her because I needed money" is a pathetic excuse, and irresponsible to say the least. So, what if she does produce an egg sac, and the new owner "Needs money"? I keep track of who posts things advocating hybrids and such-and people who deal with them, and have built up quite a large list of people that I will never buy from.
My two cents
T
This is the best I am able to offer for now. This goes through a handfull of common sterile hybrids and the basic genetic process and why these animals are sterile. Animal hybrids are a bit different than plants. With some very closely related species (such as ring species), some hybrids may be firtle. However, species that are not so closely related will be infirtle or have insanely high mortality. I'll be able to research this subject more later in the week, however my sources are pretty much confined to the internet so I doubt I'll be able to find the paper you listed.
So looking at your source you given. I counted 25 fertile hybrids and 27 sterile hybrids example given.
In casual hobby conditions? There isn't much benefit for the hobby.
I've learned that its best to ignore those who replace proper grammar and punctuation with an excessive use of smilies.talkenlate04 said:
Owe, you want the so called genus/species names that have been given to the animals that were in the aquarium by the so called experts who merely look at the animal structure rather than performing a full DNA analysis.
It seems that the pet trade is allready pretty well screwed up. So nope, it really doesnot bother me in the least. I know exactly what I want. I know that I can wait for a few months to find it as well which includes the research. In the past I have spent anywhere from 1 to 2 years looking for the right show dog. Like I said before, I found a T breeder that I trust totally. You can check this person by searching BinarySpider in this forum. I am not worried about the other guys who sale a "hybrid" because I am not buying hybrid tarantulas. There are a couple of other breeders that I am looking at also. So far they have exelent crudentials and I will consider them as well.
Ahhhhhhhh, come on, you know that you will read it. Your addicted to your side of the coin toss. Yep, something to argue about when there is nothing else to argue about.
Well, back to Easter. Later all. My time is very short these days but I do get back to this forum once in while.
Actually, I looked through some of your older posts and came to the conclusion that you're better qualified to speak on the subject than I am. Genetics isn't my strong suit. I am more familiar with the evolutionary process than I am with the study of genetics.
Well...no, this does not apply. Dogs are one species. As this is common knowledge, I shouldn't need a source. However, as I'm sure my credibility is suspect at the moment then here it is:
Inbreeding is continually using animals that are related by immediate relatives as your breeding stock. A lot of breeders that are more worried about quantity than quality use animals that are produced by them to avoid buying new stock to save money. This is why a lot of animals are inbred in any hobby. No real source, save a few exotic pet breeders I know. This makes sense to me, so it's not suspect.
While true for dogs, this does not apply to hybrids in the sense we are talking. Generally, there will be deformities for hybrids (including sterility), or the hybrids will be a third species that is not found in nature. This is a statement that assumes that dog breeds and biological species are similar. They are not.
The problem with the pet trade is that the genes aren't shuffled as effectively as they are in the wild, leading to inbreeding either purposefully such as that of dogs, or unintentionally as with our roach colonies (although, I don't think anyone really gets up in arms about the inbreeding of roaches).
So I'll run with this for a second. If everybody in the world is responsible, then a lot of things would be OK. If marijuanna came from other sources than hyperviolent drug cartels, I would be OK with it's legalization. On the other hand, if people used heroin and methamphetamine responsibly, there would be little problem with either of these drugs.
Not going to argue there. It's true. However, the risks from hybridization outweigh any benefits. There is actually no benefit from hybridization. Sure, you might make a buck...but this is not an acceptable reason. Eventually, the hybrids will somehow get into the gene pool of other species and will spread to the point where we have no more of that species, only hybrid. Some species such as b. smithi are no longer imported from their natural environment and are only kept in the pet trade through the efforts of captive breeders.
Again, we are not running short on genetic material. We are running short on species.
Hybrids occurr in the wild and captivity, however we have no way to know which is which. Hybridizing for scientiffic purposes is OK, and as long as there is no contamination of any gene pools of proper species this is OK. The only way to ensure that contamination of gene pools does not happen is to not sell them.
A lot of african cichlids come from Lake Victoria, which has suffered an unimaginable catastrophe caused in part by an introduced fish.
You are right to a point:
Definition of hybrid...the offspring of two animals who are two different species. Enough said.
They examine the physical structure, the habitat and their habits. They try to determine if these creatures mate in the wild or can reproduce. They will attempt to hybridize them to see if they can, in fact reproduce and then determine if these are species.
Except for the fact that they study these animals for a living, have years of education behind them, they know the definition of species and actually have good reasons for classifying their animals as different species.
Well, good luck with that. Genetic studies are rarely done among invertebrates. The physical characteristics that scientists look at generally betray genetic characteristics that lead to the conclusion that the animals they are studying are different species.
What are you trying to say here?
I couldnt agree anymore, nicely said.
Hey, now. Everyone can add something to anything. What they add is what makes the difference. Binary spider is technically correct when he says there are problems with classifying on physical characteristics. In the centipede world, coloration and size means nothing. Adults within the same colormorph can be highly variable in size and color, but these mean nothing in nature as they interbreed.
Although I was wrong about what percentage of hybrids are sterile, the facts in my posts still stand alone. We are arguing ethics, a large majority of which is personal opinion backed up by science.
I am arguing the ethics of the situation and have not yet heard a convincing arguement about why creating a new species not found in nature by mating two species that would never actually meet just because you want to make a few dollars is ethical.
I've said several times that the term species is merely an artificial barrier that is set in a straight continuum in both this thread and others. What I am saying is that we should respect species as they are found in nature.
I'm not saying it is. I'm saying we should stick to nature the best we're able. Just because species aren't set in stone doesn't mean we should hybridize anything. Many people enjoy this hobby because it gives them the chance to research their pet and find out where it is found in the wild. If there's nothing but half breeds left in the hobby where none of the pets are actually exotic...just man made, we become the Wal*Mart of the pet world. Nobody wants this.
I've already apologized to you and fully understand why you may not like me. Feel free to attack me, I can understand why you may feel this is warranted. I attempted to send you a private message to explain my views in private and offer a chance to bury the hatchet, however it seems you have found the ignore list function. I believe private messages are just that...private and not meant to be brought up in a public setting so I'm not going to say any more on this subject other than there is a certian irony involved.
