This happened to me with by peacock bass. Although I still love them and they look great, there a cross kilberi x mono. Two xingu’ also which I’m honestly not sure about either.
What makes one species of fish "better" than another species of fish? And what makes a species of fish "only good as feeder fish"? Those look awfully pretty. If you didn't realize, this process occurred with humans, and dogs, and many other successful species on the planet. Humans are hybrids of multiple sub-species of hominid. Dogs are ultimately a combination of Eurasian wolf, with occasional addition of divergent canine populations. All species go through a period of hybridization. Where sub-species diverge, and come back together. This could take place over a wide geographical range, or a small one. The smaller the geographical range, the more likely the converging sub-species will be more closely related and thus less genetically diverse. But speciation isn't something that can be absolutely defined. We are technically always in the process, But even in between a species and a descendant species, the intermediate period generally involves a great deal of what we would call hybridization. All evolution involves hybridization. Ultimately, hybridization has the ability create a stronger genetic pool not a weaker one. Depending on how inbred it becomes of course. Now what you are calling "deformities" are more accurately, "abnormalities". And abnormalities can lead to new and interesting traits, and eventually, in the right environment, a new species or sub-species given enough time. I would imagine from a genetic perspective, combining all the different genes also produced some exceptionally healthy fish, who have possibly undergone hybrid vigor, or adopting successful and important traits from all the previous subspecies involved. Again, environmental conditions also play a role. So fish who are for all intents and purposes, evolving in a single fish tank, are going to be rather inbred. And there will be little environmental pressure selecting for one trait over another. However, if done properly, this process could equally produce a super healthy population, of genetically rich fish. Whom, if in the wild, could theoretically not only survive, but thrive due to the combination of genes selected for. Anyway. There is no reason these hybrids should be more or less "good" or "viable" than any other species or subspecies. The issue with this specific case, is too small a gene pool over too long a period of time without addition, as you mentioned. Spread that population out into other tanks, with other unrelated cichlids, would theoretically,eventually produce a plausibly adaptable, healthy and unique population, that could be even more successful than it's parent sub-species.
Not necessarily. Inbred dogs are unhealthy and its a problem with many species. They are bad because the cross breeding removes the genetic diversity and makes them all look the same. On top of this they are inbred which of course cause additional problems.
i know there maybe some diformed ones but there are some amazing ones that would look good in better lighting.i would like them all
That's what I thought
The species isn't changing, they just aren't selecting the most colorful like breeders would and selling the rest....
❤
This happened to me with by peacock bass. Although I still love them and they look great, there a cross kilberi x mono. Two xingu’ also which I’m honestly not sure about either.
As long has u know what's what,it's not that bad some still like hybrid 🐟. The tiger shovel nose x red tail cat. Is a pretty popular fish.
Mine breed into a corn speckled sewer trout. Who woulda known
I believe that's why all male african cichlid tanks are so popular. Much more colorful with just males!
Imagine eye beater have color alunocara
That male only tanks are make more since
What makes one species of fish "better" than another species of fish? And what makes a species of fish "only good as feeder fish"? Those look awfully pretty.
If you didn't realize, this process occurred with humans, and dogs, and many other successful species on the planet. Humans are hybrids of multiple sub-species of hominid. Dogs are ultimately a combination of Eurasian wolf, with occasional addition of divergent canine populations.
All species go through a period of hybridization. Where sub-species diverge, and come back together. This could take place over a wide geographical range, or a small one. The smaller the geographical range, the more likely the converging sub-species will be more closely related and thus less genetically diverse. But speciation isn't something that can be absolutely defined. We are technically always in the process, But even in between a species and a descendant species, the intermediate period generally involves a great deal of what we would call hybridization.
All evolution involves hybridization. Ultimately, hybridization has the ability create a stronger genetic pool not a weaker one. Depending on how inbred it becomes of course.
Now what you are calling "deformities" are more accurately, "abnormalities". And abnormalities can lead to new and interesting traits, and eventually, in the right environment, a new species or sub-species given enough time.
I would imagine from a genetic perspective, combining all the different genes also produced some exceptionally healthy fish, who have possibly undergone hybrid vigor, or adopting successful and important traits from all the previous subspecies involved. Again, environmental conditions also play a role. So fish who are for all intents and purposes, evolving in a single fish tank, are going to be rather inbred. And there will be little environmental pressure selecting for one trait over another.
However, if done properly, this process could equally produce a super healthy population, of genetically rich fish. Whom, if in the wild, could theoretically not only survive, but thrive due to the combination of genes selected for.
Anyway. There is no reason these hybrids should be more or less "good" or "viable" than any other species or subspecies.
The issue with this specific case, is too small a gene pool over too long a period of time without addition, as you mentioned. Spread that population out into other tanks, with other unrelated cichlids, would theoretically,eventually produce a plausibly adaptable, healthy and unique population, that could be even more successful than it's parent sub-species.
th-cam.com/video/Nd3rqQCEtPw/w-d-xo.htmlsi=SRPYtviGxBxG4fzc
this guy is honestly so dark
Kinda like happened with Native Americans.
I've never had this problem with central american cichlids only african cichlids
you can but African problems are more common
Donate them
why are they bad. cross bred dogs are healthier
Not necessarily. Inbred dogs are unhealthy and its a problem with many species. They are bad because the cross breeding removes the genetic diversity and makes them all look the same. On top of this they are inbred which of course cause additional problems.
do you mean Pure breeding not cross breeding
Also cross breeding adds to genetic variation were inbreeding and/or selective breeding will always limit the genetic variation.
Your mother and father were probably brother and sister what about we feed you to the sharks
Probably
😆😅🤣🤣