RE: Rambling thoughts on SMP

["Griffiths, Richard" <rgriffit@visa.com>]

Steve,
I think that in the wholesale business, and I worked in it some 25 years
ago, as well as retail, for the most part, does not treat fish the way
we do--after all, imports are thrown into tanks generally without
consideration of water quality (its' new water, but pH DH, etc. are
considered).  So fish which are raised on lots of room, massive water
changes, etc., will react to adverse conditions.
But take the same fish from a breeder who delivers fish to a retailer,
or other hobbyist, and you have fewer traumatic water changes, a
likelihood, with the hobbyist of matching conditions, and less stress.
I, personally, would not call any fancy guppy at a wholesalers worthy of
purchase because they were more likely purchased from a farm. And not
much can come of that.
The key word is of course, wholesale environment; and I can agree with
your assessment on some of the fish.
>
>Interesting to see so many diverse opinions on this subject, like Robert
>Plant, "I think I'll ramble on..."
> A few of you good folk have made the case for selective line breeding and
>its innocuous effects in such pet shop staples as guppies, platies, etc.
>Coming from someone who for better or worse has spent a good amount of time
>employed in the wholesale fish racket- I can say unequivocally, the fancy,
>highly selected aquarium strains suffer from the highest mortality rates of
>all other freshwater ornamental fishes under wholesale conditions.  In
>fact, the only fancy angelfish strains that can survive to breeding age are
>those that have been produced by certain domestic breeders who infuse their
>stock with wild blood. Want to make a living breeding and selling fish with
>a wide open market?- breed diverse lineages of angelfish,
>
>Another point to make on the subject of inbreeding- certain taxa have
>adapted to a natural condition of severe population bottlenecks and
>associated inbreeding. An example would be the poeciliads (e.g. guppies,
>Xiphophorines platys) 

>which frequently colonize disturbed or seasonal habitats,
>sometimes limiting the gene pool of the founding population to one gravid
>female. These fish have adapted to this type of situation and with their
>rapid maturation and fecund habits can rapidly overcome the immediate
>effects of inbreeding depression. 
Inbreeding depression is really a myth and not conclusively supported by
data.


>Apistogramma do not seem similiarly
>adapted and therefore, warrant some attention to good genetics for
>sustained, long term maintenance.
I agree. But when fish are isolated in potholes in the road, and others
in the ditch, does that make any offspring different? How long does it
take to be different enough that  you don't put them together, or select
the best of the breed from the combined sites?
>
>The issue of conservation: I do not think the purpose of this program is
>for species preservation but rather for the continuance of an aquarium
>population for a given species. However, if the advantages of enhanced
>fertility, fecundity, color, form and general vigor weren't enough- a
>diverse, well managed, documented gene pool has scientific value as well.
True, and ichthyologists consider anything less than 100,000 not to be a
good gene pool. But when rare fish are in the hands of some top
ichthyologists, they will give them to a top aquarist to breed and
maintain; knowing that their efforts may not be good enough, and the
fish valuable enough.

>>From a biologist's view, Apistogramma are ideal candidates for scientific
>study. Perhaps some researcher will someday turn to a study of Apistogramma
>reproductive behavior to reveal some hidden insight into the evolutionary
>process or perhaps a study of morphological variation and speciation. The
>SMP's database would provide an ideal starting point.
>
>I think anyone with an interest in breeding apistos should volunteer their
>efforts to this program, even if for only one morph, population or species.
>I have kept apistos for many years and have had innumerable interesting
>species fall in and out of my hands. I would love to have some of the
>descendents from my Taenicara spawns of 1986 or my Venezuelan hongsloi of
>'89. Where are they now? Just because a species may be common today, that
>does not guarantee it will be so in the future. Think of the SMP as a sort
>of bank, a reserve where we might someday need to withdraw when
>overcollection or the whims of the tropical fish market limit our supply.
Agreed. Common fish, like the normal, striped Angelfish are rare, though
all the permutations are around; the 'Blue Acara' was like a convict
cichlid in the 50's and early 60's; but you couldn't get one in the late
70's through early 90's--because no one had sensed the need for a 'safe
house' (SMP sanctuary where the fish will be kept going by some
dedicated aquarist).

Richard

P.S. While we may all disagree with something in this thread, I
appreciate the quite open discussions AND civility in which it is being
>conducted. Kudos to all for being ladies and gentlemen.
>
>
>-------------------------------------------------------------------------
>