Re: Rams de-selection

[Mike & Diane Wise <apistowise@bewellnet.com>]

My feeling is that pulling eggs encourages egg eating in the long run. I
understand the need to pull eggs on valuable, hard to find species, too. But look
at it from the fish's view point. Behavioral studies on cichlids have indicated
that if a spawn is going to be unsuccessful it is better for the parents to eat
the eggs and gain some nutrients rather than waste it. If the eggs are
continually pulled, do these fish some how realize (anthropomorphizing) that the
eggs will not be raised (by them, at least) and eat them and get some value out
of it rather than let them go to waste? Can a population, over a period of time,
be genetically predisposed to eat their eggs? I don't know, but fish are not
primates. They don't learn from observation when they are juveniles. On the other
hand, they are not little biochemical robots strictly programmed from birth.
Experience and repetition helps, whether it is escaping predators or hatching &
raising fry. Success usually brings more success.

Being a basically lazy person, I rarely pull eggs. After 4-6 spawns my dwarfs
usually figure out how reproduce on their own. If this doesn't happen, I then
check to see if there are any physical or social parameters that could be changed
to help reproduction along. I will artificially hatch only extremely rare fish,
usually on the first and second spawns. The first two spawns are often
unsuccessfully hatched by them anyway. After this, if I have a batch of healthy
fry, I let them try it themselves from then on. In this way the fish get the
experience to reproduce on their own.

Mike Wise

Dujardin Colin wrote:

> Ken wrote :
> >> At 07:20 AM 11/2/98 -0600, Lilia Stepanova wrote:
> >> > I am pulling
> > >>eggs from mine, it may be controversial but they ate their eggs before.
> > >
> >> By doing this you are developing a strain that will not tend their
> brood.
> >> I hope you are destroying them before they breed.  The failure to do
> brood
> >> care is a very undesireable characteristic.  If these were the last
> >> remaining examples, it might be justifiable, but for rams????
>
> >Sadly, I think this is already the case.  I agree with you
> >though that fish lose their instinct to care for their fry.
> >Most angel fry are raised away from their parents as they
> >tend to eat the eggs.
>
> <>
> Hi, i find this question interesting.
> If we agree for the postulate that cichlids are intelligent fishes, able
> to learn by avoiding previous errors,
>
> Do you think that the fishes born from eggs hatched without their
> parents won't be able to breed their youngs, because they didn't learn
> it when they were young (very young fry) ? (environnemental learning
> selection)
> Do you think that they won't be able to do it because of genetical
> selection by less environmental pressure, according that the surviving
> fry of a natural brood should (?!) be better parent ? (pressure
> selection)
>
> Or do you think that they won't be able to learn to breed their fry
> because they lost the capacity by cosanguinity ? Or maybe they'll be
> able to learn...
>
> I hope you understood my questions, i'm not a genetic nor an english
> pro.
> This is a question to us : little semi-gods aquarists.
>
> Colin
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> This is the apistogramma mailing list, apisto@majordomo.pobox.com.
> For instructions on how to subscribe or unsubscribe or get help,
> email apisto-request@majordomo.pobox.com.
> Search http://altavista.digital.com for "Apistogramma Mailing List Archives"!






-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This is the apistogramma mailing list, apisto@majordomo.pobox.com.
For instructions on how to subscribe or unsubscribe or get help,
email apisto-request@majordomo.pobox.com.
Search http://altavista.digital.com for "Apistogramma Mailing List Archives"!