Re: f1 spawning

["Vern Wensley" <vernwen@home.com>]

If you are encountering this in cacatuoides maybe some spieces that are
considered difficult to spawn are easy the closer they are to wild caught.I
have had problems spawning some spieces that are considered easy by
others,cacatuoides is one of them.If it is diet are we slowly weakening our
fish over time?




-----Original Message-----
From: IDMiamiBob@aol.com <IDMiamiBob@aol.com>
To: apisto@admin.listbox.com <apisto@admin.listbox.com>
Date: March 13, 1999 2:14 PM
Subject: Re: f1 spawning


>Vern writes:
>
>> Has anyone encountered this problem,f1 fish are harder to spawn.I was
>>  talking to David Soares and we got talking about this.He said that some
of
>>  his wild fish will spawn quite easy and then when the fry are old enough
>>  they are very difficult or impossible to get a spawn out of them.I have
had
>>  this happen with my uaupesi.I would think it would be the other way
>>  around.The wild fish are not use to your water and if you got them to
spawn
>>  the fry would grow out in your water and be use to it.So they should
spawn
>>  more readly.I think this happens with the more difficult spieces.Has
anyone
>>  run into this before.Any thoughts on this would be appreciated.
>
>In the wild, fry "grow out" on a very broad-spectrum diet.  In our tanks,
we
>tend to feed them BBS and pat ourselves on the back for our good husbandry.
>There are too many nutrients necessary for any vertebrate species to
flourish
>for this to be an effective practice.  At the current time I am raising my
fry
>on BBS, but not making serious efforts toward breeding.  I have encountered
>this for the first time with my current generation of cacatuoides, which
are a
>long way from F1, to a small degree.  I usually have microworms and/or
vinegar
>eels available to supplement.  Translating this line of thinking to an F1
>breeding problem, the few F1s that overcome their deficit pass on whatever
>ability to overcome they have on to F2, and the problem diminishes.
>
>Gary had the following thought:
>
><snip>> Maybe wild males with no territorial/spawning drive get driven out
of
>desirable habitats, and effectively culled.<snip>
>
>Over the millenia, DNA with no desire to propagate itself will long ago
have
>been culled.  Face it- the only reason we exist {theological justifications
>excused) is to duplicate little strands of nucleic acids.  Any DNA which
>doesn't reproduce extincts itself.  A reproductive drive is essential for
>survival of the species.  Gary's unmotivated fish would have been all but
>genetically culled long before modern times.  Only one in a zillion fish
would
>be born with this non-desire gene.
>
>My explantion is only theoretical.  YMMV.
>
>Bob Dixon
>
>
>-------------------------------------------------------------------------
>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"!