Results 1 to 4 of 4

Thread: Wild vs Domestic

  1. #1

    Wild vs Domestic

    At what point do you consider a fish domesticated? I see many claiming wild fish or wild blood, but also know I have been outright lied to and swindled over this very thing. So was wondering what others thought.

    For example......

    Can you consider say a Paraiba or a Pinoy as being 50% wild being as there needs to be 2 generations minimum with domestic genes to produce such a fish?

  2. #2
    If you go back far enough all angels are 100% wild blood.
    I had some Rio Nanays that I personally imported from Peru. I was happy to call those wild caught because they looked and behaved like wild caught fish, but I can't be sure that the guy who supplied the exporter didn't breed them in a pond in his back garden, rather than traipsing up the Rio Nanay to catch them.
    I also have some that I imported from a breeder in the Czech Republic, they were described as f1's, but I have no way of proving that they actually were f1's and not f2's or f3's, and no way of confirming the origins of the parent fish.
    I bred one of my Czech fish to one of the wild caught fish, the resulting offspring certainly look like Rio Nanays, are they F1's, F2's, F1.5's? The simple answer is, "I don't know", I'm not planning on selling any of them, but if I do, or if I sell any of their offspring, I'll tell any buyer what I know of their provenience, but ultimately no breeder can give you more accurate information than they have been given. Ultimately it all depends on trust.

    If I went out to South America, and personally caught some angelfish from a wild environment, brought them home, and bred from them, then I would have no qualms about calling the resulting offspring f1 wilds.
    However, it's worth pointing out that an f1 isn't the same as a wild caught fish.
    First off, not all wild caught fish are willing to breed in a domestic environment, and secondly a pair selected in an aquarium setting might not naturally form in the wild. Thirdly the great majority of the resulting offspring of a pairing in the wild will probably die of disease or predation, whilst the majority of an aquarium pairing are likely to survive, all these factors are causing subtle shifts in the balance of genes in the gene pool of the domestic compared with the wild population.

    If I were then to breed sibling to sibling, I'd have no qualms about calling these f2's. But, f2's would, on average, have 25% more homozygous gene loci when compared to wild fish, plus, it's likely I would have selected parents that exhibited characteristics that I personally found appealing, rather than parent fish being selected by environmental factors in the natural environment. Add to that the subtle changes that affected their parent's gene pool and already an experienced geneticist with the right equipment would be able to distinguish between wild and f2 fish. In other words, the tank bred fish are already becoming domesticated.

    So to answer your original question
    At what point do you consider a fish domesticated?
    I would consider any fish that wasn't caught in the wild at least partially domesticated, and I would ask any breeder claiming that a fish was x% wild for a more detailed breakdown of the family tree and provenience of the wild fish. But ultimately it all boils down to how much you trust them, and how much they can trust their sources.
    Last edited by Pterophyllum; 06-17-2016 at 03:55 PM.
    Blessed are the cheesemakers!

  3. #3
    I completely agree. The time I got ripped off I was told I was purchasing 50 % wild and another line that was 87.5 % wild. The breeder claimed he had true wild fish. But when I started asking questions the truth came out. The 50% wild line had no proof of any parent being wild. And the other line the breeder kept changing the story. One day it was Rio Negro and the next Sta Isabel.

    Because so many claim wild blood, I assume based on the theory that all lines started from wild, they get away with their claims.

    Further someone claiming to be selling 50% wild Pinoy or 50% wild Paraiba just makes my blood boil.

  4. #4
    I think it is ok for breeders to call their fish "wild" as long as they clearly state the filial, F1, F2, etc.. Caveat emptor. I think that a breeder such as Ben will take the time and effort to make selective breeding a reality. His F2s look very much as one would expect an F0 to look. The problem I see in what is available most of the time is sellers offering fish that are probably F4 or F5.
    As for wild crosses, I look for the percentage of wild blood only as an indication of how much the DNA could be influenced by the parent. 75% wild DNA should have a greater degree of discernable influence than 50% wild.
    A sticky point for me is when someone crosses an F3 or F4 to a domestic and calls them a "wild cross". I only feel comfortable calling fish spawned from an F0 or F1 a "wild cross".
    Just and opinion and it's mine.


Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts