fuzzylogic
FORUM PARTICIPANT
tankoutlaws.com
Posts: 789
|
Post by fuzzylogic on Feb 22, 2012 8:42:06 GMT -6
I just found a great article describing the breeding terminology of Cichlids. I always felt like in the pet trade F0s can only be wild caught but according to this I am mistaken. Its saying the 2 breeders if not siblings then they are labelled as F0. Give it a look and let me know your opinion www.cichlid-forum.com/articles/cichlid_breeding_terms.php |
|
|
|
Post by mruble on Feb 22, 2012 10:38:20 GMT -6
Some interesting information. Sounds like a pond raised fish could be considered to be FO?
|
|
fuzzylogic
FORUM PARTICIPANT
tankoutlaws.com
Posts: 789
|
Post by fuzzylogic on Feb 22, 2012 10:55:23 GMT -6
I mean that's how the article read to me. So long as the fish weren't line bred. From 2 different distributers for example then they would be considered F0. But as long as I've been buying fish I always assumed F0 was only wild caught fish
|
|
|
|
Post by bnoel210 on Feb 22, 2012 12:07:08 GMT -6
I think when we are buying/selling fish with the majority of the hobbiest are assuming f0 is wc, f1 is first gen from wild and so on. Im wondering if we can find more information some place else to confirm this article. Cause how can you get two seperate tank raised parents and lable the fry f1. I would be extremely upset about this if i bought something labled like that. This came up cause i was trying to confirm what to lable my new white calvus fry. Dad is WC and mom is f1 and are not related to each other.
|
|
|
|
Post by rickl on Feb 23, 2012 10:49:07 GMT -6
Yeah, unfortunately the F0/F1/F2 designations used commonly in the hobby don't really match the "real" or "proper" definitions of the terms  . -Rick (the armchair aquarist) |
|
|
|
Post by jon carman on Feb 23, 2012 12:27:47 GMT -6
I consider f0 wild. Brian, don't worry about label, just tell them what they are f0 x f1. Who is to say two wilds that are collected aren't closely related. With a lot of the rock dwelling species, they probably don't go too terribly far from birthplace. So likelyhood of close DNA is probably fairly high.
|
|
|
|
Post by glenoweth on Feb 23, 2012 15:23:49 GMT -6
I consider f0 wild. Brian, don't worry about label, just tell them what they are f0 x f1. Who is to say two wilds that are collected aren't closely related. With a lot of the rock dwelling species, they probably don't go too terribly far from birthplace. So likelyhood of close DNA is probably fairly high. Agree jon, most imported get all their fish from the same collection spots over and over. and alot of types are only located in certant lake locations, so yeah WC fish can be Brother and sister! i mean if a diver grabs 15 fish from one nesting hole, where do you think they came from lol... like multies their groups just grow bigger ,and they dont spread out much |
|
.
