The thing is that when you see a bunch in a tank at the LFS they dont necessarily come from the same clutch ... wholesalers get them from all over and group perculas in one bunch and so on ... as to inbreeding from the same batch I would think that would be unwise .... like inbreeding anything ( you only have to look at the southern states to get that point ( Alabama, Arkansas etc :razz: )

Cheers

I am not talking about getting them from a LFS thought I was more curiouse if I got a couple from a person who had a clutch of them.. so they would be all from the same batch.

Steve

My limited knowledge of animal husbandry, genetics, and some sociology thrown in (a chance for me to show off):

Mating one individual to it's own sibling is common in animal husbandry (line breeding). It helps to stabilize certain traits (recessive). The interesting thing is, dog, cat, bird and undoubtedly fish breeders all do this... why hasn't it happened in humans?

It has. Before western culture (judeo-christian norms) began to take over the world, there were essentially five kinship systems. Ours is known as the eskimo system: grandma, grandpa, aunt, uncle, mom, dad, brother, sister, cousins, kids, nieces and nephews, etc. One of the others was known as hawaiian. Mom, dad, brother, sister, son, daughter. No one else. So anyone in your generation is your brother or sister. Anyone above you is mom or dad. Anyone below you is son or daughter. So yes, you do end up procreating with a sibling (and they were polygamous). Interestingly, this worked very well for several thousand years until the missionaries arrived. Interestingly, rather than having kids with one blue eye and one green eye, or two mouths, as the stories go, you simply had an equal chance of either transmitting "good" genes or "bad" genes. One of my professors really got off on scaring us kids with that story. But it's true.

So what I'm getting at here is that basically line breeding isn't as bad as people think, whether you're talking animals or humans. The reason why we don't do it? Because we think it's gross. The reason we think it's gross? In my opinion, like so many other religious traditions, it's been proscripted (proscripted meaning something you should not do, contrary to what you might think). See, you end up with two kids. One is really smart, strong, and can take down a mammoth with his or her bare hands. The other has defects. So do you cull the defective one? For a while maybe. Then something called rationalization came along, and it got thrown into primitive religion, and ancient judaism was born (and from that, christianity). So that's why we don't make babies with our siblings (and I'm fine with that).

Appendix A
Just to give examples of where line breeding can be good and bad:
Good - Lots of colours of dogs, cats, gerbils...
Bad - Bananas are actually fairly close to extinction (not enough variety between species)

Anyone with a more extensive background on this topic than me should feel free to correct me.

Well then in the southern states there ought to be a law ... dem dere rednecks jus looove dere kinfolk :smile: :eek:

Famous last words by Rednecks

"Hey ya'll. Watch this!"



Cheers

Cheetahs also don't have very much genetic diversity, and I believe cultivated coffee also suffers from the same problem.

I don't know if I buy the argument that it's not bad to inbreed. Sure you can get away with a generation or two or whatever, but when its generation after generation .... you just have to look at any of the purebred breeds of dogs or cats and the plethora of ailments that are common to those that your average mutt just doesn't have to worry about to know that this can't really be a good thing.

I don't see how the gender switching would really have an mitigating effect on any kind of problem associated with inbreeding.

You have to go through extraordinary measures, or at least measures beyond just simple tank maintenance, to raise fry, so if you just wanted a mated pair to take care of and they laid eggs or whatever ... unless you do something to catch them before they're eaten then their fate is sealed anyways. It's an unfortunate fate I suppose but it's no worse than what would happen in the wild (think about how many eggs are laid over a breeding pairs lifetime .... then think that it only takes two offpsring to survive from each pair to create a stable population .... that's a lot of mortality). And like has been pointed out, it is a good food supply for the tank .... :neutral:

Theoretically, you should end up with an equal number of superior individuals and inferior individuals. Of course, if you happen to loose the superior individuals along the way, and cross breed the inferior individuals, then you've just stabilized the inferior genes. Or something like that.

I should have noted that the hawaiian kinship system was used on a number of pacific islands, and there is one pacific island where a large percentage of the population is fully colourblind (versus the forms of partial colourblindness that are actually rather common).

Congrats Steve :exclaim: :biggrin:

That's awesome, your pair must be pretty happy together.
Too bad there gonna be fish food, although speaking with Wendell about this topic on the weekend made me realize how much work is really needed to raise these little eggs.

Good info Quinn! :cool:

I didn't realize you were so smart :razz:

Thanks Rich ... They really do seem happy and dont care what happens in the tank unless it affects them or their BTA :cool:

Cheers

Wow. Congrats. Looks like its clownfish breeding season. My pair should soon be laying their first batch of eggs ever. I can see the female is quite fat this morning and the breeding tube is out.