Proposed Variety (Morph) Naming Scheme for Ancistrus cf. cirrhosus (BN)

[Shane]

DPM1's definitions above are why I went with breed (man made) vice variant, which could be natural as in "Are you keeping the variant from the Rio Negro or the Rio Orinoco?"

Not trying to be pedantic but precise.

-Shane

[Jools]

I used the term variant in discussion with Anton Lamboj in terms of finding an umbrella term that covers breed, population and strain. I agree breed implies something that is man made. When geography is involved, I thought the prevalent vernacular term was population.

If you bred 100

Chaetostoma

and two had red eyes, would you call that a red eye breed or red eye variants?

I suspect this isn't defined scientifically, but I'd be happy to be proven wrong on this one. Our debate here also goes to underline how messy discussions of this nature are due to participants not all being on the same page. I've seem some total train wrecks of discussions on FB around this kind of thing where species and breeds concepts are clearly mangled.

Anyway, don't want to hijack the thread, but it's useful explaining what terms the site uses as a basis for informing the discussion around the Ancistrus naming convention.

Jools

[Shane]

If I had two fry come out with red eyes I would 1) take photos to document it hapened and 2) destroy the mutant animals to ensure they did not reproduce.

Now if someone else started crossing brothers to sisters with the red eye mutation until they fixed a red eye strain of Chaetostoma that bred true I would label it a breed.

Terms like breed are not scientifically defined. They really are considered "terms of art." I didn't make that up

Even though it does not interest me, I do appreciate what Ron is suggesting and he is correct that PC has a huge impact on what names do and do not become accepted in the hobby.

Maybe there is place for a new cat-elog sub section "Frankenfish - man made breeds and hybrids." There seem to be more of them everyday.

-Shane

[dpm1]

Although there may be no scientific basis for variant vs breed (I'll leave that to the Ichthyologists) there is certainly a case for differentiating from a linguistics viewpoint (OED definitions):

Variant:
A form or version of something that differs in some respect from other forms of the same thing or from a standard.

Breed:
A stock of animals or plants within a species having a distinctive appearance and typically having been developed by deliberate selection.

As you can see for general use Variant is a perfectly acceptable word to use, however as far as deliberate deliberate line breeding to 'fix' features then Breed is a more correct term. Whilst these mutations will occur in wild populations they will almost certainly be short term aberations of individual fish and will be bred out by natural selection and shear force of competition from standard forms (or if advantageous or genetically dominant first form local popilation variants distinct from their neighbours, and later possibly even new species).

Maybe it is semantics but it feeds back in to the idea of providing a more accepted scientific naming of these types. Unless it breeds true, and therefore is a dominant gene factor, it should not be considered a variant, wild or linebred, but rather just a mutated form as placing a single productive 'standard' fish in the population would soon result in a substantial decline of the original. (Assuming single genes factors only and no natural mutations).

[dpm1]

If I had two fry come out with red eyes I would 1) take photos to document it hapened and 2) destroy the mutant animals to ensure they did not reproduce.

-Shane

If performing a natural breeding cycle, ie not hand picking 'perfect' fish for line breeding then I see no need to treat these fry as anything but natural mutations and therefore unless there was an overwhelming form of evidence to support their destruction I would leave them be - ie susceptibility to disease etc.

You may choose not to purposely breed them or even label them as anything special but I feel by removing natural mutations you yourself are artificially fixing a population and hence a 'breed' by changing the natural balance to suit your own desires - precisely the opposite you intended.

Now if someone else started crossing brothers to sisters with the red eye mutation until they fixed a red eye strain of Chaetostoma that bred true I would label it a breed.

Whilst surely you yourself are fixing a non-red eye strain
...
As Spock has found out on numerous occasions, Logic can be it own worst enemy - or as I like to think of it: 'fish don't read rulebooks' (or scientific journals!)

[pleco_breeder]

Maybe there is place for a new cat-elog sub section "Frankenfish - man made breeds and hybrids." There seem to be more of them everyday.

-Shane

While I don't support the idea of trying to force a naming convention, I actually believe this may be a reasonable idea. Something else for Jools to put on the list behind the millions of other things I'm sure he's constantly trying to do for the site

With so many species, not only common bristlenose, now being bred for variations which wouldn't be found in wild imports, a pictorial guide referencing a list of different breeds could not only bring some degree of order to what has gotten so far out of hand, but allow catfish "noobs" to realize what they have. Likewise, I think it could potentially help to increase the standard of the breeds indirectly if the pics used were highly scrutinized for quality. Guppy breeders aren't going to show off their culls ;) Without the nightmare of multiple names for any strain being given any consideration when putting the page together, it could be a valuable reference tool for showing the breeds.

While I do sit on the side of the fence supporting the various breeds, I would hope a separation would be made for hybrids. They're far more predominant in Asian markets, but I've seen them in the US as well. It's sad to say, but a portion of our hobby has began to resemble flowerhorns in the past couple years. This section could realistically serve as a sort of "buyer beware", and even a valuable reference regarding genetic relation between separate species.

I completely understand the reason Shane used the term "Frankenfish", but would caution against using it in the title for fear of backlash, or implying the site doesn't support captive breeding for traits. The actuality is every F2 on the market has already been line bred, if only for traits making them more likely to spawn under captive conditions. My L184 are a prime example of this. There are three tanks on a central system with the same water quality in all tanks, and same portion of identical feed measured by weight. All were also purchased from the same breeder with multiple fish of each sex in the colony. Only one pair has spawned, but are on their third batch. While I can't guarantee they have any real advantage or phenotype, they're definitely more likely to pass on their genes and inadvertently create a line.

Larry

[Psy]

On breed vs variant.

Really, we're dealing with neither. In the snake world, they call it a color morph. The corn snake comes in dozens of colors.

If you compare it to dogs, just changing the color does not usually get you a breed. Maybe the longfin ones? Variant is maybe a little too popular when it comes to wild populations, you'd want to avoid confusion.

In tank breeding we are certainly breeding for something. If a wild population has a variation in spot size, its just as possible to decrease that variation while trying to breed for that "normal" look. I currently have a tank with red, white, and green type swordtails. Even though I'm applying a more natural selection (Raphael cats) even that isn't the same selection as found in the wild.

[rcbows]

Reading the previous posts I didn't realize that "PLANET CATFISH" only catered to the scientific community on the technical, and wild catfish side of the hobby. I didn't realize that some PC members are scientists and rely only on the strictest scientific "International Code of Zoological Nomenclature" which defines rank, in the nomenclatural sense.

No sarcasm intended!
Ron

[rcbows]

Oh by the way I "do not " beleve in Hybridizing species it is un-natural and wrong!

I "do" believe in letting natural gene mutations express themselves within a natural known species. I do not believe that Ancistrus species are crossbred with another species within the Ancistrus genus, but the different "Variants" and "Mutations" are naturally occuring and not "Man Made".

Ron

[bekateen]

Hi Ron,

No sarcasm taken.

Reading the previous posts I didn't realize that "PLANET CATFISH" only catered to the scientific community on the technical, and wild catfish side of the hobby.

On the contrary, I would say that Planet Catfish caters to catfish enthusiasts of all breeds and varieties { to make a play-on-words of the theme of this thread. Only innocent humor intended here }. In these forums I've met everyone from professional scientists (some biologists, but many not), to globe-trotting explorers, to LFS owners and employees, to professional catfish breeders, to amateur catfish breeders, to people with 5 or 6 aquaria, to the kid with their first Cory, and it has Ich. Add to this list many people who like the various color morphs (just do a search in the forum for how many people say they have the different forms of BNs, including myself - I have albino BNs and albino Corys).

It seems to me that while most people come to this site, ask their questions (to get tips, help, or advice, or to show off their fish), get their answers and then move on, I also see a small core of people who stay on this site for a longer time - people who have a true love for and interest in these catfish. These people have the historical advantage that they have seen new trends in the hobby come and go, some of them good and some of them not-so-good. As I see them, these people view fish keeping as being more about the fish and less about the fishkeeper (what you called the "wild catfish side of the hobby"). And in that context, it would seem only natural to be opposed to the selective (at best) or manipulative (at worst) breeding of morphological mutation lineages for the sake of commercial gain, and hence the negative attitude towards what have been referred to as "Frankenfish."

Line-breeding is not inherently evil, as has already been pointed out earlier in this thread; it automatically occurs every time anyone repeatedly breeds a tiny population of fish which they then trade out or sell into the hobby. In my own personal opinion, there is a significant difference between breeding color morphs (e.g. albinos, which do occur naturally in many spp, even if rare) and breeding in physical deformities. Speaking for myself, I feel it's reasonable to consider the purposeful exploitation of morphological defects (like the long fin varieties, or imagine all of the "balloon" fish now appearing in the hobby) as a negative trend in the tropical fish industry.

Okay, I realize that I've presumed to know the feelings and motivations of many other people on this site, and yet I've probably done a horrible job representing them; for that I ask forgiveness, and if I'm way off on this, I hope others correct me.

Cheers, Eric

[panaque]

I think you have put that very well Eric. You could classify me as one of the globe trotting scientist types with a passion for wild (-type) fish. However, I can also understand the fascination with variation within domesticated species, like the bristlenose - it takes me back to crossing platys in my younger days. It's all driven by the same fascination with nature for me.
I think that a kind of super thread in classifying BN morphs could be helpful to a lot of visitors to the site. Anyone who doesn't like this side of fishkeeping could just simply not participate in that thread. Just a thought...

[Shane]

Well written post Eric.

To add another free radical to the conversation.... several hobbyists believe that the "common Ancistrus" that was the base species for these "fancy" breeds is itself a hybrid.

If it does turn out that all these fancy forms stem from what was originally hybrid stock would people feel differently?

Some have said that they are in favor propagating breeds but are against creating hybrids. What if it turns out that they are one and the same?

-Shane

[dpm1]

...several hobbyists believe that the "common Ancistrus" that was the base species for these "fancy" breeds is itself a hybrid.
...
Some have said that they are in favor propagating breeds but are against creating hybrids. What if it turns out that they are one and the same?

-Shane

I believe its all but written in stone now that the Common BN originated as a hybrid, although wether it was more 'accidental' or intentionally so like some of today's man-made 'frankenfish' may well be up for debate still
(NB: 'Frankenfish is not my general way I think of these fish, unwelcomed tho they may be I find only a few truely 'wrong' - as long as they aren't actively bred in preference to the species)

Putting the BN aside I feel breeds are still a specific species fish, albeit non natural in form and hence different to a variant. Hybrids are species X * species Y...and anyone who likes Synodontis will note how terrible that can work out when attempting to match 'cute baby' appearance with 'future adult' appearance,size and behaviour.

[Jools]

I am not sure I would go far as written in stone, but I am personally content in considering that the "not WC" common BN in Europe is a hybrid a view shared by every single Ancistrus breeder I've ever met in the EU that's bred a few spp. and several other genera of fishes. For example, Ingo Seidel and Hans Georg Evers to inelegantly namedrop. Three reasons, one is geography of EU+logistics of auctions+amateur breeders and commercial breeders in the EU and the 2nd is my belief there are loads of species (most undescribed) that are very similar+import patterns that shift over time and finally, 3, Ancistrus are very prolific and known to readily hybridise.

I am considerably less certain about the US common BN but I'd be OK with assuming some that are bred in the US are hybrids.

How I represent all that in the cat-elog is the kind of thing that wakes me up a night in a cold sweat.

Jools

[dpm1]

'All but written in stone' because everything I've read about the European BN is about how it differs from any recognised species (or L). Maybe one day someone will find a wild cousin and there may be a 'halleluyah' moment but I very much doubt it considering the efforts put in so far.
The A "cf" name does sit oddly alone....may be give it an L number as it's not a described species? That would shake up the world of the elitist L-number collectors given that every second tank owner around the world would have one..(how controversial would that be? )(Yes I have an L/LDA but I tend to use its 'real' name )

And I wish someone would sort out how there are 2 'common BNs' representing different fish either side of the pond. I usually frequent other more general fishy homes so I forget about some of these quirks.

[Jools]

I'm delighted you mention that dpm1, it has more than once crossed my mind that when we reach L500 it should be given to the humble, unidentified common BN and all its many colour variations. However, the folks that do that nowadays perhaps don't share my view...

Jools

[Shane]

This seems like as good of a time as any to lay out the origin of the U.S. "common BN" as, unbeknownst to me for almost 20 years, they were originally my fish.

In the mid-1990s I purchased a group of "brownish Ancistrus" from a pet store in northern Virginia. I have no proof that these fish were wild, but any spawning of Ancistrus was still fairly rare at the time and the fish I bought were all large sexually mature adults. I was also involved in the local fish club and no one back then was breeding any loricariids.

This was still years before the PC forums, so catfish knowledge was still spreading only as fast as snail mail and magazine publishing schedules would let it. Others had spawned Ancistrus long before me, but I am confident saying that I was the first to start producing huge amounts of Ancistrus in the Washington DC metro area.

To be honest, I never put much energy into trying to identify my breeding group. In those days I was one hundred percent focused on Asian catfishes and had yet to spend years collecting in South America and studying the families of catfishes found there. L Numbers were in existence in Germany but few people in the U.S. had heard of them and the "pleco craze" was still a few years away.

Meanwhile I started producing hundreds upon hundreds of fry. I was making money hand over fist supplying the pet stores between Baltimore and Washington DC. My $2.00 fry were a lot less than the stores were paying for wild caught stock. As there was no Aquabid, my "customer base" was limited to stores within driving distance.

In the space of less than two years I was so successful that I put myself out of business. I was selling fry at $.25 because I had completely saturated my sales market. At this price I was barely breaking even and wondering how to get rid of all the fry that were fast becoming a plague on my fishroom.

It was at this time that the Florida commercial fish scene realized I was costing them money. Somehow, most likely through one of the retail stores I was selling to, they tracked me down and made me an offer I could not refuse. Ok, I literally could not refuse as it was a lot of money and I had no market for my fish. I packed up the entire Ancistrus farm and shipped them to Florida.

Just last year while speaking in Ohio I was approached by a gentleman who told me that he had owned the fish farm that bought my Ancistrus almost 20 years ago. They formed the breeding stock for what become the "common U.S. BN." He made a fortune off of them for a while as the only supplier, but eventually other fish farms got their hands on his stock and started breeding them as well. I had no idea that the descendants of my original Ancistrus could be found all over the U.S. and are still being raised in ponds in Florida to this day.

-Shane

[Jools]

Awesome account in summary of Shane's experience. It's even better when you hear it first hand over a much longer time frame and with refreshments.

Jools

[rcbows]

Shane,
I live in Florida and know most of the fish farmers in my area. I was wondering if you could tell me then name of the farm that you sold them to! You can PM me if you like. I would like to talk to them about the origins of there stalk and if they ever crossed or hybridized them with other species. I know one farm that has leteraly Millions of Ancistrus under one Greenhouse, and most are shipped over seas!

Ron

[Jools]

Ron,

It would be really interesting to know where they are shipped to Ron and to see if you could get a half decent picture of one of the millions? Is that possible? All this stuff just help builds up a global picture of the common Ancistrus which, I think everyone knows, is a heck of a complex thing.

Cheers,

Jools

[rcbows]

Jools,

That's why I asked where Shane shipped his fish to in Florida, to see if I could track down the original line. To see what the breeder now has to say about the Ancistrus sp.

I have asked Fish Farmers before about where that many fish are being sold and all they say is "Over Seas". They won't tell me exactly for fear of someone honing into there business accounts. I tend to believe them because most of the LFS even chain Pet Shop's never have any BN's for sale and say they can't get them. Yet I go to some particular farms and they are loaded with them. They always have Common Pleco's though which come from egg collection in the Florida bypass canals. That's why I sell so many BN's locally, none of the wholesalers have them. There is the largest wholesales here in this area Seagrest Farms and 5D's Tropical, they list them but most of the time when LFS order them they are always, most often not available. There is also a farm that produces a lot of Rhino Plecos ( I have one), but you never ever see them in the LFS'. They say its one of there biggest sellers.

Ron

[Jools]

Even a country would do in place of "over seas". What makes no sense to me is how that is commercially viable given fish farms in Europe and the middle and far East.

Jools

[pleco_breeder]

I suspect the farms don't even know where the fish are going. One of the advantages which drew farms to the areas around Miami, Tampa, and L.A. is the number of importers and exporters working in the industry in those areas. I've always thought it was funny that most US hobbyists complain that their dream fish is never available here, and is always being publicized in Germany or Japan. The reality is the exports are passing through US customs ports before going to those locations, and aren't being removed before going on to those countries where they have a higher value because none of the farms or wholesale jobbers were asking for them. Regardless of that, a lot of the sales in those areas also come from farms selling to the same importer/exporter to send on to the next location. If the farm is saying "overseas", and it's actually the truth, this is most likely what's happening. Not many farms actually bother with the export side because it's easier to take the decrease in value for higher quantity.

Having said that, given the ease of breeding, and relatively low cost of production, I can't imagine bristlenose not being produced locally in those areas "overseas" to cover the demand. The only scenario I can come up with would be the exporter trying to meet an exact shipping volume for pricing reasons.

Larry

[Jools]

How much of that is first hand knowledge Larry?

Jools

[pleco_breeder]

I've dealt with exporters in a similar manner by shipping to Miami, but the information directly regarding the local farms and being common practice comes from the exporter. This has been several years ago, but I'm assuming the same method is still in use today.

Larry