Hot topic...genetic quality of "fad" clownfish?

[jdreefer]

I know that the subject title is a little too specific, but you get the general topic. This is something that I would be interested in learning more about and I didn't want to derail the other threads.

There seems to be several threads currently on the board where there has been mention that some of the (for lack of a better term) "fad" clownfish being sold for high prices are not the greatest from a quality perspective. The issue seems to generally come up when we are discussing Picassos but I am guessing that it would not be limited to Picassos. I use that term more broadly than just ORA's Picassos. Several of the people whose opinion I respect and that I would consider "experts" on this board have noted that a lot of these clownfish have issues with body shape whether it be genetics, lack of culling, nutrition, etc.

I would really like to learn more about what we should be looking for and avoiding when buying these fish. There is lots of discussion about overbites, flared gills, bulldog looks, etc but I am not sure I even know what the perfect shaped Pecula would look like compared to these. I will also confess that I am one of those with a pair of ORA Picassos. Although I got them early in the fad, didn't pay all that much and believe they were from the orginal breeding pair, I do not know whether they are high quality or not. I do know that I love their coloring but that's about it. I will try to post pics of mine at some point to get opinions.

Is this a topic worth discussing?

[sugartooth]

I would like to find out as well. What are the things the 'experts' are looking at in order of importance?

Can someone also provide a short description of the effects of each problem?

For instance, when one mentions flared gills. I can gather what it means, but what about them makes it so undesirable? Is gas exchange not as efficient with these?

When I read 'bulldog' look, I took it as a way to describe what they look like, not that it was a defect. Why is it a defect?

[Jovreefer]

Of course this is a great topic for discussing.

some of these deformities happen in almost all clutches of eggs like bent gill plates, they are obvously bent & you can easily tell. I believe most smaller breeders will cull these fish but an operation like ORA does so many different fish that its hard to catch every bent gill plate to cull. Honestly I'd love to know if they do look for it & cull the ones they find. I dont know much about the side effects of bent gill plates either, maybe someone else could elaborate on that.

Stubby bodies I believe is from in-breeding, I dont think its really been proven either way, but all the "stubby" clowns I've seen have been from inbred parents. Stubby is as stubby says... a shorter clown.

Overbites & bulldog look generally go together & are also from in-breeding to much. ORA had a problem with them about 5 years ago when they had a small selection of WC black & white percs & started breeding children together to produce more. The bulldog face is just as it says, their faces looked like english bulldogs with the smushed in face & larger bottom lip. ORA did get new breeding stock & I believe they corrected their black & white bulldog face problem.

I guess the same thing is going on with their picasso's now from what someone said they have several pairs breeding now. Its a good thing there are new Picasso bloodlines being produced now from outside ORA to help the gene pool

[sugartooth]

Sorry for the naive question. Why is a smushed face or not a perfect bite no good? I guess I don't understand why you don't want them? It is because the only reason one would have this look is due to inbreeding?

[jdreefer]

Originally posted by Jovreefer

I guess the same thing is going on with their picasso's now from what someone said they have several pairs breeding now. Its a good thing there are new Picasso bloodlines being produced now from outside ORA to help the gene pool

So the new Picassos being produced have no relation to ORA? I just assumed that one or both parents were ORA offspring. Are the parents WC and do they look normal or do one or both of them have the Picasso look?

I know this is already derailing the thread, but I find it very interesting.

[Bones18]

Jdreefer,

Here is a link with pictures of the parents and a video of them just before their first spawning



Babies


Scott, I'm not sure if that falls within the limits of posting...if not please do not hesitate to remove it.

Bones

[traveller7]

Brandon,

Its easier for us to manage content on RC, so I adjusted the links to pictures in your gallery.

Folks, let's be careful to keep the discussion on topic, avoid putting some of our valued members in a bad position regarding the User Agreement, etc.

We have discussed this topic in the past and it can get quite intense, let's try not to take opinions too personally.

Thanks.

Cheers.

[Bones18]

Thanks scott

[chrisstie]

I was lucky enough to tour ORA and while the trip itself was overwhelming and hard to catch every detail of their operation, I believe they said that they avoid culling.

They try to have so many pairs of clowns (I'm sure this is more tough with, er, designer clowns) but that they have so many different cluthces and batches they organized by vats that they said the chances of inbreeding occuring were extremely slim

Don't mark my words on this, but it seems to be what I recall from the tour. That isn't to say that they didn't have problems earlier but I think they've come a long way in refining the process

[Jovreefer]

Jdreefer I was refering to the fact that they are no longer the only ones breeding outstanding picasso clowns, there is a completly different bloodline being produced & the chance for future breeders to mix lines to produce even more outstanding picasso's with absolutly no inbreeding is a wonderful thing for this designer clown.

A smushed face or overbite is really just a "not perfect clown" I dont really see any side effects that would come from it. Its just like a dog show, an abnormal look would not qualify for show, it would only qualify for a loving family pet. You would really not want to breed that & risk continueing those issues.

& I'm sorry... I did not mean to call out ORA on this, I guess when your such a large operation though, things happen & its the first example that came to mind. I think ORA is an amazing company & they do ALOT for the reef community. They do take great steps to correct a problem like the black & white smushed faces as soon as they notice it becoming a problem. I call that A+ service & I personally own an ORA picasso that I would not trade for anything!

[GSMguy]

I think most of the bent gills and smashed faces we see are from poor Husbandry as apposed to Inbreeding, Rods fish are Inbred and they don't all have smashed faces...

ORA Breeds thousands upon thousands of fish in their facility, Even Their Picasso breeding pairs must produce many of the plain True Percula that they sell in petco, to expect them to be able to catch every defect is impossible. If ORA has more than one Breeding pair we should expect them to be inbred, where else would they get picassos to breed. Just because something is inbred is nothing to worry about JMO.

Now as for the "new" picassos coming out there Are a few breeders breeding them. I Cant Believe Its all inbreeding producing these clowns. I remember Talking to Bones a year ago when he was trying to put together this pair of his, he ordered like 20-30 wild caught onyx and jigsaw, to find his favorite two, I also think he got lucky with his eventual choice, his fish are not inbred and I don't think he expected his pair to produce these style offspring.

TMC in england, The place in puerto rico with the cotton candy clown, The ocellaris/percula hybrids that Embryoguy got from a private breeder, Bonesreef, ORA, and I'm sure others in asia. all produce picasso clowns. IT cant be as simple as breeding brothers and sisters together to get these markings, Rod doesn't get that many of these kind, and his pair is brother sister.

In response to the OP the Quality of these fish IMO is not dependent on the parents of the fish but the husbandry in grow out. Price is something that is subjective and if the fish don't sell the prices will come down.

Im no expert, just trying to get my thoughts on the subject down as coherently as possible. I look forward to reading everyones thought on the subject, lets not get this thread closed.

[GSMguy]

dp

[jdreefer]

These are old pictures of mine. Their coloring is much darker now, not that coloring or pattern is the purpose of this thread. I will try to get some better pictures and post those.

So what does everyone think? So these clowns have a nice body shape or are there some flaws? Honest answers won't hurt my feelings one bit. I would honestly just like to know how their shape looks and what the ideal Percula would look like. Although my picture taking skillz may be too crappy for anyone to be able to tell anything.

I really didn't start this thread to bash anyone's clowns or have it turn into that. I would jsut like a civil discussion on what we should be looking for.

[jdreefer]

Originally posted by traveller7

We have discussed this topic in the past and it can get quite intense, let's try not to take opinions too personally.

Got any links to what you would consider good threads on the topics?

[vaporize]

I have a maroon clown that looks like a FW parrot fish, does it make into the next fad?

[traveller7]

Originally posted by jdreefer
Got any links to what you would consider good threads on the topics?

Here is one that should put folks on track in the research:
http://archive.reefcentral.com/forum...10#post1828110

Some picasso history:
http://archive.reefcentral.com/forum...9#post10142999

more picasso history:
http://archive.reefcentral.com/forum...5&pagenumber=1

and:
http://archive.reefcentral.com/forum...39#post7026139

Ratios on stubby variation:
http://archive.reefcentral.com/forum...58#post8392258

[jdreefer]

I had read all of the 2006 Picasso threads but the thread from 2003 pre-dates my time here. The thread from 2003 is an interesting discussion. They were predicting back then that misbars would become the rage and the prices would exceed those charged for normal patterns. Interesting discussion about misbars being weaker fish that nature would have naturally selected but that we have kept alive in our little boxes...

So traveller7, what do you think about the shape of the Picassos in the MACNA thread from 2006? Or mine?

Thanks for all the info

[traveller7]

It would be nice some time to have some of the old clown folks drop in for a follow up discussion, many of the crowd on that early thread far exceed my humble breeding SW experience

Even though my freshwater breeding days have completely ruined my desire for "fad" markings, I can appreciate a perfect shaped mis-bar more then most ;>) I find such a specimen, a feat of magic, alas I rarely see prime examples CB :>( When I do, I always have space available

[Slakker]

Originally posted by sugartooth
Sorry for the naive question. Why is a smushed face or not a perfect bite no good? I guess I don't understand why you don't want them? It is because the only reason one would have this look is due to inbreeding?

It has to do, inpart, to the genes being bent out of shape a little bit by the inbreeding. Also, these traits are very rarely seen in wild counterparts (I've never seen it, but that doesn't mean it doesn't exist,) so that would suggest that these things we're seeing are caused by something that we're doing wrong.

I'm not sure what the cause is myself, but it could be a number of things in my opinion. It's important to note that a small percentage of the young survive, so perhaps there are just a number of eggs that are damaged at some point in the incubation process. Additionally, things like water quality and diet are thought to effect the clowns in the developmental stages, so perhaps there is an environmental factor at play during growout that causes it.

The one thing that most people seem to agree upon is that these deformities wouldn't survive in the wild. However, people generally disagree on the topic of culling. Some say that clowns that have developed deformities should be culled out to make the genetic pool stronger, others believe they have just as much a right to live as any other fish.

One of my little clowns has deformed gill plates and there seems to be something wrong with his dorsal fin. So far he seems relatively unaffected by it, though it's not hard to see the kinds of problems that could arise from it in the wild. His gill plates are so bent that the gill structure itself is visible, which I'd imagine would make him very vulnerable.

[Heterodonut]

I second what GSMguy said about poor husbandry being the cause of more smushed faces (or pug noses) on clowns than a gene. I have seen some oscellaris juvies that were raised in small tanks for research purposes (maybe 3 liters) and they all had bites and pug noses, and their sibs that were not part of the research that were raised in 20 + gallons looked normal. Plus I've seen many tank raised maroons with bad over or under bites that were the result on fights with their siblings, not genes.

[traveller7]

Maroons are notorious for infighting at an extremely young age, mouth deformities are inferred from such activity, but sure seem to follow that concept consistently.

Deformaties can absolutely be created through environment.

[jdreefer]

Originally posted by traveller7


Even though my freshwater breeding days have completely ruined my desire for "fad" markings, I can appreciate a perfect shaped mis-bar more then most ;>) I find such a specimen, a feat of magic, alas I rarely see prime examples CB :>( When I do, I always have space available

So am I to infer that you think my clowns are mutts? You better watch it buddy, if the day comes when you stick your hand down a dark, deserted hole in the back of the tank and it gets bit by some random Picasso, you will now know who it was. My fish are now on the lookout for you...

In all seriousness though, I think this is an important topic. We will use myself as an example. I have kept fish for over half my life, have bred (either on purpose or on accident) many different freshwater fish, worked in a fish store for several years, and I have a pair of regular occelaris and a pair of B&W occs that regularly lay eggs. To date I have just been too lazy to try to raise any fry. My pair of Picassos are now showing signs that, from my personal history, tell me that they will eventually start laying eggs. I would love to try my hand at raising them should that happen, but I am guessing that there would be a chance that these offspring shouldn't be making it into the hobby for potentially several reasons (inbreeding, defects, etc).

I have just enough experience to be dangerous but not the dedication (or experience) to be a hardcore breeder. Someone like myself could end up passing fish that shouldn't be finding their way into the hobby on to others just cause we didn't know any better.

[phender]

I have raised many clutches of clowns, from three different species, ocellaris, percula and sandaracinos. IME, all the deformities that we see (flared gills, missing fins, pug noses and under markings) are caused mostly be poor husbandry and not inbreeding.

In my first attempt at raising ocellaris (in the early 90's) almost all of the babies were under marked, had flaired gills and pug noses. As I became better at keeping the water clean and providing good food, I was able to eliminate those problems in almost 100% of my babies. When I started to get a little tired of the effort I was putting into raising the babies, guess what started to happen. I started to see the same deformities again. The parents didn't change, just the husbandry.

The reason you don't see those deformities in wild caught fish is the same reason you don't see them from meticulous breeders. Its not because the malformed fry don't make it, its becasue they aren't exposed to the conditions that cause it.

Overmarking (snowflakes, picassos, etc.) seems to be genetic. IME, the majority of undermarking is environmental.

To the original poster, your fish have what I would describe as a pug nose. Compared to a wild fish, the noses on yours do not extend far enough out to meet the lower jaw properly. Is that a problem for the fish? It doesn't seem to be, but for me, it is not asthetically pleasing. But they are not my fish. I can't tell if your fish have flared gills. When viewed for head on a normal clown should look like this ( ). A fish with flared gill has more of a triangle shape when view from the front because the gill plates go like this / \.

[MJI]

Originally posted by phender
I have raised many clutches of clowns, from three different species, ocellaris, percula and sandaracinos. IME, all the deformities that we see (flared gills, missing fins, pug noses and under markings) are caused mostly be poor husbandry and not inbreeding.


Overmarking (snowflakes, picassos, etc.) seems to be genetic. IME, the majority of undermarking is environmental.

Phil,

From the info I've gleaned over here, I'm with you on these points

[GSMguy]

Originally posted by MJI
Phil,

From the info I've gleaned over here, I'm with you on these points

+1

Phil said what I was trying to say, only coming from a position of much more knowledge he was able to get it out much more eloquently.