|
| |
|
FAQs on Oscar Identification Related Articles: Oscars, Neotropical
Cichlids, African Cichlids, Dwarf
South American Cichlids, Cichlid Fishes in
General,
Related FAQs: Oscars 1, Oscars 2,
Oscar Selection,
Oscar Compatibility,
Oscar Behavior,
Oscar Systems,
Oscar Feeding, Oscar Disease/Health,
Oscar Reproduction,
Neotropical Cichlids 1, Cichlids
of the World, Cichlid Systems,
Cichlid Identification,
Cichlid Behavior,
Cichlid Compatibility, Cichlid Selection,
Cichlid Feeding,
Cichlid Disease, Cichlid
Reproduction,
|
|
Re: Oscars - Are they hybrids?
Good morning. I am wondering what "The Crew" thinks
about the origin of the aquarium variety of Oscar. I personally
believe them to be hybrids.
<No, THE Oscar, Astronotus ocellatus used in the hobby and as food fishes are
not hybrids (crosses between species)>
I replied to a post about cichlid hybrids on a forum (with what seems to be some
pretty smart people) debating this very issue in order to perhaps stimulate some
intellectual thinking. The only posts I received however were,
"You are wrong! Oscars are not hybrids." This is
a direct quote of what I had written on the forum. "Currently,
there are three species of "Oscar", Astronotus crassipinnis, A.
ocellatus, and A. orbiculatus. However, back in 1831 when Agassiz
discovered the Oscar,
<Described by Louis Agassiz in 1831>
there was only one species, Lobotes ocellatus. All three species were
believed to be this one species. When these fish were imported, they
were very hard to breed, taking years to reach maturity. Florida fish
farms (at that time basically importers) gathered large numbers of these Oscars,
regardless of looks, and threw them in outdoor ponds to raise and
breed. Since they were all considered one species, there wasn't a
problem with this. This is how all of the aquarium strains came to be
(red, tiger, silver, gold, albino, and long-finned)."
<Mmm, actually... have been in the hobby and business or ornamental aquatics
a good long time (since the mid-1960's) and have visited fish farms (in the
orient, this fish and its sport mutations are not bred commercially in the U.S.)
and have seen the efforts at selective breeding to make these other varieties...
sometimes easier to do starting with crosses... but am pretty sure these are all
A. ocellatus>
Does this argument make any real sense? Do I even have an
argument? What are your views on this? I am hoping you can
shed some light on this for me, so I will know whether to back down on this
issue or perhaps push it a little further. Thank you.
<Perhaps a trip to a large/college library and a search for literature on the
species, its history. Please see here re: http://www.wetwebmedia.com/litsrchart.htm
Karyotyping ("chromosome mapping") work has likely been done on this
"species-complex" that will reveal if the current animal in use is
just one or a mix of species.
Press on my friend. Bob Fenner>
- Jason Seymour
| |
|