Page 1 of 1
P1 - F1
Posted: Tue Nov 22, 2005 10:22 pm
by McEve
Are we going to use F1 or CB as standard for first generation tank bred? What are the pro's and con's with the two systems, which one is the most correct one to use, and where does the two systems originate from?
I'm probably the only one that doesn't know, but it might be helpful, just in case somebody else is wondering about this too, to have this one cleared up in a thread about only this issue?
Posted: Tue Nov 22, 2005 10:29 pm
by Andrew C
I have only ever heard of F1, which means first generation, and F2, second generation, and so on.
Never heard of CB, what does it mean ?
Posted: Tue Nov 22, 2005 11:00 pm
by McEve
Glad to hear I'm not the only one
I hope we'll have it explained to us soon.
I wonder if INXS didn't write something about this, but I can't seem to find it...
edit:
No, it was Lyretail, and it was P1 - not CB (captive bred.. duh) *confused*
Posted: Tue Nov 22, 2005 11:48 pm
by NeoCult
i think for zebs you either have F1 (Wild Caught) or CB (Captive Bred)
i used to keep bearded dragons and other lizards that were all labeled F1, F2 etc, its much easier with fish to have just wild or captive IMO
Posted: Wed Nov 23, 2005 12:09 am
by McEve
So what do you call the offspring from an F1 and a WC unrelated fish?
Posted: Wed Nov 23, 2005 3:51 am
by NeoCult
CB if it was bred in a tank
Posted: Wed Nov 23, 2005 6:06 am
by Barbie
The F system for fish bred in aquariums is much easier to understand and remember, for most people. Then again, people get the idea that you are somehow multiplying the generations removed from the wild if you outcross into other captive bred fish, when actually the idea is to be tracking just how inbred the fish in the group are.
Say I have a group of Wild Moba Frontosa (not such a stretch 
) and I raise up the F1 fry from them and breed them without crossing in any new genetics. The next group of fry would be F2 and so on. If you then crossed one of the F3 fry from that group with an unrelated F1 fish from someone else, you basically are back to F1 fry again. First generation from a genetic outcross. For some reason this concept is beyond most people, and it is a REALLY hotly argued and debated topic on some of the cichlid boards.
The idea is to be able to track genetics closely enough that you know when you need to outcross into new lines to keep the gene pool large enough. Now if only everyone would look at it this way, the whole works wouldn't be nearly so confusing .
Barbie
Posted: Wed Nov 23, 2005 9:25 am
by McEve
so two unrelated F1's will produce F1's?
Posted: Wed Nov 23, 2005 2:46 pm
by Barbie
Yes. Filial generations is supposed to be what you're tracking. This makes it confusing for people that want to know how many generations removed from wild it is, but makes it easy to know if the group is safe genetically to keep spawning together.
Barbie
Posted: Wed Nov 23, 2005 2:49 pm
by McEve
thanks.
I looked around a bit, and found that P1, P2 so on comes into play somehow as well. You explained the F-system in a very clear and consice manner. How about the P's?
Posted: Wed Feb 15, 2006 3:28 am
by EDGE
What if one fish is wild and the other is CB? Would that still be F1?
Posted: Wed Feb 15, 2006 11:08 am
by Caesars
The way I understand it, yes.
Posted: Wed Feb 15, 2006 3:04 pm
by Barbie
That's where the point of contention lies . Common sense says yes, as that's the first generation from a genetic outcross, but it's so hotly debated that I'm definitely not going to commit myself to saying yes, of course . Just make sure you keep a valid record of breeding lines and you can call it whatever you'd like, with the detailed explanation, of course .
Barbie