Aquatic Plant Forum banner
1 - 9 of 9 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
362 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
It's approaching a year since I purchased my original six zebra danio glo-fish. I've only had to replace one fatality in all that time. This morning, i was surprised they were late for breakfast, failing to surface from the bottom of my bowl at the first sound of the automatic feeder. I was afraid something catastrophic had occurred overnight. But instead, I could see them chasing each other in a frenzy of clusters and schooling, completely oblivious of food.
Query: I'm too lazy to break down the bowl in order to put them in breeder tanks. What are the chances that a few of the fertilized eggs will survive to produce a few fry? There are ample crevices for a few to escape being eaten.

Some Background: I once went through this with a platy, trying to rescue as many live fry as possible and put them in a floating breeder tank only to realize a month or two later that their chances for normal adulthood size would probably have been better in the main tank where they would have had ample room to swim and forage. Feels like I'm choosing between yield vs. viability?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,745 Posts
I had a few zebrafish hatched and grew to maturity in my 29G as a kid. FYI, you're committing a crime for breeding those glowfish! :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
199 Posts
FYI, you're committing a crime for breeding those glowfish!
These glofish seem unnatural and look strange to me. But I imagine they might fit a certain aesthetic...they question is, does the gene they added to make them "glow" make the fish otherwise less healthy? I seem to recall it coming from an experiment with adding jellyfish DNA or something. If it's not making them unhealthy, what are the negative consequences? Then it's similar to breeding for a certain look in any other kind of animal.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
362 Posts
Discussion Starter · #5 ·
It's illegal on two levels: the first is that the gene is a manufactured version of the jellyfish DNA and has a patent on it that reserves to the owners the exclusive right to sell products containing the gene. Secondly, there have been environmental concerns around the danger of introducing the recombinant gene into wildlife. Until recently IIRC, you couldn't even own glowfish in the State of California. In most states, however, I think it's like marijuana, you can possess glowfish as long as you don't sell or barter them in exchange for goods or services.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,745 Posts
I find the glofish gaudy but I’ve seen pictures of glofish hybrids with the original zebrafish and they look pretty good.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
5,957 Posts
In your densely planted bowl, chances are good that some fry will survive. It will be interesting to see if they are all 'glow' or if some revert to wild type. If you ever start another bowl and want a different species with resemblance to goldfish, try the yellow mutant of White Cloud Mountain minnows--no patent problems, LOL!

I think the jellyfish from which the DNA was derived should be paid royalties.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
199 Posts
@johnwesley0 you make good points. Patenting gene sequences always seems to lead to trouble. And there could be some concern of modified species becoming invasive if released, or otherwise disrupting the ecosystem (although in this case these fish seem like they'd make an extra vibrant snack). But this seems like a concern even with fish that are bred for certain characteristics, like showy bettas and whatnot.
 
1 - 9 of 9 Posts
Top