Well Bred Fish? A Standard Of Perfection?

[Deleted User]

Several times, I have heard other members remark that this or that fish looks well bred, or sometimes that it looks poorly bred.

I'm curious to know, what makes a well bred fish? Since I don't think most fish are pedigreed -- Does that mean it looks as though it's from "good" quality stock? And if so, to what standard of perfection are the fish held? Is there a written standard of perfection? Or is the term "well bred" or "poorly bred" simply an opinion based on what someone prefers to see? Does it mean anything more than it looks to be or to not be a hybrid or have hybrids behind it?

For example, I do not know much about showing dogs, however, I am able to look at an individual purebred dog and compare that dog to the AKC's standard of perfection and at least get a feel for how that dog stacks up to the ideal for the breed. Not that I care in dogs -- mine are "just" pets (and pet the most important job any animal can have).

In horses, I am very familiar with good conformation and recognize conformation flaws or ideals in any breed. In my breed of choice, I am very familiar with the written and illustrated standard of perfection and can also evaluate if the "type" is right to win big in halter or driving. "Well bred" and "well made" are not synonyms. A pedigree may read like a million bucks but the individual horse may be ewe necked, cow hocked, goose rumped and over at the knees...

SO, in fish, when someone says a specific fish looks well bred or poorly bred, what is implied? And how is that measured? Is there a set standard of perfection or an ideal that a fish breeder or hobbyist aspires to produce or own?

Thanks,
Jill

[Kazenouta]

This is a really interesting thread. I also haven't ever heard of a certain scale for determining the quality of breeding or of breeding stock for fish but, I'd be interested to hear others' opinion on the matter.

[rich311k]

There are standards used in judging. Nothing formal like for dogs or horses but there are standards used for competitions.

I would say that about fish that are know to have problems from too much mass production. For example a Blue Ram which is clearly superior and comes from a local breeder as compared to the Far East.

[Northernguy]

I don't think there is any pedigree in fish.Just look for proper finnage and colors.
If fish were judged in shows like horses and dogs I'm sure someone would come up with some kind of standards to follow.

[Lab_Rat]

Well bred fish are the ones who phenotypically represent the species with proper body shape and markings, with no signs of hybridization. A good example of this is the Labidochromis caeruleus species. A well bred specimen will be a bright yellow color with predominant black markings on the dorsal, ventral, and anal fins. Females will often have less predominant black than males but the markings should still be there. There should be no barring on the body whatsoever. A poorly bred Labidochromis caeruleus will lack black markings or have very minimal markings, have barring, have structural deformities, or have other obvious signs of hybridization.

Pseudotropheus lombardoi is another mbuna species where poor quality breeding and hybridization has made it very difficult to find good specimens. A well bred Pseudotropheus lombardoi will have 5 distinct vertical black bars on the body, none of which are broken. The males may lose the intensity of the black bar coloration when they turn yellow but the females should retain it. Often times, especially in big box stores or mixed cichlid tanks, you will see Pseudotropheus lombardoi who are poorly bred or hybrid, with more than the 5 bars on the body, broken bars, etc. You should consider yourself lucky to find a phenotypically correct specimen of this species.

Obviously, any hybrid fish is poorly bred as they do not represent the species of either parent, instead they have a mish-mash of species characteristics from each parent. And deformities in a fish show a poorly bred fish. Some breeders will select for these deformities, resulting in abnormal fish who often have health issues due to these deformities (balloon fish for example). It is unfortunate people think deformed fish are "cute" as it encourages breeding of more extreme deformities (ie fancy goldfish).

[Deleted User]

Thanks for the input so far.

It sounds like it was basically as I thought -- there is no official standard of perfection and a lot of it is just personal opinion and pretty subjective (as is the judging of any animal or object).

I guess the good news is really all fish "have" to do is provide enjoyment for their owners. None of them do "work" (as dogs or horses may) and most of them have limited monetary value regardless of how well bred.

Still, I had hoped to find there is a standard reference to refer to for what makes a "well bred" fish beyond the obvous things we all like to see (good health, good color, good fins).

Thanks for the insights!
Jill

[Taurus]

After a couple of years in the hobby, you'll just know when you see a well bred, normally active fish. Research helps, as does this forum. It's that simple, really.

[Deleted User]

PS regarding "pedigree", I didn't think there was anything kept on fish but was hedging my bet slightly. I didn't know if there are pedigrees kept on some flowerhorns? (not that I will be considering such a facet when we make our purchase) thumbs2:

[Deleted User]

After a couple of years in the hobby, you'll just know when you see a well bred, normally active fish. Research helps, as does this forum. It's that simple, really.
Well, see... that's part of it. It already seems very simple. I didn't know if it really was simple, or if I was missing out on a true standard of perfection that may be referred to (as is the case in other types of domestic animals).

[Red]

As long as the fish is healthy and nice and fat and have good colors, its good to be put in my tanks. (Killies are a whole different story)

[Taurus]

Well, price tag. I'm willing to pay more for a healthy, well bred, well cared for fish. Price tag is not always an indicator of that, but it should lead you in the right direction.

[Deleted User]

As long as the fish is healthy and nice and fat and have good colors, its good to be put in my tanks.
Well, I agree for sure. We all keep the fish we like to keep. I wanted more insight into what is meant by "well bred" in reference to a fish (having seen well bred / poorly bred tossed around here). It seems in this thread, we're finding it doesn't involve as much criteria in fish as it does in other types of animals.

[Lab_Rat]

It sounds like it was basically as I thought -- there is no official standard of perfection and a lot of it is just personal opinion and pretty subjective (as is the judging of any animal or object).


Still, I had hoped to find there is a standard reference to refer to for what makes a "well bred" fish beyond the obvous things we all like to see (good health, good color, good fins).



It is exactly like judging horses. Very subjective criteria, what one judge thinks is a champion may not be another ones pick. What you may say is well bred I may say has too steep of a shoulder, poor hock angulation, and tiny feet. Many times people try to cover up a downhill build by rotating photos to trick people into thinking a horse has better confirmation than it truly does, but an experienced horseperson can see right past that trick.

There are standards for what each species should look like, I listed two of them above. Generally wild caught and F1 hold truest, for obvious reasons. The ACA does not judge willy-nilly to pick winners in each category. I did not make up those things I wrote above, they are how each of those species should be phenotypically. That is not my subjective opinion. If I see a Labidochromis caeruleus with excellent coloration and body shape I will call it well bred. IIRC, hari-goshi has some excellent looking examples. If I see one with barring, lack of black marks, etc, I will call it poorly bred (or "made" if you will) as it does not hold true to the wild species phenotype.

[Red]

Yes, a fish that is poor bred comes from asia. Where they are over bred, and horomoned (spl?) up. You can also see it in discus or angels where a fish is deformed due to birth defects or being crammed in to small of tank. Wild angels get very tall, so if they are in to small of tanks, there fins do not grow as long as one in a higher tank. Also in guppies, you will have to cull some of the babies because of defects. If you look at a EBJD, they have problems inter breeding, they die around 3" because there organs can not grow right.
It justs happens.

[Rue]

I have a book called the 'American Standard of Perfection' for my chickens...lol...

I don't know how well they represent their various breeds...but I love seeing the breed varieties.

I'm good with dogs and horses...and I can tell if a fish is proportioned correctly for what it is...

Well-bred fish do come with a hefty price tag. It's hit and miss at the petstores - where the fish are all a result of mass-breeding. In that mass you'll get good ones and bad ones of course...up to you to pick out what you like. I know I've seen the worst-bred Black Moor Goldfish around here...dunno what happened to the nice ones that used to be the norm...

[Deleted User]

It is exactly like judging horses. Very subjective criteria, what one judge thinks is a champion may not be another ones pick. What you may say is well bred I may say has too steep of a shoulder, poor hock angulation, and tiny feet. Many times people try to cover up a downhill build by rotating photos to trick people into thinking a horse has better confirmation than it truly does, but an experienced horseperson can see right past that trick.

Well, no... I have to disagree having had some horses shown all over the nation under many, many carded judges and walking away with championship after championship. If you show registry / rated shows, vs. just state, 4H or local level, you will find there is absolutely a clear standard of perfection and good conformation overall is not subjective. Proper conformation + desired breed "typyness" has won for me repeatedly.

[Lab_Rat]

Well, no... I have to disagree having had some horses shown all over the nation under many, many carded judges and walking away with championship after championship. If you show registry / rated shows, vs. just state, 4H or local level, you will find there is absolutely a clear standard of perfection and good conformation overall is not subjective. Proper conformation + desired breed "typyness" has won for me repeatedly.

There are also national fish shows too, in addition to local ones. I suggest you do more research into standards for species you are interested in as you obviously do not have the experience or knowledge to tell a specimen that holds true to species wild phenotype from one that doesn't.

[hari-goshi]

It is exactly like judging horses. Very subjective criteria, what one judge thinks is a champion may not be another ones pick. What you may say is well bred I may say has too steep of a shoulder, poor hock angulation, and tiny feet. Many times people try to cover up a downhill build by rotating photos to trick people into thinking a horse has better confirmation than it truly does, but an experienced horseperson can see right past that trick.

There are standards for what each species should look like, I listed two of them above. Generally wild caught and F1 hold truest, for obvious reasons. The ACA does not judge willy-nilly to pick winners in each category. I did not make up those things I wrote above, they are how each of those species should be phenotypically. That is not my subjective opinion. If I see a Labidochromis caeruleus with excellent coloration and body shape I will call it well bred. IIRC, hari-goshi has some excellent looking examples. If I see one with barring, lack of black marks, etc, I will call it poorly bred (or "made" if you will) as it does not hold true to the wild species phenotype.
Hey thanks Lab_Rat! And I agree with the post. L.caeruleus is a good example. Well bred fish will show all the characteristics typical of the species. Ideally the fish will show the same body shape , finnage , and color as healthy specimens pulled from the wild. When refering to "hobby fish" that arent found in the wild its a bit more general. In that case well bred could simply mean the fish consistently throw true fry and are absent of any defects or deformities.

[Deleted User]

Yes, a fish that is poor bred comes from asia. Where they are over bred, and horomoned (spl?) up. You can also see it in discus or angels where a fish is deformed due to birth defects or being crammed in to small of tank. Wild angels get very tall, so if they are in to small of tanks, there fins do not grow as long as one in a higher tank. Also in guppies, you will have to cull some of the babies because of defects. If you look at a EBJD, they have problems inter breeding, they die around 3" because there organs can not grow right.
It justs happens.
That is good information to know and also clarifies to me some things I've noticed when browsing fish on Aquabid. Thanks!

[Taurus]

Well, no... I have to disagree having had some horses shown all over the nation under many, many carded judges and walking away with championship after championship. If you show registry / rated shows, vs. just state, 4H or local level, you will find there is absolutely a clear standard of perfection and good conformation overall is not subjective. Proper conformation + desired breed "typyness" has won for me repeatedly.

And what does this ^ have to do with this > Well Bred Fish? A Standard Of Perfection?

[Deleted User]

There are also national fish shows too, in addition to local ones. I suggest you do more research into standards for species you are interested in as you obviously do not have the experience or knowledge to tell a specimen that holds true to species wild phenotype from one that doesn't.
Lab-Rat, clearly, I was referring to your statement about horse shows :ssmile: You may think I don't know anything about evaluating fish, but you might want to take a look why you find the need to be so judgemental in your statements about others.

[Lab_Rat]

Lab-Rat, clearly, I was referring to your statement about horse shows :ssmile:

Judging is judging and as long as people are involved judging will be, in part, subjective. My entire point was that there are standards for each species, they should represent their wild type species. This point was lost on you, maybe reading and researching traits each species should have will help train your uneducated eye. Hopefully then you will understand what a well bred fish for a particular species would look like and you won't have to post such elementary questions.

[Algenco]

question answered, thread is becoming argumentative and is now closed