Piebald channel catfish
- Thread starter thebiggerthebetter
- Start date
https://www.gumtree.sg/a-fish/chang...fishes-cheap-prices/1002187320000911060693309
looks similar to the one here
looks similar to the one here
Looks like a golden guernsey catfish. Very awesome. Too bad it can almost get as big as a cow also.
Yes it does. That's a piebald walking catfish Clarias batrachus, which is the norm when it comes to the farm raised ones. Piebald channel catfish Ictalurus punctatus is, as stated, a billion to one exception. The norm for the farm-raised channel catfish is an albino form. Like for the Hemibagrus nemurus, iridescent shark catfish, and some others.
What's a golden guernsey catfish? I've never heard of it. Guernsey as in the county in the state of Ohio?
Are fish different then herps when it comes to morphs?
In herps, it is fairly easy to breed as a recessive trait once one has been found, no harder then reproducing albino's. for example, Chinese giant salamander have been farmed for food over the last decade and a half and it has resulted in entire ponds filled with "panda" piebald Chinese giant salamanders as well as many albino and leucistic individuals. pics because I think they look cool.
Last edited:
Thanks for that. Interesting. I know nothing of herps. Neither do I know whether reproducing pirbaldness is easy with fish. Got much to learn yet. It doesn't seem to be easy, because there is money in it and so far the price on rare piebald fish keeps up because the offer is low and the demand is high. Perhaps my statement above can be understood as the way things in aquaculture stand on their own, without further interference from man.
Last edited:
I was asking because it seems like "platinum's" and other morphs would be farmed more commonly then they currently are, yet they have largely held their value unlike albino BN plecos or channel cats that can be bred consistently. I do agree that the "one in a billion" figure is referring to it appearing naturally.
Just some additional thoughts:
I guess it also comes down to selection of breeders in ponds. Once a morph has been discovered the farmer has the option to harvest it, sell it, or breed it some point In the future.
The farmer has an incentive to take the short run profit instead of waiting and breeding the animal for more profit at a later date but also incurring more risk. I see this often with my clients and their investments, they much prefer selling a position for a slight gain now instead of holding it and realizing an even bigger gain a year from now.
The breeding of recessive "morphs" (like piebald, long fin, and albinism) isn't successful in the F1 generation as the parental stock would only produce animals that look normal but are het for the morph. It would take breeding two of those f1 animals together to get 25% showing the morph in the f2 generation. If bred to the parent originator, it would only produce 50% showing the morph. It would take til the f3 generation to produce the morph with any consistency. Using Channel cats as an example, with three years to reach maturation, it would take a decade to produce morphs with any consistency.
Genetic Sexual determination can also play havoc with the paragraph above. If the founding animal is male and the morph is linked to the female genome of the species, it is unlikely to be passed on. In humans this is easily seen in the form of color blindness. As I do not know nearly enough about fish genetics, I cannot comment on this further.
Just some additional thoughts:
I guess it also comes down to selection of breeders in ponds. Once a morph has been discovered the farmer has the option to harvest it, sell it, or breed it some point In the future.
The farmer has an incentive to take the short run profit instead of waiting and breeding the animal for more profit at a later date but also incurring more risk. I see this often with my clients and their investments, they much prefer selling a position for a slight gain now instead of holding it and realizing an even bigger gain a year from now.
The breeding of recessive "morphs" (like piebald, long fin, and albinism) isn't successful in the F1 generation as the parental stock would only produce animals that look normal but are het for the morph. It would take breeding two of those f1 animals together to get 25% showing the morph in the f2 generation. If bred to the parent originator, it would only produce 50% showing the morph. It would take til the f3 generation to produce the morph with any consistency. Using Channel cats as an example, with three years to reach maturation, it would take a decade to produce morphs with any consistency.
Genetic Sexual determination can also play havoc with the paragraph above. If the founding animal is male and the morph is linked to the female genome of the species, it is unlikely to be passed on. In humans this is easily seen in the form of color blindness. As I do not know nearly enough about fish genetics, I cannot comment on this further.
