Re: [Killietalk] Re: Sanctioned naming conventions? Proposal?

[Tyrone Genade <tgenade at gmail_com>]

Hello Ken

I feel that $7 is too low. We should be moving to at least $10 per
pair for "easy" fish (A. gardneri et al) and then $20 up for harder
fish (D. abacinum). Raising good quality killies needs lots of space
and good food that isn't cheap. Of course this is beside the point...

On Tue, 5 Oct 2004 08:06:08 -0400, Kenneth Combs <kcombs at mergerx_net> wrote:
>  In
> that vein, a sanctioning body isn't all that "hair brained" IMO, nor is
> de facto enforcement by market forces (using "trade friendly" names with
> a "pedigree" attribute attached)... personally because of the above
> issues, I give fish away, but that's me...

Roger Langton's new book on collection codes is now out in circulation
is the "gold standard" of killi location names. In essence it is kind
of what you are proposing. It does not make good in respect ot people
mislableing bags ot writing getting rubbed off but is a very good fail
safe. It was applied at the BKA convention with rip-roaring sucess.
Only one mistake slipped through and it was simply because there was a
rachovii 99-1 that looked very much like the 99-9 it was supposed to
be.

You concept of a pedigree: A. australe "Orange-Red"-#Petsmart does not
escape the pitfalls of the current system: i.e. bad hand writing, fish
mix-ups etc... It is however essential in fishy conservation efforts.
If you are organising something like the Simp. marginatus SMP
pedigress are very important. The difference is that SMPs are very
well micro managed while the trade isn't managed at all. Some control
is exercised in the BNL and similar publications but that is it... I
have replied to many killietrader adds about faulty codes.

> I disagree (as a longtime respectful reader of all your
> post)....

The right of free speech is only effective is we all accept the
concomitant obligation to agree to disagree.:-)

> Especially since there is some emphasis on "responsibility" and
> "conservation", again this is a hobbyist venue,not a scientific one. We
> cannot in fact "recover" if the genetics of a extirpated fish gets
> "questionable". 

Yours is a valid point. and here is an example.

Paraphyosemion gardneri nigerianus Makurdi occurs as a brilliant blue
fish with lots of red and yellow (see
http://www.gardneri.fische-killifische.de/nigerianus/makurdi/makurdi.html).
At the BKA show there were some fish labeled as Makurdi that look
nothing like this and there was lots of talk to simply lable them
aquarium strain at the auction (well Scott, here we go again).
Thankfully this did not take place as on examination of Seeger's
Aqualog the fish (that looked like this:
http://www.killi.co.uk/SpeciesDetails.php?ID=319) the fish did indeed
seem to be Makurdi.

We have to watch out for such genetic "questionablities" because they
can cause serious trouble. The problem is that for many species the
strains are very variable and there is no way by sight to tell them
apart if a lable gets lost. What then?

Well genetic testing is perhaps the only way forward as it is used to
test the pedigree of dogs. In fact we have had this proposal before:
developing genetic markers for highly variable strains.

> I don't have a firm answer, just pointing out the flaws
> when science and hobby collide under the guise of conservation...My
> proposal has flaws, so I was kind of looking for ideas to build upon...

It is good that this issue is discussed. There are flaws with the
current system and your idea may develop into a viable solution.

> incentive to maintain genetic integrity? Perhaps the breeder AKA #
> should be attached to sales...

What happens with fish from the DKG? 
Do we have A. australe Gold-DKG-0452 vs A. australe Gold-AKA-08248? I
don't think this is going to reduce confusion... A bigger problem is
that some puritans will then treat these as distinct populations and
not as fish from the same line. This could eventually cause either
strain to be lost because people can't find suitable mates. also, what
happens with a cross of the two lines?

I was circulating a N. foerschi Alegre Aquarium Strain a while back.
This strain was bred by John Alegre from a mix of males or females he
got from me and some males or females he got from Tony. Both were
aquarium strains and the resulting fish were magnificent. Both lines
were probably seperated by about 10 years (I think the person I got my
stock from got them from Tony many moons back). You try and do the
same thing with gold and brown australe today (never mind they come
from the same stock originally) and you will have several irrate
puritants on your back in no time. And I will add that that crossed
out strain was more viable than anything I have red about in recent
history. 20 to 30 eggs per day was the norm!

Personally I do not see how we can improve on the current system
without making it more complex and more error prone. Ken, your ideas
are sound  but I don't think the hobby is quite ready for them. Maybe
wen Wright finishes the construction of his hand held DNA sequencer we
can put your ideas into practice.

tt4n
-- 
Tyrone Genade
http://tgenade.freeshell.org
email: tgenade at freeshell_org; MSM: tgenade at hotmail_com
******************************************************************************
Instituto di Neuroscienze
Area di Ricerca del CNR via Moruzzi 1
56100 Pisa, Italy
http://www.in.pi.cnr.it/
******************************************************************************
All things work for good for those who love the Lord --- Romans 8:28

To join the AKA see http://www.aka.org/pages/join.html
Archives are at http://fins.actwin.com/killietalk/