Re: [Killietalk] Glo-fish

["Stan Perkins" <stanperkins at academicplanet_com>]

Bobby,

This I can agree with. My problem is with the people who don't bother to
carefully investigate something before speaking out about the thing. I, for
one, do not believe that they spent all that money just to develop a strain
of fish with fluorescent colors. Not being privy to their original research
protocols, I give them the benefit of the doubt. The company perhaps was
irresponsible in selling the fish stock but if the research hit a dead end
this was their only way to make some sort of profit. I may not like this,
but having been in the industry I know this is the way it works. I am just
tired of the whole thread. I would much rather hear about livebearer species
or killies and, to Hades, with this thread.

Stan Perkins
----- Original Message ----- 
From: <RuevenM at aol_com>
To: <killietalk at aka_org>
Sent: Sunday, December 14, 2003 8:33 PM
Subject: [Killietalk] Glo-fish


> Hi,
>
>     I have no problem with selective breeding and gene choice. In fact, I
> think some of the old strains of killies from the 50's, 60's and 70's were
better
> aquarium fish because of it. I like albino fish. I like fancy livebearers
as
> I like dog breeds, fancy chickens and hybrid orchids. I'm working right
now to
> bring back veiltail mollies to what they were 30 years ago. The glo-gene
> thing just seems like something that is fine under the control of science
but not
> something I would like commercialized in species after species. Its one
thing
> to cross related genera and develop naturally occuring mutations but its
> another to play evolution just to produce tacky fish that grab the eye
with whacky
> color. Once the motivation is purely financial trouble will follow.
>
> Bobby
>
> To join the AKA see http://www.aka.org/pages/join.html
>



To join the AKA see http://www.aka.org/pages/join.html