(snip)
>
>ROTFL! :-)
>
>May I attempt to answer, without making the subject too deep or too serious?
Sure :) As long as you take my answer in the manner in which it is
intended, that of someone who has had too long a day at work (yes it is
only 1640 here, long story) and who is writing whatever comes into his head
without any malice or thought ;)
>When we collect fish in good color, and get them to survive, then even breed
>in the aquarium environment, it would be nice if they kept something close
>to their wild colors.
Close to wild colours would be good. Different than wild colours,
"better", may not be good. It is hard to keep personal bias out of it -
hence the "better" colour some fish get in captivity.
>Our artificial diets often lack things they were getting in the crummy
>little stream where they looked so gaudy. If drab is nice, fine, but it's
>usually a clue that we are missing something in their light, water, diet,
>etc. that they originally had utilized for full color. Astaxanthin sometimes
>contains one of those possible ingredients, as do adequate carotins in
>general and other similar nutrients.
Granted, yes. A balanced diet is a part of the whole picture.
>I'm like you, Andrew, in despising the injected-dye folk. I don't even much
>care for the strong tendency of some to select for highly disfunctional
>mutants to make more colorful moving ornaments in their tanks. Trends in
>discus in recent years make pink-plaster lawn flamingos look quite tasteful
>by comparison. The swimming skills of Orandas and some *Betta splendens* can
>make me cringe.
The breeders of wierd "show strains" of animals may not inflict as much
misery upon their charges as the commercial meat breeders, but that is a
different story entirely :)
>I've never had a chance to collect rainbows or blue-eyes, so maybe they hold
>their wild colors better. I know the wild fish I have taken in the desert SW
>US often do not. Mexican Mollies (*Poecilia mexicana*), for instance rarely
>retain the brilliant orange and black caudal bands that make them so
>spectacular when found, much less the deep irridescent blue on the sides. I
>consider finding foods and other conditions that will let the fish display
>properly are part of my responsibility as the one who collected them or
>subsequently raises them.
A little slightly acid water and sunlight will go a long way to showing
rainbows off to their best. Remember, the best photos are of males in the
peak of health in ideal conditions, showing flashes of colour that are
pretty ephemeral. (Not just "spawning stripes", but the whole fish).
>Does that explain why I thought Roy's question was a pretty good one?
It is a good question. Perhaps it needs to be approached from a different
direction, though. "How can I best show off my fish?" rather than "What
can I feed them?".
>Last night we had a program at the local killy club where a German collector
>took some pictures of *Chromaphysemions* in a portable picture tank while
>collecting in Cameroon, and then photos of those same fish species in the
>aquarium, some time later. I was almost shocked at how different the wild
>fish were from the offspring. We have gotten *used* to what they had become
>and were missing the real beauty of the natural fish. IMHO, we should fix
>that in our husbandry practices, if we possibly can.
There are photos of killies and then there are photos of killies ;)
There are a lot of washed out waste-of-time fish though, it is true. These
may be all we have left. They may indeed look sad compared to wild specimens.
>Aw, hell! It got too deep or serious, anyway. Collect some and ye shall see!
Been dere, done dat :)
>SERMON MODE <OFF>
Glad to chat with you, Wright :)
Cheers, Andrew
_________________________________________________________
andrew at pcug.org.au http://www.tip.net.au/~andrew
"Who are you going to believe, me or your own eyes?"
G. Marx
_________________________________________________________