Lightning maroon clownfish on ebay

To be fair thats your opinion, this thread is following the documentation of the lightning fish and is also being answered by the successful breeder Matt pederson. If you dislike the fish that is perfectly fine. But maybe you should choose a different thread to give your negative opinion to. Please leave this thread to people who are actually interested in following this story.

 

I see a lot of people attempting to discuss dominance/recessiveness of the "Lightning" allele(s). It saddens me to see this discussion.

1) We can assume the allele(s) are rare, or that a rare combination of alleles is required to produce the phenotype. If this were not the case, the phenotype would be more common.
2) If we use the above, we can assume the following:
a) IF we assume it is a single gene allele responsible for the phenotype, the Lightning female could be (assuming autosomal) LL/Ll/ll. This is the total possible outcome. The allele could be dominant or recessive. However, these each make predictions about the outcome of offspring.
b) IF the Lightning Maroon is LL, and we assume that the allele is rare, her partner would be ll. All offspring would be Ll. Because L is dominant, all offspring would exhibit "Lightning". This (as far as I know) is not seen. Thus, this cannot be the case (either LL or that it is a single allele).
c) IF the Lightning Maroon is ll, and we assume that the allele is rare, her partner would be L_ (most likely LL). This would mean all Ll (if partner is LL) or half ll, half Ll if partner is Ll. Again, Ll is presumed to not be the case due to rarity.
d) If the Lightning Maroon is Ll, and we assume the allele is rare, her partner would be ll, and we would get half Ll, half ll. I don't know the ratios that came out of the cross, but there is a mixture... so this possibility cannot be refuted.

I am eagerly looking forward to additional crosses as well as F1xF1 crosses so that we might figure out the transmission patterns of the Lightning. Just for kicks and giggles, I think it's a single allele (or at most a few gene alleles) responsible for the patterning, and given above... dominant.

 

That is a telling series of pictures M Pedersen posted. There are countless examples of fish patterns developing with age, so it will be very interesting to see if these fish end up like their mom. Are you keeping any of the offspring for yourself Matt (specifically LM6)? It would be a shame to see that series of pictures end where it is at now.

 

With all due respect, I am interested in the story. Others have given their thoughts on it (ranging from observable inbreeding features to outrageous prices); I gave mine. This is a discussion forum and a discussion thread. There is no need to single me out for having a different opinion on a discussion thread.

 

Not Matt, but no, no others and now the PNG station is offline, so no future ones are possible currently.

Despite the polls and countless posts on the subject, hobbyists are not willing to support a fully eco smart collection station on the scale needed. In fact the support was pretty miserable, which is truly sad.

 

Thank you for the reply.

Very sad indeed.

 

There are alot of ways to dissent and still have tact. Obliviously the price is not outrageous because so many people are bidding it up.

 

That would be on my list of "Cardinal Sins" to do with a Lightning Maroon. Short reason - Goldstripe Maroons are different from White Stripe Maroons, and while they are currently considered to both be Premnas biaculeatus, the truth is that they could someday be split into separate species (based on what I know I might agree with such a move). The truth is that mixing Gold Stripe and White Stripe creates a muddled fish in terms of looks - NOT what you really WANT to get out of it. Plus, the mix can't be "undone". More on the subject - Lightning Breeding Directive - The Lightning Project

Ya know, I'm actually OK with the opinoin being vented - I take no offense to it. It's entirely subjective / aesthetic.

Why does this discussion sadden you? It's a topic that's thoroughly open for debate!

This is where we'll get some answers.

I came to a different conclusion in my genetics investigation. I'm putting the money on Partial Dominance, because this is what's seen in terms of Picasso/Platinum and Gladiator/Wyoming White.

Here's the article I wrote on my Genetics Hypotheses - The Genetic Possibilities behind the “Lightning” trait in PNG White Stripe Maroon Clownfish, Premnas biaculeatus. - The Lightning Project

I have a better series which I think I linked to in my earlier post - Lightning Maroon Clownfish Pattern Progression – Updated through June 18, 2013 - The Lightning Project - this is one of SEVERAL fish I'm currently holding back from release. So while LM6 might not show any future photos (although I hope ALL of the winners / buyers keep in touch and document), we'll have plenty of fish that I'll follow.

Gresh sums it up pretty well. Two attempts to get a sustainable and somewhat accountable fisheries up and running have left us with a handful of really interesting fish...both times I went to buy more, I sadly missed the bus (which is why there's now only 2 other F0 PNG Maroons here besides the breeding pair).

 

It saddens me because of the impossible conclusions some draw. I don't have access to the raw data, but partial dominance (or incomplete penetrance) does seem likely as well. Granted we don't know the expressivity variance either.

 

Ah yes, gotcha. I read it rather frequently that "Lightning is Recessive"...generally written with authority and certainty as if someone KNOWS it to be so. HA..laughable..it's the lease likely candidate of the three or so single loci options.

The raw data really doesn't matter that much...it really was, within any margin of error I could think of, a demonstrable 50/50 split. In fact a current headcount on everything that's here I think makes it an exact 50/50 split....even the 2013 batch that eeked out 2 babies - 1 lightning, 1 reg. 50/50.

Of course, we could have one of those crazy things go on where over time I get less or more and the results deviate, but really, this is genetics..I'm not going to influence them by observing them. 50/50 split = all bets are off, all forms of expression have a shot (by incomplete penetrance, I take it to mean you're thining of "codominance"? I'd rule that out because if this was a codominant trait, in theory we'd still see the stripes underneath, no?)