# Controversial breeding



## MollyJean (Dec 29, 2009)

Before this thing gets going, let me set one rule;

*NO ARGUING!*​
_If you do not know how to have a debate without turning it into an argument, I suggest that you just read and not post._ This is a touchy subject and I want to get to the roots of it, not stay stuck on the gut reactions to taboo practices.

I also want to make something clear. This is all theory. _I have no intention of breeding any defective fish._ At this point I haven't the knowledge or experience to do so. So consider anything said here-in as purely theory and fact gathering.








​
Over the years, betta have changed from the very simple vale-tails we had as children to many different types. We now have crown-tails and comb-tails that range from a few single spikes at the ends of the tail to double and triple branching, extra long spikes and some very strange and interesting shapes. Double-tails where almost unheard of when I was young, and now they are everywhere, and what's more, we know HOW this mutation happened and how to reproduce it. Half-moon and deltas are common, and we have the knowledge to understand and prevent rose-tails, even though they are beautiful fish. All of this came from one practice; breeding deformities. There is NOTHING like the double-tail, rose-tail and comb-tail betta in the wild, these things have been selectively bred for decades to produce a look that is favorable and, for the most part, healthy.

Of course, each type has it's issues. The comb-tail is prone to curling in the wrong water, and the long spikes can be damaged easily; The delta and half-moon can, with improper breeding, create a rose-tail, which is a beautiful fish, but not without it's own problems. And the double-tail; In my opinion it is the greatest achievement for betta breeders, but the health risks are great, a double-tail can have a very short body, and much of a betta's body contains the swim bladder, which if damaged or deformed can cause serious and life threatening problems. But we love these fish regardless, and are willing to deal with the problems as they come.

At some point, each of these breeds was nothing more then an idea, and some brave person decided to accept the challenge of breeding and refining their stock into something new and interesting. And betta aren't the only fish affected by this. Most notably, goldfish have evolved over the years into some very strange, and some scary, mutations.

But when are these experiments acceptable? When the first breeders of double-tails decided to take the chances on this form of betta, where they ridiculed and shunned? I have to think so. We are taught that it is bad to breed an imperfect fish. Our chosen breeding stock has even fins, a full body, a straight line to the nose, ect; Breeding to create a deformity is wrong on a primal level.

Why?

Many of us have come across deformities that are not normally seen in Betta. Most breeders cull these imperfections at an early age. But there are those who keep the imperfect fish and some that slip through the cracks. And some of these imperfections are not life threatening. So when is it acceptable to breed a mutation?

I have been struggling with these questions lately. I have recently started breeding, and my first pair will be ready tomorrow, after a week of preparation. They are healthy representatives of their species, both large, in the prime of their lives, both physically fit and whole; An acceptable breeding pair. There will likely be a few deformed fry.... and this is the part where the lines blur; 

_In your opinion, what should be culled?_ 
_what are your thoughts on breeding imperfect fish for a specific deformity?_

At this point, I am of the opinion that if the fish is healthy and able to live a full life, it should be allowed to do so. Case in point, Tidbit; a female who was born without a tail. This would seem to be a major deformity.. but it isn't life threatening and does not detract at all from her quality of life. In fact, this deformity might give her an edge over the other females in her group. So I know when coming across this deformity that it isn't always life threatening and any fry born like this will be spared, unless other deformities manifest that are damaging. But should this deformity be cultivated? I could easily breed Tidbit to produce more of her type, as was done with double-tail and crown-tail bettas in the past, but on a moral and ethical level, is it acceptable? I would like as much input as possible, please.


----------



## Creat (Dec 6, 2010)

I guess I am one of the few people left that feels it okay to breed pet store, or genetically unknown fish. I think that if a deformity is non life threatening nor takes away from quality of life its fine. I wouldnt breed tail-less fish because a) its probably extremely ressesive and b) I think it takes away from quality of life. I think a fish without a tail has to compensate which might lead to a shorter life.


----------



## MollyJean (Dec 29, 2009)

I thought the same thing, but Tidbit has no problems at all swimming. I had gotten a short tank for her at first, and quickly moved her out. For one, she is faster then my other fish, even the girls, and jumps much higher. And she has no tail to bite, so doesn't get damaged in scruffs with the other girls. I honestly believe she has an excellent quality of life, which is what brought this on; She is healthy, the deformity is not reducing her quality of life, so what are other reasons for or against breeding such a deformity. And not just this one, others like the extra tendrils on the sides of betta's tail, which I have seen in several bettas now.

Though I do agree, something like that might be very recessive. I have no idea how many of her siblings had the same issue, if any.


----------



## tpocicat (Aug 8, 2011)

I believe that as long as a deformity doesn't affect the quality of life, then by all means let the fish live. However, I don't think breeding for a tailless fish would be very sucessful, for one thing it would be very recessive, for another, most people buy their fish based on the fin color/form.


----------



## Oldfishlady (Mar 1, 2010)

To start....the domesticated Betta we keep are all deformed in away......The long fins are a deformity of sorts. You don't see long fin in the wild-that was a creation of man from selective breeding.

The weak, malformed, odd colored like albino in the wild are culled naturally-rarely do they survive since mother nature takes care of that. You still have a lot more deformities in the wild than you know since they don't survive for long.

When you have reproduction in a closed/controlled system-fish that normally would be culled in the wild-survive in our aquarium due to lack of predators and/or special care. 

When breeding IMO.....you should have goals and what doesn't meet that goal should be culled. Culled doesn't always mean killing, however, in my fish room it does. I cull hard at several different stages. 

My view with breeding this species is that I want quality not quantity-Lots of Betta that need homes and by keeping every single fry of low quality or that doesn't meet your goals isn't practical IMO...

My question is what are you going to do with the sever deformed offspring or the ones that don't meet your goals......

Quality of life-vs-poor quality of life....

Even the best quality breeders will produce some deformities in a spawn-just like in nature and IMO...its our job as responsible fish keepers to be mother nature in regards of culling-weak, deformed, poor quality....etc.....

Along with genetics you also have environmental factors that can play a big role in the game too....in my opinion/experience....


And Creat, your not alone...I am of the opinion that some pet shop Betta are fine to spawn too-provided that it meets your goals to improve what you are working on...especially if you are trying to create your own unique line. They either meet standards or they don't-IMO it just mystery genetic and it can be exciting to find out what is hidden-

MollyJean-if that female has quality life, is not suffering and you have the time and space to meet her special needs.....Nothing wrong with keeping her IMO, however, I wouldn't use her for spawning.....I have kept some pretty deformed Betta for pets that I normally would have culled because of their uniqueness.....


----------



## Creat (Dec 6, 2010)

Im talking internaly she might strain organs from muscles having to compensate for no tail. But a shorter lifespan for one lucky fish isnt to bad.


----------



## MollyJean (Dec 29, 2009)

Oldfishlady said:


> To start....the domesticated Betta we keep are all deformed in away......The long fins are a deformity of sorts. You don't see long fin in the wild-that was a creation of man from selective breeding.
> 
> The weak, malformed, odd colored like albino in the wild are culled naturally-rarely do they survive since mother nature takes care of that. You still have a lot more deformities in the wild than you know since they don't survive for long.
> 
> ...


Thank you for the reply, but would you expand on it a little.. WHY would you prefer not to spawn her? Is it because it is a defect and your gut reaction is to avoid breeding defects, or is there another reason? I am trying to get to the reasons behind the reactions so many people have to breeding defects.

If, for example (consider this rhetorical) I had the goal to breed a line of betta like Tidbit, or experiment with her genetics to see what other breedable deformaties I could produce, the gut reaction is don't do it, but why?

It would produce unwanted fry, and yes, many of them would have to be culled due to the poor quality of life many defects create, but this is the process used for producing double-tail, crown-tail and, outside of the betta species, many varieties of fish. Is it simply the idea that so many fish will need to be culled that leaves most people unwilling to attempt these pairings, or is it something more?

At this point, and I am sure at all points, my goal will be healthy fish, no matter what the spawning pair is. It's safe to say this is true of most breeders. Where is the line drawn though? When is it acceptable to attempt production of a new line of betta? When is it acceptable to breed a deformity?


----------



## MollyJean (Dec 29, 2009)

Creat said:


> Im talking internaly she might strain organs from muscles having to compensate for no tail. But a shorter lifespan for one lucky fish isnt to bad.


Betta with over excessive fins, uneven double-tails and rose-tails all have the potential for the problem you speak of, yet these betta are very popular. Watching Tidbit, she seems to have little problem swimming, she doesn't move as much because she doesn't have a fin which can be cumbersome. But Robin, my red half-moon, has so much trouble swimming it's heartbreaking. He spends much time resting on his heater or his leaf hammock and when he does swim, it's like he's fighting a current, but he is, in the public eye, an acceptable fish. He simply has fins that are SO LONG they slow him down.

I suppose there is no real answer for these questions. A fish can not say he or she is in pain, and we can only go by how they look and act, but there are markers for such things. A fish with a mouth or stomach problem will not eat normally, a fish with a fin or body problem will not swim normally, and will not swim much; ect;.

But there is something I am missing from the process, because double-tails are naturally prone to problems, short bodies produce swim bladder disorders and spine problems, yet these fish are bred and bred again for the trait. Why is it acceptable to breed this deformity and so taboo to breed others?

Perhaps my present goal should be breeding healthy double-tails; Make an attempt to lengthen bodies and straighten spines, as this deformity has not gotten the attention it needs in breeding.


----------



## Oldfishlady (Mar 1, 2010)

Creation of your own special unique line to improve on what we have is one thing....but to create a line without tails Why-how is that going to improve the Betta-who will you market them too.....And while I am a firm believer in creation-I also feel that what you are wanting to create is something left to the more advanced keeper-but honestly it shouldn't be done at all IMO.

If you spawn her-this at least might tell you if it is genetic-but to understand your goal....you want to see how deformed you can make a Betta and it still live...correct....

No matter what tail type you are working with you will get some deformities that will vary from minor to extreme-The difference is that not all will have that deformity and will meet the standard set forth by the IBC....Like with the doubletails, I work with the doubletail and I will get 1:50 average with bent spines that vary in degree, however, if that was reversed and I only got 1:50 straight spine-then I would draw that line.....


----------



## ChardFish (May 17, 2012)

Okay, I do not believe the question was whether or not to breed for tail-less bettas, I think that animal was an example of a non-life-threatening deformity that can leave a fish still capable of enjoying life. That said, I also breed petstore fish. However, IMO, if one is going to breed any animal, careful choice of parents for specific traits is requisite. I choose pet-store fish because I can see them. However, I look for specific colors, traits, etc, and only breed healthy, quarantined fish that I have spent time getting to know. I also take great care to keep the female from sustaining damage, and remove her if she begins to suffer. I have beautiful fish, but I do cull my fry. My rules are as follows:
1. Anything that has a grossly crooked spine
2. Any fish with lock-jaw or difficulty eating enough to survive
3. Any fish suffering from swim bladder disorder that does not recover after treatment (congenital)
4. Any other deformity incompatible with life

Now while some of these seem harsh, it must be noted that I use a larger fish to cull for me. Hannibal is very efficient and the fish suffer much less than they do starving slowly. As for those with swim bladder (not common here, but happened once to a large group), I feed everyone in the tank daphnia, a lower-protein food that encourages defecation. Most fry will then recover quickly. As they get older, those that do not usually are weaker and lay on their side most of the time. I cull these, as they are not acting as they should. Fish that act normally and scoot along eating properly but are not buoyant should be kept; many seem to just prefer the bottom, and can be incorrectly culled if one is not careful. 

As for breeding for mutation: I think that one must do genetic research before dabbling in mutation. This said, interesting colors, fin patterns and types, and the like? I say go for it as long as the fish can be happy and healthy.


----------



## ChardFish (May 17, 2012)

"Perhaps my present goal should be breeding healthy double-tails; Make an attempt to lengthen bodies and straighten spines, as this deformity has not gotten the attention it needs in breeding."

I believe one problem many have is that you cannot breed two double tails without getting deformed fish. The gene is double recessive, and must be bred to a non-double-tail. All of those offspring will be single-tails, but with the recessive DT gene. Then, the fry are bred with other fish with single tails carrying the DT gene; the resulting fry will be about 25% ST/ST (with one tail), 50% ST/DT (with one tail), and 25% DT/DT (with TWO tails :-D). These 25% are the double-tails you see on the shelf with the straight spines and nice fins. As mentioned, it is important to research the genes involved and the tendencies of recessive genes to clash if bred improperly with poor results. That all being said, happy reading, and producing lovely healthy double-tails is a great goal!


----------



## Curlyfatbottom (Sep 29, 2011)

What is the reason of breeding a no fin fish
How can it improve the line
Dt is use to balance the fin n improve the top fin
Pk is use to thicken body n ray n shorten the fin
Vt is to bring out length of the tail
That's y they are still being bred
Rt is just a heavy branch hm
Ct never really look into history of creation but my guess is that it was selective breeding from messy fin fish
Ee big ear it just a phase fish 
Like the diamond eye

I'm not telling u not to breed her
It's your choice

What do I cull
Fish that I won't buy or sell


----------



## MollyJean (Dec 29, 2009)

Oldfishlady said:


> No matter what tail type you are working with you will get some deformities that will vary from minor to extreme-The difference is that not all will have that deformity and will meet the standard set forth by the IBC....Like with the doubletails, I work with the doubletail and I will get 1:50 average with bent spines that vary in degree, however, if that was reversed and I only got 1:50 straight spine-then I would draw that line.....


I am a little more knowledgeable about genetics then you believe. I understand the concept of receive genes and cross breeding, so that is beside the point. In breeding DTs I would be focusing on spine length, because I almost never see DTs with acceptable spines. This, of course, would require a lot of culling or keeping a LOT of fry for myself. But this is a standard set by each breeder on his or her own. While some may opt to keep many imperfect fish, other breeders prefer to cull any fish that does not meet their standards. And, some people just can't handle culling half their fry. I understand the necessity for acting as mother nature. Of course, this relates to the next post;



ChardFish said:


> Okay, I do not believe the question was whether or not to breed for tail-less bettas, I think that animal was an example of a non-life-threatening deformity that can leave a fish still capable of enjoying life.


I obviously couldn't have said this better myself. No, I don't mean Tidbit exactly. But I am using her as a prime example.

Oldfishlady I don't believe others would love a tailess betta as much as I do, though the prospect of breeding her to see what her tail type truly is, or if she can produce offspring with interesting (safe) mutations is an interesting one.

What limit do you think is acceptable? When is it that you can attempt to breed a new mutation? I understand the genetics and the risks, I am looking for the reason it isn't done more often, I guess?


----------



## KadenJames (Mar 23, 2012)

Very interesting conversation. 

When it comes to breeding a tail-less betta, their quality of life is affected more than you'd think. For example, body language. Bettas use their caudals probably the most to express what they are feeling. If a female approaches her in a way she doesn't like, she can't span out her caudal and flare in response. This is a BIG handicap in breeding too- its precarious enough for the poor girls, but to be missing a way to communicate "I don't like that, stop approaching me!" could very easily result in a fight breakout, because they can't easily understand what they are saying to one another. It's like a horse's ears- perked generally means interested and outgoing, while pinned backwards means "stay away from me." If a horse didn't have ears, it'd be missing that way of communicating to other horses - and people- what they are trying to get across.

Also, just because she doesn't have a caudal doesn't mean she doesn't get bit on the caudal peduncle. IMHO it'd be less painful to be bit on the tail than the body. Not exactly an "edge," or step up if you ask me. IMO don't ever breed her. =/

Just a thought.


----------



## MollyJean (Dec 29, 2009)

That is a very good argument against breeding Tidbit specifically. She tends to do better in fights then her tank mates, as she uses her body for attack and can do more damage, but you are right that any bites would be to her body not her fins, meaning they may hurt more. But I honestly have no intention of breeding her. I am far too inexperienced. She is simply an example.

Other deformities I have seen are tails that have an extra mass of fin on each side of the body, making them look more like fancy goldfish. This is no more dangerous then excessive fins in a half-moon or delta. Half-moon is, itself, a deformity, one that has been bred into the species, and it has it's own drawbacks for the fish; Betta with large tails are more prone to injury, have a harder time moving and can suffer fin rot if the water conditions are wrong. They are much more sensitive to their environment then, say, plakets. Big ear fish are another example. So why is this acceptable and something like Tidbit, or another equal mutation, unacceptable?

I am beginning to believe it is simply a matter of personal morals more then anything.


----------



## Creat (Dec 6, 2010)

It is personal morals and it comes down to what each person thinks is right.


----------



## Curlyfatbottom (Sep 29, 2011)

Long fin=beauty
Short body=cute
No fin=???


----------



## Anitax3x (Aug 26, 2011)

I agree with OldFishLady, in the wild, the fish with deformities are culled. However I feel like experimenting is totally fine if there is a goal that the person wants to fulfill. The only reason I understand why someone would not breed a finless female is because such a deformity, based on my genetics background as I have a BS in biology, Would lead me to believe she has alot of other bad traits that are just WAITING to come out. Deformities usually come in pairs or more, so even if the phenotype ( what you see for example no tail) only shows one problem or deformity. I guarantee that she has alot of extra health issues that will come through later on in the line because of what lies in the genotype (what we don't see) . 

I hope that made sense.


----------



## LittleBettaFish (Oct 2, 2010)

I have an interesting perspective as I keep both wild bettas and domesticated splendens. In my experience splendens are so much more delicate than wild bettas. They seem much more prone to disease and neurotic behaviors such as glass surfing and tail biting. This is probably due in part to the massive and rather indiscriminate overbreeding of them by wholesalers. 

Personally, I would never breed for something that is of further detriment to the fish. This means I would not breed for oversized pectorals (I found them are prone to tearing and slow to heal), short or 'balloon' type bodies or overly excessive finnage. I also do not like the breeding of RT fish or fish with actual physical deformities such as your female with no tail. 

I cannot see the point in spawning a fish with no tail. You don't know what kind of genes are at play to cause that kind of issue, and whether these same genes will be expressed in any future generations. Also, I think it needs to be a specific type of mutation (germ-line?) to actually be passed on. 

I also cannot see the aesthetics in breeding for a lack of caudal fin. The ideal betta tends towards perfect or near perfect symmetry, and a betta with no tail throws the whole image off. 

That is just my opinion on the matter. I personally lean towards keeping the form and shape of my fish as natural as possible. Therefore, I have more females and HMPKs than I do any other tail type. I just hope that bettas do not eventually go the way of the goldfish. I feel that sometimes certain attributes we breed into these fish border on cruelty.


----------



## Aus (Feb 3, 2012)

^+1

Not a fish, but bear with me. 

The British Bulldog. It was once a BULL dog, ie, it was used for bull-baiting, and thus was a very nimble and hardy breed of dog.

Now they cannot see well, cannot walk or breathe well, don't live long, have joint issues and many males cannot mount a female without human help.

This is what 'refining' the breed for show has done to this dog. It is now a pathetic example of its species that cannot exist at all if humans aren't there to help it cope with its genetic deformities.

When I was showing my cats, I learned there was an actual rule passed that a Persian cat's nose cannot be higher than its eyes.

What? Imagine a cat with a nose so pushed in it looks like a bellybutton and barely permits the animal to breathe (ie, the nose of what passes for a 'normal' Persian these days) -- but in the middle of its forehead. That it was deemed -necessary at all- to make this rule (in the interest of the cats, who could not breathe at all) tells me a lot about the selfishness and lack of care for animals many breeders of Persian cats must possess. 

But I bet those same breeders just _wuv_ their fwuffy kitties to _pieces_!!! And would be horrified at the suggestion they do not care for their cats. It's IMO quite insane.

Breeding fish that cannot swim well, fish that cannot effectively live according to the instincts of their species due to mutation... I just think it's the same kind of self-justified selfishness and lack of care shown by the breeders of the unfortunate animals above. 

If there is a goal to breeding that includes fish which cannot function well as living beings in general (fins too long to allow ease of motion, constitution too delicate to permit good health, deformed spine, inherent risks of blindness..etc) then it is a selfish goal and not one that I, personally, can see any value in at all for the species, nor the animal itself.

But playing god with genetics to find the next most fashionable mutation is never really about the _animal_, is it?


----------



## Tikibirds (May 26, 2011)

I didn't read most of the other posts but I guess it depends on what you are looking for. If I were breeding, I think I would only cull those that had would have a poor quality of life if they were to live. I know there are alot of people on here that are willing to take care of imperfect fish if given the chance. 

IMO - humans ARE animals. Why is it OK to kill of imperfect dogs, cats, fish yet we let humans who have severe mental limitations and diseases - live?


----------



## Aus (Feb 3, 2012)

> Why is it OK to kill of imperfect dogs, cats, fish yet we let humans who have severe mental limitations and diseases - live?


If we were not consistently destroying our own environment by pillaging its resources for unnecessary products, and disadvantaging other living beings in order to live in relative luxury, this would not happen. We would not spare the resources.

We can afford to be liberal about caring for our infirm, because we don't have to worry about survival so much.

At the expense of every living thing around us, but that's another conversation.


----------



## VictorP (Jun 5, 2012)

MollyJean said:


> If, for example (consider this rhetorical) I had the goal to breed a line of betta like Tidbit, or experiment with her genetics to see what other breedable deformaties I could produce, the gut reaction is don't do it, but why?
> 
> It would produce unwanted fry, and yes, many of them would have to be culled due to the poor quality of life many defects create, but this is the process used for producing double-tail, crown-tail and, outside of the betta species, many varieties of fish. Is it simply the idea that so many fish will need to be culled that leaves most people unwilling to attempt these pairings, or is it something more?
> 
> At this point, and I am sure at all points, my goal will be healthy fish, no matter what the spawning pair is. It's safe to say this is true of most breeders. Where is the line drawn though? When is it acceptable to attempt production of a new line of betta? When is it acceptable to breed a deformity?


I believe that breeding more deformed fish into this world is a worthless endeavor. Of course the marketing will be a huge dilemma but the fact that you're bringing life into this world just to "destroy" or "cull" is not a smart decision. Also, Mildly affected betta will get around okay, but in severe cases the fish will have entirely non-functioning life.

Think of it like this. Sti's are passable through genes. Would you like it if you had to pass on something like aids to your child?


----------



## MollyJean (Dec 29, 2009)

Hmm.. I have quite a bit to think about, but this is all wonderfuly insightful. There are many points I hadn't found on my own, and are wonderful to hear...

But I need to remind everyone I'm not the bad guy. I'll make this clear.. again.

_I have no intention of breeding Tidbit!_ She is nothing more then an example, and though she be deformed, she has raised my interest in genetics and fish breeding quite a bit, to the point I want to see the insights of others in order to understand what I'm attempting better. On a very personal level, I looked at all of my betta and scrutinize them carefully to decide who I would attempt to breed first. And I will have to brace myself for culling.. if I can even do it. But Tidbit made me wonder what would happen if I bred her. And while I wouldn't, I can see the up side of attempting.. and understand many of the down sides. This is all about insight, *please don't attack me for Tidbit, she is being used as nothing more then an example.*


----------

