# Should this thread be re opened



## Death in #'s (Apr 29, 2003)

if u dont know this thread Tern maz size


----------



## Murphy18 (Oct 17, 2008)

I say leave it closed, and then close this stupid poll too


----------



## Death in #'s (Apr 29, 2003)

Murphy18 said:


> I say leave it closed, and then close this stupid poll too :rasp:










is this ur first posts out of the lounge


----------



## Grosse Gurke (Jan 3, 2003)

You could also start a new topic if you want.....


----------



## Death in #'s (Apr 29, 2003)

Grosse Gurke said:


> You could also start a new topic if you want.....


that might require work


----------



## notaverage (Sep 10, 2005)

haha..this got a little tense in that thread.
why reopen for shits and gigs?


----------



## Wide_Eyed_Wanderer (Aug 22, 2006)

scavee has the biggest tern


----------



## SeedlessOne (Nov 21, 2006)

Sounds like a bunch of girls fighting in that thread. Frank seems like a tool.


----------



## hastatus (Jan 16, 2003)

> SeedlessOne Posted Yesterday, 07:41 PM
> Sounds like a bunch of girls fighting in that thread. Frank seems like a tool.


I suppose your basing this opinion on your vast knowledge?


----------



## Ja'eh (Jan 8, 2007)

I voted no. Too many know it all's that in reality don't know anything with exception of Frank, GG and a couple of others.


----------



## Murphy18 (Oct 17, 2008)

Ja said:


> I voted no. Too many know it all's that in reality don't know anything with exception of Frank, GG and a couple of others.


A big x2!!

Couldn't agree more.


----------



## the_w8 (Jul 28, 2003)

haha that thread was fairly retarded


----------



## memento (Jun 3, 2009)

I voted yes.
Not for self proclaimed wise guys to start shouting again that their fishes are the biggest (guys, we're not talking about your dicks so get real...), but 'cause :
1) there still is a possibility that ternetzi's are not nattereri's but a different species, derived from piraya.
2) it still is not clear how big an aquarium specimen can get.
3) I still would like to know if dollarbills are still a measuring tool









However, if it results in a lot of noisy crap about who's fish is the biggest then leave it closed


----------



## Uncle Jesse (Feb 18, 2007)

Not unless a mod wants to post something, but then they should immediately close is again.


----------



## hastatus (Jan 16, 2003)

> febsalien Posted Today, 04:27 PM
> *Not unless a mod wants to post something*, but then they should immediately close is again.





> This forum is maintained by Frank Magallanes of OPEFE and associates. He will answer your questions based on scientific field research, *scientific announcements, present day scientific classifications of piranhas, and how species relate to one another. All based on factual and recorded scientific view of these species in the wild. *


Simply an update on what is going on in today and how it relates to piranhas. Like GG said earlier, you can always start a new topic.


----------



## Trigga (Jul 1, 2006)

Frank I read how you think terns are more closely related to piraya.. Do they also have a rayed apidose fin?

I say keep it closed and start a new thread, no sense opening a thread with a bunch of old info when we can open a fresh one and discuss what we know now.


----------



## hastatus (Jan 16, 2003)

> Trigga Posted Today, 04:49 PM
> Frank I read how you think terns are more closely related to piraya.. *Do they also have a rayed apidose fin?*
> 
> I say keep it closed and start a new thread, no sense opening a thread with a bunch of old info when we can open a fresh one and discuss what we know now.


Meyers in his PIRANHA BOOK mentions that occasional examples of P. nattereri show a rayed adipose fin. However, his descriptions (or I should say AXELROD) descriptions are mired in a lot of errors, to include those remarks. But, I have seen photographic examples of P. nattereri that we hobbyists call ternetzi, yes they do possess 1 or 2 rayes in the adipose on a few samples. An example is shown here :Ternetzi.


----------



## Trigga (Jul 1, 2006)

Do they all show this characteristic?


----------



## Death in #'s (Apr 29, 2003)

people need to understand wild caught and tank raised are 2 totally diffrent things
of course any animal in human care will most likely live longer and get bigger

and dollar are not measuring tools and neither are rulers that are covered by the fish or 1 foot away


----------



## Trigga (Jul 1, 2006)

I would love for you to show me any difference between a wc 10" Red and a captive bred one.


----------



## hastatus (Jan 16, 2003)

> Trigga Posted Today, 07:10 PM
> I would love for you to show me any difference between a wc 10" Red and a captive bred one.


Paulo Petry says he can tell the difference, not sure what technique he would use, but one of the keys is captive bred are generally over fed and tend to be more "dumpty" looking. In science, the fish is x-rayed and the number of bones (serrae) are counted. In nearly every instance, captive bred exceed the number of serrae and bones of a wild caught fish.


----------



## Us And Them (Dec 4, 2008)

hastatus said:


> > Trigga Posted Today, 07:10 PM
> > I would love for you to show me any difference between a wc 10" Red and a captive bred one.
> 
> 
> Paulo Petry says he can tell the difference, not sure what technique he would use, but one of the keys is captive bred are generally over fed and tend to be more "dumpty" looking. In science, the fish is x-rayed and the number of bones (serrae) are counted. In nearly every instance, captive bred exceed the number of serrae and bones of a wild caught fish.


Where do You find all of this information ? Books ? online ?
or was this information just gathered over years of schooling and ACTUAL research you have done yourself.

Seems like i always learn something new everytime you post


----------



## Trigga (Jul 1, 2006)

What about fish that were wc then raised in captivity? Do they grow more bones to adapt to the heavier feedings?


----------



## SeedlessOne (Nov 21, 2006)

hastatus said:


> > SeedlessOne Posted Yesterday, 07:41 PM
> > Sounds like a bunch of girls fighting in that thread. Frank seems like a tool.
> 
> 
> I suppose your basing this opinion on your vast knowledge?:laugh:












Who the f*ck cares about a size of a fish.........


----------



## Trigga (Jul 1, 2006)

Hey man the more you know the more you grow


----------



## SeedlessOne (Nov 21, 2006)

Kinda off topic..... Im wasted


----------



## hastatus (Jan 16, 2003)

> What about fish that were wc then raised in captivity? Do they grow more bones to adapt to the heavier feedings?


No, the gene pool is not replenished. Majority of piranhas in the U.S. come from just a few sources where mass breeding is done via aquariums. Ohio for example (House of Tropicals) had such a successful breeding operation, they would acually sell piranha eggs so people could hatch their own baby piranhas. All of this plays on the DNA of piranhas, not to mention the effects on the skeletal formation. Much of this is ccvered at OPEFE web site. Just take some time and look it up and read it.

I find that occasionally, when I answer questions here, there is always 1 or 2 smartasses that have trouble digesting the information so they resort to lower levels of communication to push their thoughts off. If you really want to know stuff about piranhas, ask your questions. If all you want to do is bash the messenger for whatever childish reason, I won't be responding to it further.


----------



## hastatus (Jan 16, 2003)

> Where do You find all of this information *? Books ? online ?*
> or was this information just gathered over years of schooling and ACTUAL research you have done yourself.
> 
> Seems like i always learn something new everytime you post


Actually, I help authors write their books based on my achival data on piranhas. This is all research I've done myself with the help of academics. I'm self-taught researcher and I have had the eyes and ears of authorities for many years because they see me as the bridge between them and the hobbyist. So while some folks don't like the idea that I have more information than they get out of book or magazine, I still share that information with the world-wide web in the interest of science. The information I share with hobbyist (as GG and others can tell you) have kept the law from banning piranhas in Oregon.

There is always something new to learn about piranhas. I'm still learning about them, but in a different way than just having them in a fish tank and making broad assumptions.


----------



## blbig50 (Jan 1, 2009)

Frank, not trying to be ignorant or anything, but have you gone into the Amazon/ South America and done any studying there. If so, where and what did you find?


----------



## Trigga (Jul 1, 2006)

hastatus said:


> > What about fish that were wc then raised in captivity? Do they grow more bones to adapt to the heavier feedings?
> 
> 
> No, the gene pool is not replenished. Majority of piranhas in the U.S. come from just a few sources where mass breeding is done via aquariums. Ohio for example (House of Tropicals) had such a successful breeding operation, they would acually sell piranha eggs so people could hatch their own baby piranhas. All of this plays on the DNA of piranhas, not to mention the effects on the skeletal formation. Much of this is ccvered at OPEFE web site. Just take some time and look it up and read it.
> ...


I think you misunderstood my question.

Say I bought a wc fish @ 3" and a captive bred at 3".. When both are say 10"(so a few years under my care) would they both have the extra bones?


----------



## Death in #'s (Apr 29, 2003)

Trigga said:


> > What about fish that were wc then raised in captivity? Do they grow more bones to adapt to the heavier feedings?
> 
> 
> No, the gene pool is not replenished. Majority of piranhas in the U.S. come from just a few sources where mass breeding is done via aquariums. Ohio for example (House of Tropicals) had such a successful breeding operation, they would acually sell piranha eggs so people could hatch their own baby piranhas. All of this plays on the DNA of piranhas, not to mention the effects on the skeletal formation. Much of this is ccvered at OPEFE web site. Just take some time and look it up and read it.
> ...


I think you misunderstood my question.

Say I bought a wc fish @ 3" and a captive bred at 3".. When both are say 10"(so a few years under my care) would they both have the extra bones?
[/quote]
good question wondering that myself now


----------



## memento (Jun 3, 2009)

As could have been expected, the groups are gathering again... in the left corner we've got : the scientists and those who follow that appraoch. 
And in the right corner we've got : the other half








Science versus stupidity, always the greatest show on earth...

For the few that make my visits to this forum worth it : go on, some of us actually áre digesting the information and think about it.

For the other half : you guys were right all along. I didn't have a dollarbill (I'm dutch, so why should I have one) but one as scientific :

*Picture removed....GG


----------



## Murphy18 (Oct 17, 2008)




----------



## memento (Jun 3, 2009)

And then we get cranky ? All I'm saying is that without the scientific information provided, this entire topic is nothing more then boasting and noise. Like a bunch of schoolkids shouting their's is the biggest (hell yeah, the picture was sarcastic meant)

Edit : You know Murphy, actually I agree with one of your reactions yesterday. And let's face it, without those "few", this thread, as well as the previous, ís going to be a "my fish is bigger and you are wrong" topic...
I might not state that as polite as some of you did earlier, but if this thread is heading that direction, just close it again...
And if anyone feels the urge to ban me for that, just do so.

Another edit : of course I didn't want to upset the sensitive ones, so I changed the attachment. The comparison will be clear enough I guess.


----------



## Piranha Guru (Nov 24, 2005)

Death in # said:


> > What about fish that were wc then raised in captivity? Do they grow more bones to adapt to the heavier feedings?
> 
> 
> No, the gene pool is not replenished. Majority of piranhas in the U.S. come from just a few sources where mass breeding is done via aquariums. Ohio for example (House of Tropicals) had such a successful breeding operation, they would acually sell piranha eggs so people could hatch their own baby piranhas. All of this plays on the DNA of piranhas, not to mention the effects on the skeletal formation. Much of this is ccvered at OPEFE web site. Just take some time and look it up and read it.
> ...


I think you misunderstood my question.

Say I bought a wc fish @ 3" and a captive bred at 3".. When both are say 10"(so a few years under my care) would they both have the extra bones?
[/quote]
good question wondering that myself now
[/quote]

No. The extra bones are an inherited trait that has become prevalent in captive bred populations. They don't spontaneously develop the extra bones during their life...they are born with them. Moving a wild p to an aquarium won't change its bone count, nor will moving a captive born p back to the wild. It all depends on the genes the fish inherited from its parents, and its parents' parents, etc...

A smaller breeding gene pool over time will lead to populations (captive in this case) with excessive mutations (more bones in this case) that show up more often. It's kind of similar to the founder effect in the wild...a small sample of a population is now in a new isolated area and takes with it the genes and mutations with them. Over time these get compounded and amplified, new ones pop up and get passed on if not lethal or undesirable, and eventually the population is genetically different enough to use phenotypical differences to differentiate them. In the wild, natural selection determines this...in captive populations artificial selection determines this (humans).


----------



## hastatus (Jan 16, 2003)

> No. The extra bones are an inherited trait that has become prevalent in captive bred populations. They don't spontaneously develop the extra bones during their life...they are born with them. Moving a wild p to an aquarium won't change its bone count, nor will moving a captive born p back to the wild. It all depends on the genes the fish inherited from its parents, and its parents' parents, etc...
> 
> A smaller breeding gene pool over time will lead to populations (captive in this case) with excessive mutations (more bones in this case) that show up more often. It's kind of similar to the founder effect in the wild...a small sample of a population is now in a new isolated area and takes with it the genes and mutations with them. Over time these get compounded and amplified, new ones pop up and get passed on if not lethal or undesirable, and eventually the population is genetically different enough to use phenotypical differences to differentiate them. In the wild, natural selection determines this...in captive populations artificial selection determines this (humans).


Sums it up nicely.


----------



## Ba20 (Jan 29, 2003)

i find it amazing that someone that joined the forum just a few months ago and has one piranha knows 10x more than everone here.


----------

