Forums36
Topics40,944
Posts557,786
Members18,483
|
Most Online3,612 Jan 10th, 2023
|
|
9 members (Bill Cody, Dave Davidson1, FishinRod, Bucyrus22B, Rangersedge, JPierson, MidwestCass, catscratch, Boondoggle),
1,071
guests, and
183
robots. |
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2009
Posts: 814
Lunker
|
OP
Lunker
Joined: Mar 2009
Posts: 814 |
Here is what I think I know about HBG. The perhaps grow faster, but not necessarily bigger than regular BG. They have bigger mouths and are more aggressive. And while they tend to me 90% male, if they do reproduce the offspring can be less desirable green sunfish. So, why not cross BG with RES, PS or CNB so that the outcross would still be a desirable fish? Are they more closely related so you'd have less hybrid vigor? Is one of the desirable traits of HBG their mostly lack of reproduction? Do I ask too many questions and am I giving clues to Bruce's top secret breeding program?
Last edited by Bullhead; 06/10/09 10:08 AM.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 10,458 Likes: 2
Ambassador Field Correspondent Hall of Fame Lunker
|
Ambassador Field Correspondent Hall of Fame Lunker
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 10,458 Likes: 2 |
I personally think the BGxRES cross is perhaps the most desirable. There are a few circumstances where HBG are a better choice than pure BG but I cannot think of many.
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 13,966 Likes: 276
Moderator Lunker
|
Moderator Lunker
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 13,966 Likes: 276 |
If by CNB you mean Coppernose BG, since they are (just) a subspecies of BG, the BGxCNBG cross should not have uneven numbers of both sexes or suppressed fertility. Like F1 LMB. ... am I giving clues to Bruce's top secret breeding program? Word to the wise, Bullhead, since you have raised this issue, don't go down any dark alleys or get into any strange cars.
"Live like you'll die tomorrow, but manage your grass like you'll live forever." -S. M. Stirling
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2009
Posts: 814
Lunker
|
OP
Lunker
Joined: Mar 2009
Posts: 814 |
I better be careful. I don't imagine I live too far from his secret la-bor-a-tory.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 6,979 Likes: 14
Ambassador Lunker
|
Ambassador Lunker
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 6,979 Likes: 14 |
This is probably one of the most-debated issues on this, or any other fish related forum. And while I am too new at this to have my opinion carry much weight, let me state my reasons for choosing this fish. Actually, HBG were not my first choice. Initially, I wanted CNBG, but I believe they do not do well in my part of the country. (Indiana). I've seen how native Bg and RES do in my ponds, which is very well,but I wanted to try something different. I want big fish. Really big fish. And while I very well could of achieved that by feeding out native BG, I didn't want the prolific reproduction of which we're all familiar with. That procedure requires much more of a "balanced" effort, with an adequate number of predator species to control reproduction. And yes, I do have LMB in my HBG pond. But I don't have the worry of wondering if the Bass are keeping up with the reproduction, or if the BG are getting too crowded, should I fish out the BG, or add more LMB? No problem here, I feel certain that stunted, or undesirable outbreeding won't be an issue. That lets me concentrate on one thing. Growing big fish. Of course I still have to provide good quality food and acceptable water quality, but that's the same with any fish. Which brings me back to the "balanced Pond" scenario. With HBG it's just not as critical IN MY SITUATION, as it would be with native BG. I don't require a self-sustaining population, I will control, (mostly) the HBG numbers by adding new fish and removing, (harvesting), those large enough to come out. I think this is where a lot of folks get into trouble. You have to use HBG in the right situations. Again, I'm new at this and may be way off base, but that's my approach.
"Forget pounds and ounces, I'm figuring displacement!"
If we accept that: MBG(+)FGSF(=)HBG(F1) And we surmise that: BG(>)HBG(F1) while GSF(<)HBG(F1) Would it hold true that: HBG(F1)(+)AM500(x)q.d.(=)1.5lbGRWT? PB answer: It depends.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 10,458 Likes: 2
Ambassador Field Correspondent Hall of Fame Lunker
|
Ambassador Field Correspondent Hall of Fame Lunker
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 10,458 Likes: 2 |
I don't think you are way off base at all sprkplug. If anything you hit the nail on the head for the one method that HBG work well in...
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 6,979 Likes: 14
Ambassador Lunker
|
Ambassador Lunker
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 6,979 Likes: 14 |
thanks CJ... I need all the encouragement I can get!
"Forget pounds and ounces, I'm figuring displacement!"
If we accept that: MBG(+)FGSF(=)HBG(F1) And we surmise that: BG(>)HBG(F1) while GSF(<)HBG(F1) Would it hold true that: HBG(F1)(+)AM500(x)q.d.(=)1.5lbGRWT? PB answer: It depends.
|
|
|
Moderated by Bill Cody, Bruce Condello, catmandoo, Chris Steelman, Dave Davidson1, esshup, ewest, FireIsHot, Omaha, Sunil, teehjaeh57
|
|