Pond Boss Forums STOCKING A NEW POND Types of fish to choose Intergrade CNBG?

This may be a slightly moot point because the truck is on its way to stock my new 5 acre pond with CNBG this afternoon. Late last week another pond management company rep informed me that CNBG that come from certain hatcheries in Arkansas are not pure strain. He stated that he gets his fish from a Alabama hatchery.

I inquired to the pond mgt company that is doing my stocking and they insured me that while my fish were coming from a hatchery in Arkansas, they were pure strain CNBG. So this morning I called the hatchery in AR and the rep did not instill a high level of confidence in me that their fish are in fact pure strain.

So I thought I'd post this situation and see if anyone else has any thoughts or has had experience with a large Arkansas hatchery's CNBG. I asked the hatchery rep if his brood stock had the characteristics of the Florida pure strain and in summary he said "not really" but he believed that was due to the environmental differences occuring in AR vs deeper in the south.

The management company I am using is a very reputable company from what I know, so I dont think they would knowingly mislead me. I wish I had more lead time to research but I only learned about this 2 days ago.....oh well! I will be happy to get the first fish in the pond any how.

BTW, this is an awesome forum and fantastic resource for all. Long live Pondboss; I hope everyone using this forum continues to suscribe and support.

Treading lightly, as I have no experience with CNBG, may I ask what your reason/s are for wanting pure Florida strain fish? Growth rate? Ultimate size potential? Visual display?

I have CNBG from that hatchery, and they have grown nicely with no problems.

I also have F1 bass from that hatchery and they were stocked last September (bluegill in April of same year) and I have several bass pushing 4 lbs now.

We're just managing for a general fishing pond though, so neither the bass or bluegill are we shooting for trophies. I have caught 1+ pound bluegill already though.

This possible scenario has been brought up before, and it's a very interesting topic. At least to me it is.

PSH, I think I have as many questions as you do.

Do the Arkansas CNBG adapt to the new conditions, or are they bred to enhance their adaptability? If they are somehow crossbred with Northern BG to help cold water hardiness, what traits would be the dominant ones? Would these fish be considered hybrids?

Taylor, do your CNBG have the typical coloring characteristics, ie white fin tips/lines, and other markings?

Sprkplug, yes the growth rate, better eating feed (by some accounts), and color characteristics vs NBG.

The so called Pure Florida strain CNBG are a strikingly beautiful fish. And from what I read, they do tend to grow quickly under optimum conditions. As far as to how this translates into ultimate size potential, I certainly have an opinion, but I will let others who have years of experience with these fish weigh in on that. I will simply say that I have seen folks with "Arkansas strain" Coppernose grow some amazing fish, the same with "pure" northern strain.

I put 100 of the Arkansas (Dunn's Fish Farm) CNBG in my new sediment pond. They were only an inch or two long when stocked late summer/early fall. Hopefully by mid to late next summer I will be able to start seeing some of the characteristics of CNBG compared to the BG stocked from Wallace Fish Farm in Kansas that were stocked in my main pond. Probably be another year yet before some are mature enough to really start showing the features well.

Dunn's sells these fish quite a ways further north than where I am, so I would assume they would live up here. Fireishot, I decided specifically to try them based on some of the previous discussions here on the forum you talked about. I did not really need the additional BG, but since I was getting the RES anyway and had a new little pond, thought what the heck. Be a good chance to see how they worked out. If all 100 winter kill, not a huge problem in my situation. But I would think they will be ok. Dunns sells lots of fish up this way. You would think if the fish were no good for up here, they eventually would not be able to sell them any more.

Plan on feeding them and removing some as they grow to make more room in the pond as there are also 200 RES stocked at the same time. On a 1/10th acre pond they will over crowd at some point, so as the fish grow my intention is to pull out some and transfer into the main pond (or even my old pond, depending on where I think they can be utilized best).

So I hope to have at least a visual comparison of BG vs Arkansas CNBG at some point in the future.

IMO as they are the same species they are not hybrids.

Here from a prior thread

http://forums.pondboss.com/ubbthreads.ph...true#Post302793

http://forums.pondboss.com/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=66840&page=1

http://forums.pondboss.com/ubbthreads.ph...true#Post279613


From PB mag. - order it now.

THE CUTTING EDGE – SCIENCE REVIEW
By Eric West


Coppernose Bluegill vs. Regular Bluegill – which one for you?


A question we often get on the Pond Boss Forum is should I stock Regular Bluegill Lepomis macrochirus macrochirus or Coppernose Bluegill Lepomis macrochirus mystacalis also previously classified and referred to as Lepomis m. purpurescens . To answer that question we should look at the traits of both and use the one that will work best for the particular goals for the water in question. As we all know traits come from genetics. So what is the difference in the genetics of Coppernose vs. Regular Bluegill? Well it started a long time ago and it took a long time to get there. Here is the basic story. Millions of years ago peninsular Florida was, like it is today, connected to the mainland. Bluegill were present all over the eastern US. Sea level rose and peninsular Florida was cut off by the sea from the mainland creating two separate populations. Bluegill on both the mainland and on the peninsula continued to evolve separately each influenced by local conditions with a divergence time of roughly 2.3 million years. After a few million years of this separate path sea level fell and the two land masses were connected again. However the two bluegill sub-species were now a little different genetically. The rivers were connected and the two subspecies migrated and integrated in a zone along the deep southeast where the two sub-species mixed. If this sounds familiar it should – it’s the same story as the Florida Largemouth Bass and the Northern Largemouth Bass where the divergence time between Northern (M. salmoides) and Florida (M. floridanus) bass is approximately 2.8 million years. If you know one story you should have a fairly good idea of outcome of the other. Surely as a pond owner you have heard the bass story. Florida Bass get bigger under the proper circumstance and do not due well in cold climates. Yes Bluegill have a similar story.

Coppernose Bluegill get bigger under the right circumstance but do not flourish in colder climates. In fact Coppernose are susceptible to poor results and substantial winter kill in northern US regions as are Florida Largemouth Bass. So how do you tell Coppernose and Regular Bluegill apart. Take a look at the pictures included. The Coppernose has a copper band across its head/nose in adult males, has fewer and wider vertical bars, has orangish/red fin margins and tail coloration , 12 anal fin rays and often light/white fin edges most visible when young. The Regular Bluegill has 11 anal fin rays and none of the other traits mentioned.

So how do they compare? Here are some points from a study on the subject titled Performance Comparison between Coppernose and Native Texas Bluegill Populations by John A. Prentice and J. Warren Schlechte in the 2000 Proceedings of the Annual Conference of the Southeastern Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies , Vol. 54 at pgs 196-206 looking at growth (size at age) , survival and catchability.

Coppernose Bluegill were significantly larger than Native Bluegill in all scenarios tested with the largest observed difference being 19.2 mm total length (.756 inch) and 33.5 grams ( 1.18 ounces) over 2 years. At 3 years there was a 16 mm (.63 inch) difference on average and at 4 years 24 mm (.945 inch). With other fish species present there was no difference in angling vulnerability between the types. Spawning activity of the brooders began at the same time (last week of Feb in 1995 and first week of March in 1997) and produced the same size offspring for tagging at the same time each year ( mid-April) in what appeared to be similar numbers. Survival of young of the year Coppernose was substantially greater than for Native Bluegill.

Before you draw to many conclusions note this was in Texas where the weather is close to that of the Coppernose’s native range. That is a critical key to success with Coppernose. While there is an often cited study titled Cold Tolerance in Two Subspecies of Bluegill by , A. J. Sonski , K. E. Kulzer , and J. A. Prentice, in the 1988 Proceedings of the Annual Conference of the Southeastern Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies , Vol. 42 at pgs 120-127 , that states Coppernose and Native Bluegill have similar cold tolerances the key is the test was done on bluegill all from the same area (Texas). Its purpose was to determine if Coppernose could survive the Texas climate. There is substantial observed and anecdotal evidence that Coppernose do not do well in cold climates (roughly north of the north line of Arkansas/Tennessee extended) . In the far northern US Coppernose become subject to high winterkill rates. This would be consistent with their similar relationship to Florida Largemouth Bass which have repeatedly been tested to do poorly and die in cold climates. The study first cited above was also in ponds with no supplemental feeding. Reported scientific evidence is substantial that in ponds the most common cause of reduced growth is a shortage of food. It is not known how much, if any, of the early growth difference between the two sub-species was due to limited forage. The two sub species will integrate (inter-breed) with the offspring exhibiting mixed traits and no apparent negatives but there is very little published data on them.So the answer to the question should I stock Coppernose Bluegill or Regular (native) Bluegill or both is – it depends. Your location (climate) and your goals are key factors. If you are in the Deep South or the Southwest (including Southern California) and not at high elevation (Appalachian, Rocky or Sierra Mountains) Coppernose should be considered. In short is your temperature profile similar to those areas? To some extent management practices and the existing bluegill population, if any, are also possible factors. Whichever type you choose keep in mind that the most important factor to growing nice bluegill is to be sure they have enough food to eat and not to much competition.



Edited by Bill Cody (17/07/12 09:30 AM)
Edit Reason: enhancements

Thanks for the information guys.

yes, they look like other CNBG I've seen, and just like the BG I've caught off Disney World property in the past...

I'm not sure if mine came from Dunn's, as I bought them from a place that actually hauls a truck up there and picks them up. I just know the place in Texas I got them from gets them from Arkansas.

I'll probably put Overton's CNBG in our next pond though.

I have used several sources - Ark through Greg Grimes (he picks the hatchery so no junk fish) , OTS CNBG from Todd - excellent fish !!! and from ASF and SEP and Suttles - fish were from AL ,and MS and directly from Fla imported (directly from) CNBG stock - also good fish. Pick your sources carefully.

Evolution
Vol. 28, No. 1, Mar., 1974
Biochemical Genetics...
Biochemical Genetics of Sunfish. I. Geographic Variation and Subspecific Intergradation in the Bluegill, Lepomis macrochirus
John C. Avise and Michael H. Smith
Evolution
Vol. 28, No. 1 (Mar., 1974), pp. 42-56


Abstract
Electrophoretic variation in proteins encoded by 15 genetic loci was analyzed in 2415 bluegill (Lepomis macrochirus) repsenting 47 populations from 7 Southern states. Populations from the Florida peninsula and southeastern Georgia (L. m. purpurescens) {CNBG} differ in allelic composition at several loci from populations in central and western Georgia west to Texas (L. m. macrochirus) { regular BG}, yielding coefficients of genetic similarity below the range generally found for continuously distributed conspecific populations in other vertebrates, but quite comparable to previous reports for various semispecies pairs. Populations of L. m. purpurescens are essentially monomorphic for Es-3100 and Got-258, while populations of L. m. macrochirus are segregating for Es-396 and Es-392, and are fixed for Got-2100. Within several river drainages in South Carolina and eastern Georgia, bluegill populations are segregating for all of these alleles. In particular, a highly significant correlation between frequencies of Got-258 and Es-3100 indicates that the two subspecies are intergrading in a wide zone of overlap. A closer examination of genotypic class proportions of a large population of bluegill from the intergrade zone confirms that the two subspecies are backcrossing and are apparently fully interfertile {able to interbreed with other species or subspecies and produce viable offspring}. Degrees of introgression appear equal for alleles at these loci. The high correlation in population allele frequencies across loci is compatable with the hypothesis that the alleles are behaving as neutral markers of intergradation. However, mildly significant deviations from expected genotypic proportions may indicate influences of selection. The pattern of intergradation evidences a secondary meeting of allopatrically evolved races. Since populations of pure L. m. purpurescens are largely confined to the Florida peninsula, it is likely that Pleistocene rises in sea level were important in their original isolation from L. m. macrochirus. Populations of bluegill within reservoirs are generally homogeneous for frequencies of common alleles at polymorphic loci. However, there is significant heterogeneity in allele frequencies between reservoirs within any drainage system. The magnitude of this variance is greatest in the intergrade populations within the Savannah River basin, and is far less in 'pure' samples of L. m. macrochirus. The bluegills examined may be characterized by three areas of relative regional uniformity, in which genetic differences within a drainage system are probably as great as those between drainage systems: 1) the Florida populations of L. m. purpurescens 2) the intergrade populations and 3) populations of L. m. macrochirus.

All Colored text my notes or edits.