Pond Boss Forums INTRO Questions & Observations Is this a GSF, and should I be committed?

I see what you are getting at. I was looking at it from more of an accelerated growth rate perspective rather than maximum size.

Theoretically I would think that the hybrids should be able to attain greater size, but I would have to say that I haven't come across any evidence where the hybrid will without a doubt be larger than the parentals to a statistically significant degree.

This is probably because aquaculture operations are interested in shortening the time that it takes to get the fish to market rather than holding on to them for years to see the result.

Point taken!

Daryl Bauer, who is a biologist for the Nebraska Game and Parks commission has told me that for a project, they looked at all of the various state records of bluegill, green sunfish, and bluegill/green sunfish hybrids, and they were absolutely convinced that the hybrid (GS X BG) has less ultimate growth potential than the purebred bluegill, all other things being equal, such as food availability, water quality etc.

Intuitively (which means nothing from a scientific standpoint, of course), it doesn't make sense for me that you could take one fish that grows to 1.5 pounds, and another that grows to 3 pounds, and produce a fish that grows to be 4 pounds.

I've always told clients that when it comes to BG X GS, big mouth = more prey options = faster initial growth.

Furthermore, there have been countless instances that I've heard of folks who bought GS X BG hybrids and were told by the supplier that they will automatically get to be 2 pounds, yet I've caught and handled literally thousands, if not tens of thousands of these hybrids and never seen a true two-pounder. I've seen tons of fish in the 1-1.5 pound range. I once handled a hybrid that weighed 1-12, but that wouldn't rank in the top 100 bluegills that I've weighed.

It's an interesting mental exercise. I've admittedly not seen that one "all-defining" study that stacks BG against BG X GS. It would be extremely interesting, and it could be one of many times that I've had to eat my words. I've been wrong before, and I'm likely to be wrong again.

Bruce you are seldom wrong and certaintly not this time.


I bet there are at least 50 threads here on or about the genetics of HBG (hybrid lepomis). All hybrids do not result in hybrid vigor. HBG do not get significantly bigger than BG as size is not the trait exhibiting hybrid vigor. The do grow a little faster in the early part of their life ( < 1 yr.) due to their bigger mouth and aggressive nature. In order to make a comparison of HBG to BG you need to compare the HBG to a mostly male BG population to keep the comparison honest (apples to apples)as between 65 and 99% ( most time 95%+- ) of HBG are male. Hybrid vigor is best exhibited in HBG for their very aggressive disposition (easy to catch).

Like all pond tools there is a correct time and place to use HBG. They are good for a put and take fishery (great kids pond) with a predator.

Very interesting Bruce.

If we assume that one fish population is 1.5 pounds, and the other fish population is 3 pounds then one might suspect that the hybrid offspring might be, lets say 2.25 pounds which would be the average of the two (after many many crosses).

With hybrid vigor / heterosis, you might see that the population of hybrids actually have a weight of 2.35 pounds, which is greater than the average of the two parentals.

Hybrid vigor / heterosis just means greater than the average expected. Not greater than the parentals. Intuitively, and scientifically (unless there is a mutation within a promoter that controls growth) we would not expect the offspring to be greater than both of the parentals. Just one of the parentals (the smaller one... but remember this would only be if size was the trait that is experiencing the hybrid vigor. It does not always happen this way. Just an illustrative example).

I really made a BIG mistake when I said that the hybrid would be larger than the Parentals. What I really meant was that I would expect the hybrid to be larger than ONE parent, with an average weight larger than the average of BOTH parentals.

I apologize for completely screwing that up. I think I am going to stop writing things after midnight. Never comes out how I thought I wrote it when the morning rolls around. Pretty embarrassing.

The problem with heterosis in most animals is that it is extremely difficult to find two populations that are far enough apart genetically. If they are very similar from a genetic standpoint, then the effectiveness of hybrid vigor is lowered significantly. I don't know enough about fish and their relatedness to say anything of value as far as that goes.

Here's what Keystone Hatchery in Illinois has to say about hybrids vs. regular bluegills:

http://keystonehatcheries.com/bluegill-vs-hybrid-bluegill-0

This ones's pretty close Bruce:

http://www.pondboss.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=161425

Gflo no apologies needed around here. I often think the same thing when I go back and read what I posted. You were right on most everything you wrote. Thanks for posting and providing insight.

I was fooled into getting the HBG for my pond since I had no clue and they made it sound good. I guess the nice thing is if they do grow faster for the first few years it means I can harvest them sooner and try to get enough of them out so the CNBG can replace them.

Thanks for the great responses to this thread, I decided to put the two GSF in the pond that I brought home since they lived for 8 hours in a Thermos and it didnt seem right to whack them after that. Otherwise I will not be adding them to the pond. Sorry JHAP

With your luck they were a male and female! If they were two males or two females, you may be surprised in a couple years when you catch a big 10" GSF. An all male GSF pond could be interesting...

Wow... my ISP goes down for a day and I miss out on my favorite conversation! HBG! I read back through all the posts thinking "here we go again", then I was struck by something I hadn't thought about before. Many times I have read about the growth potential of HBG vs. BG, as in how can a hybrid be expected to exceed the size of it's parental species, or native BG can theoretically reach 4 lbs., etc. Then the ephinany struck. It's so obvious that I can't believe it just occured to me. I'm calling it "Tony's general theory of relativity". You see, (as I'm sure most of you have already figured out, I'm kinda' slow), size is relative to location. Guys, I have nothing but the highest respect and admiration for all of you. The fact that you're willing to take the time to help neophytes like myself means a great deal to me, and I would never knowingly or intentionally say anything meant to disrespect anyone here. On the contrary, I mean the following as a compliment. You guys are cutting edge, you're so far advanced from myself, and I suspect many other pond owners out there, that you give me reason to aspire to greater things. Remember however, that size is relative. Case in point, in this part of Indiana, a true 1lb BG is cause for discussion around the breakfast table at the local diner. A stringer of 1lb. BG's will get your picture in the local daily paper, and admiring glances from the regulars in the bait shop. An honest-to-goodness 1.5lb. BG will cause people you don't even know to knock on your car window and ask for your autograph. Any bigger than that, you're gettin' your own statue on the courthouse lawn. It all boils down to what your goals are. Are you satisfied with 1-1.5 lb fish? HBG will get you there quicker than BG. Native BG are "perennials", you put em' in, they're there forever, unless something tragic happens. HBG are "annuals" they require replenishment from time to time. BOTH species require management to achieve their full potential, at least that's what I believe. Again, I hope I haven't come across the wrong way, It was not my intention to offend or upset anyone, I just wanted to supply a viewpoint from what I consider myself to be: an average pondowner. I appreciate the chance to learn from, and participate with everyone here.

Tony

I think you have it right Tony. Even the best BG managers on here struggle to grow numbers of BG into the 1 pound range, or 1.5 pound range and I can't think of but a handful of 2 pound BG I have seen on here. When you think about how much time and money is put into feeding, breeding and managing to grow BG that size, it ain't easy. When you catch a 1 pound BG from a public body of water where they aren't fed and pampered, it really amazes me... HBG have their place in pond management and what you are doing with yours is a prime example! Perhaps as more knowledge is shared on here and elsewhere along with the years it takes to get BG to grow to enormous sizes we'll see more BG pushing 2 pounds and maybe a few over 3.

Sprkplug,

So if I understand what you are trying to point out, please correct me if I am wrong.

If you are a pond owner looking to catch plenty of 1/2 pound sunfish to eat, with occasional 1 pounders as a bonus, and the 1.5 Pound exceptional trophy then HBG are the way to go.

But if you are going to heavily manage to reach the 2 plus pound sharks that I am sure most of us dream of seeing and many on here can achieve in there ponds then the Native BG or CNBG are a better fit for that.

Does this sound about right?

Others please chime in and correct anything that may seem out of line.

Thanks

No problemo.

Two GSF is all it takes.....

Muhaaaa, Muhaaaaaaaa, Muhaaaaaaaaaaaaa

All I'm saying is that size is relevant to the observer. I think that everyone on this forum would agree that a 2lb. BG is an exceptional fish. I would also feel safe in stating that a 1lb. BG wouldn't raise many eyebrows. I have been BG fishing for 40 years, and I am still waiting to catch my first honest-to-goodness 1lb fish. Around these parts they are about as scarce as dna from a sasquatch. Both Native and hybrid BG will achieve the sizes you listed, it's just that around here most folks either aren't willing, or plain don't know how, to manage for trophy sunfish. They add BG to the pond because that's how it's always been done. There's no research or science behind the decision making process, other than talking to the fish supplier. Here's what I believe, and I don't have one shred of evidence to back this up, just a gut feeling. Let's say you dig two identical ponds, let them sit empty for a couple years, then stock one with native BG, and the other with the same amount and size of HBG. Add some fathead minnows. Then 6 months later, add an equal amount of 6" LMB to each one. Thus ends any and all pond management on your part. Wait a year, for everything to "get some size to it", then turn your friends, family, and yes, allow yourself, onto your new honey holes. Wait another 2 years. Which pond has the biggest BG in it now? My money's on the hybrid pond. Why? cause' the LMB have been fished to near extinction, the native BG have taken advantage of the reduced predator base and reproduced themselves to several digits left of the decimal point. Over in the hybrid pond, the severe male bias of the hybridization has allowed the remaining LMB to do a better job keeping the reproduction in check. In addition, the larger mouth of a HBG has allowed them to consume prey items too large for BG. More food available means more growth. Remember, this is a real world unmanaged pond. No supplemental feeding has, or is occuring. This is what I see around the county roads in my neighborhood, although I'm trying to talk to anyone who will listen about management practices. It's just not easy to convine some folks that the work and the expense doesn't end when the fish are stocked.

Sprkplug,

There's plenty of 1 lb. bluegill in Indiana as long as you don't mind what people call 1 lb. bluegill are really 12 oz.

Tony, I pretty much agree with what you wrote... I am betting less than 5% of pond owners actively manage them.

Cecil, you are spot on about that... it seems that the phrase "It was as big as my hand", automatically means the fish weighs at least a pound, if not more... maybe, but I still wanna' see it on a scale!

yep, it's a shame that a lot of potential is never fully realized. I guess that's why I agreed to become an ambassador for Pondboss... just trying to promote what has done wonders to help me....

Tony

sprkplug,

I am planning on starting to feed my pond so once that starts I can try to keep records and see how well they grow.

I would think with feed as most BG ponds are raised we should see their size explode.

Now that does not mean they will slow down around a pound or so but at least we can get an idea.

Thanks

That makes me feel a LOT better about my pond. I can tell my friends I have a bunch of Indiana 1 pounders. They won't know the difference.

Scarce here too!