50+ Acre lake, stocked about 7 years ago with Florida's, where they at? Getting harder every year to catch fish in general, much less a big fish.

Lake is probably underfished though we have been removing 13" and less LMB for about 2 years now. Lake get's checked via seine about twice a year.

3 years ago during the spring you could get worn out catching 1-3# bass, with an occasional 5 or 6 pounder in their. Typical day for me then was hauling in about 12 1-3 pounders and a mix of 4,5,6 pounders though less in quantity. Last year fishing dropped of, and now a typical day I'm lucky to catch 4 to 6 fish 14" and less. Big ones aren't biting. Where the heck are they? For the record I have caught and witnessed being caught a few 6 pounders, and have heard that we have produced some 7 and 8's via catches. All were released.

I have read and heard stories of the Florida LMB getting less aggressive/smarter as they mature, but this is ridiculous. I have thrown every lure in the box at them. At first they loved artificial worms, then they quite biting them as much. Next starting tossing crank baits at them and would wear them out, but now.......they don't want any of that.

Our bream are definelty under fished. You think that the bream are just to easy for them to get?

Anybody else run into this problem with Florida's?

Where can I buy some dynamite?

Try using live bait.

BrianC,

Just wait until your dad gets home! You're going to get an earful now!

Both Meadowlark and George have a lot to say about this subject. I'm sure they'll be along.

Brian, this subject has been beat to death on small ponds, but not that I am aware, on a 50+ acre lake.

You might want to check out the thread “Stocking a new pond >> Types of fish to choose >> half F1 and half florida bass?

http://www.pondboss.com/ubb/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=5;t=000313

An interesting LMB info link from ML post : http://www.strikeking.com/journal/journal022-1.shtml

I am in the camp of believers that it’s more influence of catch and release problems with LMB than Florida, F1’s or northern species problems.

George Glazener

I'm in the camp...if you own a private pond and can't catch bass the way you want to, you are doing something wrong. (or you have trespassers or water turkeys) Granted, fishing will not be "great" every day, but you liked getting exhausted catching the 1-3 lb bass right ? Managing a pond for bass in the 2-4 lb. range is completely different than managing for 6+ bass. I have always preferred the 2-4 lb. range with a sporatic lunker, that may explain the differences between my ponds, and ML & George. If you don't have Lusk's book, get it immediately.

Brian C,

There is not much that can be said that is not already posted. A 50 acre lake is difficult to analyize and most likely you need a professional fish sampling project.

This is a guess and will go against the grain of how most managers think.... perhaps you have harvested too many small bass and now the big bass do not have any competition for the available food. If so, they will fill up at night or not have to range far for food.

Excess bream generally means too few preditors.

If you do not have the books already, I suggest you purchase the Pond Management books sold by Pond Boss, they will give you some great insight and will let you develop a plan.

Again, first and foremost, you need to know your fish population.

You can make your own C4 (a bit dangerous and really frowned upon now days) or look in the yellow pages for a local demolition specialist for some red stick. Just remember to throw the stuff into the wind, just last year a guy threw some dynamite downwind and the wind blew his boat over the blast site, it killed him. By the way, the fish biologist can tell when you use red stick on a fish, the air bladder breaks. A guy in Arizona tried to claim the state record with a blasted bass and was arrested.

Good luck

Thanks for the replies guys. We actually have a biologist helping us with the lake.

We drained down 1/2 the lake last summer and dug it out for better depth. We restocked the lower half of lake with F1's at the recommendations of the biologist. We have a large culvert (8') connect the two sides which is presently screened off.

He has basically told us that while working with quite a few lake owners, that our problem is not uncommon with Florida's, thus the reason for mixing in the F1's. We will remove the screens this summer, and hopefully the F1 and Florida's will present us with a new strain that's easier to catch. That's the plan, anyway.

I am interested in shocking the lake to actually see what we have grown in the last 7 years, and I have been told, that the results will amaze.

Thanks again for the replies.....

You are preaching to the choir (somewhat). Several of us herein have voiced the same concerns. I'm not convinced that F1's are the answer, but there certainly is evidence to support that. I'm trying them also, and will never stock or recommend that anyone stock pure Floridas in small catch and release ponds...the really surprising thing is you are talking about 50 acres....not exactly small in my book.

You will be told...1) you just aren't a good fisherman, 2) use live BG 3) let me show you how to catch those bass. Looks like C4 has even been suggested.

Its a real problem and the most disillusioning thing I have experienced about Pond Management, including poachers/trespassers. No one ever told me that if I did everything right, I still wouldn't be able to catch bass, but that is exactly what happens. Many pros deny this happens.

What's the answer? One option is too reduce fishing pressure, limit it to only 3 or 4 times a year is what I was told (this stinks, in my opinion). Another option is to look at alternative predator fish. HSB is a great alternative to LMB in certain situations. Some of us on this forum are moving to "put and take" operations with HSB in our ponds. The early results are very encouraging.

I hope you will stay active on the Forum and share your experiences with us...we don't have many 50 acre projects to read about.

p.s. sorry Cecil I just can't help myself...at least I didn't complain about water turkeys!

geeZ Brian I see you are member 29, so I didn't need to say anything about asking you to continue to post....but please do anyhow.

I've been around a while! Actually Bob came and visited our lake a few years ago when it was only a couple of years old.

Our lake is an interesting story and setup. It is actually divided into two lakes by a road with an 8' culvert you can pass thru with a boat. Each side has it's own interesting characteristics. One side deeper, more structure, and original to design, and the other is shallow, and recently dug out due to poor construction which left us with average 3' deep waters, with no deep water. We have taken care of that problem with 4 dirt pans cutting a 6' channel the long way through the lake. Deep holes from dirt excavations (some of which sits under my new house), and new structure added. This side was screened of from other side and restocked about a year ago with F1's and bluegill.

We have been just fishing the original (deeper) side of the lake for the past 3 years after the drain down, which may or may not add to our problem.

The more I read on the Florida's, the better I understand what is happening. We were strictly catch and release for the first 3 years, but the lake has never been fished heavily. Typically during the week, maybe two boats during a couple of days. Weekends, about the same. Fish would bite a noticeable pattern of baits, then quit.
First artificial worms were the ticket (still work the best), then spinners which they soon quit taking, next crankbaits which was a blast, but they have become very wary of them now. I have tried topwater (not much success), jig and pig, wacky worms, carolina rigging, just about anything you can name. It's funny how you can catch a 14" twice (holes in jaw), but rarely will you catch a big un twice in these lakes. I must also note that I have never tried fishing in the early morning hours. ALL of my fishing is later afternoon/evening fishing, so it's hard to analize the situation fairly.

I have caught many a bass out of this lake in the last 5 years, and have returned many (all over 14") the last 2 years. We still seem to have a bass crowded condition, even though the few of us that fish it are doing our best to cull the 14" and down bass.

No doubt the LMB in this lake are educated! Catch and release has made it harder and harder to catch "quality size" bass. We are not managing for a "trophy" lake, yet we are trying to make it fun with the opportunies to catch quite a few 3,4,5 pounders, with an occasional "big boy". It's not working. We are now mostly catching (by far) 14" and under sized bass. We keep records (past two years), and they tell an interesting story, which I don't like.

We are doing a lake seine tomorrow, and have scheduled a lake shock for September. Hopefully we have enough growth outa the new stocked bass to remove the screen, and let the F1's meet the Floridas. It will be interesting to see the results in the next few years. I was told however that the F1's and existing FLM may not do much mixing because of the seperation of the two bodies of water, and we are now actually managing and treating them as two different lakes, though connected.

Sorry for the book, just catching up.......I get lost during hunting season!!

It has been my experiance that catching florida bass is much more difficult than catching northern strain bass. All of the pure florida bass that I have caught over eight pounds have been on live bait. The northen black bass may not grow as large but in my opinion it is more fun to catch 20 4# fish than one 10# fish. I recently totally drained a small one acre pond. The pond was originally stocked with floridas and catfish along with forage fish. The first three years were excellent for bass fishing. We would catch 50 to 60 a day. Then the bass disappeared. When the pond was drained many of the bass that were transported to a new pond were over 5# but could not be caught.

When Florida bass and native LMB are stocked together, has any study been done regarding the agressiveness of the resulting crosses?

Dudley Landry :

Some have been done by different hatcheries although I have not seen a written paper. They have gone beyond that to select the most aggressive northerns and largest florida's to cross and call them tiger bass in one case and in another bulldog bass. There have been several posts on this fourm about the topic. I heard Ken Cook the bass pro and fisheries biologist about 8 years ago talk about several ponds he was stocking with only the most aggressive fish he caught to experiment with the idea. So the idea is not new . I would also like to know if there are any written studies on this topic. There are a number of studies on intergrades { another name for florida/northern crosses of which F-1's are a type} , florida's and northerns in ponds but they don't focus on the aggresive trait but on others. We have that situation in several of our ponds and are keeping an eye on the results. ewest

Thanks for your response, ewest. I hope you post your results.

I think Eric has posted about this subsequent to this thread regarding the heritability of hook and line vulnerability. Researchers found that selection for vulnerability (breeding fish that were caught more than 3 or 4 times) increased vulnerability in subsequent generations. The opposite was true when fish, subjected to fishing pressure, were not caught and then selected for breeding. In the latter case, fish became increasingly difficult to catch and the effect was even greater. So I think everyone is aware that vulnerability to hook and line is a selectable trait and that harvest/culling introduces selection that makes fish in a BOW more difficult to catch over time.

These same researchers have/are investigating consequential effects along different paths of inquiry. One of the more interesting paths was on growth rate. It turns out that LMB that are less vulnerable to fishing grow the fastest and the researchers think that the same LMB actually consume less food. By their estimation, the specific energy requirements of maintenance metabolism for the low vulnerability line are 30% less than the high vulnerability line. This is remarkable. Selection for higher growth rate would also select for low vulnerability.

I am reminded of another post of Eric's which highlighted findings by texas researchers that found that in a typical BOW there are two populations of LMB where one population grows along one growth path and the other population grows along another. IIRC the slow growers tend to live longer and ultimately grow as large. While it may seem counterintuitive, it may be advantageous for quality of fishing for hatcheries to select for vulnerability only.

There has also been research on the ability of fish to learn hook avoidance. LMB, it turns out, are relatively slow to learn when compared with BG for example. Radabaugh found that individual bass also have different capacity to learn. Aside from hook avoidance, Radabaugh tested also for learning to take artificial feed. It would also be interesting to learn how the selective pressure of artificial feed learning may contribute to the selection for one or the other of the vulnerability lines. My intuition is that poor learners also tend to be the most vulnerable to hook and line.

jpsdad - this is a 15 year old thread - a lot has occurred/posted in that time. You have summarized some of the advances from other threads and your research. A number of PB Cutting Edge articles have addresses some of these ideas and there is a whole lot that we don't know. I am sure I have missed a lot of info as the world of knowledge is advancing exponentially.

I believe that many fish traits are inherited/adaptive and most we don't have any info about . Many we cant see or observe such as internal physiology (guts , brains , chemistry ). Maybe we should try to gather a bunch of threads and info and do an archive on the topic.


Good question - there is an 1980 vintage study on fast growing LMB. I wonder if aggressiveness and learning ability are related but not the same. Some of the early fast growing offspring of big LMB were very aggressive and often were quickly eaten by larger predators because they took more risk in feeding. But a few of the aggressive fast growing LMB offspring of big LMB ended up being huge.

There has been such research in the 15 years since the question. I will find the info and check back. IIRC the adding of only a small % of Northern genes offsets the negative aggressiveness of Fla LMB. The same for size - small % of Northern genes still allows for Fla LMB size to be retained.

Been there done that when talking of changes made to a pond where the Floridia's were hard to catch on artificial's. Not a study but an experience.

First spring, Todd Overtons Camolot Bell fingerlings added.
2'nd spring adult CB lmb added.
3'rd spring adult Pure Florida lmb added
4th spring added adult feed trained Northern lmb.
6year fall, local adult native lmb added.

Today, I see that CB marking on some of the yoy lmb some I do not see that CB marking.

Tracy, I wasn't aware that the Camelot Bell line were Todd's. Are these the F1s?


The traits seem to be interlaced to some degree. The authors who developed high (HVF) a low (LVF) vulnerability lines also noted differentiated growth within the lines. In one work they noted that the larger males of the HVF line were most fit for reproduction. The received more eggs and sired more swim up too. So there seems to opportunity to, especially noting your comment above, to select for fast growth within the HVF line.

I have given a fair amount of thought about the most appropriate traits for artificial selection. As time goes by, I lean further from growth as primary trait. Not that it is not important but rather it seems to be secondary to other important traits. For example, for BG it may be much better to have a line that consistently lives for 8 to 10 years over one that grows to 1 lbs in two years. Interesting stuff indeed.

Tracy, I too have added Camelot Bell (aka Lone Star Legacy), northern strain, and very recently F1 LMB. Seem reasonably catchable, though that might be because they aren't pressured a whole lot. I harvest about 200 a year, maybe 120 hook & line, 80 by electrofishing (which I prefer since it does not take out the most aggressive fish).

I've seen very few of the blue-green markings, which makes me think that Florida genes aren't widespread. On the other hand, I've been told that not all the Lone Star fish have that mark, and some pure northern strain do(!), though not as common.

From a prior thread

Here is the study

There is a lot unknown about the subject of your question. There are some threads here on many aspects of that goal. Read up on catchability and growth rates. Look into the research on TPWD share a lunker genetics and studies on integration of Fla and Northern LMB in TX waters. Here is a bit to ponder.

Subspecies Composition of Angled and Electrofished Largemouth Bass in Texas Reservoirs , Dijar J. Lutz-Carrillo, and Spencer Dumont in Proceedings of the Annual Conference of the Southeast Association of Fish and Wildlife. Agencies 66:75�81, 2012 Proc . The study�s results provide biologists with a provocative concept that, in southern waters (natural integrated zone of FLMB and NLMB), FLMB likely are more difficult to angle than NLMB, but the phenotype (genetic trait) of reduced angler susceptibility (catchability) is mitigated (reduced) by introgression (genetic mixing), even at low levels of NLMB genes. While many factors may function concurrently to determine angling susceptibility, including fishing pressure, naivety of individual fish, learned lure avoidance, and stress from catch and release , we now know that catchability is a genetic and heritable trait as was previously discussed in earlier Cutting Edge articles ( see Garrett (2002) and Philipp et al. (2009) ). Note that when pure FLMB were removed from the dataset numbers (leaving only crosses with high levels of FLMB genetic influence) the trait of reduced catchability disappeared. Stated differently the addition of only a small amount of NLMB genetics caused poor catchability to disappear.
Trophy fish (≥13 lbs.) from introgressed populations are represented disproportionately as non-introgressed FLMB relative to the frequency of FLMB in the general population ( TPWD, unpublished data). Thus, in an appropriate environment, genetic composition appears to be a critical component of maximum size in largemouth bass. While most of the differences in growth and maximum size between these subspecies are likely due to intrinsic physiological differences, behavioral differences, such as reduced angling susceptibility, may also play a role. FLMB that are potentially less susceptible to angling would be removed from populations at reduced rates relative to non-introgressed NLMB or crosses, allowing a greater proportion of FLMB to reach an older age and greater size. However I recall TPWD data also showing many of the share-a-lunker fish were high FLMB percentage crosses. From Pond Boss � The Cutting Edge.

jpsdad, The Camolot Bell lmb were certified pure Florida strain. Proven growth potential. Todd Overton at that time was the way to get those fry. Today he has the Lonestar legacy wich I believe are the same pure florida lmb. Maybe Todd will jump in. Been awhile since he has been on the forum.

Frank, because of my pond only being 3 acres I thought it was a good place to produce my own F1's.

Yes a good idea. Some interesting info on what happens when you add Fla LMB into a pond with Northerns and F-1 and X. In most cases over time Fla genes take over (become predominate} depending on the # of Fla..

Our Overton Lonestar Legacy Florida Bass have Camelot Bell Genetics in the mix but they don't make up the entirety of our Gene pool, we have tweaked the genetics with certified Florida Bass from other sources to ensure we have maximum growth potential. As Anthropic said the Green spot shows up on a large percentage of Florida's but I also see it in F1s as well as random bass that come in ponds from who knows where.
Our F1's are a cross between our Legacy Florida Bass and our source for Northern Bass. These fish have tremendous growth potential as we have produced double digit fish both in the pure Florida Legacy Bass and the Northern Feedtrained Bass (Albeit not very often, but I've seen plenty of 7-9lb) F1's seem to be slightly more aggressive than the pure Florida's but the main selling point is their willingness to feed train and stay on pellets in a natural environment, this takes alot of the guess work and active management out growing big bass in your pond as having high protein fish feed available daily can fill in forage gaps that would otherwise create a bigger issue. The downside to F1's is that as they interbreed in the long run you end up with F2,F3,F4,FX..etc These latter generations lack the hybrid vigor of the first cross and ultimately without the supplementation of genetics in the long run you will end up with fish that has no extraordinary genetic characteristics and is similar to what you would find naturally.
We have successfully feedtrained a good number of pure Florida fingerlings the last several seasons but we still don't have alot of info available as to if they consistently stay on the fish feed after being introduced to a natural environment. Hopefully they consistently do as I believe this will help with their catchability. My recommendations currently for catching our Legacy bass are stick more with natural patterns, especially in clear water, bright flashy lures with a lot of vibration don't seem to entice them as much as more aggressive strains of bass.

There is a lot on the Forum about Fla , Northern , F-1 and F-X LMB. I tried some of Todd's and they did well. I do take issue with 2 points.

"... F1's seem to be slightly more aggressive than the pure Florida's but the main selling point is their willingness to feed train and stay on pellets in a natural environment,... "

The main selling point for F-1 and the reason they were first developed by the founding hatchery was the increased aggressiveness (vs Flas) as many of their customers were complaining about not being able to catch the stocked pure Flas.

" The downside to F1's is that as they interbreed in the long run you end up with F2,F3,F4,FX..etc These latter generations lack the hybrid vigor of the first cross and ultimately without the supplementation of genetics in the long run you will end up with fish that has no extraordinary genetic characteristics and is similar to what you would find naturally.

I don't believe this to be accurate - IMO. This has been covered before on the Forum. Lack of hybrid vigor comes from outbreeding depression and occurs in the FX offspring of crosses of 2 different species (not within a species) ie hybrid Bluegill ( a GSF X BG cross). Some studies show that the 2 LMB types are too close genetically to result in this happening. Some disagree with this analysis and believe it does occur. I have not personally seen outbreeding depression in F-1 in my 20 years of following their use. You can plan around this by stocking some pure northerns and some pure Flas (which I have also done). There is a lot (very lot) we don't know about mixing Fla , F-1 and Northerns together and what happens over time. Some data suggest Fla genes tend to dominate (in southern use) other data is inconclusive when the % of Fla fish is low vs F-1 and Northerns. It is just a big " it depends" situation. I know of ponds stocked with just F-1s for over 15 years with no such issues.

I know TP&W genetically tests all the fish that they get called to get for their "Sharelunker" program. I wonder how that plays out percentage wise between the pure Florida strain and the F1's (and possibly pure Northern strain)??

If I remember correctly, most ShareALunker fish had Fla genes but were not pure Fla LMB. Don't recall any pure Northern strain, though there may have been a few.

IMHO I think both of the ideas are correct (and incorrect) in part. Breeds, Lines, and Varieties are all examples of artificially selecting for a predictable standard for life like dogs, fish, and tomatoes. These standards have highly concentrated genes that produce a great degree of variety of traits within a species (for example chihauhuas and great danes). Usually when inbred lines of different standards are bred together, the F1 offspring produced are fairly consistent in terms of their traits. But the FX generations do show a high degree of variability. If the F1 was very desirable, often efforts are undertaken to select for the F1 traits and produce an inbred variety that consistently produces offspring that are like the F1s. This can only be done through artificial selection as nature will itself go the path that favors those traits that contribute most to reproductive success. If the breeder is very good at identifying the desired traits he can usually produce a variety, breed, or line with traits that are consistent with the F1 generation in about 7 to 9 generations.

I think most people over anticipate the level and consistency of selection from recreational fisheries suppliers than they would expect from tomato seed supplier, for example. I think the most pertinent traits are shaped by natural selection factors in what seem to be regionally superior traits. Here regionally superior means that the trait contributes to reproductive success over the long haul in the waters these fish have evolved. In a recreational pond, the traits that win are those that favor reproductive success and after 7 generations the genes will reflect what contributed most to reproductive success. If aggressiveness, then we will see that trait (as we do in the North). Faster growth and slower metabolism seem to be important to survival and reproductive success in the South. I think each pond is its own laboratory and one very important environmental influence is the human predator contribution of fishing and culling/harvest. There is only one way to remove this influence on traits of a population of the adult fish. One would need to eliminate the dependence on natural reproduction for trophy path recruits.

Here is a start to an archive on the topic - I am still looking for more.



Which Bass Type - F-1 Tigers or Native - Pond Boss Forum
https://forums.pondboss.com/ubbthre...ntegrade+zone&Search=true#Post496578

Must read: PB article on Genetics & Catchability! - Pond Boss Forum
https://forums.pondboss.com/ubbthre...ntegrade+zone&Search=true#Post475742

f1 bass offspring - Pond Boss Forum – Bob has a comment
https://forums.pondboss.com/ubbthre...ntegrade+zone&Search=true#Post463289

Lone Star Legacy Bass Breeders 2016 - Pond Boss Forum – Bob has a comment
https://forums.pondboss.com/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=447815&page=1

To help all understand that there is a natural intergrade zone where there is little evidence of F-1 , F-X outbreeding depression.


Cold intolerance is the known reason. Many studies confirm this. There are plus and minuses and corresponding reasons for each LMB stocking approach. There is no one "I am right" plan. See info below map for others view.

There is little to no proof that outbreeding depression applies to Fla/North crosses whether they are F-1 , 2 or FXs (all referenced as integrades) in there natural integrade zone .


Status of Subspecies as of 2011 subject to change:
Florida Largemouth Bass and the Northern Largemouth Bass were once considered to be subspecies. Many state fisheries agencies still consider them to be subspecies and treat them as such, often stocking �Florida strain largemouth� on top of the native Largemouth Bass stocks. Although the American Fisheries Society (AFS) also officially still recognizes them as subspecies, biologists specializing in the field are calling for them to be separated into two distinct species: Florida Bass and Largemouth Bass. This is based off genetic studies that suggest that the genetic variation between Florida Bass and Largemouth Bass . A natural intergrade zone occurs where the two species� ranges meet and overlap in the deep southeast. Artificial intergrade zones exist where state agencies have stocked Florida Bass over Largemouth Bass for decades.





http://sepond.com/fish-stocking/largemouth-bass --- Southeastern Pond Management approach


Here is American Sport Fish�s approach.

Florida bass in the southern latitudes grow faster after age two, and live longer than Northern bass. They also have the potential of reaching larger sizes. These are record-breakers. However, they are less tolerant of cold temperatures, and they can be harder to catch. As they grow older, they learn to ignore artificial bait. Pond owners often complain about not being able to catch larger Florida bass, except on live bait. Nevertheless, their size and long lifespan make them excellent additions to many ponds.

Through more than 15 years of genetic selection, American Sport Fish has developed a very aggressive strain of northern bass called the Gorilla bass. Aggressive feeding behavior is an inheritable trait, and each generation of bass has been selected for its aggressive behavior. These fish are strong feeders and respond well to artificial baits even when they become older. They are more tolerant of colder water than the Florida bass..Adult Gorilla bass are often added to lakes that are home to a majority of Florida bass, to increase the angler's catch rate and to introduce their aggressive feeding genetics to Florida bass populations.

Created by our team of scientists, the Tiger Bass� has been specially bred for aggressiveness and fast growth. In well-managed lakes, Tiger Bass� have consistently gained more than two pounds per year. Biologists refer to this fish as a true F-1, because it is a cross between two pure subspecies of bass: a special strain of aggressive Northern Bass (which we call Gorilla Bass) and a pure strain of Florida Bass that comes from proven trophies (females from 13 to 16 pounds). American Sport Fish is the only hatchery licensed to produce and sell the Tiger Bass�
The world record bass, which weighed 22 pounds and 4 ounces, came from southern Georgia and is thought to be a northern/ Florida intergrade. Our Tiger Bass� have already gained weights of 15 pounds in eight years. We expect them to break state records in the next several years.


F1 LMB vs Florida strain LMB, pros and cons??? - Pond Boss Forum
https://forums.pondboss.com/ubbthre...ntegrade+zone&Search=true#Post441639


Tiger Bass ( F1) - Pond Boss Forum
https://forums.pondboss.com/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=274647&page=1

F1 LMB and Outbreeding Depression - Pond Boss Forum many good biologists on this one Wes Neal , D Willis , Overton , Grimes and others – lots of good stuff in this one
https://forums.pondboss.com/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=184554&page=1

Wes notes --
wneal
Lunker
W
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 10
United States
Hey Eric, and thanks for the "warm" welcome all. I agree completely with Eric that inbreeding is much more of a concern. However, I want to argue one point...

You cannot compare intergrade bass (have both strain's alleles) that are naturally produced and adapted over 1000s of years with Fx generation hybrids produced through man-made causes in a small pond. The natural intergrades have had much time to select for the genes from both sides that best fit their environment. Thus, the "bad" combinations have been weeded out. No such selective pressures occur in ponds in the time frames we are discussing, so the bad combinations will persist and their inferior traits may become evident in only a few generation. That is the risk of outbreeding depression.


I agree that stocking from multiple sources may be a good idea. However, Dave Davidson's comment about the impurity of pure strain fish is a major concern. Despite what some people claim, the only accurate way to tell a Florida bass from a northern bass is genetically, so it is real easy to accidentally contaminate a pure strain population. We plan to test fish from a few hatcheries this spring - I will report on what we find.

No one has really looked at the time needed between gene pool refreshments. I would guess that every 5-10 years would be good, and is certainly better than never.


F1 outbreeding depression? - Pond Boss Forum
https://forums.pondboss.com/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=141071&page=1

Do I need some better genes? - Pond Boss Forum
https://forums.pondboss.com/ubbthre...ntegrade+zone&Search=true#Post129974

Thus, although our results provide no evidence of a genetic basis for variation in functional

morphology, the observed phenotypic plasticity represents an important mechanism

that can mould a fish�s morphology to the resource base of a lake.


intermixing lmb strains... - Pond Boss Forum
https://forums.pondboss.com/ubbthre...ntegrade+zone&Search=true#Post114857

PB may/june09 Science & the cutting edge.... - Pond Boss Forum
https://forums.pondboss.com/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=204888&page=1

This speaks to what I was saying above. An intergrade population which has undergone natural selection over many generations is very different from the F1 combination of two isolated populations. Each population has genetics concentrated in traits important to their waters and the fish that survive to reproduce are reflections of these dominate genes. Each population is in essence an inbred line that has been naturally selected for its particular environment.

When inbred lines are crossed, many dominate traits are expressed in the offspring from both lines. The next generation allows more variation to one side or the other. I don't consider this depression in terms of the quality of the genetic pool, only that the individuals have a broader spectrum of traits expressed in the Fx generations. In truth, the F1s are more genetically diverse than offspring of the pure strains. Intergrading between connected bodies of water is probably important to genetic diversity in general allowing the larger populations to share genes over time scales important to evolution.


Here I think that Wes may be underestimating the speed of selection. In addition to fishing harvest, the natural selection acting on fish populations is rather intense. Only a minute fraction of swim up fry will successfully reproduce. The genetics favorable to reproductive success in this environment will dominate the adults that are recruited. LMB live for 9+ years. The individuals initially stocked (but not culled) will dominate the catch of large fish during this time frame, when they have passed, natural selection and fishing mortality will be what has selected the generations that take over.

Good hatcheries (that first produced F-1s) are run by fisheries biologists and they through years of selection for good traits in both Flas and Northerns have accounted for this issue. They are well aware of the issue and constantly select from their stock to produce the best product. That is why your source for fish is important.

I would be interested in any info from someone who has experienced outbreeding depression in a pond stocked only with quality F-1s. There have been many thousands of such stockings and no suggestion of a problem to my knowledge. There is significant selection inside the pond and millions of different possible genetic combinations upon which evolution works.

Bob Lusk
Editor, Pond Boss Magazine
Lunker

Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 3,192
Likes: 4
Whitesboro, Texas
F1 bass cannot have true F1 offspring. They can have F2 offspring or Fx (unknown) offspring. They cannot breed back to the genetics of the original parents, either. They can only provide the genetics they have, which is a mix of both parents.

Fish genetics is much more complicated than others, for several reasons. With deer, you have a known buck, known doe, one to three offspring...and they don't eat each other. You can provide the best habitat, great food, etc, and see the results in a couple of years.

With bass, a female may have 30,000 eggs, which might hatch, some might not. Then, of those which hatch, only a percentage has the right genetic mix of good growth, aggressive nature...whatever they need. If some percentage of those fish survive long enough, you can grow big fish. But, under water, it's a 'fish eat fish' world. We can't control survival rates or judge the fish as they grow so we can protect the best of the best youngsters before they get eaten. So, it becomes an environmental situation with luck.

I completely agree with these comments above Eric. The competitive environment in the pond prevents bad genetics from growing up to spread inferior genes. What makes it to reproductive age has great genetics, or I suppose might have been very lucky, but I do not believe in luck.

Perhaps there really is vigor resulting from the combination of Northerns and Florida. If so, even if F2 progeny is highly variable, the ones that survive to reproductive age are reasonably argued to be the ones with relatively greater vigor. So perhaps mother nature performs the selection of those progeny that are most like the parents (F1s)