Pond Boss Forums STOCKING A NEW POND Types of fish to choose F1 LMB and Outbreeding Depression

Thanks Dr. Neal. I absolutely missed the part regarding the introduction of native bass genes.

So, to maintain "hybrid vigor" and to deny the opportunity for outbreeding of mutts we add only new Floridas to the gene pool.

The way I understand it, there is no way to deny the opportunity of outbreeding after either the F1s OR a mix of the two strains have been introduced. The key would be to stock pure strain and keep it as pure as possible by restocking down the line with same strain as the originals, but possibly a different source.

Todd,

Thats the way I see it as well. Only thing is, isn't that what most of us have been saying all along. I feel like we have made a circle with this thread and are back where we were originally. Except its actually a good thing to be back at what was originally believed about outbreeding, F1's, and correcting it.

Todd, what do you mean by "strain"? I'm trying to really get this down.

Wes, I guess I do not need to contact you to join in. thanks so much and I fully understand you had your arm twisted to cover this topic. You did a great job of expressing your views. I'm overwhelmed right now with work/calls due to floods but will keep an eye on this topic. As mentioned American Sportfish has been working on the backcross Female bass and will let you know current status.

Yes Todd I was saying that was good news from business persepctive. Good seeing you btw and if you find big bass we will take them.

Stocking Florida bass on top of a Fx population will NOT maintain hybrid vigor. Once the population is Fx, the new Florida fish can either spawn with other new Florida fish, making Florida fish, or they can spawn with Fx fish, making Fx fish. The only way to make an F1 hybrid is for Florida and Northern bass to spawn together. Even if you replaced 50% of the Fx bass population with Florida bass, you'll end up with 25% Florida bass by generation 1, and 6% Florida bass by generation 2, with nearly all fish Fx by generation 3.

Generation Fl No F1 Fx
Refresher 50.00 0.00 0.00 50.00
Gen 1 (%) 25.00 0.00 0.00 75.00
Gen 2 (%) 6.25 0.00 0.00 93.75
Gen 3 (%) 0.39 0.00 0.00 99.61

Short of frequently removing large numbers of small Fx bass and stocking pure or F1 bass, the population will always shift to an Fx population in just a few genreations.

Dave, when I mention strain I am referring to what I thought were sub-species such as either pure floridas or pure northerns, but now I understand that the scientific community has accepted these two 'strains' as two different species entirely. So I'll have to get used to calling them different species.

Greg, thanks and good to see you as well.

Thanks Wes for posting on PB. You will find this a very inquisitive group. Guys go read the link I posted earlier for some of the science and the note about what Wes' job is. Wes you will always be a PB friend and respected with us no matter if a hornets nest is stirred up or if there is disagreement. Disagreement here is common but always respectful and open to change as we learn more. I know I have had at least 3 different opinions on some topics due to new info and study.

This is true cutting edge stuff that is not proved ( long term studies) as to F-1s or Fx specifically but is the application of general principals of genetics to the idea. There is so much we don't know yet and as Wes noted the more important point is food , water quality , and age. There are natural populations of Fxs in the intergraded zone that don't show outbreeding depression as noted by and in the TX studies linked. We can all watch my pond 3 and lets see what happens. It is stocked with TX Overton pure Flas , Northerns from Greg and F-1s from ASF. In three years +- we will sample some 8-12 inch fish and see pics/results and genetic testing. Keep in mind that quality fish local to your area are locally adapted for your area ( don't put fish from Ohio in a southern pond nor MS fish in Ohio). Local adaptation is very important. The bigger risk IMO is inbreeding - genetic regression (to few genes from to small a source)over time.

Much to learn on this topic and additional studies over time will help.

Todd and Wes need clarificaiton. I swtiched from use of strain to sub species term a few yeas ago. Todd you sure it is now species???

Dave Philipp made the case for two separate species in 200, but I don't believe that it has been formally accepted yet. The book "Common and Scientific Names of Fishes from the United States, Canada, and Mexico" published in 2004 does not distiguish the two as separate species. That book is generally considered the authority by most scientists. For all intents and purposes, a sub-species and strain are the same thing.

That should have said in 2000.

OK Wes thanks, I read that article that you recommended and based my comments on that, but I'll stick with sub-species or strain for now.

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.

Enlightening discussion. Hopefully the mods will add this to the archives.

Congratulations, Wes. You're up to 7 posts.

Look out, CJ.

There's the pot calling the kettle black...

Genetics are extremely interesting to me, but wasn't an area I studied heavily in college. However, this truly groundbreaking stuff! I am very curious to see how Eric's pond turns out... I am very intrigued by the map Eric posted with the genetics of the bass from different areas of the country. Particularly areas where LMB were not native.

Related to the topic of inbreeding and outbreeding, when stocking a new pond particularly a large one where thousands of one fish would be stocked or at least several hundred... Would it be a good idea to source those fish from several or at least a couple different sources so as to help guarantee genetic variance amoungst the fish in your pond? At what time down the road should you add new genetics to your bass, BG, etc... 5 years, 10 years?

I had no idea we had a 5 digit poster in our midst. been staying away too much.

If stocking in the thousands I would source from different genetics. One hatchery could do this but you should be sure they understand and then ask them to explain what exactly they are going to do. On pond 3 I got CNBG and RES and FH and TShad from 2 sources Todd and SEP and LMB from 3 sources Greg , ASF , and Todd. The BG from Todd were from 2 sources his and George.

Ewest's answer is much better than mine, but my simple answer to your question would be "yes." It certainly couldn't hurt as long as you trust each supplier and know exactly what you're getting.

Our original LMB stockers came from 3 different hatcheries. We went that route because of genetics (and redneck common sense).

Speaking of going full circle. Lets not forget the reason we stock F1s in small southern ponds. I am hoping that between selective harvest of inferior fish, original stockers doing the same by foraging on subsequent generations and maintaining a poundage of fish that can be supported by the pond, that I have made a wise decision.
If not, I can always stock a couple of flatheads.

edit: I do think this could be valuable information for hatcheries to consider.

It's my opinion also that you should stock from multiple sources, whether through the same hatchery guy or completely different hatcheries. As long as you let your fish supplier know what your intended goals are and as davasta said, you trust them...

Trust is a huge factor. About 10 years ago I started looking for pure Floridas. Among others, I contacted Bill Wingo, a local and highly reputable Pro and was told that he was having trouble finding them. He was finding, through sampling, about a 5 to 10% mix. I appreciated his honesty.

I had not realized that most Florida bass carry some intergrade genes.

This thread has reinforced something I said years ago regarding experts. All of us here, regardless of education and/or experience, have a similar outlook. We are simply students sharing our experiences. Thanks to all, especially Dr. Neal, for reminding us of that.

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.