Red Loss ...

[Samuel Phan]

Hi,

I have a spawn of marbles that threw out a percentage of red fishes. They are now about 1.5 months.

Recently, I detected red loss in them. In fact, within less than 2 weeks ... some of them are lossing their reds completely and now look more like a marble than a red. Finnage have turned clean like cellophane too.

My question:

- Is red loss a genetic deficiency?
- Is it worth keeping?
- Is there any use ofr such fish for eventual spawns?

With Best Regards,
Samuel Phan


Samuel Phan **** Chiat
(Creator Of Sam's Betta Colour Rendezvous)

[Foo Hong]

I think red loss is desirable in that it helps u to get fishes with clean colours w/o red washes...:)

[Samuel Phan]

Talked to the boss at Straits ... he mentioned that some of his very unique fishes also derived from fishes with Red Loss. The red gave way and out comes some very beautiful butterflies and such.

Thanks ...

With Best Regards,
Samuel Phan

quote:
I think red loss is desirable in that it helps u to get fishes with clean colours w/o red washes...:)




Samuel Phan **** Chiat
(Creator Of Sam's Betta Colour Rendezvous)

[Foo Hong]

yep marbles n BF when young can carry red colour but losses them due to teh red loss factor I think. Red loss in irids also help you to get rid of the red wash problem if you can get it in.

But you want redloss in everything except extended red <img src=icon_smile_tongue.gif border=0 align=middle>

[Samuel Phan]

Hi Foo Hong,

Thanks for your reply ... really need that confirmation.
The word "Red Loss" kinda represent something that is undesriable .... but today onwards ... it has got a new meaning to me.

Thanks again ...

With Best Regards,
Samuel Phan

quote:
yep marbles n BF when young can carry red colour but losses them due to teh red loss factor I think. Red loss in irids also help you to get rid of the red wash problem if you can get it in.

But you want redloss in everything except extended red <img src=icon_smile_tongue.gif border=0 align=middle>




Samuel Phan **** Chiat
(Creator Of Sam's Betta Colour Rendezvous)

[Jung]

Yeah! Red loss is indeed very very useful. But also very hard to control exactly... cos it kinda behaves differently in different lines: i.e. in one line the effect is more pronounced (almost all fish lose almost all red) while in another line, some red is always left. Have tried a few outcrosses (opaque lines), both parents' lines with red loss... sometimes the red loss effect is amplified (extremely strong red loss in the offspring) and sometimes reduced (hardly any loss...lots of wash...worse than either parents' spawn)... strange...

[Dr Hsu]

quote:
... sometimes the red loss effect is amplified (extremely strong red loss in the offspring) and sometimes reduced (hardly any loss...lots of wash...worse than either parents' spawn)... strange...



Agreed! That's the problem with these genes - very difficult to predict!

Regards,

Li Chieh
"Good judgement is based on experience, and much of that is based on prior bad judgement!"

[Samuel Phan]

In that case ... better pray hard (to quote Foo Hong ... pray to the Quan Yin Mah) that my Opaque spawn have lots of Red Loss. =)

And Jung ... hopefully I will have some female Opaque HM from the spawn. =)

With Best Regards,
Samuel Phan
quote:
quote:
... sometimes the red loss effect is amplified (extremely strong red loss in the offspring) and sometimes reduced (hardly any loss...lots of wash...worse than either parents' spawn)... strange...



Agreed! That's the problem with these genes - very difficult to predict!

Regards,

Li Chieh
"Good judgement is based on experience, and much of that is based on prior bad judgement!"


Samuel Phan **** Chiat
(Creator Of Sam's Betta Colour Rendezvous)

[Foo Hong]

Just remember when you pray to Kuan Yin Mah, do not use red josssticks or candles <img src=icon_smile_big.gif border=0 align=middle>

[Samuel Phan]

Ha .. point taken.
quote:
Just remember when you pray to Kuan Yin Mah, do not use red josssticks or candles <img src=icon_smile_big.gif border=0 align=middle>




Samuel Phan **** Chiat
(Creator Of Sam's Betta Colour Rendezvous)

[Samuel Phan]

Just to contribute on my observation on Red-loss on my recent spawn:

Opaque HM STM X Opaque STF

Spawn Size: 200

Initially the spawn gave tonnes of red-wash on the fries when they reach about 1 month old. 90% of the fries actually have the red-wash which I was unsure whether they will go away eventually.

Now at 1.5 month, almost all the fries have red-loss taking effect and most of them turned out snow-white. But on areas where the red once appear ... it becomes see-thru or transparent.

Thus I have now Opaque fries that are snow-white but some with see-thru areas on their finnage.

Can anyone confirm on the disappearing red that creates the see-thru finnage?

With Best Regards,
Samuel Phan

quote:
Yeah! Red loss is indeed very very useful. But also very hard to control exactly... cos it kinda behaves differently in different lines: i.e. in one line the effect is more pronounced (almost all fish lose almost all red) while in another line, some red is always left. Have tried a few outcrosses (opaque lines), both parents' lines with red loss... sometimes the red loss effect is amplified (extremely strong red loss in the offspring) and sometimes reduced (hardly any loss...lots of wash...worse than either parents' spawn)... strange...




Samuel Phan **** Chiat
(Creator Of Sam's Betta Colour Rendezvous)

[Foo Hong]

See thru is see thru, bcos there is no white layer over the fin thats all. This is another problem with whites, so you see to get a real nice white is not so easy, alot are either not fully covered with white, or shinny white i/o matt white. Selective breeding is key.

[Samuel Phan]

I see ... I see ... thanks.

quote:
See thru is see thru, bcos there is no white layer over the fin thats all. This is another problem with whites, so you see to get a real nice white is not so easy, alot are either not fully covered with white, or shinny white i/o matt white. Selective breeding is key.





Samuel Phan **** Chiat
(Creator Of Sam's Betta Colour Rendezvous)

[Myron Tay]

I have had an example of a extended red fish that has experienced complete loss of all its red pigment, probably due to old age. After the red loss, the fish had a flesh colour with black scales on the body and some part of the fins with black pigment. Imagine a red fish without its red pigment. Quite an interesting sight!

[Myron Tay]

quote:Originally posted by Brett Webster

Hi Guys

My first post on this forum though I have been veiwing this forum for quite a while. I would like your comments on the following.

10 weeks ago my extended/cambo red ddr ct male (derived from red/cambo parents) had spawned with a new red bf ct female (lineage unknown) I had gotten through Kevin Tan here in Australia. Well, the results have been surprising to be the least! (Apologies for the photo qualities).

This is Dad:
http://www.bettaclub.org.sg/forum/uploaded/Brett Webster/200462195747_ER CT F1.jpg

This is Mum:
http://www.bettaclub.org.sg/forum/uploaded/Brett Webster/200462195923_Red CT BF Female.jpg

And, this is number 1 son!!
http://www.bettaclub.org.sg/forum/uploaded/Brett Webster/20046220015_01 013.jpg

He's roughly one and a half inches total length at the moment (the spawn got slowed by whitespot which I was able to eliminate without losing any fry about 4 weeks ago) and is starting to branch into DDR.

There are about 50 surviving fry, 2 so far showing what I believe MAY be the prescence of the red loss gene. The remainder of the spawn is showing either extended/cambo red. The red in both affected fish has slowly been disappearing over the past 2 weeks. At first I thought YAY, tribands!! Now, I'm not so sure. Has anyone seen the red loss gene in action before? Or is this just a messy butterfly? Thanks for any input.

Brett

Yes, Brett. It is red loss.

[Myron Tay]

quote:Originally posted by Brett Webster

Hi Guys

My first post on this forum though I have been veiwing this forum for quite a while. I would like your comments on the following.

10 weeks ago my extended/cambo red ddr ct male (derived from red/cambo parents) had spawned with a new red bf ct female (lineage unknown) I had gotten through Kevin Tan here in Australia. Well, the results have been surprising to be the least! (Apologies for the photo qualities).

This is Dad:
http://www.bettaclub.org.sg/forum/uploaded/Brett Webster/200462195747_ER CT F1.jpg

This is Mum:
http://www.bettaclub.org.sg/forum/uploaded/Brett Webster/200462195923_Red CT BF Female.jpg

And, this is number 1 son!!
http://www.bettaclub.org.sg/forum/uploaded/Brett Webster/20046220015_01 013.jpg

He's roughly one and a half inches total length at the moment (the spawn got slowed by whitespot which I was able to eliminate without losing any fry about 4 weeks ago) and is starting to branch into DDR.

There are about 50 surviving fry, 2 so far showing what I believe MAY be the prescence of the red loss gene. The remainder of the spawn is showing either extended/cambo red. The red in both affected fish has slowly been disappearing over the past 2 weeks. At first I thought YAY, tribands!! Now, I'm not so sure. Has anyone seen the red loss gene in action before? Or is this just a messy butterfly? Thanks for any input.

Brett

Yes, Brett. It is red loss.

[Brett Webster]

Thanks very much for the quick response Myron. I'm assuming this is a good thing when it comes to any other lines of ct's I'm working with (particularly with irrids) where red wash is a problem? Is this an uncommon occurence?

The other thing I noticed is that perhaps the red loss gene (assuming that's what this is) does not follow the typical mendelian genetic models ie. punnet square. Only 2 fish from roughly 50 (4%) exhibit this trait, so far (they have some development to go yet). Comments?

[Brett Webster]

Thanks very much for the quick response Myron. I'm assuming this is a good thing when it comes to any other lines of ct's I'm working with (particularly with irrids) where red wash is a problem? Is this an uncommon occurence?

The other thing I noticed is that perhaps the red loss gene (assuming that's what this is) does not follow the typical mendelian genetic models ie. punnet square. Only 2 fish from roughly 50 (4%) exhibit this trait, so far (they have some development to go yet). Comments?

[David Esguerra]

Wow, talk about black in a red line.

However, by what I know of red loss, the fry/fish are usually red for some time then lose the red exposing whatever color it has other than the red.

Was the #1 red at any time?

[David Esguerra]

Wow, talk about black in a red line.

However, by what I know of red loss, the fry/fish are usually red for some time then lose the red exposing whatever color it has other than the red.

Was the #1 red at any time?

[Brett Webster]

Yes David, from the tip of his nose to the tip of his tail, VERY red!

[Brett Webster]

Yes David, from the tip of his nose to the tip of his tail, VERY red!

[Myron Tay]

quote:Originally posted by Brett Webster

Thanks very much for the quick response Myron. I'm assuming this is a good thing when it comes to any other lines of ct's I'm working with (particularly with irrids) where red wash is a problem? Is this an uncommon occurence?

The other thing I noticed is that perhaps the red loss gene (assuming that's what this is) does not follow the typical mendelian genetic models ie. punnet square. Only 2 fish from roughly 50 (4%) exhibit this trait, so far (they have some development to go yet). Comments?
Brett

That is a tough question since I work on increasing the amount of red in my fish rather than removing it! :D

Yes, the red loss gene could be useful for those seeking to remove red (this was suggested by Dr Gene Lucas eons ago), but my sense is that it is not popular with those in the irridescent lines who are seeking to remove any occurrance of red in their lines in the first place.

My guess is that the rarity of the red loss occurrance points to its under-development.

Sorry, not much help there.

[Myron Tay]

quote:Originally posted by Brett Webster

Thanks very much for the quick response Myron. I'm assuming this is a good thing when it comes to any other lines of ct's I'm working with (particularly with irrids) where red wash is a problem? Is this an uncommon occurence?

The other thing I noticed is that perhaps the red loss gene (assuming that's what this is) does not follow the typical mendelian genetic models ie. punnet square. Only 2 fish from roughly 50 (4%) exhibit this trait, so far (they have some development to go yet). Comments?
Brett

That is a tough question since I work on increasing the amount of red in my fish rather than removing it! :D

Yes, the red loss gene could be useful for those seeking to remove red (this was suggested by Dr Gene Lucas eons ago), but my sense is that it is not popular with those in the irridescent lines who are seeking to remove any occurrance of red in their lines in the first place.

My guess is that the rarity of the red loss occurrance points to its under-development.

Sorry, not much help there.

[David Esguerra]

Hehehe, yep, Myron is not the one to ask about red loss, for one thing if I had his breeding program, I would not want any red loss as he wants his fish to be as red as possible.

Then again, I am not Myron and do not breed for reds.

Red loss has been used and even overused in the opinion of some breeders (including myself) to just do what you plan to do, to use it against red wash.

It has been used effectively with irrids as well as with opaques. However, this also causes a problem. You see, there is still a certain quality of red loss that is desired and another that is not.

Some red loss lasts for the rest of the fish's life, some do not. This is quite apparent in some "opaque" lines particularly in the American continent with some breeders/newbies always complaining of their opaque whites turning red as they get older. The color change is so abrupt at times that the keepers think that the fish has septicemia or some other disease. This is the more undesireable red wash.

With the red wash that lasts forever, we have little if no problems, however with the less desirable red wash, we have the problem of when the red would reveal itself. Hence, in the long run, you could have a fish that is clean without any wash in maybe the first 2 or 3 months of life but the afterwards turn out to be the messiest fish around. Just think if you planned to use the "clean" fish and find out that it was quite "dirty".

That said, red loss was heavily used in some of the opaque lines a while back though by what I could see of the situation, this is more true of American lines rather than for Asian lines. Red loss has such a bad rep with some American breeders of opaque white that some would even recommend that you not use a male that is too clean as most probably, it has the red loss working and would throw out fry that would be red washed which is a terrible fault for an opaque.

As for the red loss being passed in normal Mendelian way, I think I could liken it to what I have learned from Myron's work on extended red. Like red, red loss could be passed in normal mendellian way, however, the intensity does not act Mendelian. So if you breed a fish with red loss, you'd expect a certain percentage of its fry to exhibit the trait, however whether the red loss would be for the whole body (some red loss does not lose all of the red) or if the red loss would be for life or not is something not that easily predicted.

And while on the topic of red loss and color loss, there have also been some cases of blue loss. I think that Myron's take of red loss not being that well developed is true for maybe Asia and Australia but for American lines, as I said, it is quite used and is very much ingrained in marble and opaque white lines. It is so ingrained that some of the newer breeders would expect all marble lines to have red loss which is not true, at least not all of the time. Unfortunately, I have virtually no knowledge of what is happening in the European breeding scene.

This is just my take, I'd rather breed out the red out of an irrid line rather than use a "shortcut" and cover it up with red loss. But that's just my opinion, you could use the red loss if you want but I have just outlined some of the risks involved.

[David Esguerra]

Hehehe, yep, Myron is not the one to ask about red loss, for one thing if I had his breeding program, I would not want any red loss as he wants his fish to be as red as possible.

Then again, I am not Myron and do not breed for reds.

Red loss has been used and even overused in the opinion of some breeders (including myself) to just do what you plan to do, to use it against red wash.

It has been used effectively with irrids as well as with opaques. However, this also causes a problem. You see, there is still a certain quality of red loss that is desired and another that is not.

Some red loss lasts for the rest of the fish's life, some do not. This is quite apparent in some "opaque" lines particularly in the American continent with some breeders/newbies always complaining of their opaque whites turning red as they get older. The color change is so abrupt at times that the keepers think that the fish has septicemia or some other disease. This is the more undesireable red wash.

With the red wash that lasts forever, we have little if no problems, however with the less desirable red wash, we have the problem of when the red would reveal itself. Hence, in the long run, you could have a fish that is clean without any wash in maybe the first 2 or 3 months of life but the afterwards turn out to be the messiest fish around. Just think if you planned to use the "clean" fish and find out that it was quite "dirty".

That said, red loss was heavily used in some of the opaque lines a while back though by what I could see of the situation, this is more true of American lines rather than for Asian lines. Red loss has such a bad rep with some American breeders of opaque white that some would even recommend that you not use a male that is too clean as most probably, it has the red loss working and would throw out fry that would be red washed which is a terrible fault for an opaque.

As for the red loss being passed in normal Mendelian way, I think I could liken it to what I have learned from Myron's work on extended red. Like red, red loss could be passed in normal mendellian way, however, the intensity does not act Mendelian. So if you breed a fish with red loss, you'd expect a certain percentage of its fry to exhibit the trait, however whether the red loss would be for the whole body (some red loss does not lose all of the red) or if the red loss would be for life or not is something not that easily predicted.

And while on the topic of red loss and color loss, there have also been some cases of blue loss. I think that Myron's take of red loss not being that well developed is true for maybe Asia and Australia but for American lines, as I said, it is quite used and is very much ingrained in marble and opaque white lines. It is so ingrained that some of the newer breeders would expect all marble lines to have red loss which is not true, at least not all of the time. Unfortunately, I have virtually no knowledge of what is happening in the European breeding scene.

This is just my take, I'd rather breed out the red out of an irrid line rather than use a "shortcut" and cover it up with red loss. But that's just my opinion, you could use the red loss if you want but I have just outlined some of the risks involved.

[Brett Webster]

You make some valid points David and I have observed what you mention in opaques. I was also wondering about the permanancy of this red loss. To be honest I have no plans for the fish at this stage, I would rather observe him for a few more weeks to see how his colour develops. Thanks for your input.

[Brett Webster]

You make some valid points David and I have observed what you mention in opaques. I was also wondering about the permanancy of this red loss. To be honest I have no plans for the fish at this stage, I would rather observe him for a few more weeks to see how his colour develops. Thanks for your input.

[David Esguerra]

Your welcome, still your pair and the result is quite a curious one. I personally like how their son currently looks but as I said, red loss could be quite unstable. At least you know that the parents looked like but to an untrained eye, your young fish could even be mistaken to be a product of a black lace cross.

And just like my first comment, talk about black in a red line. If you'd take a look (assuming you haven't yet) on Myron's and other's records on red breeding, some form of black is used to darken red lines and cambodian to lighten it. Well, your fish just shows how much black there actually is in some red lines because once the red loss kicked in, well your fish virtually turned black.

I don't know if this is a good or bad thing for reds (sorry, I'm not a red breeder) but I'd be betting that when that fish was still red that it was a much darker red than the fish on Myron Tay's avatar. Am I right?

Niways, happy breeding.

[David Esguerra]

Your welcome, still your pair and the result is quite a curious one. I personally like how their son currently looks but as I said, red loss could be quite unstable. At least you know that the parents looked like but to an untrained eye, your young fish could even be mistaken to be a product of a black lace cross.

And just like my first comment, talk about black in a red line. If you'd take a look (assuming you haven't yet) on Myron's and other's records on red breeding, some form of black is used to darken red lines and cambodian to lighten it. Well, your fish just shows how much black there actually is in some red lines because once the red loss kicked in, well your fish virtually turned black.

I don't know if this is a good or bad thing for reds (sorry, I'm not a red breeder) but I'd be betting that when that fish was still red that it was a much darker red than the fish on Myron Tay's avatar. Am I right?

Niways, happy breeding.

[Brett Webster]

Given his age (and the poor lighting conditions in their growout tank!) it is difficult to day how bright the red was David. That said, I hadn't paid any special attention to any of the fish in that tank until I noticed this colour shift occuring. Many of his siblings are a briliant red if that's of any help, much like their father.

[Brett Webster]

Given his age (and the poor lighting conditions in their growout tank!) it is difficult to day how bright the red was David. That said, I hadn't paid any special attention to any of the fish in that tank until I noticed this colour shift occuring. Many of his siblings are a briliant red if that's of any help, much like their father.

[Myron Tay]

quote:Originally posted by Adrian Phoon

[bh]My red female HM recently day after day has been losing it's colour. The tail and body had became 80% white when originally red. Can you help me on what to do??
Probably the red loss gene at work.

[mel]

hi peoples,

just want to pose a question that has to do with this topic. my latest spawn to mature is a ohm green x yellow gold plakat parentage and i got out of it 1 green female that looked to have red between rays when young, 7 presumeably opaques with gold and green irridescence and a fair bit of redwash on them and 2 gorgeous red/golds with very defined red and gold patterning. i was warned after spawning the parents that i would get a fair bit of redwash and that is what i got.

then the redloss gene kicked in and all including my gorgeous red/golds lost all their red. which i was jumping for joy when it happened cos i then ended up with perfectly coloured fish except for the red/golds who are now just a metallic gold end of story.

my question would be.. the mother was a pale yellow with dense gold irridesence and i have read that yellow is a non red gene... could this bring on the onset of the redloss gene?

would be interested to know

[derrick kuah]

Mel,
Anythings that is "metallic" is difficult, cos its a very "new" colour.Anyway, your green Ohm , its a Turquios(normal irres) or metallic green.

If its metallic, than the fishes you get , is the right colour.And your breeder should carry the red loss genes.
if its normal irres, than your result should be very different. normally , first generation from an imbellis(metallic) cross will gives only metallic green fishes(MOst..???). Only subsiquent crossing(sibling)or with same kind, will produce colour,correponded to their parent. And they are all metallic.So i guess your Ohm should carrys some metallic gene..hehe[:I]

I don,t know about yellow in metallic but normal yellow do carrys red loss with them.
Note:metallic colour genes are different from normal colour types, can,t help you here cos i m too lazy to read.understand thru experiences.

[Myron Tay]

quote:Originally posted by mel

my question would be.. the mother was a pale yellow with dense gold irridesence and i have read that yellow is a non red gene... could this bring on the onset of the redloss gene?

would be interested to know
Mel

The red-loss phenomenon was also observed in some of the older red females in my previous spawn, which might have carried the non-red gene. However, it has since disappeared from my line.

My hunch is that it is the result of one gene or multi-factoral trait that is separate from the gene that produces non-reds. However, it does appear in some non-red / red lines. Not sure if it is prevelant in irridescent lines. Further investigation on this is warranted.

[Ramon]

Hi,

there is one interesting effect on one male and one female. It seems like the color disappears from the fish, starting from the beginning of the anal fin and the lower side of the head. It the white areas get larger and larger, will have an eye on this fish.


http://www.bettaclub.org.sg/forum/uploaded/ramon/200541023957_redloss.jpg

cheers
Ramon