4 ms·

I once spoke with fish biologist about goldfish (or was it carasius? I don't remember), they reproduce via gynogenesis, it's like pathogenesis but they need so

by dvh 2y ago

I once spoke with fish biologist about goldfish (or was it carasius? I don't remember), they reproduce via gynogenesis, it's like pathogenesis but they need some trigger like other fish spawning, and I said surely there must be some hidden pond in some misty mountains in China where there are still male goldfish. I asked him if he believe such hidden pond could exist somewhere and he said no and mumbled something about triploids. Scientists are not romantic.

vanderZwan 2y ago
They're romantic until romanticism gets in the way of dispassionate interpretations of what the data tells them to be the most likely truth. Would you rather have them make stuff up and undermine the very purpose of their job?
- PittleyDunkin 2y ago
  I think there's a middle ground we call "the capacity for imagination", which can be both romantic and need not conflict with empirical analysis.
  - vanderZwan 2y ago
    The thing is, this story sounds like miscommunication/misremembering all-around because male goldfish do exist, and their "reproduction" section on wikipedia does not mention asexual reproduction at all[0]. Also, the wiki page on gynogenesis suggests that it specifically is a form of reproduction that still requires a male and a female, but that the male does not contribute any DNA to the offspring[1]. So male fish are required either way, although they are typically from an "adjacent" species. Searching the general internet just returns articles claiming goldfish can reproduce asexually, followed by another paragraph claiming they can't (proving to me that it's all AI generated bullshit). Not even going to link examples. Then, finally, Google Scholar points to two articles with the following titles: Genetic responses in sexual diploid and asexual triploid goldfish (Carassius auratus) introduced into a high-altitude environment and Genetic homeostasis and developmental stability in natural populations of bisexual (Carassius auratus) and unisexual (C. gibelio) goldfishes[2][3]. Reading those finally clarifies that goldfish (carassius auratus) are the diploid species that reproduces sexually, and the Prussian carp (carassius gibelio) being the adjacent triploid species that reproduces via gynogenesis, including by using sperm from goldfish. So if the question was interpreted as "could there still be male Prussian carp somewhere in the wild?" I'm guessing the answer was "no" because being a triploid that reproduces via gynogenesis seems to be a fundamental part what defines their classification as a separate species. Any hypothetical "diploid Prussian carp" would probably be labeled as different species altogether. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goldfish#Reproduction https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goldfish#Reproduction [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gynogenesis https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gynogenesis [2] https://www.techrxiv.org/doi/full/10.22541/au.166859689.91177037 https://www.techrxiv.org/doi/full/10.22541/au.166859689.9117... [3] https://link.springer.com/article/10.3103/S0095452709050077 https://link.springer.com/article/10.3103/S0095452709050077 [4] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prussian_carp https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prussian_carp
thaumasiotes 2y ago
> they reproduce via gynogenesis, it's like pathogenesis That's an interesting choice of word construction. parthenogenesis -> virgin birth. gynecogenesis -> woman birth. [gynogenesis is an impossible form, and pathogenesis would refer to "disease birth"] I can see how "virgin birth" is distinctive compared to ordinary birth. How is "woman birth" supposed to be different? Are people not normally born from... women?
- dvh 2y ago
  pathogenesis was spellcheck error (I meant parthenogenesis) and gynogenesis is real https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gynogenesis https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gynogenesis
- deaddodo 2y ago
  > How is "woman birth" supposed to be different? Are people not normally born from... women? It's referring to the to, not the from. But in either case, yes; however, males are usually involved. In this case, it's woman exclusive. They simply use sperm to stimulate the urge to procreate/kick off the process. Thus, the need for other species to be spawning nearby.

by dvh 2y ago

vanderZwan 2y ago

They're romantic until romanticism gets in the way of dispassionate interpretations of what the data tells them to be the most likely truth. Would you rather have them make stuff up and undermine the very purpose of their job?

PittleyDunkin 2y ago
I think there's a middle ground we call "the capacity for imagination", which can be both romantic and need not conflict with empirical analysis.
- vanderZwan 2y ago
  The thing is, this story sounds like miscommunication/misremembering all-around because male goldfish do exist, and their "reproduction" section on wikipedia does not mention asexual reproduction at all[0]. Also, the wiki page on gynogenesis suggests that it specifically is a form of reproduction that still requires a male and a female, but that the male does not contribute any DNA to the offspring[1]. So male fish are required either way, although they are typically from an "adjacent" species. Searching the general internet just returns articles claiming goldfish can reproduce asexually, followed by another paragraph claiming they can't (proving to me that it's all AI generated bullshit). Not even going to link examples. Then, finally, Google Scholar points to two articles with the following titles: Genetic responses in sexual diploid and asexual triploid goldfish (Carassius auratus) introduced into a high-altitude environment and Genetic homeostasis and developmental stability in natural populations of bisexual (Carassius auratus) and unisexual (C. gibelio) goldfishes[2][3]. Reading those finally clarifies that goldfish (carassius auratus) are the diploid species that reproduces sexually, and the Prussian carp (carassius gibelio) being the adjacent triploid species that reproduces via gynogenesis, including by using sperm from goldfish. So if the question was interpreted as "could there still be male Prussian carp somewhere in the wild?" I'm guessing the answer was "no" because being a triploid that reproduces via gynogenesis seems to be a fundamental part what defines their classification as a separate species. Any hypothetical "diploid Prussian carp" would probably be labeled as different species altogether. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goldfish#Reproduction https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goldfish#Reproduction [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gynogenesis https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gynogenesis [2] https://www.techrxiv.org/doi/full/10.22541/au.166859689.91177037 https://www.techrxiv.org/doi/full/10.22541/au.166859689.9117... [3] https://link.springer.com/article/10.3103/S0095452709050077 https://link.springer.com/article/10.3103/S0095452709050077 [4] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prussian_carp https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prussian_carp

thaumasiotes 2y ago

> they reproduce via gynogenesis, it's like pathogenesis That's an interesting choice of word construction. parthenogenesis -> virgin birth. gynecogenesis -> woman birth. [gynogenesis is an impossible form, and pathogenesis would refer to "disease birth"] I can see how "virgin birth" is distinctive compared to ordinary birth. How is "woman birth" supposed to be different? Are people not normally born from... women?

dvh 2y ago
pathogenesis was spellcheck error (I meant parthenogenesis) and gynogenesis is real https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gynogenesis https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gynogenesis
deaddodo 2y ago
> How is "woman birth" supposed to be different? Are people not normally born from... women? It's referring to the to, not the from. But in either case, yes; however, males are usually involved. In this case, it's woman exclusive. They simply use sperm to stimulate the urge to procreate/kick off the process. Thus, the need for other species to be spawning nearby.