Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

SoylentNews is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop. Only 17 submissions in the queue.
posted by martyb on Friday July 24 2020, @11:40AM   Printer-friendly
from the are-they-tasty? dept.

Scientists Accidentally Bred the Fish Version of a Liger:

American paddlefish and Russian sturgeon were not supposed to be able to create hybrid offspring. Surprise!

[...] At first glance, American paddlefish and Russian sturgeon seem about as different as two fish can be.

The Russian sturgeon, whose eggs are used to make top-shelf caviar, is a carnivore that hoovers crustaceans and smaller fish off the floor of rivers, lakes and coastal areas the world over. The American paddlefish, found in only 22 of the United States, is a filter feeder that strains zooplankton from the water. It has a comically long snout covered with tens of thousands of sensory receptors.

[...] Last year, researchers were trying to induce gynogenesis, a form of asexual production that requires the presence of sperm, but not the actual contribution of their DNA, in Russian sturgeon.

Something unexpected happened: The paddlefish sperm the researchers were using successfully fertilized the sturgeon eggs.

[...] Hundreds of hybrids emerged from those eggs and a month later, more than two-thirds of them were still alive. Around 100 of these hybrids are alive today.

Both creatures are known as “fossil fish” because of their ancient lineage. Their last common ancestor swam during the age of the dinosaurs, and the two have been evolving independently, on opposite sides of the planet, for over 184 million years — which makes them nearly twice as evolutionarily diverged as humans and mice. That led scientists to assume that they were too evolutionarily diverged to be hybridized.

Journal Reference:
Jenő Káldy, Attila Mozsár, Gyöngyvér Fazekas, et al. Hybridization of Russian Sturgeon (Acipenser gueldenstaedtii, Brandt and Ratzeberg, 1833) and American Paddlefish (Polyodon spathula, Walbaum 1792) and Evaluation of Their Progeny, Genes (DOI: 10.3390/genes11070753)


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday July 25 2020, @07:47PM (1 child)

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday July 25 2020, @07:47PM (#1026241)

    You put far too much thought and effort into that comment. Osama Hazuki is incapable of logical or rational thought. Your efforts were wasted, I'm sorry to say.

    Starting Score:    0  points
    Moderation   +1  
       Insightful=1, Total=1
    Extra 'Insightful' Modifier   0  

    Total Score:   1  
  • (Score: 2) by VLM on Sunday July 26 2020, @02:13PM

    by VLM (445) on Sunday July 26 2020, @02:13PM (#1026574)

    Its is pretty funny that I'm leading off with some empathy question of what would a X think about a Y and instead of an actual answer I get some weird rant about how when "all" white men encounter something they do not personally fetishize, they're supposed to be insulted when someone says they're either fascinated with or terrified of it, which is actually pretty funny rather the intended insult. Its not even good propaganda because people laugh at it too much.