Quote:
Originally Posted by yak'em-n-stack'em
After speaking with an ichthyologist here at lsu today. I'm just gonna stop arguing.
He told me
"fish do pass down genes. Some of these genes can be attributed to survival and being able to live longer and grow older. That doesn't mean that a random fish without these genes can't grow to a large size in the right conditions, but there is definitely genes that are passed on that can be attributed to survival"
|
Everything passes down genes. Tapeworms, crickets, crawfish, monkeys, humans, etc. This is not the argument here, maybe a side argument with 'w'
, but read what you just typed. 'these genes CAN be attributed to SURVIVAL and LIVE LONGER and OLDER. So they CAN, doesn't mean they DO. and the next sentence you write about how a random fish can grow to large size also.
The genes do not change, in other words, lets say Fish X if left alone in Big Lake would grow to 10 lbs in 5 years if left alone. She already has those genes, and wether it spawns at age 1, 2, or 5, it is still putting out the big trout genes. They don't get a new set of genes when they reach 10 lbs. If this was the case, a fish would have a chance to acquire a gene that maybe lets them detect a hook, so if you catch the big trout and release her, they acquire this gene and then pass it down the line, eventually trout would be impossible to hook.
And also, we must remember that female trout only give half the genetic information, the other half comes from the male. Like in deer, the biggest buck in the world doesn't always produce trophy bucks, the doe comes into play also