Betta Tail Types

[Opcn]

I've never seen or heard plakad in reference to a CT or an HM (especially seing as how HM's are long finned) if its a CT its called a CT.

 

[coconutman39]

so your saying a plakat cant have a 180 span or Crowns?

 

[JoKeR]

Half-Moon plakat!

 

[Opcn]

My contention is that the fish joker posted would be called a Half Moon by convention rather than a plakat HM

EDIT: Mistyped plakat rather than Half Moon

 

[wuvmybetta]

My contention is that the fish joker posted would be called a plakat by convention rather than a plakat HM

Wow,opcn since when are you even interested in such things But just so ya know, it is indeed a HM plakat.

 

[coconutman39]

sorry to argue the point opcn.

 

[Opcn]

CCNM, I didnt know that this qualified as an argument, But so long as a subject is unclear its best that we illuminate it isn't it

Wuv, I meant to say HM as apose to plakat, I see several places that a plakat is definid as a wild type tail, and since HM is not wild type I would think that it wouldn't qualify as plakat, Is there a flaw in that logic?

 

[wuvmybetta]

Yes. Originally they were 'wild types' but they've since been evolved to carry the colors and tail forms of the more common splendens.A 180 degree spread in a plakat is a HM PK. The term 'wild type' only implies that they're closer to their wild caught relatives than any other betta.

I see what you're saying though. I've argued the point revolving around CT PK's...isn't that just a crown with shorter finnage. But,apparently not. One thing to always keep in mind about bettas is that they're ever changing. Nothing's set in stone (including the IBC standards )

 

[coconutman39]

i dont know if we should classify plakad as a tail type. before all tail types could someone edit in the diffrences between Long tailed bettas and plakad bettas?

 

[smithrc]

wow, many thanks Julie
this helps a lot I now think my new
femle is actually a male plakat.

I'm now thinking the same thing.... The worring bit is i now have 2 of the'females' in the same tank (15gal)

I might have to go and get some better pics for a good ID.

[edit] Anyone fancy helping me out, click here...

 

[Fishy411]

This male is 32 rays and it is an over halfmoon royal blue male.
Yes. both belongs to me. They will have champion line down the line for competition if I breed them. Colors will be green, steel, royal blue, and butterfly. I love to breed betta and they are beautiful!

can that thing even swim? Tha tail si huge

 

[SRC]

Maybe we need 2 stickies...

1 for regular Betta tail types...and 1 for Plakat tail types lol

cas I was under the impression a Plakat was a type of betta..not a type of tail .

 

[cation]

cas I was under the impression a Plakat was a type of betta..not a type of tail .

A plakat is a Betta splendens, just like any long finned betta is. So they're the same. But plakats males are always distinguished by their short tails. Plakats can be double tails or single tails. Those two types may also display crowntail or halfmoon. Dr. Lucas' current thinking on the matter is that half moon is NOT a gene (therefore you should never assume a fish labeled "HMx" actually carries a set gene), and that it is likely that crowning is only partially genetic, whether long fin or short fin

Here's a portion of one of the good doctor's articles on the subject:


Are There Half Moon Or Crown Tail Genes?

In my opinion the answer is no! Both traits exhibit continuous variation. Both also turn up in relatively small numbers in spawns. Both seem to nearly disappear in F1 hybridization with strains that do not 'carry' the traits. True breeding strains of either do not, to my knowledge, exist. They certainly are not traits that are inherited through the single gene, dominant-partial dominant-recessive (Mendelian) mode. They also don't really conform to the multiple factor or multigenic mode although that might come closer. So how can they be explained?

I believe these variants represent an extreme of some part of the normal range of variation of whichever genetic type they are. Another way to put it is that all the fish from a spawn are basically the same genetically and they only vary within the scope of possibility for their type. There doesn't need to be mutant genes for Half Moon or Crown Tail to provide for the types. I believe breeders have seen something desirable about these respective tail shapes and tried to, by selection, breed to enhance them. To some degree they have succeeded.

Selection can and does guide the development of types but the range of possibility is quite different from what it becomes if there is a new genetic mutation. Attempts to 'fix' a type that only emerges after persistent selection are likely to be frustrated by the number of generations required and the slow progress toward the goal. In the case of these two Betta types it is clear that the types have been refined and there are strains that produce the ideal, but we still don't have strains that breed true, meaning that matings can be made that will produce all of that type.

Although I haven't worked extensively with either Half Moon or Fringe Fin (Crown Tail) Bettas, I have worked with them and I have a considerable amount of anecdotal information about them from others who have. I believe that anyone who knows will agree that good specimens of Half Moon occur in low percentages in even the best strains. I am talking about numbers like five percent. The rest of the fish in the spawns do not have full half circle caudal fin anatomy. Even if you breed from the best you can get, you are likely to get a low percentage of good ones. If you breed from lesser quality individuals, even though they come from the same spawn, you can expect to get proportionately lower numbers of good ones ... if any at all.

While there may be an ideal type for Crown Tails in Indonesia, where most of the best developed ones seem to be coming from, it isn't clear to breeders in this part of the world what that may be. I think strains are a bit farther along than Half Moons in the sense that a higher percentage of individuals with some form of ray projection appear in spawns but this might be a function of how strictly the type is defined. It could well be that the number of fringed finned individuals might only contain a small percentage which would be considered true or ideal Crown Tail and the rest inferior. A lot like those 170 degree or 160 degree less-than-Half Moons. In the spawns I have, that I got when I crossed Crown Tails with Bettas that have smooth edged fins, none of the progeny show anything more than a very faint suggestion of ray extension. If you weren't specifically looking for them you wouldn't recognize anything different about them at all.

So, What's This All About, Anyhow?

The main concern I have is that we are dispensing information that is incorrect or at least that has thus far not been proven. I hear people routinely refer to fish that are 'Half Moon geno,' for example, since what they refer to are fish that come from lines that have produced Half Moon phenotypes. Use of the term 'geno' implies that these fish have a genotype (from which 'geno' has been contracted) or carry a gene that will produce more of them. Since there has been no demonstration of the existence of a mutated gene that is responsible for this trait, and breeding patterns cannot be carried out that could be if there were, it is inappropriate to use that kind of language when discussing them.

From what I have been able to determine so far, I believe the same should be said for the Crown Tail trait, although I'll feel more confident after I am able to analyze more than F1 generation progeny. "

From Midwest Betta Club

 

[SRC]

But isn't that how many of the betta's we have now came about? Trial and error..and try try again? Over years and years?

I know a Plakat is Betta Splenden..but more often then not...people refer to the specific type fish in question, ie Crowntail, Halfmoon, Delta, ect. But now that there are different types of Plakat's becoming more and more avaliable I'm sure in the future they will be more and more refered to by their individual tail types under the plakat name.

Take the giant plakat for example, that is not a tail type..but yet instead a body type..a type of plakat.

I think, personally, it would make more sense to refer to them (them being plakats) by their tail type (ie a halfmoon plakat, a crowntail plakat, a delta plakat), so people are not confused or misled by what they own or are trying to purchase. Just because it is a relatively new type of betta tail variation..doesn't mean that after many years of selective breeding that it won't become a recognized "gene".

Creating a new type of betta is no different then creating a new breed of dog or cat. All domesticated dogs are canine's..but they are not the same. You take several different breeds and combine them to bring out desired traits...over a period of time of breeding dogs and getting the desired traits to surface, and in turn breeding those dogs together..you create a gene (something that is produced with great accuracy each time a new generation is produced). Then after you have a record of producing the same traits over and over it is finally recognized by the public as a "breed". I don't see how it wouldn't work the same way with betta's. Especially since this is a relatively new wave with breeding plakats.

 

[cation]

SRC, you're missing the point of the article. Tail types would be delta/superdelta, veil tail, spade tail, round tail, and pin tail. All of these (except veiltail) can occur in both long and short finned fish. According to Dr. Lucas, Half moons do not appear to be mediated very much at all much by genetics, so it is not a trait that can EVER be true breeding. The same appears to be the case with crowntails.

Therefore, HM and Crowntails might not even be considered tail types, but "add-ons" to an already existing tail type. In example - you can have a delta that also has half moon. Is this a "Half moonl tail type"? According to Gene, No. The tail type would generally be delta - but the fish managed to extend its tail spread to HM.

As for Giants, that's genetic. It was a mutation that was bred. It appears to be a simple mutation that produces incomplete dominance, according to the best currently available research as provided by Jim Sonnier.

Do you see the difference? I don't know if I explained myself clearly...