Help me, Glo fish has a lump!

[Sharyboy1214]

Please help me. I have a Glofish Tetra, i've had them for about 3 years now and I am getting ready to move so I've been holding out on the partial water changes i typically do it weekly. It's been about 2 weeks now and I move on friday but i went to feed my fish and now he has a weird round lump. I've posted a picture. Does anyone have any idea what this is, or how I can fix it?

Thanks. I would appreciate the help.

 

[Andy Sager]

Can't see the picture but anyway, because the Glo-fish are genetically modified fish, they are prone to getting tumors as they age. There's really nothing you can do for fish tumors.

 

[Jacky12]

I have never heard of a link between insertion of fluorescent DNA in the zygote used in development of GloFish. I was given a group years ago and they are all fine. They are as healthy as their non-modified counterparts & will remain so, as long as high standards of husbandry are maintained.

Please don’t hate me, but I was recently gifted with a group of GloFish P.scarlare. They are modified koi. You can see some orange around the head that fluorescents purple under a blue light.

These pics show regular koi and modified ones under white and blue light. The unmodified ones look surprisingly cool under the blue light.

 

[Aiken Drum]

I thought it was more the breeding practices that glofish have that was the cause of the poor quality fish rather than the genetic modification. They started with a very small number of parent fish and all future generations are decended from that small genetic pool. They had to discontinue their entire betta line because they where so unhealthy.

No first hand experience of glofish here as they are illegal. Big fines for keeping them and potential prison time for breeding and supplying. I've only heard of one case of prosecution though.

 

[Jacky12]

Yes, I have heard that as GMO they are not legal in certain countries like New Zealand. Didn’t know about UK. They are a thriving business in the US. As you probably know an Asian group developed them decades ago as a means of detecting water pollution which caused the fish to glow. Two US groups were working on the same project for the similar purposes. US entrepreneur bought the patent from the Asians, seeing the potential.

It is my understanding they breed as well as their normal counterparts. It is a thriving not so underground business here in the US. Although technically illegal to breed and sell, it goes on over here, even on eBay.
I would imagine the company would only go after large retailers selling these fish, but I have never heard of even that.

The patent actually ran out in 2022, at least here in the US. I don’t know how this affects breeding fish from the Glofish company, however, millions of dollars were spent in getting these fish approved by the FDA. Each individual color had to be approved and then mass producing them was another huge undertaking. There is an interesting video on YouTube about some old man who oversaw the production of more than 1 billion of these fish. So unless Elon Musk or one of his countless kids wants them, I doubt another company is going to spring up and compete with GloFish.

 

[Aiken Drum]

The ban on GM fish is an EU wide law that we still have after Brexit. I don't see any desire to change this particular law and it's likely we will align more with the EU again in the future than move further away.

 

[Jacky12]

I am actually far more interested in the genetic transmission of the fluorescent genes than the legalities. I know that F1 from GMO and its counterpart produce fish with at least some fluorescence, but I have not been able to gather much information, in large part because I have not dug deep enough. I wonder if it’s a case of simple Mendelian genetics or what. I’m sure people have been playing around with this at home for the last 20 years, but I have not had the time to look into it.

 

[Andy Sager]

I am actually far more interested in the genetic transmission of the fluorescent genes than the legalities. I know that F1 from GMO and its counterpart produce fish with at least some fluorescence, but I have not been able to gather much information, in large part because I have not dug deep enough. I wonder if it’s a case of simple Mendelian genetics or what. I’m sure people have been playing around with this at home for the last 20 years, but I have not had the time to look into it.

Just for goofs, a pro breeder buddy of mine bred the GMO danios when they first came on the market and found that by the 5th or 6th generation, the fluorescent gene was bred out of the fish. It would take breeding the glos with non glows then breeding those offspring back to the parents and so on to keep the flo gene from getting wiped out. Now you have some first hand knowledge. Just to clarify, breeding the Glo fish at home was never illegal. Selling the home bred glo-fish WAS illegal.

 

[Jacky12]

I believe the precise language on the site is it illegal to deliberately breed them. lol. But accidental pairings do happen, right?

I know a breeder who did the same thing with danios and by F4 the color was gone. I mentioned this to the new owner of a local small pet store that specializes in fish. Turns out he worked for the big place that produces Glofish in Florida. When asked how long the fluorescent DNA is transmitted he said in most cases indefinitely nowadays. The situation is much better with new DNA insertion techniques than those originally used. If the DNA does not adhere to the correct loci on the chromosome in the single cell embryo, there will be no fluorescence. This can happen at F1 and going on for several generations before the loose connection is lost.

However, far superior DNA insertion methods are now used, primarily
CRISPR, resulting in indefinite transmission of the trait.

 

[Andy Sager]

I believe the precise language on the site is it illegal to deliberately breed them. lol. But accidental pairings do happen, right?

I know a breeder who did the same thing with danios and by F4 the color was gone. I mentioned this to the new owner of a local small pet store that specializes in fish. Turns out he worked for the big place that produces Glofish in Florida. When asked how long the fluorescent DNA is transmitted he said in most cases indefinitely nowadays. The situation is much better with new DNA insertion techniques than those originally used. If the DNA does not adhere to the correct loci on the chromosome in the single cell embryo, there will be no fluorescence. This can happen at F1 and going on for several generations before the loose connection is lost.

However, far superior DNA insertion methods are now used, primarily
CRISPR, resulting in indefinite transmission of the trait.

I'm no lawyer but I would LOVE to fight that first sentence in court. LOL I'd call it the " Sh*t Happens" defense. The only way to keep fish from not spawning or having viable young is to A) don't have males and females together. ( Good luck with that with the caliber of people selling these glo fish) or B) Don't maintain the fish correctly which would bring up an ethics case for sure.
As for the results, yes, this was done not long after the fish were on the market so like everything, times have changed and your results may vary. In the end tho, I'm still not a fan of the process and will never own a glo-fish.