
Farming remarks
Israeli fish farmers started using an Oreochromis niloticus ♀ x O. aureus ♂ hybrid in the 1960s aiming to prevent uncontrolled propagation of tilapias in production ponds. It is also cultured in Saudi Arabia, with a great interest for aquaculture, especially because it has a better growth and yield than O. niloticus, O. aureus, and O. mossambicus. Furthermore, among several interspecific tilapia hybrids, O. niloticus x O. aureus has shown to be the most suitable one in terms of growth rate, sex ratio, cold tolerance, and body coloration. Stocking hormonally sex reversed FINGERLINGS has become the generalised practice to cope with the uncontrolled spawning issue under farming conditions. Usually, only males are farmed, but 2-3% of the sex-reversed FINGERLINGS remain as females which are still able to spawn in grow-out ponds. Thus, predator species are used to feed on these unwanted eggs, LARVAE, and FRY in warm freshwater aquaculture ponds.
Currently, important information about this hybrid is still missing in the literature, making it difficult to better assess its welfare in farms. Considering wild information, findings about home range as well as aggression and migratory distances is still missing for the parental species O. niloticus, whereas there are important knowledge gaps about home range, depth range, and migration patterns for the parental species O. aureus. Further research on reproduction, stress response, and malformations in farms are urgently needed. Moreover, important farming information about aggregation for the early life stages and substrate use for these age classes and SPAWNERS is still missing.
For details see: WelfareCheck | farm (latest major release: 2025-03-27)
Related news
After Oreochromis niloticus (Nile tilapia) and Oreochromis aureus (Blue tilapia), we looked into their hybrid: O. niloticus x O. aureus. Although praised for better growth and higher cold tolerance compared to the parental species, welfare wise the hybrid is not more than the sum of its parts. Whereas O. niloticus reached a WelfareScore of 1|4|3 and belongs to the top 5 species we cover at the moment, the hybrid places at 2|2|1 and only reaches "High" scores for Potential and Certainty in about half the number of criteria than O. niloticus. This means that good welfare in the best case scenario may only be achieved in 2 of 10 criteria, and we are certain about our scoring (in terms of number and quality of sources) in 1 criterion.
Compared to O. aureus (1|2|0), it is a slight improvement of welfare which is good news as worldwide, ca 100 times more individuals are reared of this hybrid than of O. aureus. Still, in 9 out of 10 criteria we request further research to know better the situation as is and how to improve it. For details, please find the WelfareCheck here.
Probably, we updated the profile. Check the version number in the head of the page. For more information on the version, see the FAQ about this. Why do we update profiles? Not just do we want to include new research that has come out, but we are continuously developing the database itself. For example, we changed the structure of entries in criteria or we added explanations for scores in the WelfareCheck | farm. And we are always refining our scoring rules.
The centre of the Overview is an array of criteria covering basic features and behaviours of the species. Each of this information comes from our literature search on the species. If we researched a full Dossier on the species, probably all criteria in the Overview will be covered and thus filled. This was our way to go when we first set up the database.
Because Dossiers are time consuming to research, we switched to focusing on WelfareChecks. These are much shorter profiles covering just 10 criteria we deemed important when it comes to behaviour and welfare in aquaculture (and lately fisheries, too). Also, WelfareChecks contain the assessment of the welfare potential of a species which has become the main feature of the fair-fish database over time. Because WelfareChecks do not cover as many criteria as a Dossier, we don't have the information to fill all blanks in the Overview, as this information is "not investigated by us yet".
Our long-term goal is to go back to researching Dossiers for all species covered in the fair-fish database once we set up WelfareChecks for each of them. If you would like to support us financially with this, please get in touch at ffdb@fair-fish.net
See the question "What does "not investigated by us yet" mean?". In short, if we have not had a look in the literature - or in other words, if we have not investigated a criterion - we cannot know the data. If we have already checked the literature on a criterion and could not find anything, it is "no data found yet". You spotted a "no data found yet" where you know data exists? Get in touch with us at ffdb@fair-fish.net!
Lorem ipsum
In the fair-fish database, when you have chosen a species (either by searching in the search bar or in the species tree), the landing page is an Overview, introducing the most important information to know about the species that we have come across during our literatures search, including common names, images, distribution, habitat and growth characteristics, swimming aspects, reproduction, social behaviour but also handling details. To dive deeper, visit the Dossier where we collect all available ethological findings (and more) on the most important aspects during the life course, both biologically and concerning the habitat. In contrast to the Overview, we present the findings in more detail citing the scientific references.
Depending on whether the species is farmed or wild caught, you will be interested in different branches of the database.
Farm branch
Founded in 2013, the farm branch of the fair-fish database focuses on farmed aquatic species.
Catch branch
Founded in 2022, the catch branch of the fair-fish database focuses on wild-caught aquatic species.
The heart of the farm branch of the fair-fish database is the welfare assessment – or WelfareCheck | farm – resulting in the WelfareScore | farm for each species. The WelfareCheck | farm is a condensed assessment of the species' likelihood and potential for good welfare in aquaculture, based on welfare-related findings for 10 crucial criteria (home range, depth range, migration, reproduction, aggregation, aggression, substrate, stress, malformations, slaughter).
For those species with a Dossier, we conclude to-be-preferred farming conditions in the Advice | farm. They are not meant to be as detailed as a rearing manual but instead, challenge current farming standards and often take the form of what not to do.
In parallel to farm, the main element of the catch branch of the fair-fish database is the welfare assessment – or WelfareCheck | catch – with the WelfareScore | catch for each species caught with a specific catching method. The WelfareCheck | catch, too, is a condensed assessment of the species' likelihood and potential for good welfare – or better yet avoidance of decrease of good welfare – this time in fisheries. We base this on findings on welfare hazards in 10 steps along the catching process (prospection, setting, catching, emersion, release from gear, bycatch avoidance, sorting, discarding, storing, slaughter).
In contrast to the farm profiles, in the catch branch we assess the welfare separately for each method that the focus species is caught with. In the case of a species exclusively caught with one method, there will be one WelfareCheck, whereas in other species, there will be as many WelfareChecks as there are methods to catch the species with.
Summarising our findings of all WelfareChecks | catch for one species in Advice | catch, we conclude which catching method is the least welfare threatening for this species and which changes to the gear or the catching process will potentially result in improvements of welfare.
Try mousing over the element you are interested in - oftentimes you will find explanations this way. If not, there will be FAQ on many of the sub-pages with answers to questions that apply to the respective sub-page. If your question is not among those, contact us at ffdb@fair-fish.net.
It's right here! We decided to re-name it to fair-fish database for several reasons. The database has grown beyond dealing purely with ethology, more towards welfare in general – and so much more. Also, the partners fair-fish and FishEthoGroup decided to re-organise their partnership. While maintaining our friendship, we also desire for greater independence. So, the name "fair-fish database" establishes it as a fair-fish endeavour.