I just posted something in Michael Kotzulla’s “P. nagyi”-thread which thematically also belongs here. So I repeat the corresponding part of my answer here in this topic:
I decided to leave the parents with their fry even if a part of the offspring do not survive. Be it as assumed – then the surviving fry are the most viable. There is another assumed advantage: Fry which grow up with their parents might learn certain things which they don’t when separated early. And for the numbers of fry ………… yes, we should attempt to breed the paros to distribute them to other paro friends ………. but let’s be honest: you always have too many offspring which do not find a new home – and then you get a problem with available space. So for me the advantage lies in only few but well grown young fish, raised in a situation as natural as possible. To prevent being eaten is one of the first things a young fish has to learn in captivity as well as in the wild – if not by the own parents, then by other fish in the environment. To artificially raise all fry – even the weakest ones – by preventing them from all possible dangers to me is not the way to obtain a healthy population, even in captivity.