HYBRIDS? - Pics and Questions

[HunterB]

Originally Posted by HunterB

Polar Bear jack?

sorry bout the above post
apparently someone got annoyed by it...and didnt leave there name after the lil red mark

[Rich Conley]

Originally Posted by HunterB

sorry bout the above post
apparently someone got annoyed by it...and didnt leave there name after the lil red mark

As the person who committed to the polar bear jack, I'd tell you it wasn't me, but there's no way to actually know, which is kind of sad.

[Smashtoad]

Originally Posted by Ed

This is the actual quote
snip " there is debate on whether or not frogs interbreed in the wild. it likely happens but IMO that is for nature to sort out and not us. if you want to mix animals look into snakes or lizards, (leopard geckos are a good way to go in that direction)"endsnip

The let nature sort it out is a reference to any potential intergradation zones in the frogs natal habitat and really is regardless of whether or not the person keeps frogs in little glass boxes.

My point was that the hypocrisy of some hobbyists knows no bounds. Breeding beautiful hybrids, from a big picture standpoint, is no more harmful than keeping them in captivity in the first place.

Originally Posted by Ed

...we have already seen several morphs disappear in the hobby (how many people have blue truncatus any more?) due to a failure to keep them around.

I cannot argue this point. Seems to be a valid concern.

Originally Posted by Ed

Based on this and the comment that you would be first in line to purchase hybrids, I guess you are advocating hybridization. Is that correct? ...but based on this I suspect trolling is really your game.

I am not advocating it as much as decrying the ferocity with which some people rally against it. There is no game...just wanted to weigh in.

Originally Posted by Ed

Please cite where the discussion on hybrids and population fluctuations in the hobby has ignored scienctific evidence or clarify how does this personal opinion on what is a political issue have to do with the hybrid discussion.

Granted...this was a vague point. My feelings on this were prompted by the current witch hunts being waged against anyone who dares to question Al Gore or man's role in climate change. Al is a man who refuses to publicly debate his "science", lies openly in public, and is never called on it, because those who would call him on it are kept out.

I would not advocate hybridization when the result is a muddying of genes and total loss of a certain species or variant. I suppose in some cases that could be the result, and I would not be into that.

Originally Posted by Ed

And if you are going to reference something please at least make the attempt to get it right.. The commercial character is Sonny not Frodo and Frodo didn't go crazy for not kissing the ring.... A short google search would have pulled it right up.....

Lord of the Rings' Frodo, not Godfather. And I know that that Frodo didn't actually kiss the ring either...it was a joke.

Originally Posted by Ed

I really don't expect a cohesive response as the post really does seem to be aimed at trolling up a thread that had quited down.

I don't want to make people upset, just make them think. So anyone who disagrees is trying to encite angst?

[pedan]

Jeeze, I've been thinking all wrong for years now. I always supported be happy with those you loved.

But I guess we should be preserving the morphs of humans as well, keep the races separate. After all we wouldn't want to loose a pure line of race would we?
What was I thinking all that time.

[skylsdale]

Originally Posted by pedan

But I guess we should be preserving the morphs of humans as well, keep the races separate. After all we wouldn't want to loose a pure line of race would we?

Actually...line breeding and designer morphs in the hobby are, using your example, more akin to what you just mentioned: keeping races seperate. And then, if some individuals in that race were to be born with lighter colored feet, only allowing them to marry and have children. Hybridization would be more along the lines of force-breeding humans with Bonobos.

[pedan]

Originally Posted by skylsdale

Actually...line breeding and designer morphs in the hobby are, using your example, more akin to what you just mentioned: keeping races seperate. And then, if some individuals in that race were to be born with lighter colored feet, only allowing them to marry and have children. Hybridization would be more along the lines of force-breeding humans with Bonobos.

Ron, although I was trying to be way out there to make a point, I understand what you mean and I think that was a flaw in my explanation. I was referring to the conversation regarding mixing morphs of a particular species. I was not referring to the mixing of species. But whenever this topic comes up they both seem to be discussed on top of one another, and I think they are different topics.

[skylsdale]

I figured you were trying to be way out there, Josh...at least I was hoping so: the analogy is a pretty far reaching one.

I also think we have to choose our wording carefully in these types of conversations and communally define what we mean. For instance...what you mean by the term "morph" may be different than what I mean.

I think the term "population" is a much better phrase and gives an indication as to what's going on in the wild. For example, let's say there are two isolated populations of R. imitator in the wild...they don't come into contact with one another, they don't interbreed, etc. Then in captivity I would say it would be best to keep them managed and bred seperately. However, let's say within one of those two populations (which has individuals genetically represented in captivity) there are a few random frogs that have red feet. Only breeding frogs together with this trait would then be the line breeding, designer morphing, etc. that we see. Responsible captive management would say that the red-footed frogs should be bred regularly and randomly in with all the other frogs.

However, what if in captivity there were three seperate "morphs" of a frog...but those frogs had actually come from a single population in the wild that expressed quite a bit of diversity in color? Those animals, as a reflection of their wild counterparts, would best be managed and bred together. This "mixing" would actually be the best method for maintaining these animals longterm in captivity...however, due to false seperations the hobby had created among the frogs, by the hobby's standards, it could be viewed as hybridization.

I understand that people get tired of these same discussions popping up, but people need to realize that this hobby has a constant influx and rotation of members, and for some people this is the first time they may be reading and thinking about this topic. As tiresome as it may be for some of us, it is definitely something that needs to be discussed. It is currently estimated that close to half (up from 1/3) of all amphibian species on the planet are either in decline or have recently gone extinct. If we want to help conserve and/or alleviate the pressures we put on wild populations (especially the pressure of collection for a private hobby), then I think we need to take this conversation seriously and continue having it in a civil and respectful way. Those who are tired of it are by no means bound to keep clicking on this thread.

[Ed]

Originally Posted by pedan

Ron, although I was trying to be way out there to make a point, I understand what you mean and I think that was a flaw in my explanation. I was referring to the conversation regarding mixing morphs of a particular species. I was not referring to the mixing of species. But whenever this topic comes up they both seem to be discussed on top of one another, and I think they are different topics.

Hi Josh,

There are problems with mixing the morphs just as much are there with mixing the species.. for example, there are a number of tinctorius morphs that are no longer imported nor are they likely to ever be reimported.. now combine the idea of using these patterns to create designer morphs with the trend in the hobby to visually identify and sort morphs based on visual characteristics.. there are a number of thread.. I got this/these frog(s), what do you think they are... intergrades between the morphs will in the first offspring will in all probability be different in the first generation post intergredation.. but the second and further generations should show a range of patterns and traits ranging from one parental pattern to the other.. which unscrupulous people could then sell (particuarly if the value is higher) as pure morph.. or they could end up in the hands of people that then assign them to that morph being unaware of the mixed parentage.
Now this wouldn't be a problem if the hobby wasn't so prone to fluctuations and loss of morphs and species... there are a number of examples within this hobby itself over the years such as the blue truncatus I referenced earlier... and this is an ongoing issue.
These morphs developed these stable patterns for specific reasons and represent specific lineages of those frogs in the hobby and we as the hobby have shown that we have issues maintaining them long term (I've been around 20 years) without the added pressures of intergrades and hybrids creating designer morphs. This is where and to some extent people get emotional about the whole issue. It wouldn't be an issue if people did not assign specific species and morph data to frogs of unknown provence and/or we could believe that people would not misrepresent the frogs. It wouldn't take a whole lot to wipe out a distinct genetically determined pattern of the frogs potentially forever in the hobby.

Ed

[Ed]

Originally Posted by Smashtoad

My point was that the hypocrisy of some hobbyists knows no bounds. Breeding beautiful hybrids, from a big picture standpoint, is no more harmful than keeping them in captivity in the first place.

It depends on how big a picture you are using.. on a global scale probably not.. on the hobby scale it is a big problem. As I noted in a seperate post.. there is a trend in the hobby to visually identify frogs based on thier patterns when they are of unknown provence. This is where intergrades and/or hybrids have a real risk of destroying the genetic stability of genetic controlled patterns. When you consider that the frogs can have a life span reaching 20 plus years and the rapid turnover in the base of this hobby combined with the trend to visually pigeon hole frogs based on pattern.. (and that is assuming the breeder or seller is being honest and scrupulous).

Also it should be noted that a number of hybrids are not that good looking...



As for the angst comment... one of the few things that really gets my angst roiling is apparent deliberate misquoting.....
That and misrepresentation of data/facts are usually good to get me rolling...

Ed

[Tony]

Ed, was it you that posted about Azureus being re-imported for zoo collections due to existing bloodlines being tainted by hybridization? I can't find the post now, but I swear it was you and I'm curious to read more about it.