HYBRIDS? - Pics and Questions

[Ed]

Originally Posted by Alfy111

I was just pointing out that they had suggested the idea of a naturally occurring hybrid.

They also suggest natural hybridization again when they are talking about variablis.

"Caldwell and Myers (1990) raised several questions about the organization of the D. ventrimaculatus group, particularly concerning the taxonomic status of D.
variabilis. They argued that it is unclear whether D. variabilis warrants specific status. Our analysis indicates that D. variabilis from Tarapoto, Peru and D. ventrimaculatus
from Yurimaguas, Peru are more closely related to each other than they are to D. ventrimaculatus from Pompeya, Ecuador (Figs. 3–5). This is consistent
with the hypothesis that D. variabilis is a color and pattern variant of D. ventrimaculatus."

Then they go on to say:

"We believe that further research (particularly hybridization studies) is warranted
before a conclusion on the species status of D. variabilis is reached. D. amazonicus (Schulte, 1999) also appears closely related to a population of D. ventrimaculatus
from Allpahuayo, Peru."

Im not so sure they are talking about the DNA- DNA hybridization because they say that:

"Critics argue that the technique is inaccurate for comparison of closely related species, as any attempt to measure differences between orthologous sequences between organisms is overwhelmed by the hybridization of paralogous sequences within an organism's genome."

SInce they stated they are closely related species I'm not sure if this procedure would be accurate.

And this is where they suggest that geographic barriers and genetic differentiation don't account for all of the speciation (creation of new species):

"The evidence presented here for an association between genetic divergence
and the presence of geographic barriers does not provide an explanation for multiple speciation events or for high levels of species diversity in northwestern
Amazonia."

You are correct though, never does it directly bring up hybridization, but it certainly opens the idea by directly stating that there are other factors besides geographic barriers and genetic divergence that influence speciation.

And thank you, I thought it was a pretty good article too.

1) They are referring to DNA hybridization... the problem is that there may not be sufficient divergence in the markers if the species are closely related.
2) the argument that it is a morph and not a species does not in any way support the hybrid arguement
3) the multiple speciation event also does not support the hybridization argument.

There is a lot of data out there on the effects of naturally occuring hybrids in anurans... and in the vast majority of cases, they are lone isolated incidents that even if fertile do not go on to reproduce because if they are males, the differences in thier calls is sufficient to render them "unfit" to females of each species and hybrid females often have a hard time orienting on a male as they are programmed to look for a different call. There are a couple of exceptions like Rana esculenta but that is very much the exception to the rule.

Ed

[Alfy111]

Originally Posted by Ed

There is a lot of data out there on the effects of naturally occuring hybrids in anurans... and in the vast majority of cases, they are lone isolated incidents that even if fertile do not go on to reproduce because if they are males, the differences in thier calls is sufficient to render them "unfit" to females of each species and hybrid females often have a hard time orienting on a male as they are programmed to look for a different call. There are a couple of exceptions like Rana esculenta but that is very much the exception to the rule.

Ed

Thank you for pointing all of that out, and I appreciate all of the information you're able to provide. You clearly know your stuff. I also came across another study in which they crossed many color morphs of the pumilio and produced viable offspring. My question to you then is how do we know this isn't happening in the wild, and this isnt why we have so many different color variations and keep discovering more and more?

JSTOR: An Error Occurred Setting Your User Cookie

Also, why is it that some hobbyists consider green footed leucs a complete different morph and get upset when they are mixed with standard leucs? And why are there over 10 different morphs of E. Anthonyi? Im just wondering if we are actually crossing different morphs all the time in the hobby? It sounds like a legitimate concept that "hybrids" have been made since the hobby originated and continue to be made unknowingly.

[Alfy111]

and here is another perfect example of natural hybridization. In this case frog A crossed with frog B to produce frog C. frog C exists, is discovered to be less viable, so frog A breaks off from the entire population to evolve into a different species that will only breed with its own kind. but still at teh end of the day, frog A, frog B, frog C, and NOW frog D all exist. Thats 4 different "species" (i guess u can call them that) that started out as just 2.

Wildlife Extra News - Australian frogs create new species in record time

[thedude]

Originally Posted by Alfy111

Thank you for pointing all of that out, and I appreciate all of the information you're able to provide. You clearly know your stuff. I also came across another study in which they crossed many color morphs of the pumilio and produced viable offspring. My question to you then is how do we know this isn't happening in the wild, and this isnt why we have so many different color variations and keep discovering more and more?

JSTOR: An Error Occurred Setting Your User Cookie

Also, why is it that some hobbyists consider green footed leucs a complete different morph and get upset when they are mixed with standard leucs? And why are there over 10 different morphs of E. Anthonyi? Im just wondering if we are actually crossing different morphs all the time in the hobby? It sounds like a legitimate concept that "hybrids" have been made since the hobby originated and continue to be made unknowingly.

as far as the pumilio go, some of them are on isolated islands so they obviously arent crossing. and with the mainland populations, some of them are also geographically isolated. for the most part, the reason why there are so many different colors and patterns is because these populations are isolated from eachother and have evolved differently and because they have a lot of variation. the different species of insects they eat could play a role as well. sometimes it might even be because certain females only want blue frogs, etc. we try and keep things pretty seperate when we dont know what it is. thats why we have "morphs" called Xcristobal06 and cauchero05 or what have you.

also, with the leucs, there is a difference between a hybrid and breeding for color traits. if we keep green foot leucs seperate and breed them without the other standards, they arent a hybrid, and could always be bred with standards and introduce those genes back into the captive population. whereas, a hybrid will always be a hybrid, the genes cant be bred back out. and most people keep them seperate because they think they are a different population. ive heard mixed results as to there origin, someone whose been around longer than me would have to answer that.

[Alfy111]

Originally Posted by thedude

as far as the pumilio go, some of them are on isolated islands so they obviously arent crossing. and with the mainland populations, some of them are also geographically isolated. for the most part, the reason why there are so many different colors and patterns is because these populations are isolated from eachother and have evolved differently and because they have a lot of variation. the different species of insects they eat could play a role as well. sometimes it might even be because certain females only want blue frogs, etc. we try and keep things pretty seperate when we dont know what it is. thats why we have "morphs" called Xcristobal06 and cauchero05 or what have you.

also, with the leucs, there is a difference between a hybrid and breeding for color traits. if we keep green foot leucs seperate and breed them without the other standards, they arent a hybrid, and could always be bred with standards and introduce those genes back into the captive population. whereas, a hybrid will always be a hybrid, the genes cant be bred back out. and most people keep them seperate because they think they are a different population. ive heard mixed results as to there origin, someone whose been around longer than me would have to answer that.

Eh.. all of this is extremely debatable. Greenfooted leucs are treated as an entirely different morph is some countries. On this board, crossing morphs is considered creating a hybrid. And a lot of geographic populations end up overlapping, like in the example i posted above your post. I also don't think that color variations come about just by isolation, i thnk there is probably something else behind it. The idea about the insects influencing the color would sound somewhat logical, but it definitely wouldnt influence patterns and is definitely a far stretch. I know a lot of animals get coloration from what they eat but I'm not sure if that can hold in this case.

[ChrisK]

Pumilio generally aren't sorted by color but by geographic location, people will keep orange bastis with yellow bastis etc, and check this thread out, these frogs are all uyama (I keep uyama also, and my pair definitely is nowhere near identical to each other): Uyama Pumilio In Detail. Pic Heavy!

[Ed]

Originally Posted by Alfy111

Thank you for pointing all of that out, and I appreciate all of the information you're able to provide. You clearly know your stuff. I also came across another study in which they crossed many color morphs of the pumilio and produced viable offspring. My question to you then is how do we know this isn't happening in the wild, and this isnt why we have so many different color variations and keep discovering more and more? .

There shouldn't be any surprise that the offspring were viable as this is not a hybrid (which is also why, they used the term crossbred (see Crossbreed - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia) in the title). It depends on how the different populations are situated geographically. In most cases, the individual populations are isolated from one another and selection pressures from predation and female mate choice drove the developement of stable, population specific patterns and colors. If given enough time, this would eventually resulted in speciation.

Originally Posted by Alfy111

Also, why is it that some hobbyists consider green footed leucs a complete different morph and get upset when they are mixed with standard leucs? And why are there over 10 different morphs of E. Anthonyi? Im just wondering if we are actually crossing different morphs all the time in the hobby? It sounds like a legitimate concept that "hybrids" have been made since the hobby originated and continue to be made unknowingly.

If I remember correctly and there should be more than a few people to correct me if I get it wrong, the reason many hobbyists keep the two morphs seperate is because there have been a several importations of leucomelas that are probably from different localities and until the DNA work is done to show that they are or are not from seperate localities, then it is safer to keep them seperated.

With respect to the tricolor/anthyoni complex, is because those are populations that not only differ in pattern geographically but may be from very different habitats. Basically the different morphs in captivity are from different localities that contain stable pattern variations. This is not uncommon and some of the most extreme examples are known in annual killifish... which the hobbyist who tend to keep them work to keep the populations pure as multiple populations of those interesting fish have gone extinct both in captivity and in the wild..

Ed

[Ed]

Originally Posted by Alfy111

and here is another perfect example of natural hybridization. In this case frog A crossed with frog B to produce frog C. frog C exists, is discovered to be less viable, so frog A breaks off from the entire population to evolve into a different species that will only breed with its own kind. but still at teh end of the day, frog A, frog B, frog C, and NOW frog D all exist. Thats 4 different "species" (i guess u can call them that) that started out as just 2.

Wildlife Extra News - Australian frogs create new species in record time

I think you should reread the article. The speciation event doesn't involve hybridization and the article did not make a claim for the hybrids to be thier own species.

This effect is not unknown and can have an effect even within a current population. Some caudates can have difficulty in successfully courting females from populations that are too distant yet gene flow still occurs preventing them from total speciation... If the gene flow is ever disrupted, then speciation would probably occur...

Ed

[Ed]

Originally Posted by Alfy111

Greenfooted leucs are treated as an entirely different morph is some countries. On this board, crossing morphs is considered creating a hybrid..

Only because people do not understand that it isn't a hybrid... Which if you read through a number of posts I have pointed out repeatedly...

Originally Posted by Alfy111

And a lot of geographic populations end up overlapping, like in the example i posted above your post. I also don't think that color variations come about just by isolation, i thnk there is probably something else behind it. The idea about the insects influencing the color would sound somewhat logical, but it definitely wouldnt influence patterns and is definitely a far stretch. I know a lot of animals get coloration from what they eat but I'm not sure if that can hold in this case.

Overlapping ranges on a map do not necessarily mean that the populations are in contact. This is a common misconception when people work with range maps. The populations are usually restricted to areas where they conditions are appropriate to that species with the area inbetween being a population sink (individuals of that species move into that area but do not breed and/or suffer heavy losses due to predation, disease, and/or enviromental conditions). This results in isolation of the populations which then allows for predation and mate choice to drive optimal patterns for that locality (which is also one of the driving factors between the species that mimic one another)... This effect is well known in a number of vertebrate species such as the annual killifish noted above...


Ed

[samual989]

lol still no pics and moderate or not still no pics destroy this thread ,still fascists for controling opinion but its your board lol stay cool!! i am going to only breed crosses & flood the market now lol thanks for your blessings guys lol because one person can control a market...