This is for you, Dave - Dendroboard
Dendroboard

Go Back   Dendroboard > Vivariums > Plants
Register Blogs FAQ Calendar Mark Forums Read Advertise

Support Our Sponsors
No Threads to Display.

facebook

Like Tree23Likes
  • 5 Post By epiphytes etc.
  • 1 Post By dendrothusiast
  • 1 Post By epiphytes etc.
  • 6 Post By Pumilo
  • 2 Post By josh_r
  • 2 Post By Judy S
  • 3 Post By Groundhog
  • 1 Post By Jeremy M
  • 1 Post By Dendro Dave
  • 1 Post By epiphytes etc.

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old 01-16-2014, 12:58 AM
epiphytes etc.'s Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Mckinleyville, CA
Posts: 2,765
Thanks: 321
Thanked 242 Times in 210 Posts
Default This is for you, Dave

Petal to the metal: Glowing plants race to market - NBC News.com
__________________
Jason Elam

Livin' La Vida Vivarium
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
  #2 (permalink)  
Old 01-16-2014, 04:36 AM
FroggyKnight's Avatar
TWI/ASN
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Washington
Posts: 1,950
Thanks: 304
Thanked 168 Times in 157 Posts
Default Re: This is for you, Dave

I LOVE BIOLUMINESCENCE!! It has to be one of the greatest natural wonders in the world

John
__________________
Living in a frogger's paradise

Imis, vanzos, variabilis, fants, leucs, tincs, terribs, pumilio
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old 01-16-2014, 08:49 AM
dendrothusiast's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 630
Thanks: 23
Thanked 31 Times in 29 Posts
Default Re: This is for you, Dave

Just wait until we start seeing this in our unusual "terrarium" plants. I for one would like to see it in certain gesineriads like pearcea hyperticiflora and some nauticalyx sp. If you know how certain ones grow it's not hard to imagine the effect they'd have.

Really cool direction both groups have gone with bioluminescence.
epiphytes etc. likes this.
__________________
Arman Villanueva
Reply With Quote
 
  #4 (permalink)  
Old 01-16-2014, 08:59 AM
Dendro Dave's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Oklahoma
Posts: 6,279
Thanks: 189
Thanked 630 Times in 431 Posts
Default Re: This is for you, Dave

LoL, thanks! ...I actually found this the other day and went to check on the bidding but they start at $100 and I'm still waiting for a new job to start, so I'll have to wait till more are available and cheaper probably

...But that article cleared up my confusion about whether or not these were the same people that had the glow plant kickstarter campaign. Seem there are 2 glowing plant companies, so that is cool.

The one that had the kickstarter is also going to be selling a makers kit to do you own glowing plants...
Glowing Plant | Maker Kit

I'm wondering if you couldn't switch out the Arabidopsis seeds in the kits for some other seeds, like my blue oxalis They're going to try roses, so the same materials may work for other plants, but then again maybe not.

They need to get busy on making some glowing moss. Maybe I'll contact them and see if they are interested in that, or using some of my micro liverwort. If they could make that stuff glow it would be awesome looking in a viv. Not sure how feasible that is though since the plant doesn't have seeds.

Anyways... you can bet I'll be keeping an eye on this stuff, thanks again
__________________
Everything I've ever written is/was just my opinion!
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old 01-16-2014, 02:25 PM
epiphytes etc.'s Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Mckinleyville, CA
Posts: 2,765
Thanks: 321
Thanked 242 Times in 210 Posts
Default Re: This is for you, Dave

Biolumenescent Nepenthes
Judy S likes this.
__________________
Jason Elam

Livin' La Vida Vivarium
Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old 01-16-2014, 04:41 PM
Pumilo's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Denver, CO
Posts: 9,505
Thanks: 792
Thanked 1,625 Times in 1,185 Posts
Default Re: This is for you, Dave

I wonder if it would be possible to insert the bioluminescent gene into a Dave? If we could get a nice healthy green glow, into a Dave, we wouldn't need bioluminescent mosses, plants, and frogs. Every viv that said "Dave" looks into, will have that green glow!
__________________
Doug
GREEN? Frogs aren't green! Who told you frogs were green?
Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)  
Old 01-16-2014, 04:42 PM
Dendro Dave's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Oklahoma
Posts: 6,279
Thanks: 189
Thanked 630 Times in 431 Posts
Default Re: This is for you, Dave

Quote:
Originally Posted by epiphytes etc. View Post
Biolumenescent Nepenthes
I think Jewel orchids would be near the top of my list.
__________________
Everything I've ever written is/was just my opinion!
Reply With Quote
  #8 (permalink)  
Old 01-16-2014, 04:49 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Peru
Posts: 747
Thanks: 3
Thanked 41 Times in 26 Posts
Default Re: This is for you, Dave

Quote:
Originally Posted by FroggyKnight View Post
I LOVE BIOLUMINESCENCE!! It has to be one of the greatest natural wonders in the world

John
Natural bioluminescence is awesome. man made bioluminescent stuff is not so cool.. I don't like the fact that mankind is playing with this kind of stuff.. it all start with this kind of "cool" stuff and people accept ot and it's all good... Makes me scared of what people will think is acceptable in the future when they are wanting to do some serious genetic alterations..
Groundhog and FroggyKnight like this.
__________________
I live in Peru.... It's different.
Reply With Quote
  #9 (permalink)  
Old 01-16-2014, 05:07 PM
Dendro Dave's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Oklahoma
Posts: 6,279
Thanks: 189
Thanked 630 Times in 431 Posts
Default Re: This is for you, Dave

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pumilo View Post
I wonder if it would be possible to insert the bioluminescent gene into a Dave? If we could get a nice healthy green glow, into a Dave, we wouldn't need bioluminescent mosses, plants, and frogs. Every viv that said "Dave" looks into, will have that green glow!
Unfortunately probably not...
"These molecules, because they're in a high-energy state, are quite toxic to the plant," explained Evans. The challenge is to produce as many luciferins as possible while simultaneously boosting the plant's ability to metabolize them. Fortunately, plants can also accept luciferin-recycling genes that the bacteria use — but which ones?"

That suggest to me that it would likely be even more difficult in mammals, without killing, shortening their life spans, or at least causing some health problems. But now that they have luciferase/luciferin gene system sequenced it at least opens the door to more possibilities. We may have to wait for more complicated genetic and tissue/organ engineering tech to catch up and make it possible for mammals to metabolize and maybe even control their bioluminesce.


They've done GFP (different then bioluminescence) in mammals, so I don't doubt that would be possible to do in humans... There is some debate on whether or not I qualify as human though

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/n...31_600x450.jpg

For now other then decking myself out in glowing makeups, various glowing accessories and/or leds and fiber optic fabric I will not be able to glow autonomously for some time.

There is this though...



http://genyu.net/2012/12/11/shedding...on-uv-tattoos/
http://mentalfloss.com/article/50096...onsive-tattoos
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UV_tattoo

If/when I ever get around to finally getting a Tattoo, I'm going to try to get something that incorporates UV ink into the design. (Unless it turns out this stuff actually is unsafe)
__________________
Everything I've ever written is/was just my opinion!

Last edited by Dendro Dave; 01-16-2014 at 05:26 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #10 (permalink)  
Old 01-16-2014, 11:14 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Union Bridge, MD
Posts: 3,070
Thanks: 405
Thanked 127 Times in 121 Posts
Default Re: This is for you, Dave

Dendro D...you are one sick puppy... but how can I not be intrigued.....??? Just imagine where the tats can go..and what they can say...and the arrows...Lordie...I feel faint....
Dendro Dave and bradlyb like this.
Reply With Quote
  #11 (permalink)  
Old 01-22-2014, 04:38 AM
Groundhog's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: New York
Posts: 2,103
Thanks: 250
Thanked 149 Times in 110 Posts
Default Re: This is for you, Dave

Quote:
Originally Posted by josh_r View Post
Natural bioluminescence is awesome. man made bioluminescent stuff is not so cool.. I don't like the fact that mankind is playing with this kind of stuff.. it all start with this kind of "cool" stuff and people accept ot and it's all good... Makes me scared of what people will think is acceptable in the future when they are wanting to do some serious genetic alterations..
Could not say it better m'self. Now, if I may ask:

W-T-F ?!?!?


You cats get all bothered over hybrid this, advocate natural that, etc. --but it's totally #@!% awesome to create glow-in-the-dark gesneriads?

Huh?

Please, someone, patiently explain to me how this is cool, but screwing around with frogs is some kind of capital crime--please. Is plant and animal genetic material different--in some philosophical/existential sense?

I be's confused...
__________________
1.0 Hyla gratioisa
1.0 Intellagama leseurii
1.1 Lophognathus temporalis
1.1 Ptychozoon kuhlii
Reply With Quote
  #12 (permalink)  
Old 01-22-2014, 06:10 AM
Jeremy M's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: nor cal
Posts: 200
Thanks: 36
Thanked 14 Times in 14 Posts
Default Re: This is for you, Dave

hmm, interesting. while I personally don't endorse the artificial development of organisms such as this, I can't deny that it's fascinating to learn about. I recall reading an article a while ago about Prof. Chia Tet Fatt's development of a bioluminescent dendrobium sp. orchid- more relatable to this hobby, I think, despite its lack of presence on the market. Certainly more desirable than something that would die in a few months. What I found most fascinating about this achievement was that instead of using the glow-genes from bacteria or jellyfish like what had been done prior, they went and harvested the genes from a firefly! That just kind of blew my mind. And then the article mentions something about "producing light for up to 5 hr stretches", which makes it seem like it only produces light in pulses, just like a firefly... too insane.

As for me, i'm content to stick to my 100,000 jars of bright glowing Panellus stipticus! such neat little shrooms. they work great for vivs too. When cultured right, they can be super bright.




EDIT: I guess it was only an excerpt from the newsletter that I saw that's been making its rounds on the web. I'll insert it here in the name of those saps who are too lazy to do a simple google search:

"The world's first and only genetically modified bioluminescent orchid has been successfully developed by Prof. Chia Tet Fatt from the National Institute of Education (NIE). To create the bioluminescent orchid, Prof. Chia transformed tissues from orchids (the Dendrobium genus) using the firefly luciferase gene. Using a method called "particle bombardment", biologically active DNA from the firefly gene was delivered into orchid tissues. Transformed cells were identified by their bioluminescence trait. These transformed tissues were propagated and used to generate transgenic plants (plants with a foreign gene incorporated). This process was repeated several times, and the bioluminescent trait was present in all transgenic plants. This confirms that the firefly luciferase gene has been integrated into the orchid. Unlike the fluorescent traits which store and re-emit light energy, the bioluminescent trait of the orchid uses its own energy to create light. These bioluminescent orchids will produce constant light, visible to the human eye, for up to 5 hours in a stretch. This greenish-white light is emitted from the whole orchid, including roots, stem, leaves and petals. The intensity of light produced varies across the different parts, ranging from 5,000 to 30,000 photons per second. Genetic transformation can help supplement traditional breeding of orchids to create orchids with desirable traits, such as novel colours, longer shelf life and increased resistance to pests and diseases. It is also possible that this procedure can be used for the transformation of other species."
Reply With Quote
  #13 (permalink)  
Old 01-22-2014, 06:16 AM
Jeremy M's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: nor cal
Posts: 200
Thanks: 36
Thanked 14 Times in 14 Posts
Default Re: This is for you, Dave

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dendro Dave View Post
They need to get busy on making some glowing moss. Maybe I'll contact them and see if they are interested in that, or using some of my micro liverwort. If they could make that stuff glow it would be awesome looking in a viv. Not sure how feasible that is though since the plant doesn't have seeds.
Actually dave, there already is at least one species of recently discovered bioluminescent moss. Some hikers who seemed to have lost their way and minds stumbled upon it, and it appears to be legit.
here's the link to the quoted article which contains the video: Bioluminescent Moss — Wandering The Blue Marble
Just take a look at the potential medical benefits- anything with such a respectable array of benefits must be real. Right?? Although they forgot to add the use of keeping our frogs awake during those long, lonely nights. Sorry if I just gave you a new life goal of finding this stuff and propagating it in terraria


(... and the actual name of the moss is Schistostega pennata. It isn't truly bioluminescent but only luminescent, from specialized orb-shaped cells which collect and amplify light which is then reflected out through a chloroplast filter into what we see, allowing it to grow green in the darkest places where other mosses can't thrive. Not the same as bioluminescence, but in my opinion, an equally cool natural adaptation which is probably more useful than glowing anyways (mainly because we don't really know why many glowing creatures glow) That's the closest to a plant producing its own light for self-feeding that I think we're going to get folks, sorry.)
Reply With Quote
  #14 (permalink)  
Old 01-22-2014, 06:38 AM
Jeremy M's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: nor cal
Posts: 200
Thanks: 36
Thanked 14 Times in 14 Posts
Default Re: This is for you, Dave

Sorry for hijacking this thread, I just love bioluminescence! It prompted me to do even more searching and I stumbled upon this article: 3 Ways to Grow Bioluminescent Algae at Home - wikiHow
which really really excited me until I remembered that I already knew what dinoflagellates were, and that all the bioluminescing ones were saltwater species (fingers crossed, someone correct me with the exception that's always present in nature!), so my fantasy of a (very) humid tank's glass or water feature full of glowing algae has now vanished as well. Not that Dinoflaggies are the kind of algae that would or could glow on glass... but alas, I can still dream. *sigh*
Seriously though, someone should try this. I remember digging up sand on a local beach (Rodeo Beach, Marin headlands, SF bay area) at night-time when I was a kid (and I still do, when I get the chance (glowing algae or not)) and seeing similar organisms flash green at me from being disturbed. Though it was hardly enough to see, it was still incredibly awesome and what got me hooked on bioluminescent species in general.
Which reminds me, I really need to get down to Catalina and do some more scuba diving and snorkeling, because that totally relates to everything that this thread is about.
FroggyKnight likes this.
Reply With Quote
  #15 (permalink)  
Old 01-22-2014, 06:56 AM
FroggyKnight's Avatar
TWI/ASN
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Washington
Posts: 1,950
Thanks: 304
Thanked 168 Times in 157 Posts
Default Re: This is for you, Dave

I used to culture a few species of bioluminescent algae, both for fun and as a teaching tool since I occasionally volunteer to teach a little biology I did a simple comparison of the brightness of the light that each species emits as a school project a while back. Fun stuff.

I MIGHT have a video of some glowing brightly in a flask, but I KNOW I have pictures. I will try to dig them out in the next few days or so.

The only down side to keeping these is that they ARE toxic and I don't think it would be possible to culture them in a fish tank.


Ok..... I might start culturing again, these things are too cool

John

P.S. Bioluminescent dinoflagellates look awesome under a microscope. Just saying.
__________________
Living in a frogger's paradise

Imis, vanzos, variabilis, fants, leucs, tincs, terribs, pumilio

Last edited by FroggyKnight; 01-22-2014 at 06:58 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #16 (permalink)  
Old 01-22-2014, 07:56 AM
Dendro Dave's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Oklahoma
Posts: 6,279
Thanks: 189
Thanked 630 Times in 431 Posts
Default Re: This is for you, Dave

Quote:
Originally Posted by Groundhog View Post
Could not say it better m'self. Now, if I may ask:

W-T-F ?!?!?


You cats get all bothered over hybrid this, advocate natural that, etc. --but it's totally #@!% awesome to create glow-in-the-dark gesneriads?

Huh?

Please, someone, patiently explain to me how this is cool, but screwing around with frogs is some kind of capital crime--please. Is plant and animal genetic material different--in some philosophical/existential sense?

I be's confused...
If you read just the bold parts that is the short version of my reasoning

I've actually asked myself this same question, especially since I was pretty active on the DFW thread (I dislike hypocrites and I hate being a hypocrite). I'll leave it to those of you who read this to judge me as one given that my stance against DFW and designer darts wasn't based in a moral/ethical position against animals or plants like that in general, but because of the consensus in our community/hobby and how that community/hobby was disrespected"

Basically my main ethical/moral objection isn't with the animals themselves, or genetic engineering...though I can't say I'm 100% comfortable with it. I take it on a case by case basis, and want it to be manageable within the hobby community (things kept as separate as can be) and of course safe for the animals/plants. My problem was our community has pretty much reached a consensus (where frogs are concerned) that we don't want this in our hobby, yet those people just decided to ignore that and not only did they have plans to do it but on a commercial scale!

Quite awhile back, I looked into seeing how possible it was to create a GFP dart frog, and found that it probably was possible for a smart guy to pull off in his kitchen if he had the bucks and the brains and could get access to some of the stuff legally. I started a thread asking what people thought because I figured it was something the hobby probably wouldn't go for, and basically while it was mostly an intellectual curiosity I did toy with the idea of actually trying it, but beyond the cost and the learning curve it seemed clear to me it was to controversial for the community and I abandoned the research in actually how to do it.

Basically I didn't wanna be the guy who said "F you all, I'm making a GFP dart!", and I especially didn't wanna be the first guy to try and profit from that. IMO I handled things they way DFW or whatever they are calling themselves now should have. I looked into it, figured out where the community seemed to stand and then I respected that community (DFW uttery failed at all that).

Also we do have GFP axolotl in the amphibian hobby already, and while I will never be the guy to make a GFP dart, I think it would be much easier to manage a frog like that in our hobby since it would likely only be 1 or very few blood lines of frogs involved. Probably 1 morph of a species and you'd often be able to tell if those frogs were GFP under a UV light.

Even if that line of frogs bred with non GFP lines (of same species/morph/locale) and passed the GFP genes to their offspring, we are only talking about 1 or very few genes and not something that creates a type of hybrid that has been infused with a bunch of genes that effect appearance and behavior (But where do you draw the line? ...And the hobby seemed against it). Also it seems those kinda hybrids would potentially be more of a problem when it comes to allowing some of the offspring to be sold/passed as normal (At least in many cases a black light would reveal if an animal was GFP or not). At the very lest even if an animal with GFP passed as normal, because it is just 1 gene it likely wouldn't effect the frogs behavior, and future offspring from that frog would probably loose the ability to glow over time if they weren't bred back to more GFP animals. So in a way to some degree it is reversible, only being 1 or a few genes in one blood line of frogs it is also a much smaller change to the frogs genetics even if there is a bold visual FX under the right light.

Also It would probably have to be a line of frogs that regularly produce albino or similar offspring. That makes that frog much easier to separate from the rest of the hobby (but there is still some risk once a frog like that exists).


As for plants and other hobbies....
The plant hobby (or at least many subsections of it) seems to have already accepted hybrids. In our end of the plant hobby we already use a bunch of plant hybrids in our vivs. Many bromeliads and air plants are crosses as are many other plants. "bla bla x bla bla" bromeliad etc..etc.. So basically that ship has sailed, and while arguably anyone who owns a plant is involved in the plant hobby, that hobby is huge compared to ours both in the number of people involved and the number of species.

Essentially I think that hobby is all but impossible to police in the manner we can the frog hobby which deals with far fewer people and far fewer species and we actually already seem to have a consensus that for frogs at least we find this unacceptable, and I think people should respect that till the paradigm shifts, if it does. I don't think that a consensus exists in the plant hobby overall, and think because of the scope of that hobby the individual is somewhat less restricted and responsible for adhering to and even enforcing some moral/ethical stance on hybrids (especially since they seem pretty popular with the plant guys).

Another example that is a bit more sketchy is the fish hobby. Glo fish? ...Well they're here. I didn't make em. I don't sell them (and so far have never bought any), and while I'm sure lots of aquarist are against them, again because of the size/scope of the hobby there seems to be less consensus and again both because of the size/scope and the fact they are already in retail stores that ship has kinda sailed when they're being sold at wal-mart, and petsmart/petco. Also they are pretty readily identifiable as what they are while frog hybrids can pass undetected more easily.

So I think in cases like that it becomes up to the individual to determine their own stance and govern their own behavior. In the case of DFW they (IMO) had much more of a personal responsibility to the hobby community they were involved in, and utterly failed in that responsibility.

Anyways I think it was really important for Groundhog to bring this up. I can't speak for others that might like some glow plants but all that crap above is basically how a justify, rationalize, and explain it for myself. This is where and why I draw the lines I do. I can't speak for the rest of you who like glowing plants, glo fish, GFP axolotl but hate what DFW was up to, because my moral/ethical objections weren't really based in a moral/ethical stance against hybrids or genetic modification in general, but in the practices of DFW and their responsibility to us, a hobby that has a consensus that says, "No, this isn't what we want!".

For anyone interested here is the thread I started awhile back to get the community talking about it and to help figure out the consensu regarding GFP frogs. Being active in the community for so long I had a pretty good idea that it would be controversial so the thread isn't the sole means by which I determined where the consensus stood and that it would be to controversial for me to do. (IMO This is what DFW should have done, then they should have respected it)
http://www.dendroboard.com/forum/gen...ecially-7.html





Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeremy M View Post
Actually dave, there already is at least one species of recently discovered bioluminescent moss. Some hikers who seemed to have lost their way and minds stumbled upon it, and it appears to be legit.
here's the link to the quoted article which contains the video: Bioluminescent Moss €” Wandering The Blue Marble
Just take a look at the potential medical benefits- anything with such a respectable array of benefits must be real. Right?? Although they forgot to add the use of keeping our frogs awake during those long, lonely nights. Sorry if I just gave you a new life goal of finding this stuff and propagating it in terraria


(... and the actual name of the moss is Schistostega pennata. It isn't truly bioluminescent but only luminescent, from specialized orb-shaped cells which collect and amplify light which is then reflected out through a chloroplast filter into what we see, allowing it to grow green in the darkest places where other mosses can't thrive. Not the same as bioluminescence, but in my opinion, an equally cool natural adaptation which is probably more useful than glowing anyways (mainly because we don't really know why many glowing creatures glow) That's the closest to a plant producing its own light for self-feeding that I think we're going to get folks, sorry.)

I'd never heard of that stuff so thanks. Bummer it isn't actually bio luminescent but still pretty cool how it reflects light. I've heard of a few people getting moss from that far north, including New York to work in a viv so Ya if anyone ever finds some, send me a bit

As for the medical claims, all those conditions can be treated with Chocolate... Chocolate and/or sex (though sex is more likely to also cause some of those conditions then chocolate).
Groundhog likes this.
__________________
Everything I've ever written is/was just my opinion!

Last edited by Dendro Dave; 01-22-2014 at 08:11 AM.
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Dendro Dave For This Useful Post:
Groundhog (01-23-2014)
  #17 (permalink)  
Old 01-22-2014, 02:05 PM
epiphytes etc.'s Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Mckinleyville, CA
Posts: 2,765
Thanks: 321
Thanked 242 Times in 210 Posts
Default Re: This is for you, Dave

Quote:
Originally Posted by Groundhog View Post
Could not say it better m'self. Now, if I may ask:

W-T-F ?!?!?


You cats get all bothered over hybrid this, advocate natural that, etc. --but it's totally #@!% awesome to create glow-in-the-dark gesneriads?

Huh?

Please, someone, patiently explain to me how this is cool, but screwing around with frogs is some kind of capital crime--please. Is plant and animal genetic material different--in some philosophical/existential sense?

I be's confused...
I think the main difference is that most plants can be propagated asexually, and frogs can't (yet ), so there isn't as much of a danger in losing "pure" species.
Groundhog likes this.
__________________
Jason Elam

Livin' La Vida Vivarium
Reply With Quote
  #18 (permalink)  
Old 01-23-2014, 06:08 AM
Groundhog's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: New York
Posts: 2,103
Thanks: 250
Thanked 149 Times in 110 Posts
Default Re: This is for you, Dave

Dave, I read your post 2X--once again you impress with your intellectual honesty.

Your essay should be required reading on how to discuss the ethical ramifications of owning organisms in a civil, informed manner.


Some thoughts on you and Jason:

1) I think it is important to think through what--if anything--we have a right to "demand" of other hobbyists. After all, in a real sense pets are property. That may sound callous, but what is the real-world alternative?
Yet I do not think it inappropriate to state that, as a hobby, we stand for:
--ethical and humane husbandry;
--ethical and minimally-invasive collection practices;
--cb stock where possible;
--honest business dealings.

Let me clarify: By "hobby" I mean the entire herp hobby, not only PDFs. I think the problem arises though, when we tell people, "you cannot modify X in Y manner. Well, I have stated many times that I am annoyed by the need to create stupid morphs and hybrids (albinizing every snake, red parrot cichlids, hairless cats, etc.); conversely, it has gotten to the point where I now appreciate normal ball pythons and $1.49 green swordtails!

Yet, I would rather have a dog than a wolf, and I like the fact that there are plant cultivars that make our hobby easier (more compact bromeliads, cool begonia morphs, mini-gesneriads, etc.) I for one would appreciate some freakin' compact anthuriums!!! I do not keep danios (they are annoying), but if I did, I would have a couple of glofish. And if they ever produce a GFP ribbed newt, I shall probably cave. (And while we're at it, I would like to see a crested gecko that either: 1) cannot lose its tail or (2) regenerates a lost tail!)

2) But, when it comes to plants, I think something else is at work. For centuries, people have developed and refined ways to modify plants. I also grow produce, and every heirloom I grow is a cultivar. In horticulture, plant shows often favor "cultural perfection" over "closest to natural." Here Jason has an important point: Because of cloning, all we have to do is a few manipulations, and we can have all the Begonia 'Bozack' we could ever want--so easy to pass around cuttings. (In fairness, every horticultural society I know advocates for growing and preserving species.)

But maybe this is because--from the POV of an animal--plants are more "static"--they do not complain or exhibit distress, at least in a way that can elicit empathy (think of a suffering constrictor, dog, baby seal, circus animal, etc.) After all, there is no PETA-equivalent for plants; we do not ask if we are "hurting" the Capsicum annuum when it is bred to a compact plant with fruit so large it cracks the stems--that ship sailed centuries ago...

3) Maybe PDF keepers are so adamant because they can be. After all, dendrobatids have so much diverse beauty, there is no real need to $#@! with them--they're already diverse, small, largely diurnal, fascinating. Q: Would anyone really want albino or leucistic darts? What the hell for? (Still, there will be someone who believes that, if they want a GFP frog, what business is it of yours?)

4) Or maybe Dave alludes to a larger, more uncomfortable point: In some ways, we're all full of shit. After all, we are human, and given to desires, curiosity, boredom and a fine capacity to rationalize. I know this much: We would not want any Alien/Cardassian/Twilight Zone moth___kers coming down here and inserting genes into us. So far, that is only sci-fi...

Maybe the best we can hope for is to be honest with ourselves, and others.

And for this, I salute Dave for his thoughtfulness and candor.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dendro Dave View Post
If you read just the bold parts that is the short version of my reasoning

I've actually asked myself this same question, especially since I was pretty active on the DFW thread (I dislike hypocrites and I hate being a hypocrite). I'll leave it to those of you who read this to judge me as one given that my stance against DFW and designer darts wasn't based in a moral/ethical position against animals or plants like that in general, but because of the consensus in our community/hobby and how that community/hobby was disrespected"

Basically my main ethical/moral objection isn't with the animals themselves, or genetic engineering...though I can't say I'm 100% comfortable with it. I take it on a case by case basis, and want it to be manageable within the hobby community (things kept as separate as can be) and of course safe for the animals/plants. My problem was our community has pretty much reached a consensus (where frogs are concerned) that we don't want this in our hobby, yet those people just decided to ignore that and not only did they have plans to do it but on a commercial scale!

Quite awhile back, I looked into seeing how possible it was to create a GFP dart frog, and found that it probably was possible for a smart guy to pull off in his kitchen if he had the bucks and the brains and could get access to some of the stuff legally. I started a thread asking what people thought because I figured it was something the hobby probably wouldn't go for, and basically while it was mostly an intellectual curiosity I did toy with the idea of actually trying it, but beyond the cost and the learning curve it seemed clear to me it was to controversial for the community and I abandoned the research in actually how to do it.

Basically I didn't wanna be the guy who said "F you all, I'm making a GFP dart!", and I especially didn't wanna be the first guy to try and profit from that. IMO I handled things they way DFW or whatever they are calling themselves now should have. I looked into it, figured out where the community seemed to stand and then I respected that community (DFW uttery failed at all that).

Also we do have GFP axolotl in the amphibian hobby already, and while I will never be the guy to make a GFP dart, I think it would be much easier to manage a frog like that in our hobby since it would likely only be 1 or very few blood lines of frogs involved. Probably 1 morph of a species and you'd often be able to tell if those frogs were GFP under a UV light.

Even if that line of frogs bred with non GFP lines (of same species/morph/locale) and passed the GFP genes to their offspring, we are only talking about 1 or very few genes and not something that creates a type of hybrid that has been infused with a bunch of genes that effect appearance and behavior (But where do you draw the line? ...And the hobby seemed against it). Also it seems those kinda hybrids would potentially be more of a problem when it comes to allowing some of the offspring to be sold/passed as normal (At least in many cases a black light would reveal if an animal was GFP or not). At the very lest even if an animal with GFP passed as normal, because it is just 1 gene it likely wouldn't effect the frogs behavior, and future offspring from that frog would probably loose the ability to glow over time if they weren't bred back to more GFP animals. So in a way to some degree it is reversible, only being 1 or a few genes in one blood line of frogs it is also a much smaller change to the frogs genetics even if there is a bold visual FX under the right light.

Also It would probably have to be a line of frogs that regularly produce albino or similar offspring. That makes that frog much easier to separate from the rest of the hobby (but there is still some risk once a frog like that exists).


As for plants and other hobbies....
The plant hobby (or at least many subsections of it) seems to have already accepted hybrids. In our end of the plant hobby we already use a bunch of plant hybrids in our vivs. Many bromeliads and air plants are crosses as are many other plants. "bla bla x bla bla" bromeliad etc..etc.. So basically that ship has sailed, and while arguably anyone who owns a plant is involved in the plant hobby, that hobby is huge compared to ours both in the number of people involved and the number of species.

Essentially I think that hobby is all but impossible to police in the manner we can the frog hobby which deals with far fewer people and far fewer species and we actually already seem to have a consensus that for frogs at least we find this unacceptable, and I think people should respect that till the paradigm shifts, if it does. I don't think that a consensus exists in the plant hobby overall, and think because of the scope of that hobby the individual is somewhat less restricted and responsible for adhering to and even enforcing some moral/ethical stance on hybrids (especially since they seem pretty popular with the plant guys).

Another example that is a bit more sketchy is the fish hobby. Glo fish? ...Well they're here. I didn't make em. I don't sell them (and so far have never bought any), and while I'm sure lots of aquarist are against them, again because of the size/scope of the hobby there seems to be less consensus and again both because of the size/scope and the fact they are already in retail stores that ship has kinda sailed when they're being sold at wal-mart, and petsmart/petco. Also they are pretty readily identifiable as what they are while frog hybrids can pass undetected more easily.

So I think in cases like that it becomes up to the individual to determine their own stance and govern their own behavior. In the case of DFW they (IMO) had much more of a personal responsibility to the hobby community they were involved in, and utterly failed in that responsibility.

Anyways I think it was really important for Groundhog to bring this up. I can't speak for others that might like some glow plants but all that crap above is basically how a justify, rationalize, and explain it for myself. This is where and why I draw the lines I do. I can't speak for the rest of you who like glowing plants, glo fish, GFP axolotl but hate what DFW was up to, because my moral/ethical objections weren't really based in a moral/ethical stance against hybrids or genetic modification in general, but in the practices of DFW and their responsibility to us, a hobby that has a consensus that says, "No, this isn't what we want!".

For anyone interested here is the thread I started awhile back to get the community talking about it and to help figure out the consensu regarding GFP frogs. Being active in the community for so long I had a pretty good idea that it would be controversial so the thread isn't the sole means by which I determined where the consensus stood and that it would be to controversial for me to do. (IMO This is what DFW should have done, then they should have respected it)
http://www.dendroboard.com/forum/gen...ecially-7.html








I'd never heard of that stuff so thanks. Bummer it isn't actually bio luminescent but still pretty cool how it reflects light. I've heard of a few people getting moss from that far north, including New York to work in a viv so Ya if anyone ever finds some, send me a bit

As for the medical claims, all those conditions can be treated with Chocolate... Chocolate and/or sex (though sex is more likely to also cause some of those conditions then chocolate).
__________________
1.0 Hyla gratioisa
1.0 Intellagama leseurii
1.1 Lophognathus temporalis
1.1 Ptychozoon kuhlii

Last edited by Groundhog; 01-23-2014 at 06:21 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #19 (permalink)  
Old 01-23-2014, 12:34 PM
Dendro Dave's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Oklahoma
Posts: 6,279
Thanks: 189
Thanked 630 Times in 431 Posts
Default Re: This is for you, Dave

Quote:
Originally Posted by Groundhog View Post
Dave, I read your post 2X--once again you impress with your intellectual honesty.

Your essay should be required reading on how to discuss the ethical ramifications of owning organisms in a civil, informed manner.


Some thoughts on you and Jason:

1) I think it is important to think through what--if anything--we have a right to "demand" of other hobbyists. After all, in a real sense pets are property. That may sound callous, but what is the real-world alternative?
Yet I do not think it inappropriate to state that, as a hobby, we stand for:
--ethical and humane husbandry;
--ethical and minimally-invasive collection practices;
--cb stock where possible;
--honest business dealings.

Let me clarify: By "hobby" I mean the entire herp hobby, not only PDFs. I think the problem arises though, when we tell people, "you cannot modify X in Y manner. Well, I have stated many times that I am annoyed by the need to create stupid morphs and hybrids (albinizing every snake, red parrot cichlids, hairless cats, etc.); conversely, it has gotten to the point where I now appreciate normal ball pythons and $1.49 green swordtails!

Yet, I would rather have a dog than a wolf, and I like the fact that there are plant cultivars that make our hobby easier (more compact bromeliads, cool begonia morphs, mini-gesneriads, etc.) I for one would appreciate some freakin' compact anthuriums!!! I do not keep danios (they are annoying), but if I did, I would have a couple of glofish. And if they ever produce a GFP ribbed newt, I shall probably cave. (And while we're at it, I would like to see a crested gecko that either: 1) cannot lose its tail or (2) regenerates a lost tail!)

2) But, when it comes to plants, I think something else is at work. For centuries, people have developed and refined ways to modify plants. I also grow produce, and every heirloom I grow is a cultivar. In horticulture, plant shows often favor "cultural perfection" over "closest to natural." Here Jason has an important point: Because of cloning, all we have to do is a few manipulations, and we can have all the Begonia 'Bozack' we could ever want--so easy to pass around cuttings. (In fairness, every horticultural society I know advocates for growing and preserving species.)

But maybe this is because--from the POV of an animal--plants are more "static"--they do not complain or exhibit distress, at least in a way that can elicit empathy (think of a suffering constrictor, dog, baby seal, circus animal, etc.) After all, there is no PETA-equivalent for plants; we do not ask if we are "hurting" the Capsicum annuum when it is bred to a compact plant with fruit so large it cracks the stems--that ship sailed centuries ago...

3) Maybe PDF keepers are so adamant because they can be. After all, dendrobatids have so much diverse beauty, there is no real need to $#@! with them--they're already diverse, small, largely diurnal, fascinating. Q: Would anyone really want albino or leucistic darts? What the hell for? (Still, there will be someone who believes that, if they want a GFP frog, what business is it of yours?)

4) Or maybe Dave alludes to a larger, more uncomfortable point: In some ways, we're all full of shit. After all, we are human, and given to desires, curiosity, boredom and a fine capacity to rationalize. I know this much: We would not want any Alien/Cardassian/Twilight Zone moth___kers coming down here and inserting genes into us. So far, that is only sci-fi...

Maybe the best we can hope for is to be honest with ourselves, and others.

And for this, I salute Dave for his thoughtfulness and candor.
Thanks ...I'll just add that one of the major reasons I tow the party line on this issue for the most part is because of how what I do, or others do will effect other people. In a perfect world we could have some GFP darts, designer dart frogs, etc... and keep all those separate from the other frogs in the hobby and trust people to be responsible and not to mix those with other frogs or sell them as something they aren't.

I'm usually not a fan of the slippery slope argument but I think it does apply here. Once we say it is ok, it's going to start happening more, and be less controllable. And even if this is all going to happen whether we want it to or not, it is probably best that it happens as slowly as possible. Really one of the only ways to insure it happens as slowly as possible is to fight against it as long and hard as you can.

One example of how this might play out is similar to mixed tanks. We are still mostly against them, but more and more it seems we are letting some people who have proven themselves and go about it in a fairly responsible manner get away with it without being lynched, even if we ourselves may not personally want to do it, or even condone it in general. This has happened slowly over a period of years and you still really need to know what you're doing if you post a mixed tank and expect not to get flamed.

One of the reasons as to why I was so against DFW that I kinda elluded to, was that given the scope of their operation they were making this decision for all of us. They sounded as if they were going to potentially inject 100's if not 1000's of hybrid/mixed morph frogs into the hobby in a relatively short time.

I don't support some dude creating a tinc/auratus hybrid, or buying 1, but if he keeps it to himself doesn't produce and sell more I'm likely not going to freak out and demand they be drummed out of the hobby (Others might though). It comes down to putting our personal desires over the communities desire, basically selfishness... when the majority doesn't want it and we do it, and can't guarantee it won't effect them then I think the individual has crossed the line into selfishness.

If one tries to argue that the community is being selfish for not letting people do this, well that is a type of selfishness that protects the majority/community interests, and I think we have every right to protect the hobby and the community interest. I think the individual usually has less right to just tell us all to go screw ourselves then we do to demand of them a little respect for the way we do things. So IMO sometimes whether we are full of crap or not kinda depends on if we are protecting our own interests or protecting the community/hobby as a whole. Also we can't really stop anyone from doing what they want, but we can sure as hell speak up when we don't like it, and not give those people any money... Even as individuals we each have every right to do that. You can do what you want, but there will always be consequences.
__________________
Everything I've ever written is/was just my opinion!
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Does Dave need photoshop? EverettC Member's Frogs & Vivariums 16 02-05-2005 07:44 PM

Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.3

All times are GMT. The time now is 07:08 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0
vBulletin Security provided by vBSecurity v2.2.2 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2017 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.