[trevtron2]

I was looking through the different morphs of Dendrobates leucomelas and read that the standard ones also can be green footed. Is this true??? and would it be compatible with the standard morph?

 

[trevtron2]

I got it from here >>>

http://www.dendroboard.com/forum/care-sheets/13015-dendrobates-leucomelas-novice.html

And this is what said ... Standard - this includes the "orange", "yellow", and "green foot" which are just bloodlines and variation within the morph, and in some cases line breeding has occurred to make these traits more predictable. Also part of this morph is the "Chocolate" selectively bred genetic form (aka "Albino", "Vanishing Jewels"). Originally from Venezuela.

 

[fieldnstream]

I believe your question is answered in the other link I included in your other thread. Keep in mind that the caresheet is 5 years old.

 

[SmackoftheGods]

There are green-footed leucs. I'm unsure of whether they come from the same population as what we consider to be "standards." There was not a lot of locality information provided when leucs were being shipped into the US, and until someone goes down and does some research in Venezuela I doubt if we'll ever be sure if the green-foots are from the same population as the standards....

 

[ConFuCiuZ]

I would consider Green Footed Leucs as the same category as standards and as well as Chocolates.I believe that chocolates and green footed leucs are a mutation that came up during captive breeding. There isn't sufficient evidence to categorized green footed leucs as their own morph. Some ppl also say that fine spotted leucs aren't consider a morph . The only true morph out of the luecs are the Guyana banded leucs and on top of that there are two different morphs of banded luecs i believe. The one that Joshs frogs sells, which the black bands grown thicker as they grow and the ones bj sells. There are some green footed leucs out there, but hard to find

 

[trevtron2]

If I some how found a green footed or chocolate luc could they be put in the same cage as a standard, and could they breed with one and other?

 

[Woodsman]

Hi Chris,

I don't think this is quite right. There are a number of people here that will attest that Green-footed D. leucomelas came into the U.S. in shipments during the 1990s and are a distinct "morph". I think what has happened since then is that they have all been bred into the "standard", so standards can have green feet or not.

Chocolate leucomelas are a line-bred frog, as you say.

If someone is looking into leucs, I strongly recommend the Guyanan Bandeds, as they are much larger and the striking yellow and black banding is pretty spectacular (though I will never give up my "standard" pairs either).

Take care, Richard.

I would consider Green Footed Leucs as the same category as standards and as well as Chocolates.I believe that chocolates and green footed leucs are a mutation that came up during captive breeding. There isn't sufficient evidence to categorized green footed leucs as their own morph. Some ppl also say that fine spotted leucs aren't consider a morph . The only true morph out of the luecs are the Guyana banded leucs and on top of that there are two different morphs of banded luecs i believe. The one that Joshs frogs sells, which the black bands grown thicker as they grow and the ones bj sells. There are some green footed leucs out there, but hard to find

 

[Baltimore Bryan]

I also thought I remember seeing people claim that the "green foot" leucs were from a separate population. However, some of them may have been bred into the standard population, but that would not mean that if you found a "pure" green foot leuc that it should be mixed with the standards.
Chocolate leucs are derived from the standard population and can (should) be bred back into the standard population.
The Guyana banded leucs are a whole different type of frog, so don't mix them with what you already have.
Bryan

 

[SmackoftheGods]

I would consider Green Footed Leucs as the same category as standards and as well as Chocolates.I believe that chocolates and green footed leucs are a mutation that came up during captive breeding. There isn't sufficient evidence to categorized green footed leucs as their own morph. Some ppl also say that fine spotted leucs aren't consider a morph . The only true morph out of the luecs are the Guyana banded leucs and on top of that there are two different morphs of banded luecs i believe. The one that Joshs frogs sells, which the black bands grown thicker as they grow and the ones bj sells. There are some green footed leucs out there, but hard to find

Chris,

This is a common logical fallacy. The lack of sufficient evidence for one idea cannot be used as evidence that the inverse or alternative theory must be true. Thus, the lack of hard evidence that green-footed D. leucomelas are a separate population from standards cannot be used as sufficient evidence that the two should be mixed (just like the lack of hard evidence for the hypothesis of abiogenesis cannot be used as evidence that there is a God). In fact, I find it more prudent to assume (so long as data is unavailable) that green-footed leucomelas should be kept separate from standards, rather than keeping everything together, until new data is available.

"Chocolate" D. leucomelas is just a display of amelanism which shows up in many varieties of frogs in our collections. These should be bred back into their various populations.

Also, I might point out that "believing" something doesn't make that something any more true. Until you have some hard evidence on the matter, it would be good to avoid statements regarding "the only true morphs."

If I some how found a green footed or chocolate luc could they be put in the same cage as a standard, and could they breed with one and other?

Hi Trevor,

I'm afraid, from your question, that you're asking one thing and you're going to receive an answer that doesn't directly answer your question. So I'm going to answer the question you asked, and then the question many hobbyists on the board think you should have asked.

If you found green-footed leucs they _could_ be kept in the same vivarium (some hobbyists around the board are averse to the word "cage") as a standard and they _could_ interbreed. However, this isn't saying much. There are those who put leucomelas and auratus and tinctorius in the same vivarium, some have even had minimal problems with this set-up (although it is highly frowned upon by a vast majority on the board). And yes, leucs and auratus and tinctorius can interbreed.

The question many people would hope that you ask is not "can I," but "should I." And that question is a bit more difficult to answer simply based on the origin of the green-footed frog. If the green-footed leuc is just a recessive trait in standard leucs then you should breed the green-footed allele back into the gene-pool. If the green-footed leuc is from a separate locality then you should keep green-footed leucs separately from the standards. Because hard evidence concerning this (at least to my knowledge) is minimal, I would suggest keeping your green-footed leucs separate from your standard leucs (not that it would do much good, I have a feeling that most or all of the leucs in the hobby are all thoroughbreds at this point). Some people may differ from my opinion.

As far as the chocolates go, you can and _should_ breed them with your standard leucomelas. Failure to do so will likely ultimately lead to line-breeding, in-breeding, and possibly in-breeding depression.

 

[trevtron2]

WOW thanks for all the responses this helped a lot!!!!

 

[JimO]

Zach Brinks (zBrinks) has locale, import dates, and the names of the importers for his breeding group of green-feet and standard leucs. I just picked up some green-footed tads from him in Daytona and the family tree he gave me was impressive. The two lines he has were imported in the 90s and he has kept them separate. I believe he is one of the few people who sells leucs with that kind of data.

Oh, and Zach told me that not all "green-footed" leuc individuals actually have green feet, but that they are slightly smaller, more shy, and lay smaller clutches than the standards.

 

[ConFuCiuZ]

Thx for all this info. Cleared up some things that i was fuzzy on, but thanks

 

[ConFuCiuZ]

Zach Brinks (zBrinks) has locale, import dates, and the names of the importers for his breeding group of green-feet and standard leucs. I just picked up some green-footed tads from him in Daytona and the family tree he gave me was impressive. The two lines he has were imported in the 90s and he has kept them separate. I believe he is one of the few people who sells leucs with that kind of data.

Oh, and Zach told me that not all "green-footed" leuc individuals actually have green feet, but that they are slightly smaller, more shy, and lay smaller clutches than the standards.

So, the green footed tads you have right now are still tads or have they morph out yet. Second question. Are they green footed or are they was Zach mention in your second paragraph?

 

[SmackoftheGods]

Zach Brinks (zBrinks) has locale, import dates, and the names of the importers for his breeding group of green-feet and standard leucs. I just picked up some green-footed tads from him in Daytona and the family tree he gave me was impressive. The two lines he has were imported in the 90s and he has kept them separate. I believe he is one of the few people who sells leucs with that kind of data.

Oh, and Zach told me that not all "green-footed" leuc individuals actually have green feet, but that they are slightly smaller, more shy, and lay smaller clutches than the standards.

Zach really is the leucomelas master. He should be responding to this thread more than I should. It doesn't surprise me that he's got an awesome lineage of his frogs....

There were rumors of creating some taxon management groups for leucs a while back. It wouldn't surprise me if more data was more readily available in the near future.

 

[JimO]

They are still tads and have just started growing their back legs. They are from his green-footed breeding group and I hope they do have green feet, but even if they don't, they are still locale/population specific specimens.

I also wanted to point out that because leucs have been around so long, they are probably one of the most heaviliy line bred species in the hobby. It's my understanding that fine spotting, banding, and orange coloration are all traits that have been line bred to one degree or another. The same is true, I believe with chocolate leucs. I'm pretty sure that a yellow leuc can become orange if fed Repashy Superpig or an equivalent color enhancement.

I hope Zach jumps in because I have exhausted my knowledge of leucs and am beyond my expertise. I could be wrong on a couple of points.

So, the green footed tads you have right now are still tads or have they morph out yet. Second question. Are they green footed or are they was Zach mention in your second paragraph?

 

[JimO]

This would be great. I'm sure there must be quite a variety of color morphs of Leucs in the wild that would be just as distinct as the Surinam Tinctorius morphs.

I mean look at all the unique tinc morphs from the Sipaliwini Valley, which previously was only associated with azureus. If importation of Sipaliwini tincs started today, there would probably be several different morphs that have all been accepted as azureus. The isolated islands of rain forest in the Valley region are probably similar to the islands off Panama and even on those islands (Bastimentos for example) there are sometimes more than one recognized unique color morph.

There were rumors of creating some taxon management groups for leucs a while back. It wouldn't surprise me if more data was more readily available in the near future.

 

[fieldnstream]

Zach went into some detail a few weeks ago about this, heres the link:
http://www.dendroboard.com/forum/sc...994-keeping-species-morphs-going-hobby-3.html