Piebald Amazons ...anybody got any by chance?

[JuliusSqueezer]

Of course animals "CAN" and often "DO" inbreed in the wild...noone has argued that they don't. This is why you will likely live to see the extinction of tigers, cheetahs and many other animals well on the way out....Of course there is a "CHANCE" of accidental inbreeding in captivity even from animals bought in different places...probably especially in Canada where importing them is a great deal more difficult. But how does going ahead and inbreeding because they may have already inbred before make any sense? I don't get that mentality at all. BTW, if you would stop feeding live prey, your rainbow boa wouldn't be missing scales. Also...this thread wasn't meant to be an inbreeding debate...I simply asked if anyone knew of anymore piebald amazons. I'm not on a get rich quick off selling snakes scheme and I can't be convinced to inbreed anything on purpose so why the hostility? So I like diversity in a genepool? woopee...how does that make me a bad person? Have I insulted someone's personal lineage? If so I'm sorry...that wasn't my intentions.

[Jeff_Favelle]

So I like diversity in a genepool? woopee...how does that make me a bad person?

I think you may have a lack of understanding on how genetics actually work. Have you ever wondered why its illegal to keep reptiles/amphibians as pets in Canada? Do you think its because the feds actually listened to the "humane" societies and thinks its immoral to keep them in cages as pets? No, its because of the dangers of a kid catching a frog, keeping it for a year, and then releasing it in another pond. The other pond may very well be inhabited by the same species, but if its far enough away, or has enough barriers between it, the two distinct metapopulation may never come in contact with each other naturally. This is what biologists worry about. Reptiles don't migrate. They live in distinct populations (locales). They don't really stray. They are born, grow up, and breed in the same area, generation after gneration. Its why when you find a cool-looking natural variant, you can go back years later, and depending on the alleles involved, can find similar specimens.

Reptiles are not mammals, so don't use analogies to them. It doesn't apply and is irrelevant. There is no migration. Taking an ATB and breeding it with a new specimen that's from unknown origins or from a different population is a no-no in biological circles. Its the main reason that CB herps will never be used a source for re-introduction to the wild. Mixing distinct populations is worse than inbreeding a line of snakes 10x over, if not more. All that inbreeding does is to line up like alleles. That's a good thing, because if the population is strong to begin with, it will stay that way, not to mention it will keep all the genes necessary to exploit its micro-niches better than any other possible substitute. Mix in new genes, even if its from the same species across the river, is NOT a good thing as that locale may have been evolving for a few thousand years under a slightly different set of conditions.

This is well-known in the biological world. I worked under 3 different natural history curators and I once argued (as you are) that inbreeding was bad. I was just a 1st year undergrad at the time, and by the time my work studies were done, I actually understoof how things worked. Reptiles don't migrate. They never will. They live in distinct pockets of the main population. Sometimes the pockets are connected, sometimes they are not. But it is far safer to breed an animal back to its parent, than to guess whether or not two WC animals are from connecting pockets.

And I wouldn't say the one-eyed boas and runty Burms are from inbreeding. I would its the opposite. Outbreeding. Pre-zygotic and post zygotic factors acting on the chromosomes of individuals that were NOT meant to breed together. Its precisely why the old books on Bci boas stated several times that certain bos simply weren't compatible. Those old books were on to something. Unless you can guarantee that your two animals are from the same area, you are doing more harm than good in outbreeding it to a line that does not share gene flow with it. Its called intra-specific hybridization, and, in reptiles, is far worse than breeding related individuals. If that wasn't the case, then reptiles would have died out a long time ago, because that's how it happens in the wild.

[Invictus]

Originally posted by JuliusSqueezer
BTW, if you would stop feeding live prey, your rainbow boa wouldn't be missing scales.

Whoa whoa WHOA. For starters, I have NEVER fed live prey to ANY boa except for the absolute most picky of kenyan sand boas who would absolutely not take anything else. You have got some nerve making an assumption like that.

Secondly, this particular Colombian Rainbow is NOT missing scales. It may look that way because of the camera, but her white markings (I just found another one on her actually, making it 3 total) are not in any way differently textured than the surrounding scales. They are not indented nor elevated, and actually one of them has half the scale colored and the other half of the scale is white. These are NOT feeding scars. But thank you for being so presumtuous.

Jeff - I'm sorry, but I will never agree that outcrossing the genes is literally detrimental to the reptile, and in fact that is one of the craziest things I've ever heard. There is plenty of evidence that suggests that outcrossing is the ONLY reason why reptiles have survived as long as they have. I'm not saying every single generation without fail should be outcrossed, but after 10 lineages, COME ON... time to diversify the bloodlines. If it's so harmful, why do many breeders now strive to offer unrelated pairs and trios? Suggesting that outcrossing is harmful is even more ridiculous than saying that inbreeding is harmful. As long as you are pairing strong alleles to strong alleles, you will end up with strong offspring.

I'm also not going to say that inbreeding is the reason for one-eyed albino boas or dwarf albino burms, but if you look at the reproduction of snakes that have been inbred up to the 16th generation, they have smaller clutches, more slugs, and smaller babies. This has also been proven time and time again. Once you hit a certain generation, it's time to diversify the genes a little. That's my opinion anyway, and comes from education I've received from people who I consider to be FAR more knowledgeable than me.

[JuliusSqueezer]

Originally posted by Invictus

Here's a pic of her missing scales - she has 2 such spots on her body (Look at the mid-section right above the head):



Thing is, I'm pretty sure it's NOT a form of piebaldism, it's just a birth mark kinda deal.

umm I didn't presume anything...You must have mistakingly wrote that the scales were missing...now you say they are in tact. That's cool though ...nice snake.

Jeff? First of all...I wouldn't expect a Canadian to know much about the snake movement down here in warmer climates but I don't know much about moose migration either...but anyway they do move a great deal...not uncommon to move 10 miles or so per summer. And especially snakes like ratsnakes and kingsnakes that will crawl into a roll or bale of hay that may be sold and transported to another farm abroad...I find them way outside their supposed native range...sometimes a state or two over all the time around farms when I'm out herping. Floods will very often move them around a bit too. If inbreeding is so cool, Why does Prince Charles look so goofy?

[JuliusSqueezer]

Oh...and this...."Have you ever wondered why its illegal to keep reptiles/amphibians as pets in Canada?" I'll have to say no to that one. I've never even been to Canada...why would I sit around and wonder about such a thing? So...keeping reptiles is illegal in Canada? I wasn't aware of that either. Does this mean you are a criminal?

[tHeGiNo]

I think he might have meant it is illegal to take reptiles/amphibians from the wild and take them in as pets. Also, there are moose in the United States aren't there?

[JuliusSqueezer]

"Also, there are moose in the United States aren't there? " Yah in Alaska....My sisters were born there but I have never been there either. There are no moose that I am aware of in Georgia, Texas, California or Tennessee. Those are the only states I have ever lived in.

I think a bigger concern if it's anything like the concerns we have for releasing animals back into the wild...would be that they fear someone will expose a native species to pathenogens from exotic species also kept and then introduce infected wildlife back to the wild. Our wildlife people actually move things around from time to time to broaden the genepools a bit...not try and restrict it....they ust like to call the shots and be in charge.

[Jeff_Favelle]

Suggesting that outcrossing is harmful is even more ridiculous than saying that inbreeding is harmful. As long as you are pairing strong alleles to strong alleles, you will end up with strong offspring.

Ken, I'm sorry you've never heard of pre-zygotic and post-zygotic barriers to intraspecific breeding, but it indeed exists. 1st-year Bio text (Campbell 7th Edition) has a HUGE section on it, and my work study prof specialized in it. Its real and it exists. Whether or not its silly in YOUR mind is irrelevant. Most studied example on it is "lemnic" and "benthic" sticklebacks that are separate as a meta population only by their feeding habit. Its real. Do whatever you want with the information, its irrelevant to me. And I indeed thought the same way you did, until the end of 1st year as an undergrad. Sorry.

I'll have to say no to that one. I've never even been to Canada...why would I sit around and wonder about such a thing? So...keeping reptiles is illegal in Canada? I wasn't aware of that either. Does this mean you are a criminal?

Wasn't just for you, but the entire ssnakess.com board in general. But seeing as you're going to be a smart a$$ about it, I would think anyone above 5 years old would be able to tell that I was referring to native herps and not just any pet snake. But whatever....

I think a bigger concern if it's anything like the concerns we have for releasing animals back into the wild...would be that they fear someone will expose a native species to pathenogens from exotic species also kept and then introduce infected wildlife back to the wild.

Nope, that's not the reason, sorry.

And especially snakes like ratsnakes and kingsnakes that will crawl into a roll or bale of hay that may be sold and transported to another farm abroad...

This is somehow the natural order of things now? Are you kidding me? You are calling snakes hiding in HUMAN bails of hay and being transported by HUMAN trucks as snake migration for breeding purposes? I'm sorry man, I can't continue this discussion. I'm going to go insane trying to get anything across to you.

Best of luck with the ATB. I don't think enough people work with them. I only owned one a LONG time ago, but they are cool snakes. I hope you get out of it what you want.

[anders_240sx]

After reading this enitre post, it seems that everyone seems to be more concerned with proving their points, than taking the time to think about what everyone else had to say. Personally, I feel that both invictus and jeff have good points. The only thing I can say is that I have heard of snake migrations. Obviously not to the extent of mamals and such. As well, select reptile species, such as desert dwelling species and species living in areas that have dry seasons are all known to collect in oasis'. As for refering to bio textbooks. As long as its within a few years old, I would consider it valid. In such sciences like biology, the textbook, and methods changes constantly. 20 years ago, we assumed dinosaurs such as allosaurs and Tyranosaurs walked using their tails as balance. This has now been proven completely false. Thats just my thoughts ...Good luck finding an ATB to breed with

[JuliusSqueezer]

stickleback is a fish, not a reptile. You jumped me for comparing mammals to reptiles and now you want to bring up fish?

Noone said that the migration was for breeding purposes...I just said they get moved around that way and kinda funny how none seem to be sprouting hair or legs from the lack of inbreeding because of this. LOL...Jeff. I have had to argue with a few people before that think inbreeding isn't harmful and I will forever argue that it is....but I have NEVER heard anyone with at least one tooth put his crack pipe down long enough to try and say that inbreeding is the only healthy way to breed and that NOT inbreeding is harmful...I don't think you are going insane...I think you might already be there. Books are great...but the reason they have new editions (like your 7th edition) is because "facts" seem to change as new studies and better data is collected. Or maybe you fell asleep reading a chapter while "The Deliverance" was on TV and your dreams mingled with your reading? Anyway...I had a professor tell our biology class (I guess chemestry wasn't his bag) that if you take away a hydrogen atom from H20 that you get a half a drop of water. I was really hoping he was going for the lame HO joke...but he wasn't. I did learn though fairly early on that college professors and Doctors are sometimes a bit whacked...and the worst part is...they write books.

[JuliusSqueezer]

Oh...and here is an example of what inbreeding does to snakes. Do a little research on Golden Lancehead vipers found only on the Brazilian island of Queimada Grande where these snakes populate an avg of 1 snake per square meter. It is very probable that we will live to see their extinction despite their thick current population...why? inbreeding. Fewer and fewer snakes are being found without both male and female sex organs and these messed up sexually frustrated snakes aren't breeding.

Also you say if inbreeding was so bad that all reptiles would be extinct? Well obviously they aren't nor do they all inbreed as exclusively as you think....but the fact remains...most species of reptiles that have ever inhabited this planet ARE extinct.

[Invictus]

You still haven't answered the question Jeff, and using fish as an example is not going to further your cause at all. Why is it suddenly becoming so important for breeders to sell unrelated pairs of snakes and lizards if it is in fact HARMFUL (and I'm still snickering over this) to outcross snakes?

[Oliverian]

Well obviously they aren't nor do they all inbreed as exclusively as you think....but the fact remains...most species of reptiles that have ever inhabited this planet ARE extinct.

Yes, but as a direct result from inbreeding? I don't think so. As for the origin of this thread, I actually do think you may have something going for you with the piebald spot. If it does prove genetic, that would be awesome for you. I personally don't understand your reluctance to inbreed for even one generation, but if thats how you feel, its fine by me.

-TammyR

[JuliusSqueezer]

Tammy....there may come a day when I start breeding back distant cousins looking for the gene again if I never find another one to work with. That's as inbred as I will ever be willing to commit to though. I would rather do the outcrossing first and then play craps with the possible hets if it's even indeed genetic rather than to have to go back and do damage control. But like I mentioned earlier....Corallus breeding projects are very slow. You can't fatten them up and breed them in 2 years...Yes she is a breedable adult...but any offspring will still take quite sometime to work up to breeding size so I have time to look. I'm 39 years old now...This can be my little project to keep me busy through my old age that is coming up LOL. Someone else will probably find one first and inbreed out a bunch of one eyed 3 tongued piebalds long before I prove anything anyway...but that's how it goes I suppose.

[Jeff_Favelle]

You still haven't answered the question Jeff,

What exactly IS your question Ken.

And the stickleback reference was for you guys to easily find the pre and post-zygotic articles that abound in the periodical section of ANY major university. Its THE case study that is used to teach 1st year students, as its the easiest to comprehend. I wasn't using fish as an analogy, I was using the FAMOUS case study so it would be easy for you guys to cross reference and try a little bit of higher learning.

Which clearly you aren't interested in, so I won't press it. I just tried to provide a way to quickly find the info I was relating to. You for some reason, thought I was making analogies about fish and reptiles. Unbeknownst to me why.........