Does inbreeding really hurt anything?

[pet_snake_78]

I know there are some fatal homozygous morphs so obviously the siblings would be a pure choice to breed together. What I am asking about is more as a general rule. It seems in school it was always stressed that inbreeding was bad but some of the lines in herpetoculture are said to have started from a very small number of founders and are still going. Does anyone have first hand experience with inbreeding issues (with snakes that is lol)

Also when snakes first landed on small islands, wouldn't they have came from just a few specimens to begin with? Seems places like the galapagos would have shown issues in their populations after hundreds or years if inbreeding were a big enough issue?

[franks]

Perpetuated inbreeding causes problems but if you are referring to getting "a pair" from the same clutch that does not necessarily have any negative consequences to those animals or their offspring. Personally, it would be cool if nobody breeder siblings but that just is not practical. (I actually recently ordered a 1.1 pair.) The problems we see are in lines that were never outcrossed.

And Mikoh- (since I know you will read this) I asked Nick about the question you posted regarding other carpet python lines. He said the other lines were outcrossed from the get go and that the problem is made worse by jets. For instance, the zebra line started with an animal that was sexes wrong and could not breed. (Obviously) it was sold and the first time it ever bred was to a completely unrelated Line.

[Mikoh4792]

Originally Posted by franks

And Mikoh- (since I know you will read this) I asked Nick about the question you posted regarding other carpet python lines. He said the other lines were outcrossed from the get go and that the problem is made worse by jets. For instance, the zebra line started with an animal that was sexes wrong and could not breed. (Obviously) it was sold and the first time it ever bred was to a completely unrelated Line.

You're a psychic! which lines are you talking about? Are you talking about the ivory line?

To the OP, inbreeding for a generation or so shouldn't cause problems in snakes. People do it all the time and that's what it means to line breed. Just make it a point not to breed anything with obvious problems/defects. Inbreeding happens a lot in the wild where a snake's range is not large and they end up breeding with related animals.

[shaunyboy]

its called line breeding mate

Carpet Pythons can be line bred right up to and past F5 with no issues

ive heard some boa's can have physical defects when line bred too far,born blind,or with one or no eyes

imo it all depends on the species


cheers shaun

[Will0W783]

In my opinion, yes, it does. You might not see any outward signs in one generation, but inbred snakes can have weaker immune systems, higher propensity for diseases like cancer and kinking, and subtle proportion abnormalities.

For example, inbred eyelash vipers tend to have larger eyes, under- or overbite, smaller heads, and tend to die young. I've seen some ball pythons with messed-up looking heads (weird snout shapes, eyes buggy, etc).

There are so many beautiful, natural variations in snakes- why intentionally do something that could decrease an animal's quality of life just to take a breeding shortcut or try to perpetuate a tiny pattern/color variation?

Just my $0.02, and I know it will not be a popular opinion, but I'm in it for the animals and their best interest.

[Aaron_S]

Originally Posted by Will0W783

In my opinion, yes, it does. You might not see any outward signs in one generation, but inbred snakes can have weaker immune systems, higher propensity for diseases like cancer and kinking, and subtle proportion abnormalities.

For example, inbred eyelash vipers tend to have larger eyes, under- or overbite, smaller heads, and tend to die young. I've seen some ball pythons with messed-up looking heads (weird snout shapes, eyes buggy, etc).

There are so many beautiful, natural variations in snakes- why intentionally do something that could decrease an animal's quality of life just to take a breeding shortcut or try to perpetuate a tiny pattern/color variation?

Just my $0.02, and I know it will not be a popular opinion, but I'm in it for the animals and their best interest.

Many ball python deformities have nothing to do with inbreeding. Bug eyes or weird shaped heads can be caused by incubation problems or just general abnormalities.

I find your opinion interesting when you say it's for the animals but yet you own and wish to breed many venomous species that which are wild caught purely to own captive bred specimens. If you were in it for the animals, why not just let them be in the wild and deal with what we've already got?

[Mikoh4792]

Originally Posted by Aaron_S

Many ball python deformities have nothing to do with inbreeding. Bug eyes or weird shaped heads can be caused by incubation problems or just general abnormalities.

I find your opinion interesting when you say it's for the animals but yet you own and wish to breed many venomous species that which are wild caught purely to own captive bred specimens. If you were in it for the animals, why not just let them be in the wild and deal with what we've already got?

Originally Posted by Will0W783

In my opinion, yes, it does. You might not see any outward signs in one generation, but inbred snakes can have weaker immune systems, higher propensity for diseases like cancer and kinking, and subtle proportion abnormalities.

For example, inbred eyelash vipers tend to have larger eyes, under- or overbite, smaller heads, and tend to die young. I've seen some ball pythons with messed-up looking heads (weird snout shapes, eyes buggy, etc).

There are so many beautiful, natural variations in snakes- why intentionally do something that could decrease an animal's quality of life just to take a breeding shortcut or try to perpetuate a tiny pattern/color variation?

Just my $0.02, and I know it will not be a popular opinion, but I'm in it for the animals and their best interest.

Would you guys agree that it really depends on the type of snake? For example dwarf island boas and some type of kingsnake(I forgot. I think it was mountain or scarlet kings) don't have very large ranges in the wild and are very isolated populations. Therefore they are for the most part or completely(in the case of some island boas) very inbred. Maybe there are snakes that have not been inbreeding as long in the wild and do not handle it well.

[Georgia]

Originally Posted by mikoh4792

would you guys agree that it really depends on the type of snake? For example dwarf island boas and some type of kingsnake(i forgot. I think it was mountain or scarlet kings) don't have very large ranges in the wild and are very isolated populations. Therefore they are for the most part or completely(in the case of some island boas) very inbred. Maybe there are snakes that have not been inbreeding as long in the wild and do not handle it well.

100% fact..

[Will0W783]

Aaron, yes many deformities have absolutely nothing to do with inbreeding. And, one or two generations probably doesn't hurt. But, why take the chance?

I do own wild-caught animals. The wild-caught vipers I work with are usually rarer species that would benefit from captive bred lines being established. People are going to want to own them, so solid healthy CBB lines take pressure off wild populations by decreasing the need for further importation and establishing populations to keep the species alive if habitat is lost. I do go for captive bred whenever I can however. So from a scientific research and preservation standpoint I do feel I'm in it for the animals.

Many morphs and line-bred pythons/boas do great and have no problems. I just personally feel that it's best to avoid inbreeding, even if it takes longer to establish a given trait.

[formica]

Natural Selection/Evolution, requires inbreeding, without it, there is no 'survial of the fittest' as genes will not come to dominate a species without inbreeding.

problems arise when bad genes are inbred, in the wild bad genes would mean early death in many cases, a reduced chance of passing on genes to a new generation, so even tho it results in some death of individuals, over all in the wild it actually helps a species become stronger, by helping to remove bad genes and reinforcing good ones

in captivity its a different story, those bad genes may not lead the animal to an early death, it may even breed, in which case those bad genes (leading to deformation, disorders etc), if they exist, will be passed on and further weaken the species overall


most of the time, when people talk about inbreeding in this sense, they tend to react on a moral level, which is not helpful in tis case imo

[StudentoReptile]

Ahh...another discussion on the ethics of captive breeding.

I think I'll just watch this one.

[smy_749]

Originally Posted by pet_snake_78

I know there are some fatal homozygous morphs so obviously the siblings would be a pure choice to breed together. What I am asking about is more as a general rule. It seems in school it was always stressed that inbreeding was bad (This is not true, it can be both beneficial or detrimental, depending on the gene as formica pointed out, it is an essential piece of the puzzle in evolution / survival of the fittest ) but some of the lines in herpetoculture are said to have started from a very small number of founders and are still going.(This is true, but many of these lines have issues, or were later crossed with new wild caught blood.) Does anyone have first hand experience with inbreeding issues (with snakes that is lol)

Also when snakes first landed on small islands, wouldn't they have came from just a few specimens to begin with? Seems places like the galapagos would have shown issues in their populations after hundreds or years if inbreeding were a big enough issue?

Formica hit the nail on the head. People will argue about the scaleless morph, the blind more, the brainless morph, whatever the hell morph, because they think (I don't know for sure) that these morphs have negative physical effects, and some of them do (jags in carpets for example), but nobody talks about line breeding that resulted in better eyesight, better muscle tone, better camoflauge, etc...Why's that? Because we are not nature, we are not predators, we don't know whats good for the species, and even if we did, we probably wouldn't breed it out unless it was marketable ($$$$$).

My point is that line breeding can go either way, if you know what your doing. I'm not expert on dog breeds to say the least, but look at how my specialized breeds for specialized tasks we've managed to come up with by picking out the fastest/largest/strongest/best sense of smell/ blah blah blah.

[shaunyboy]

Originally Posted by Mikoh4792

Would you guys agree that it really depends on the type of snake? For example dwarf island boas and some type of kingsnake(I forgot. I think it was mountain or scarlet kings) don't have very large ranges in the wild and are very isolated populations. Therefore they are for the most part or completely(in the case of some island boas) very inbred. Maybe there are snakes that have not been inbreeding as long in the wild and do not handle it well.

i agree completely mate.....


its all depends on which species

there are islands with limited bloodlines and as far as i know,the island populations don't have a high rate of deformed snakes


cheers shaun


cheers shaun

[Aaron_S]

Originally Posted by Mikoh4792

Would you guys agree that it really depends on the type of snake? For example dwarf island boas and some type of kingsnake(I forgot. I think it was mountain or scarlet kings) don't have very large ranges in the wild and are very isolated populations. Therefore they are for the most part or completely(in the case of some island boas) very inbred. Maybe there are snakes that have not been inbreeding as long in the wild and do not handle it well.

I am speaking from a standpoint of captivity. Comparing the wild vs captivity is comparing apples to oranges. Not the same two topics so I refrain from that.

[Aaron_S]

Originally Posted by Will0W783

Aaron, yes many deformities have absolutely nothing to do with inbreeding. And, one or two generations probably doesn't hurt. But, why take the chance?

I do own wild-caught animals. The wild-caught vipers I work with are usually rarer species that would benefit from captive bred lines being established. People are going to want to own them, so solid healthy CBB lines take pressure off wild populations by decreasing the need for further importation and establishing populations to keep the species alive if habitat is lost. I do go for captive bred whenever I can however. So from a scientific research and preservation standpoint I do feel I'm in it for the animals.

Many morphs and line-bred pythons/boas do great and have no problems. I just personally feel that it's best to avoid inbreeding, even if it takes longer to establish a given trait.

At one point ball pythons were a difficult species to keep, breed and people wanted them. The original keepers who accomplished this goal of reproducing it in captivity probably had the same idea of "decreasing wild populations" and "further importation". It didn't really help did it?

My point is, it's still not really for the animals because you're doing it for "scientific" purposes.

We all keep these animals for selfish reasons is my point. It's never really "for the animals".