# Southern Surinam Cobalts?



## Dendrobatid (May 6, 2010)

My thoughts are that I would probably recommend leaving the determination of sub-species up to the professional taxonomists. Unless you have some DNA evidence or collected them yourself I would not be trying to split up a species. If people want to breed what they think are specific locale tincts that is fine. But please keep in mind until they are officially designated as sub-species they are just Dendrobates tinctorius period. Again as long as people in the hobby realize that no Conservation Organizations are going to be knocking on the door of their Arks anytime soon asking for frogs for reintroduction programs. This is just my humble opinion and it is not in an effort to upset anyone.


----------



## Mantellaprince20 (Aug 25, 2004)

who is saying they are a subspecies? All he is saying is that they were collected due to their yellow side, which he calls a yellow side variant. Variant is just a genetic trait in a population. These are cobalt tincs with a yellow sided variation in their pattern, possibly unique for the local of collection.....


----------



## Dendrobatid (May 6, 2010)

"They are split up because they were caught in two different areas guys. They need to be seperated. Need to see them in real time to enjoy them. If we could get better data we would have more precise locality on them and if you have ever herped in your lifetime then you would know a different subspecies can be seperated by less than a mile. "

This was posted by a individual selling them.


----------



## Tony (Oct 13, 2008)

Who tried to designate them as a subspecies? And what exactly are you advocating with this post? Are you saying that since a tinc is a tinc we should start interbreeding all morphs? Or maybe just the ones that look similar? Maybe cross azureus, New River, and blue Sips since they are all blue? Souther Suriname, old line Suriname, French Guiana, and Brazilian Cobalts are all blue and yellow, do they go together? Maybe Alanis, Infer Alanis, and Oelemarie should be mixed up too? Or were you just posting inflammatory garbage about how hobbyist collections have no value to conservation to stroke your own ego as a (former?) zookeeper?


----------



## Mantellaprince20 (Aug 25, 2004)

I didn't see the seller originally post that portion. It isn't really any different than people keeping red bastimentos, orange bastimentos, etc as breeding separate. As far as I have heard, A pair of red basti's will throw almost every color of offspring, even blue. If you want to maintain the variant that they are offering, then yes, you should only breed from that collection point. A different morphs/subspecies can be as close as a few hundred yards from eachother, as long as there is some sort of barrier. I have been to costa rica, and in tortuguero just crossing a 15 foot wide canal yielded 2 very different populations of O. pumilio "blue jeans". Sizes, pattern, colors, etc were all different. Now if these came into the hobby, would one prefer to breed both populations without a problem, or would one prefer to separate these differing populations? 

If he did call them subspecies, then yes he is wrong for that, but to recommend breeding them as a local morph/variant is not wrong, but somewhat more responsible .

ed parker


----------



## Dendrobatid (May 6, 2010)

Tony, 
That was not my intention at all. People have the right to do what ever they want. I personally don't think that that would be inbreeding since they are the same species. That being said I certainly do not advocate hybridizing or selective trait breeding. I by no means am trying to stroke anything. There are a ton of people on here that know a ton more than I do about Darts. I just feel that certain individuals try to market new bloodlines to fatten their wallets. Personally I have issues with that.


----------



## Dendrobatid (May 6, 2010)

Ed P.
I couldn't agree more.


----------



## EricIvins (Jan 4, 2010)

Ummm.......Im confused.......

I posted the add, but made no reference to sub-species or anything of the like........

I have two variations, and I'm going to keep those variations seperate......Why?........Because I can.......Afterall, I should have Froglets by the end of summer........

Dude......If you really think I'm trying to fatten my wallet your sadly mistaken......I do this for a living, and if you think my wallets fat, your out of your noodle........Personally, I have issues with people putting words into my mouth......

Re-read the add......I'm still confused, but I do beleive your more confused than I'am.......Your posting about a reply made to the add.......


----------



## Dendrobatid (May 6, 2010)

Eric,
Thank you so much for the kind words and ascertaining my mental state. I'm so happy that you will be able to breed tinctorius that will surely be an amazing feat. 
The reason you may be confused, may be due to the fact that you didn't read the passage that I quoted. This may be due to the fact that I wasn't quoting you. You may want to make an appointment with a Maxillofacial surgeon to remove that foreign object from you mouth.

Thanks again,

Jim Giacobbe


----------



## EricIvins (Jan 4, 2010)

Dendrobatid said:


> Eric,
> Thank you so much for the kind words and ascertaining my mental state. I'm so happy that you will be able to breed tinctorius that will surely be an amazing feat.
> The reason you may be confused, may be due to the fact that you didn't read the passage that I quoted. This may be due to the fact that I wasn't quoting you. You may want to make an appointment with a Maxillofacial surgeon to remove that foreign object from you mouth.
> 
> ...


I read it a few times actually........You've posted it on two of my threads, even though what you stated has nothing to do with me.......

So to reiterate, I've said nothing of the sort about sub-species or what not......Instead, why don't you contact the person that did and discuss it with THEM.......Not me......This isn't my first picnic.......

I chose to seperate these Cobalts because of the differences......They may or may not be from different populations.......I was happy I got the general area they were collected in......If I would have asked for anything more, I would have received false information.......No one in their right mind will give up micro-localities, or else the population(s) will be gone within Months......

Anything else I'm doing wrong?......


----------



## Taron (Sep 23, 2009)

The guy is referring to my comment.....he thinks I am putting them in a different sub species. Even though a thread was opened up to discuss what these were. As for his knowledge he knows nothing because he had zero to do with the import. The frogs were originally sold as yellow head sips. We as in the dendroboard commmunity decided to call them southern cobalts because of the differences. Some are green some are yellow but they were all collected in sipilawini. When you are looking at 100 of them it is obvious your looking at two different localities. Eric and I have seen this first hand and it is not tough to see it. Last time I checked sub species were not recognized by cites and were only used by people for identification purposes. I mean why would we ever want to seperate these guys from the rest of the so called nominat cobalts. Heck everyone was talking about how patricias were just another cobalt and now look at everyone.

As for now they are cobalts like we have said, but the second I have one die it is getting chopped up for research so we can put them were they belong.


Its funny how you guys want to keep blue sips, new rivers, and azureus seperate even though there are less differences then these frogs.

Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk


----------



## Dendrobatid (May 6, 2010)

I have absolutely no problem with individuals making the personal decision to keep certain locales separate from other locales. What I'm saying is I don't think that just because you import frogs you are qualified to make those decisions based on some minor morphological differences. If you were qualified you would be classified as a extreme taxonomic splitter. If you actually read the post although some people did agree to call them what ever name you made up, there were quite a few that were opposed to it. So in that case I wouldn't say that this community agreed to anything. You need to wait for the actually scientific community to conduct research which includes certain empirical studies like DNA analysis among other parameters. About 15 years ago people in the scientific community were already working on reclassifying "Azureus" as just a morph of _tinctorius_. My point is that you cannot just start splitting species without have the scientific proof to back it up. You might want to try to say that I'm pro mixing locales to get others to support your ruse. But that is absolutely not the *TRUTH.* I feel that individuals have the right to do what ever they want in the privacy of their own homes. I just don't think it's right for you to encourage newer people in this hobby to think they are getting something different, when in fact they are not!


----------



## FrogOly (Oct 5, 2007)

Dendrobatid said:


> I just don't think it's right for you to encourage newer people in this hobby to think they are getting something different, when in fact they are not!


Do you have any data to support the claim the southern cobalts are the same as any other cobalt? To create an argument based on speculation and second hand information would be absurd. 

Would stating the questionable frogs as "March 2011 tinc imports that are claimed to be collected in the Southern Sipiliwini region for potentially breeding a semi-specific locale" be more appetizing to your sense of justice?


----------



## Dendrobatid (May 6, 2010)

The burden of scientific proof is not on me. I'm not the one claiming they are something else. So actually you should probably asking the individual that is claiming that for evidence to support their claim. Hearsay does not exactly fit into the realm of scientific taxonomic classification.


----------



## FrogOly (Oct 5, 2007)

Dendrobatid said:


> The burden of scientific proof is not on me. I'm not the one claiming they are something else. So actually you should probably asking the individual that is claiming that for evidence to support their claim. Hearsay does not exactly fit into the realm of scientific taxonomic classification.


But you are saying the southern Surinam cobalts are not different than any other cobalt, so what info do you have to make your claim? Do you know they came from some other area? Again the sellers are claiming a semi-specific locale which you have been disputing. What is the basis of YOUR dispute?


----------



## Dendrobatid (May 6, 2010)

My dispute is that the information of a couple of importers, does not science make. Show me some proof of where they came from. Once again I'm not saying they are different, they are. If you believe everything you hear, then I'm sure those importers might have some real estate to sell down in Florida. This is my point that you can't just claim things without proof. I'm not claiming anything, they are.


----------



## Tony (Oct 13, 2008)

Dendrobatid said:


> I'm not claiming anything, they are.


You are claiming that all locality data in the hobby is meaningless and that a tinc is a tinc, leading to the logical conclusion that all tincs should be interbred regardless of morph/locale. The simple fact is that the old line Cobalts came in with only "Suriname" as their point of origin, while these new ones have come in from the Sipalwini area of southern Suriname. How do you justify your insistence on mixing them when Cobalt type frogs are so widespread through the country and are fairly likely to be from distinct populations?


----------



## Dendrobatid (May 6, 2010)

Tony,
I'm not sure if you are reading my posts all the way through. I clearly state that I'm not advocating breeding different locales. My point is clear, I don't feel that we should make taxonomic classifications without going through the proper scientific method. What people do in the confines of their 4 walls is certainly none of my business.


----------



## Dendrobatid (May 6, 2010)

Tony,
Just to clarify what I meant by "they are". I didn't mean the frogs, I meant the people making the claims. I'm not disputing that different locales exist. I'm clearly encouraging people to review the facts, and not make decisions based on non-scientific methods. That is heart of my point.


----------



## zBrinks (Jul 16, 2006)

I have yet to see anyone claiming that they are different subspecies - what I saw was someone making a point about how there can be much variation in a species over a small area.


----------



## Dendrobatid (May 6, 2010)

"They are split up because they were caught in two different areas guys. They need to be seperated. Need to see them in real time to enjoy them. If we could get better data we would have more precise locality on them and if you have ever herped in your lifetime then you would know a different subspecies can be seperated by less than a mile. "


I feel that using the word separated would strongly suggest sub-species. Especially since the second time he uses it he says that a subspecies can be separated by less than a mile.

This is just my humble opinion. Once again what people do in their personal life is none of my business. I'm just surprised that people accept information with no real facts. I was just trying to clarify the above quoted comment that's all.


----------



## Taron (Sep 23, 2009)

Well like I said when one dies I will gladly take it to my old professor at the local university who deals in genetics. I am pretty sure he is qualified. Your theory is bogus because we know where these came from and that is why we don't want them mixed. So once we do know what they are then we don't have to worry about a bunch or crossbred frogs. However if they come back as cobalts then what's the harm. None! Because we waited, we kept them seperate, and we found out the truth. You can always mix them in later if they are the same, but you can't take the mix out once its been bred. 

Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk


----------



## Dendrobatid (May 6, 2010)

Once again you sound like a broken record. Let me say this again: I am not advocating mixing anything! Not sure why this keeps coming up. You can do whatever you want with your frogs. Breed them to pitbulls if you want. I again was clearly questioning your scientific proof, period! I'm done repeating myself over and over. If you have some scientific evidence I look forward along with everyone else to hear about it. 

Thanks so much for the posts.

Take care for now.

Jim Giacobbe


----------



## Tony (Oct 13, 2008)

Dendrobatid said:


> Once again you sound like a broken record. Let me say this again: I am not advocating mixing anything!


So you start a thread saying it is wrong to treat these as a separate population from old line Cobalts, but you are not advocating mixing them? What exactly is the point you are making? Nobody ever claimed these are a subspecies, and I'm sure they are not since no other _D. tinctorius_ population has been elevated to subspecies status. What purpose did you have in mind besides insulting a few sellers and stirring people up?


----------

