# What would you say this frog is?



## astrozombies (Jun 17, 2005)

OK, what would you guys say the frogs in these two links are? Cobalts? Patricias? Something else? The colors are true to what is shown. SKy blue or powder blue legs with a cream, almost white colored back.

http://www.dendroboard.com/coppermine/d ... =572&pos=2

http://www.dendroboard.com/coppermine/d ... =572&pos=3


----------



## Dane (Aug 19, 2004)

I would say Pats, because they both have roughly the same coloration, but they could still be just really washed out Cobalts.


----------



## cbreon (Apr 25, 2005)

based on the leg coloration my bet would be a patricia, but tinc variability can be sometimes deceiving. I think this is why it is so important to keep tinc morphs that are close in appearance housed seperately and consider your source before purchasing .


----------



## KeroKero (Jun 13, 2004)

Ehhhhhh they don't look like pats to me, the color in the legs isn't a nice baby blue, but more in line of a cobalt. My cobalts, while they don't have hearly as thick patterns on the back, have the same washed out coloration. It comes from supplimentation (or lack there of) in a lot of the cobalt morphs on how strong their yellows are (except for brazils and FGDs, which always seem to have strong yellows).


----------



## cbreon (Apr 25, 2005)

Corey, I'm beginning to think we disagree on just about everything :lol: . The cobalts I used to have maintained bright yellow backs into adulthood and their legs were a much darker blue. Although I didn't consider the fact that there are different cobalt morphs. Again, know your sources, know your morphs, problem avoided.


----------



## astrozombies (Jun 17, 2005)

Well I know my source, and i know they are cobalts. I just have never seen a pair this light in color before and they came from imported cobalts. I was just curious what everyone's thought was on them because like I said I have never seen a pair like this and the coloring except the leg reticulations almost points to patricia.


----------



## KeroKero (Jun 13, 2004)

cberon - if your tincs morphed out yellow, they will maintain it to adulthood. I've been talking with a breeder about this and basically it seems it might have very little to do with how much you suppliment their diet with after they morph - its how much they got as tadpoles (my work with tricolor has shown similar stuff, and this has been a big topic in the past that "coloring up" your animals to WC colors actually has to do with the tadpole diet, not the frog diet). If they morph out with strong color, they tend to keep it. If they morph out with next to no color due to lack of supplimentation during the tadpole stage, they tend to keep the washed out color. Here is a pick of one of my Surinam Cobalts from Matt Mirabello that shows this washed out coloration due to an unsupplimented tadpole diet:










You can see the same washed out coloration as the animals in question. There is no doubt there is a serious color difference between WC cobalts and patritias, patricias looking like washed out cobalts, but when you have that strong a blue inthe leg, and that washed out a yellow, its usually just a washed out Cobalt.


----------



## cbreon (Apr 25, 2005)

Interesting indeed, defintely looks reminiscent of a patricia but just a little off in the coloration.


----------



## KeroKero (Jun 13, 2004)

Yeah, does it? So now you have to think how unhelpful some of these morph guides are... not only are they showing locales and morphs not in the hobby (how can it be a frog not in the hobby?! come on people!) but you're comparing WC and CB animals... which may or may not have a vast difference in coloration. A good hobby guide would help out with this, and would hopefully include the differences between WC/CB supplimented/CB unsupplimented. Sadly one does not exsist  .... yet.


----------



## Guest (Feb 22, 2006)

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I was lead to believe, the Patricia that were discovered/imported in the late 90's had green/grey legs. This was the distingushing difference between the powderblue and Patricia. Pictures I saw looked nothing close to the blue on the cobalts ( note: I said *Pictures*).

Peace out,
Kenny


----------



## KeroKero (Jun 13, 2004)

Yup, that's why I mentioned the blue in the legs being the key in the ID.

Powder blues are white on top, but their legs are powdery blue (duh), blue grey, to straight grey. The patricias typically were more yellow (in the WCs) on top, and definately were powdery blue/GREEN rather than powdery blue/GREY of the powder blues.

Anything stronger than a powdery baby blue on the legs is an indicator of a washed out cobalt. This is not a light baby blue, but a strong cobalt blue, that can almost look black in some animals. If you describe it as "bright" rather than "powdery light" you aren't looking at a pat or powder blue. The original animals poctured have what I would call "bright" blue legs, they may be lighter at the joints (which occurs in some lines of cobalts) but the main part of the legs are definately bright blue. The cobalts shown have the lighter "bracelets" sometimes seen in cobalts which is why any of the lighter blue is on their legs. My cobalt barely has any bracelet on its wrists, and these are less distinct probibly because they are a different line of cobalts.


----------



## astrozombies (Jun 17, 2005)

The bracelets are actually one of the things i can see that identifies it for me. I knew they were cobalts as they came from Saurian so it's not as if they came from a questionable breeder, but rather one of the best in the business. I was just curious as to what some others thought, because at first glance they definately resemble patricias but the legs are a bit darker and have more reticulation. These do have alot less black on the backs than most cobalts which is one of the reasons i think they look good. thanks for all of the replies!


----------



## cbreon (Apr 25, 2005)

Just so were clear, I was not incinuating that you got these frogs from a questionable breeder. I was just trying to convey the importance of being able to trust your source and the frogs lineage, and the importance of keeping track of morphs, sources, and origin. Hopefully no offence was taken by my comments.


----------



## astrozombies (Jun 17, 2005)

Oh no, I knew that. I just wanted everyone to know that they were cobalts for sure and just to show how much variation we can have in morph of frogs. No offense taken!


----------

