# Is anyone purposefully trying to crossbreed morphs



## Quaz

I'm just curious. I want to see if anyone is purposefully trying to cross morphs of tinctorious or others like auratus or galacts or any.

I'm interested to see what a citronella tinc. and an azureus cross would produce.

If not has anyone seen accedental crosses?


----------



## evolvstll

read:

http://www.dendroboard.com/phpBB2/viewt ... ght=hybrid


----------



## Quaz

OK, I think hybrids are cool. Does anyone have any pictures of a neat looking hybrid? 

Really... what does it really matter if people produce new/ different looking frogs? 

Are they ever going to be reintroduced into the wild? probably not. If so, the zoos and conservationis can supply them. 

Are they going to make keeping dart frogs any less enjoyable for the keeper? No... 

Will it introduce new interesting color morphs to an already vast and amazing diversity of species? Yes 

I've read and understand all the views stated so far and this is how I feel. So bring on the hybrids. I want my azureus to glow in the dark.


----------



## jschroeder

At my work we have a really beautiful cross of a powder blue tinc with a costa rican auratus, I can try to get a photo of them if you would like to see. These were not crossed on purpose and will never leave the facility, and are used as education animals for kids to see up close. I do not personally condone purposefully producing hybrids for profit (wow, that's a lot of p's  ), but I also don't think that vilifying everyone that even utters the word hybrid is right either. I personally would rather people be more open about these sort of things, rather than force people that might want to do these "horrible things" into hiding, where it's eaiser for damage to the hobby to occur. 

Hopefully Quaz, you won't get completely flamed for bringing this up. It's time for people to realize that there is more than one way for people to enjoy this hobby, and even if I don't agree with it, all we can do is give our opinions (which evolvstll provided a link for). 

Peace

Justin


----------



## IN2DEEP

*Hope I don't get blacklisted for this.*

I too would like to see pictures of some hybrid frogs. Just for the possible combinations. I wouldn't try to do it on purpose. I'm just someone who wants to enjoy my animals and who has no plans of ever selling them or their offspring. I'm thankful that there are breeders providing "pure bloods" that I can obtain. I have no ambition to "farm" frogs the way they do. I'm more interested in their personalities/behavior. I see pictures of frog rooms containing many small tanks with one pair in each and that's not what I want. I've been looking at my new tank that is 32"Wx22"Dx32"T (which is way to small IMO) and trying to decide which species do I really want 8 brothers and sisters hopping around in. I would like to have a color variation (other than plants) in my setup. My main reason for not making a tank that is 7'Wx3'Dx4'H is that I don't want to look at the same frog everywhere I look. So if anyone has pictures of accidental hybrids, please do share. If you got pictures of the ill effects of hybrids, please show them also. After all, knowing the consiquences deters "criminal" behavior.


----------



## GSXR_MURRHEE

Here's a quick one. Leuc x azureus hybrid (female azureus, male leuc)










I think I have a few more that I've found around the net saved on my computer. I'll put them up tomorrow.

Sean


----------



## Nuggular

The reason hybrids are looked down upon so heavily in the hobby is one really good reason. We dont want hybrids entering the trade and buy them without realizing they are hybrids. Therefore creating an unclean bloodline and possibly getting further into the community if bred with another frog of the species it was supposed to be. Some hybrids look alot like a species/morph already out there. So why throw even more confusion into the hobby. 

So basically, do what you want, but keep them in your house and dont bring them around to shows to try and sell off. Keep them to yourself and they will stay out of the hobby. I would be super pissed if I bought a hybrid instead of the actual frog I was trying to aquire. 

So be careful, this is a touchy road you are going down.


----------



## Quaz

That's awesome. If it doesn't have any blue and if it could breed true to that color and pattern it could be called a reticulated luec.

Man I can feel the heat comin :shock: 

But seriously, that is a sweet looking frog


----------



## xfrogx

First of all think about the vast majority of Frogs in our hobby. If we were to start mixing them it would honestly be chaos, another problem is ATLEAST HALF of the people that have frogs HAVE NO IDEA WHAT LINE THEY ARE! So throwing hybrids into the mix I think would ultimatly RUIN this awesome hobby, I hate it and think its stupid for the above reasons. My 2 cents.


----------



## Nuggular

well put xfrogx


----------



## frogman824

I'd have to agree with Ramsey and Nuggular, do what you want but NEVER sell them off even if it is stated what kind of hybrid they are. Take a look at all of the sponsors here on DB, none of them sell hybrid frogs. Chances are pretty good that if any of them did, they would go out of business because people would lose all respect and not want any of them in their collection, as well as not wanting to give them the business.


----------



## xfrogx

frogman824 said:


> I'd have to agree with Ramsey and Nuggular, do what you want but NEVER sell them off even if it is stated what kind of hybrid they are. Take a look at all of the sponsors here on DB, none of them sell hybrid frogs. Chances are pretty good that if any of them did, they would go out of business because people would lose all respect and not want any of them in their collection, as well as not wanting to give them the business.


I dont know if they would loose respect persay, but would go out of business from the fact that you would be so dang confused on where they came from or even what there parents were, like I said it would be a total mess.


----------



## Anoleo2

xfrogx said:


> First of all think about the vast majority of Frogs in our hobby. If we were to start mixing them it would honestly be chaos, another problem is ATLEAST HALF of the people that have frogs HAVE NO IDEA WHAT LINE THEY ARE! So throwing hybrids into the mix I think would ultimatly RUIN this awesome hobby, I hate it and think its stupid for the above reasons. My 2 cents.


I agree. I just don't like mixing. 

And also, Before we go making new frogs, we should try and help the old ones.


----------



## Quaz

there will always be the purest, the conservist, the fanatic, and the public. These animals to most people are nothing more than pets. When I ask them what kind of frog would you like to have they'll say. "a yellow one" or "red one" or "something that just looks really cool"

Yes we do have that with all of the natural morphs but really, I still don't see a valid argumenitive reason not to hybrid. Interbreeding is probably more pervasive in the hobby now and probably more problematic too.

If you think hybridization will make warped freakshow frogs, it might make a few. I don't think it'll get to be like fancy goldfish or parrott fish.

If you think it'll weaken the gene pool. Doubtfull, it'll most likely make it stronger by the introduction of new traits. 

If you think it'll have an impact on conservation of wild frogs. There will still be pure bloods out there that can be reintroduced. But if the habbitat is distroyed I don't know of many conservationists that would release a non native species to a different part of the jungle.

and for who ever said that hybrids are ugly, I'd pay good money for that frog pictured above.


----------



## Anoleo2

Quaz said:


> I'd pay good money for that frog pictured above.


I think that's one of the problems. Some idiot will be overcome with greed and start selling hybrids, and thus getting them into the hobby. 

Do what you want I guess...


----------



## xfrogx

Quaz said:


> there will always be the purest, the conservist, the fanatic, and the public. These animals to most people are nothing more than pets. When I ask them what kind of frog would you like to have they'll say. "a yellow one" or "red one" or "something that just looks really cool"
> 
> Yes we do have that with all of the natural morphs but really, I still don't see a valid argumenitive reason not to hybrid. Interbreeding is probably more pervasive in the hobby now and probably more problematic too.
> 
> If you think hybridization will make warped freakshow frogs, it might make a few. I don't think it'll get to be like fancy goldfish or parrott fish.
> 
> If you think it'll weaken the gene pool. Doubtfull, it'll most likely make it stronger by the introduction of new traits.
> 
> If you think it'll have an impact on conservation of wild frogs. There will still be pure bloods out there that can be reintroduced. But if the habbitat is distroyed I don't know of many conservationists that would release a non native species to a different part of the jungle.
> 
> and for who ever said that hybrids are ugly, I'd pay good money for that frog pictured above.



Dont count on there being new bloodlines to refresh the ones we have, in the next ten years it wouldnt surprise me if some of our captive bred frogs are exstinced in the wild. I Think the point I made above is one of the best arguments there is personally. It would DEFINATLY WEAKEN the gene pool! I dont see how it couldnt! The statement about interbreeding is a little off aswell, Frogs interbreed in the wild too, and I know ALOT of people and breeders (main suppliers infact) that use different generation frogs from different parents so there is always a good run of blood going.


----------



## Quaz

Ok, let me clarify. I never mentioned getting new bloodlines from the wild.

And cross breeding would "alter" the natural gene pool but it wouldn't weaken it.

Just because breeders inbreed their stock doesn't mean it's a good idea. Even if nobody mixes species you'd still see undesirable traits, bone and organ disorders, albinism, and other disorders.

If I go to a show and pick up two frogs from a vender they'll most likely be related. Then if I give or sell a pair of their offspring to someone inwhich they will breed. That will weaken the gene pool.

That's why in dogs muts can be much better, healthier animals that their purebred cousins.


----------



## pl259

Raising and breeding PDFs is a lot different then say Beardies or snakes. And in general, so are the people involved. Due to the global issues surrounding wild PDF populations, and other reasons, the vast majority of these people, my self included, have a very strong slant toward preservation and conservation of the various PDFs. This is very different then say your average beardie breeder, looking to create that awesome new beardie morph/phase.

While I'm sure there are persons out there producing PDF hybrids, I doubt that the hybrids nor the people producing them, will ever be accepted by this mostly conservative community. There's no money to be made, no fame to be gained, and a lot of support and respect to be lost.


----------



## MJ

> That's why in dogs muts can be much better, healthier animals that their purebred cousins



Dog's are not being wiped out at a phenominal rate like amphibians..


----------



## Mywebbedtoes

*Re: Hope I don't get blacklisted for this.*



IN2DEEP said:


> My main reason for not making a tank that is 7'Wx3'Dx4'H is that I don't want to look at the same frog everywhere I look. So if anyone has pictures of accidental hybrids, please do share.


This can be resolved by having a group of thumbs in with larger terrestial frogs. There are still some agression concerns, but cross breeding would not be an issue. But in a tank that big, agression should not be a huge risk. 



> Dog's are not being wiped out at a phenominal rate like amphibians..


Exactly, thank you MJ


----------



## Jayson745

I personally dont see the point of hybrids with dartfrogs. There are so many species available to us, in so many different colors, you should be able to find something you like.

Its also to easy to get mystery animals when you go down that road. Take a hybrid and breed it back to one of the parents, then that animal looks alot like the parent(possibly exact), but has a tanted bloodline.

If there was a way to painlessly sterilize baby hybrid frogs, I would have absolutely no problem with it. As far as I know there isn't, so one person not being responsible with a hybrid could cause problems for years, to people hes never even met.


----------



## Quaz

> Dog's are not being wiped out at a phenominal rate like amphibians..


 Oh good, now I don't have to keep up my german shepherd conservation project because there must be plenty of wild ones in Germany

I fail to see how cross breeding poison dart frog morphs will help or hinder the distruction of the rainforest.



> This can be resolved by having a group of thumbs in with larger terrestial frogs. There are still some agression concerns, but cross breeding would not be an issue. But in a tank that big, agression should not be a huge risk.


If i'm not mistaken auratus and pumilio can be found in the same areas and there are no apparent crosses




> Its also to easy to get mystery animals when you go down that road. Take a hybrid and breed it back to one of the parents, then that animal looks alot like the parent(possibly exact), but has a tanted bloodline.


I do see how this is a valid concern. I know I wouldn't be too happy if I bought a pair of frogs and was never told of a differing morph parent in the bloodline and I expected to raise true offspring. I think this concern is valid but still not that big a deal. 

I'm open to logical debate. I'm willing to have my opinion turned if someone can present to me a logical reason why crossing morphs will harm (threaten the life) of the species, the population, the environment, the hobby, or mankind in general.


----------



## jschroeder

Just because you, I, or anyone else doesn't see the point in a hybrid dart doesn't mean that somebody might. I agree with all the arguements against hybrids except for the concern that thses frogs will be leaked back into the hobby unknowingly. If you are someone that values the genetic integrity of your animals, you are more than likely going to get your animals from somebody reputable in the hobby that can tell you the history of the animals. I know the people that I buy from and know their sources. I really don't loose sleep at night worring about a hybrid sneaking into my collection. With the way this hobby is structured, I don't think we will ever see a time when every breeder is forced to produce hybrids to stay in business because there will never be a large demand for them. Responsible aquisition of your animals is more important than worring about a handful of people who want/have hybrid darts.

Justin


----------



## SeaDuck

When you contemplate the breeding of hybrids some long term ethical questions need to be resolved first. 

What happens to the offspring that are created? They cannot be ethically sold or given away because there is no control of what happens to them after they leave your care. The fact that they are hybrid could easily be lost when they change hands once or twice. Remember many people make promises that are not kept and people bounce hobbies and exchange pets. 
What happens when you bore of them or for any other reason can no longer keep them? Life changes cannot be predicted and ultimately if you create them you are responsible for them and to the hobby that they do not cause harm.

Cheers, Robert


----------



## GSXR_MURRHEE

Quaz- I tried to look up some of the links I had on hybrids, naturally they don't work anymore lol. If you're really that interested in seeing them you can still find a few sites on the net that will have pics, they just won't be in English. 
Not to sound like I agree with the whole hybrid idea (sorry I just don't), I found a couple more pics for you I was gonna post but they were copyrighted and all, so I'll just say...look up tinctorius amatopo and tinctorius Agreja. According to a couple of the German forums I was reading in, those two are supposedly tinc hybrids in Europe. They'll give you some leads to others too.

Sean


----------



## rmelancon

With regards to inbreeding and the "degradation" of genectic diversity and or health of the animals: Dart frogs should not be compared to dogs, humans, wolves etc. With dart frogs it is in their natural history to inbreed. Many population have small ranges and within this range the individuals may have an even smaller range. This is how they have evolved, it is in their genetic code to "support" inbreeding.

As far as hybrids, if you could guarantee that you can track every hybrid produced throughout it's "life" in the hobby and track every offspring of said hybrid and could guarantee that it or any of it's offspring never get confused for a pure bloodline, then go for it. But obviously this is impossible. So if we allow or "accept" hybribs in the hobby it is only a matter of time before the statement "an azureus is an azureus is an azureus" is no longer true, because your azureus that looks identical to my azureus could breed and produce a frog that looks like a leucomelas. Then that "leuc" is bred to another pure leucomelas and they start throwing offspring some of which look like new rivers. At that point I think the hobby loses.


----------



## Nuggular

Well said rmelancon


----------



## Mywebbedtoes

Quaz said:


> This can be resolved by having a group of thumbs in with larger terrestial frogs. There are still some agression concerns, but cross breeding would not be an issue. But in a tank that big, agression should not be a huge risk.
> 
> 
> 
> If i'm not mistaken auratus and pumilio can be found in the same areas and there are no apparent crosses
Click to expand...

If you read what I actually wrote you would see that's exactly what I said. A pumilio will not breed with a tinc or auratus. That was my point for people who want more than one animal in a large tank.




> I'm open to logical debate. I'm willing to have my opinion turned if someone can present to me a logical reason why crossing morphs will harm (threaten the life) of the species, the population, the environment, the hobby, or mankind in general.


You have had lots and lots of logical debate, you have obviously just made up your mind.


----------



## sbreland

IMO, here's the major concern. Lets say you decide to cross a few frogs of your own and keep them for yourself... Who does that hurt? Nobody. The problem comes in when people cross a couple of frogs and then try to pass them off at shows or in distribution as a new morph, not a hybrid. They lie to make a profit off of their hybrids and so lots of frogs eventually get into the hobby as what people think is a new breed but sometime later when it's too late everyone finds out it's a cross. It just wrecks the integrity of the hobby. Not saying you would do this, but there are some that would and have. I know there are frogs in the hobby right now that people think are actually not real morphs in the wild (mostly tincs I think, but can't remember), but were produced as hybrids and distributed into the hobby as new morphs. In the end, if you want to do it please just keep them in your own collection and don't encourage anyone else to do it... you might be encouraging the next person that might try to pass a hybrid off as a new morph.


----------



## Nuggular

You hit it right on the nose sbreland. That is why everyone is against it. And thats why it is so looked down upon. We are trying to discourage it if at all possible.


----------



## Rain_Frog

*sigh, I hate to be redundant, but here goes:

Like most said, they're your frogs. 

As long as people preserve the morphs already in the hobby and keep track of where they get animals, hybrids and morph crosses shouldn't be an issue. This area needs room for improvement. 

However, hybrid animals are more prone to cancers and behavioral issues.

There are no guarantees the "morphs" we have are true morphs or crosses. It gets worse when trying to decipher mantella taxonomy. You just have to make a leap of faith when it comes to breeding.

But I can't see why anybody would cross morphs or species right now when the plight of many is jeopardized by deforestation.


----------



## Quaz

Ok... ok... I'm in agreement about the hybrid getting into the hobby as a pure and mucking stuff up for other keepers who thought they had a pure frog. That would probably make me mad. It'd be like buying a Toyota with a Ford engine.

The way it is now each morph and species has it's own clout and prestige and I gues that would all be taken away if there were a bunch of look-a-likes and semi-species.

It would also make naming them really complicated too.

As far as what hybrids have to do with the rainforest I still can't make the connection.


----------



## Nuggular

> As far as what hybrids have to do with the rainforest I still can't make the connection.


We are here to preserve what's out there. Not change and munipulate it. That's were hybrids have plenty to do with the rainforest. It's all a part of the conservation effort.


----------



## GSXR_MURRHEE

*sbreland wrote*


> The problem comes in when people cross a couple of frogs and then try to pass them off at shows or in distribution as a new morph, not a hybrid. They lie to make a profit off of their hybrids and so lots of frogs eventually get into the hobby as what people think is a new breed but sometime later when it's too late everyone finds out it's a cross. It just wrecks the integrity of the hobby


If I remember right, thats what happened with the Agreja's in Europe. A Dutch breeder created a hybrid, then lied and tried to say it was a newly discovered morph from the wild. People didn't find out what he had done until it was too late.


----------



## Quaz

> We are here to preserve what's out there. Not change and munipulate it. That's were hybrids have plenty to do with the rainforest. It's all a part of the conservation effort.


So you want to preserve the animals that now live in your frogroom?

So if I take an endangered spotted turtle from a swamp in Maryland it's helping to conserve the east cost wetlands as long as I don't crossbreed the spotted turtle?

I mean, I can kind of see where you're coming from.
You want to preserve the rainforest. You want to preserve the natural strains of dart frog. The frogs come from the rainforest. i got all that but if the forest is wiped out it'll have nothing to do with the frogs you have in an aquarium and if all the dart frogs become tainted with other strains it really won't have an effect on the forest.

Maybe, it's that you want to keep a pure representative of what one day could be an extinct species in the wild. But not crossbreeding won't actually save the rainforest. hmmm...

Maybe I'm just too naive to understand your complex thinking.


----------



## Mywebbedtoes

I think he means the later, that it will preserve a species from the forest if the forests and wild species are wiped out, not that by keeping frogs we are actually saving the rain forest (unless you by from those using proceeds to do so).


----------



## Jungle_John

i do not like to see frogs crossed so i will not do so. however if you do want to see them go buy jewls of the rainforest. they have many pictures of hybrids for you.


----------



## bsank

Quaz,
I can't see there being a time when captive dart frogs will be "reintroduced" to the rain forest as a method of conservation and a way to save the dart frog in the wild. If you get by the issue of taking a frog that has potentially lost its defense/coping mechanisms against predators and micro-organsims, there has to be forest available in their original range to reintroduce them to.
Also, as mentioned before, the many varieties of colors and patterns that appear in the many species is already present. There is no need to cross the frogs with unique genetic traits or frogs of different species to try and create a new and more spectacular morph than the standard animal, as you might find happening with other pet hobbies.
Ultimately, it seems like those who stick with the hobby are more conservative and like minded than those who are in and out, which their presence in turn influences newer hobbiests.

BTW...
Is it just me or does anybody else cringe at the thought of non Central/South American plants in your vivarium? For me it has spread to my Iberian cork bark background. I think I'm just getting anal...


----------



## Ed

bsank said:


> Quaz,
> I can't see there being a time when captive dart frogs will be "reintroduced" to the rain forest as a method of conservation and a way to save the dart frog in the wild. If you get by the issue of taking a frog that has potentially lost its defense/coping mechanisms against predators and micro-organsims, there has to be forest available in their original range to reintroduce them to..


While very very unlikely it is not out of the realm of possibilities. As for the toxin issue, this could be dealt with by fencing in sections of the habitat to exclude predators and keep the frogs from roaming until they reestablish toxin profiles similar to wild frogs or alternatively, the enclosures could have mesh large enough to allow metamorphs to emigrate from the enclosure but maintain the adults... 

Ed


----------



## The_Greg

I am a noob.. but... here is my take on things...

Say the rainforest dies. completely. We will have little 10, 20, 70 gallon representations of what it was like (seeing as we plant the vivs to look like the rainforest, too) We can use that to show future generations this precious, awesome, important part of earth.


If we start creating hybrids, not only will it get messy and upset the pureists, but it has the potential to make the hobby into nothing but mainly mutt frogs and we wouldnt have anything to show future generations. We wouldnt have a preserved model of that part of the rainforest. With non-hybrid frogs, we can point and say "this is what it was like! these little beautiful creatures lived in the rainforest!" It would just be lame to take your children to a zoo and point and instead say "look, this is kinda, sort of... not really what it was like... .... ..."

i dont know if i illustrated my point well, but... take it for what its worth. 

Plus, theoretically, if the rainforest makes a comeback we could somehow, maybe reintroduce captive frogs to the wild and sort of stock the forests i suppose...?


----------



## OneTwentySix

I think one thing we need to consider is the fact that the hobby can only support so many species/morphs of frogs dependant on the number of people in the hobby and the number of variants they are able to keep. We've lost a huge variety of frogs, morphs, and locales simply because they dropped out of popularity. If suddenly leucozureus became popular, not only do we have all the problems with genetic integrity and other issues, but the hybrid is going to be taking up spaces that could be occupied by something else. We're having a hard enough time establishing some of the new morphs, species, and locales from the Peruvian imports while maintaining what we already have; we don't need artificial species and morphs.

Besides which, there is such a HUGE variety of dendrobatids already in the hobby that anyone can find something to suit them. Instead of creating a new frog, why not appreciate what we already have?


----------



## sbreland

The_Greg said:


> Say the rainforest dies. completely. We will have little 10, 20, 70 gallon representations of what it was like...


Well, let's hope this doesn't happen or saving frogs will be the least of our worries. Human life will not survive if something like that happened, and frogs would not be the most important thing to worry about then...


----------



## gm_kevin

Quaz said:


> So you want to preserve the animals that now live in your frogroom?
> 
> So if I take an endangered spotted turtle from a swamp in Maryland it's helping to conserve the east cost wetlands as long as I don't crossbreed the spotted turtle?
> 
> I mean, I can kind of see where you're coming from.
> You want to preserve the rainforest. You want to preserve the natural strains of dart frog. The frogs come from the rainforest. i got all that but if the forest is wiped out it'll have nothing to do with the frogs you have in an aquarium and if all the dart frogs become tainted with other strains it really won't have an effect on the forest.
> 
> Maybe, it's that you want to keep a pure representative of what one day could be an extinct species in the wild. But not crossbreeding won't actually save the rainforest. hmmm...
> 
> Maybe I'm just too naive to understand your complex thinking.


Think about all the extinct species in the world. Thousands of animals, that are gone and will never return. We've taken an interest in these frogs, which happen to be endangered, and are taking it upon ourselves to keep a true-to-the-wild population stable and growing. What if someone had done that with say, dodo birds? We wouldn't be reading about them, we'd be going to the zoo and seeing them, alive. Maybe even seeing them reintroduced to the wild and stronger than ever. But if that person had accidentally crossbred their dodo birds with some other bird, the future populations would no longer truly be dodo birds, and the dodo bird population would be extinct. It's a far fetched example, but you get the idea. It's a conservation effort to keep these rainforest gems in their natural state, not cross breeding different species from thousands of miles apart. A few people start creating hybrids, playing god (which is what you're doing), and people start questioning authenticity, creating a huge setback. There are so many color variations of dendrobates, if they're not colorful enough maybe you should try the reef hobby or something.


----------



## bluedart

I think it's important, firstly, to examine why we are in the hobby we are in. One of the main reasons is that we are dealing with animals that are really nice to look at--we like pretty things. Another huge reason that we do what we do is the vivarium--we like to create enclosures as "natural" as possible (ignore the plant locality... at least they're usually live plants). We are trying to reproduce a little part of the rain forest within the confines of a glass box. How cool is it that nature, in all her own doing, has created these striking creatures? There are darts of almost every color on the spectrum, several general size categories, etc--they're diverse as it. It's easy to conclude that the top two reasons that people keep dart frogs are: they're pretty and we can make a fun project by recreating the rain forest in a glass box in our homes. 

However, there is only so much room for glass boxes and people are craving for more--more colors, more sizes, more species. Those common frogs slowly fall to the side. No, we're not keeping these frogs with the plans of tossing them back into the wild 50 years down the road. We keep these frogs because their NATURAL colors and their NATURAL behaviors are so damned interesting! We aren't preserving the rain forest, we're preserving the nature of these animals! And, unfortunately, the collector mindset of many people is encouraging the "common is bad, rare is good" mentality and we're adding more species and morphs yearly. This is fine. However, consider E. tricolor. We had many morphs and bloodlines of these frogs around in the states following the first few shipments; years later, as they began rising in popularity again, we have found that a vat majority of these bloodlines has simply disappeared. This is a concern because THIS pattern--the slow, trickling disappearance of bloodlines with the fall of popularity--is going to be what weakens the gene pools. There won't be 3 lines from which you can cross, there will be one. 

My battery is about to die, but I want to make one more point about hybridization: species cannot interbreed and produce viable offspring. All of these species hybrids are going to be sterile. However, morph hybrids can produce like rabbits. This creates problems because each individual morph represents a little alcove in nature--consider the vast array of tinctorius. It took nature thousands--millions--of years to reach that point. It's the mixture of these bloodlines that will produce problems down the road; this hobby has, as a rule, feigned away from the "Designer" mentality of leopard geckos, ball pythons, and many other mainstream reptiles. We're a hobby that is more focused on preserving what we have--the various lines, morphs, and species that have accrued in the hobby over the last few decades--than we are of CREATING. We get our creativity out in the tank, and we get our pleasure out of watching what we create blossom and grow as naturally as it can. 

This isn't so much an argument saying HYBRIDIZATION IS A SIN as it is a means of relaying why we don't approve of it. We've only got so many competent individuals who can keep these frogs within the hobby. There are dozens of species around as is, and more are coming in--this is to satisfy those insatiable individuals who want something new. And, above all, we--as a hobby--seek to improve the hobby. Whether we do that by producing offspring from rarer frogs to spread the blood, by creating new methods of rearing tadpoles, or by keeping a few tanks of less desirable frogs to keep the bloodline around, we do it for the hobby as a whole. I know from experience how much money can go down the drain on an "experiment." Hybridization does nothing to further the hobby and it represents nothing natural. They're your frogs, but this is our hobby. Have at it.


----------



## q

Please do not. 

There over 170 species of dart frogs. This represents only what we know of. Many areas of the rain forest are far remote areas sure to contain some of the worlds most beautiful and perhaps rare specimens.

It is enough that even rain forest areas are being compromised and reducing the population of some of the worlds most fascinating animals, including some dart (and other) spectacular frogs.

Cross breeding, produces some interesting outcomes I'm sure. But compromises all that nature itself has worked very hard to produce. 

We are only priviledged to have this wonderful and unique opportunity to spy into another world that without captive breeding (and clean, pure captive breeding), none of us would even have.

I say, let this be enough. Let us show appreciation for this sacred opportunity by embracing it with the utmost respect. This is true grattitude and recognition of the "value" of the opportunity given us.

q.


----------



## q

Please do not. 

There over 170 species of dart frogs. This represents only those species that we know of. Many areas of the rain forest are far remote areas sure to contain some of the worlds most beautiful and perhaps rare specimens.

It is enough that even rain forest areas are being compromised and reducing the population of some of the worlds most fascinating animals, including some dart (and other) spectacular frogs.

Cross breeding, produces some interesting outcomes I'm sure. But compromises all that nature itself has worked very hard to produce, and is constantly fighting to keep. 

We are only priviledged to have this wonderful and unique opportunity to spy into another world that without captive breeding (and clean, pure captive breeding), none of us would even have.

I say, let this be enough. Let us show appreciation for this sacred opportunity by embracing it with the utmost respect. This is true grattitude and recognition of the "value" of the opportunity given us, and the responsibility of a "true" hobbyist.

q.


----------



## q

*REPLY*

see above


----------



## dneafse

*morphs and hybrids*

The argument that hybrids could potentially be misrepresented as morphs, and therefore should not be created, seems to overlook the fact that a good number of natural morphs may be derived from hybridization events. For example, red wolves derive from hybridization events between gray wolves and coyotes. So, the categories of morph and hybrid are not mutually exclusive.

A personal code of ethics for this hobby with regard to hybridization should take into account one's primary motive for participation: conservation, or recreation.

If one places high importance on the conservation and preservation of natural bloodlines, the most efficient way to achieve that is to donate money to conservation organizations, rather than spend it on the creation of racks of vivaria containing line-bred frogs. 

If, on the other hand, one simply enjoys keeping and collecting beautiful animals, there would seem to be no ethical restriction on hybridization.

People who argue against hybridization on the basis of conservation of natural lines, and who keeps frogs themselves, are a bit hypocritical because their very participation in this hobby helps to destroy natural populations.

Dan


----------



## Ed

*Re: morphs and hybrids*



dneafse said:


> The argument that hybrids could potentially be misrepresented as morphs, and therefore should not be created, seems to overlook the fact that a good number of natural morphs may be derived from hybridization events. For example, red wolves derive from hybridization events between gray wolves and coyotes. So, the categories of morph and hybrid are not mutually exclusive.
> 
> A personal code of ethics for this hobby with regard to hybridization should take into account one's primary motive for participation: conservation, or recreation.
> 
> If one places high importance on the conservation and preservation of natural bloodlines, the most efficient way to achieve that is to donate money to conservation organizations, rather than spend it on the creation of racks of vivaria containing line-bred frogs.
> 
> If, on the other hand, one simply enjoys keeping and collecting beautiful animals, there would seem to be no ethical restriction on hybridization.
> 
> People who argue against hybridization on the basis of conservation of natural lines, and who keeps frogs themselves, are a bit hypocritical because their very participation in this hobby helps to destroy natural populations.
> 
> Dan


Actually morph and hybrid are different things and they bringing them together just confuses the issue.. Red wolves are not a "morph" they are thier own distinct species. There is some doubt that they are the result of hybridization between grey wolves and coyotes.. (and this is not commonly accepted in any case). Interbreeding of coyotes with red wolves is one of the most significant threats to the population and accounts for some of the coyote DNA markers when tested.. (see http://www.fws.gov/alligatorriver/redwolf.html and http://www.nsrl.ttu.edu/tmot1/canirufu.htm) . 

People who are arguing against the conservation of the species in the hobby are not being hypocritical. There is insufficient space in conservation organizatios to maintain even a significant fraction of dendrobatid species in numbers large enough to sustain the genetic diversity (the current recommendation is only D. azureus is to be maintained. One out of how many species?)... If you think that habitat protection by institutions is going to do it then you need to review the data on chytridmycosis... The institutions cannot do it themselves and if you look at the history of this hobby even within a relatively short period of time (say 15 years) you would already see significant loss of genetic diversity in the frogs that are no longer being imported due to loss of interest (E. tricolor/E. anthonyi are a great example). Hybridization events and release into the hobby put the entire populations in captivity at risk. If the people sustainable maintain the species then they are not destroying the natural habitat (or if they support true sustainable farming or harvesting then they are actually supporting the natural habitat by preventing its conversion to soybeans or another crop).. 

For example, a popular reptile, leopard geckos in the pet trade are not a true species but a hybrid complex... you cannot get true pure leopard geckos in the USA anymore. 

Ed


----------



## Abbathx

i am not going to or would crossbreed interbreed any of my animals but if people were to hybrid would it be more accepted if the morphs that are in the same location and could breed in that location in the wild be like that ?
but i wouldnt do this .... just looking for opinions.


----------



## a hill

I agree with the general agreement above.

If you want another example its simple. 

Why you should be drawn to the hobby is how amazing these frogs are as they are now. NOTHING was done to get these colors!

If you want to be in a hobby where taking an animal and breeding recessive traits to make a more colorful individual there are many others for you. If you want to go with small things a newer hobby thats getting popular is the freshwater invertebrate hobby. Like this hobby but opposite in this argument, there are so little in the terms of variations that people are trying to get more breeding that are different variants but the problem with some is that in the local pet stores and things we can't figure out what these weird colored shrimp are. And if this hobby went that way it would be very similar, there is enough problems with figuring out locale and morph with existing frogs. 

So I'd say no. But to each his own.

-Andrew


----------



## kyle1745

Just a note as I did not see it mentioned...

Most hybrids from what has been said before do not fair well and I do not think any have bred that I know of. So your basically creating a mutant that can not continue to exist.

I have to agree with whomever brought up the snake hobby. If you interested in making something maybe snakes are the way to go. 

Also on the mention of dogs it is my understanding what has happened with dogs over the years is a rather tough thing on a genetic level and does not work with most other animals. Many dog breeds also have endless issues due to it as well.


----------



## xfrogx

kyle1745 said:


> Just a note as I did not see it mentioned...
> 
> *Most hybrids from what has been said before do not fair well and I do not think any have bred that I know of. So your basically creating a mutant that can not continue to exist.*
> 
> I have to agree with whomever brought up the snake hobby. If you interested in making something maybe snakes are the way to go.
> 
> Also on the mention of dogs it is my understanding what has happened with dogs over the years is a rather tough thing on a genetic level and does not work with most other animals. Many dog breeds also have endless issues due to it as well.


yeah I meant to mention this, From what ive read and come to the conclusion of they come out sterile, so even if we did decide as a hobby to start hybridizing, they wouldnt beable to continue, and they would probably be retarded. :shock:


----------



## MonopolyBag

Ha, hybrids can be good and bad. I think that hybrids in the hobby would be fine, but I see where if people get them mixed up that could cause trouble. So maybe in the future someone will figure something better out.


----------



## Dendro Dave

I believe that in the professional breeders guide or maybe jewels of the rain forrest, it mentions several crosses that were fertile...but i'd have to look to be sure, and im lazy  Besides mother nature is a trickly lil vixen....cant trust her. 

Oh and morph crosses are probably going to be fertile which may not be as bad as species crosses but could still lead to alot of confusion down the road.


----------



## bbrock

There are many, many, reasons why I prefer to stick with genetically pure animals in my collection - most of which have already been posted. But there are a couple of reasons why I'm concerned about other people producing hybrids. One reason is that it will fundamentally change the culture of this hobby. I've seen it happen in the snake hobby and take a look at the orchid hobby for an extreme example. In short, creating hybrids is driven by ego, and often greed rather than an appreciation for the evolutionary history of of the animals or their natural environments. Spend some time with a python breeder and sooner rather than later you will hear about how much money a particular designer morph is worth. I'm not saying it is bad, it just isn't the culture I want to be involved with. I was in the snake hobby just before designer mutants started to become popular and I witness the culture shift from conversations about the natural history of the animals to conversations about how to manipulate genetics and often, how to make money. No thanks, that's not for me.

Secondly, we talk a lot about how if people keep track of the history of their animals, then there should be no problem keeping pure lines. Well, how exactly does that work? Just look through some of the threads trying to tease out the genetic history of various lines of frogs and you will see that even among the "reputable breeders" there is a lot of uncertainty about where animals come from. You have to have an organized system to keep track of these things. The Amphibian Steward Network is that system. More people need to become stewards to make the system work:

http://www.treewalkers.org/projects/ASN/

Also, there is conservation value in managing captive frogs as pure wild lines even if they aren't going to be reintroduced to the wild. Download the documents from the above link to read why. One reason is that if you learn how to manage wild lines with non endangered species, then you will have the skills to make you a potential partner in managing more threatened species. As has been mentioned, zoos and professional institutions don't have the capacity to address the current amphbian crisis and its captive breeding challenges. We, the private sector, have an unprecedented opportunity to put our skills to work for conservation.

Finally, there have been a lot of myths about genetics and hybrids presented in this thread. Some have been addressed but not all. The "genetically pure" ancestors of dogs are wolves. A purebred dog is nothing more than a selectively bred, genetic subset, of wolves. Hybrids between two species are NOT always sterile. There are many, many, examples of fertile interspecies hybrids. Red wolves were mentioned. Red wolves are not the product of hybridization between gray wolves and coyotes. The best evidence is that coyotes and red wolves evolutionarily diverged from wolves relatively recently. Coyotes diverged first, and red wolves diverged a little later. Red wolves occupy an intermediate niche between the two species so they share physical and genetic traits of both gray wolves and coyotes. The hybrid hypothesis has been widely publicized by groups who were opposed to the protection and reintroduction of the red wolf but is not scientifically accepted unless something new has come out in the last year or two that I don't know about. When red wolf populations were depleted, they began hybridizing with coyotes and producing fertile offspring. That's what led to the capture and genetic testing of all red wolves to isolate genetically pure animals and start a captive breeding program. Saying that red wolves are hybrids between gray wolves and coyotes is like saying that humans came from modern apes. No, humans and modern apes share a common evolutionary ancestor. There is a difference.


----------



## HappyHippos1

Haha, Just talk of all this inbreeding/hybridization has made me think about West Virginia. 

We DON'T want West Virginia in the dart frog trade!

BTW, J/K.

I think the frogs are better left to their own type. Although I've got to think a few different Auratus' morphs (or some similar frogs) have intermingled I think we should leave it up to nature.


----------



## Derailz

Just to add a little bit more of a tidbit here, hybredization is a bad thing, but has anyone ever done research to see if by crossing 2 different frogs, you could actually get aknown morph from the wild? It is my opinion that nature has already hybridized some of the morphs for us, so why would we want to do that anymore? I think it would be very interesting to learn what frogs when crossed turn into a morph. I also think that Inferalanis reminds me of a Lorenzo and alanis combined. While it would be very interesting to see the results of such a study, it is not for me to do, I'll leave that for the geneticists.


----------



## porkchop48

I think I may take take offense to the West virginia comments. I am from Wv and can vouch that I have not been hybridized in any way shape or form. 
Any way I wish I had something intelligent to add but I do not. I think cross breeding is wrong and I personally would never do it but that is about it.


----------



## bruce

*Hybrids etc..........*

Let me preface this and say I have been in the pet business for many years, in particular with Gouldian finches (endangered in wild) and their mutations (mostly man made), Having now switched to frogs, I would hope that the expierence that I had with Gouldians does not replay itself with the Dart frog breeders. In particular, the inability to buy a genetically PURE Gouldian not split to any other kind of head colour or mutation. With Gouldian finches, their phenotype may look pure but they can carry all different kinds of mutations. If you ask most Gouldian breeders, the birds history and genetic "pureness" has been lost in favor of new costly mutations for the most part. This has happened in the last thirty or so years it seems. That is less then a generation! 
I can only imagine with the limited gene pools we have and the actual numbers we have of some species, this coupled with lack or limited numbers of importations, careless breeding of hybrids and their general release (as has happened with Gouldians), would be a disaster. Good luck to future generations and the Dart frog industry. With deforestation added in as well as disease in the natural state overwhelming local populations (rocket frogs for example), I say lets leave well enough alone. 
Hasn't there been dialogue allready about a "Green" leucomela existing when others believe it is a hybrid between a leucomela and a auratus? 
Some may argue with Tics and their variations it is happening allready in the wild, while true, lets keep our limited gene pool pure for future generations. 
It's just an opinion. 
B.


----------



## dneafse

I don't want to take this discussion too far off course, but in the interests of highlighting the problems with species definitions, I think it's worth pointing out that increasing amounts of nuclear and mitochondrial DNA evidence indicate that coyotes played a larger genetic role in the ancestry of red wolves than the gray wolf did (Nowak 1979, Roy et al. 1994, Roy et al 1996, Reich et al. 1999, Hedrick et al. 2002) and that the genetic intermingling of coyotes and gray wolves occurred 10-20 thousand years ago (Reich et al. 1999). The controversy around red wolves centers on whether hybridization occurred sufficiently long ago to warrant their conservation as a distinct evolutionary lineage, or whether they originated from more recent hybridization in the last few hundred years. In either case, the genetic evidence for mixed ancestry in their evolutionary history is incontrovertible.

Whether or not people in this hobby realize it, they are domesticating and genetically changing the captive frog population with every generation of breeding. Even if the appearance of captive frogs is roughly conserved, their behavior and physiology is being artificially selected to conform with captive husbandry. And even in the most naturalistic vivarium, the conditions of captivity are far removed from natural habitat. We are selecting for frogs that can survive on a monotonous diet in a very small space, that don't have to worry about picking optimal egg deposition sites and that don't need to practice good parental care. 

For this reason, I don't see a conservation imperative for preserving frogs in a 'natural' state in captivity, as the very act of keeping frogs captive makes them different (less fit) than wild frogs. If some hybrids are infertile or inviable, all the more reason to not worry about people experimenting with hybridization; they're a a dead end, and they won't contaminate any of the inbred 'pure' morph lineages. 

To preserve natural diversity in dart frogs, which I whole-heartedly support, one has to protect them in situ in their native habitat, and recognize that we keep captive frogs for our own amusement to the detriment of natural populations. Hobbyists who maintain line-bred locality morphs in the name of conservation of genetic diversity are contributing to collection pressures on wild populations, and are falsely assuaging their consciences.

Dan


----------



## bbrock

Dan, 

I have not read the Hedrick paper and thanks for posting it. The validity of much of the prior work has been highly controversial. It has been a long time since I read the other papers and I should refresh myself on this topic. But my recollection (which may be wrong) was that this line of evidence was from mitochondrial DNA and the conclusions drawn about hybridization are not warranted based on mDNA alone. If there is concurring evidence from from nuclear DNA, that changes the picture a bit. But given other lines of evidence that speciation can occur much faster than original evolutionary theory assumed, I still think it is very unreasonable to claim that red wolves are the result of hybridization. If one wants to say that hybridization plus natural selection created the red wolf, I will buy that.

As for your other comments. Please read the chapter on managing genetic integrity in the ASN manual and get back to us on whether breeding for conservation is a waste of time. You are going against the body of evidence from the field of conservation biology on this one. We've heard these arguments before and there is a common misconception that preserving genetic integrity in captivity requires replicating natural selection. That simply isn't true.


----------



## defaced

bbrock said:


> One reason is that it will fundamentally change the culture of this hobby. I've seen it happen in the snake hobby and take a look at the orchid hobby for an extreme example. In short, creating hybrids is driven by ego, and often greed rather than an appreciation for the evolutionary history of of the animals or their natural environments. Spend some time with a python breeder and sooner rather than later you will hear about how much money a particular designer morph is worth. I'm not saying it is bad, it just isn't the culture I want to be involved with. I was in the snake hobby just before designer mutants started to become popular and I witness the culture shift from conversations about the natural history of the animals to conversations about how to manipulate genetics and often, how to make money. No thanks, that's not for me.


I think this is a very strong point that we need to be aware of. Thank you for bringing it up because it is a big part of why I discourage hybrids/crosses/etc.


----------



## dneafse

*Does stewardship have to entail ownership?*

Brent,

OK, I think we can agree that hybridization plus natural selection played a role in the ancestry of the red wolf. I never wanted to claim that any dendrobatid morphs may have derived from hybridization in the absence of selection, just that hybridization or genetic introgression may in part explain some of the natural variety in dart frog morphs. Given the extreme variability of many species and the lack of hard barriers to gene flow, I think this is a difficult hypothesis to exclude.

Inbreeding depression and genetic drift in captive populations are not controversial phenomena. Captive populations of animals have been observed to diverge morphologically (e.g. McPhee 2004) and behaviorally (e.g. Margulis 1998) from wild stock. Whether inbreeding and drift preclude successful reintroduction is likely dependent on the type of organism, the number of generations in captivity, and other factors. 

I respect the efforts of TWI to minimize inbreeding depression in captive populations, but the long term maintenance of genetic integrity in captive populations will require continuing collection from wild populations.
The difference between dart frogs and most other taxa that are subjects of captive breeding programs (like whooping cranes) is that many rare dart frog populations are already subject to over-collection. 

I don't think we'll ever agree on this point, but I favor a conservation approach that focuses on habitat protection and an anti-collection, anti-ownership ethic, rather than an approach that potentially exacerbates collection pressure. For example, for the price of just a single D. ventrimaculatus 'Iquitos', one can protect indefinitely an entire acre of Amazonian rainforest (http://www.worldlandtrust.org/supporting/donation.htm).

Both approaches have their merits, and I'm partly playing a devil's advocate here because I think many readers of this forum could stand to be more aware of the environmental impact of their desire to own (rather than just appreciate) rare frogs.

Dan


----------



## Ed

*Re: Does stewardship have to entail ownership?*



dneafse said:


> Brent,
> 
> I don't think we'll ever agree on this point, but I favor a conservation approach that focuses on habitat protection and an anti-collection, anti-ownership ethic, rather than an approach that potentially exacerbates collection pressure. For example, for the price of just a single D. ventrimaculatus 'Iquitos', one can protect indefinitely an entire acre of Amazonian rainforest (http://www.worldlandtrust.org/supporting/donation.htm).


The problem with this is that simply protecting habitat is not a viable method for a large number of amphibians due a number of factors including but not limited to pathogens like chytridmycosis, and pollution(including endocrine disrupters). These items as they become more and more pervasive in the enviroment make conservation through simple habitat protection a moot point as these items render the habitat unsuitable for the amphibians in question. 
This has become a widely accepted tenet with respect to amphibians...in fact AZA with respect to amphibians is shifting gears because of this very issue....

Ed


----------



## Ed

For those who want to see the references Dan is citing see 

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_o ... c50039ff53 

and I believe http://pondside.uchicago.edu/ceb/Margulis1998.pdf 

(It can be hard to infer out a specific paper based solely on the author's surname and year of publication without any other information...) 



Ed


----------



## bbrock

*Re: Does stewardship have to entail ownership?*



dneafse said:


> Brent,
> 
> snip
> 
> Inbreeding depression and genetic drift in captive populations are not controversial phenomena. Captive populations of animals have been observed to diverge morphologically (e.g. McPhee 2004) and behaviorally (e.g. Margulis 1998) from wild stock. Whether inbreeding and drift preclude successful reintroduction is likely dependent on the type of organism, the number of generations in captivity, and other factors.


You're right, these phenomena are not controversial. Nor are their potential negative effects on genetic fitness for individuals released in the wild. But I believe you are confounding a number of issues here. Modern captive breeding management has developed, and continues to refine, methodology for minimizing genetic drift and inbreeding depression in managed captive populations. It is not a foregone conclusion that captive populations will be unsuitable for reintroduction to the wild even after medium to long term management. Also, minimizing drift does not require replicating natural selection in a captive environment. Rather, it requires recognizing the allele as the unit of management and developing breeding schedules designed to conserve alleles and maintain their proportions in the genome as close to that found in the wild population as possible. These are very different things. I have only been able to read the abstract from the McPhee paper but I don't think either of these papers add much to your argument. The phenomena described in the McPhee abstract is well known in wildlife biology and was described decades ago in wild turkey reintroductions. In turkeys, eggs collected in the wild but raised by surrogate domestic turkeys also showed almost total lack of predator avoidance behavior and had very low (actually zero) reintroduction success rate. Sorry I don't have a citation as I know longer have access to a research library but the study was publish by the Missouri DNR. At any rate, we can rule out genetics as the cause of the turkey example since no captive breeding was even involved. Only captive rearing. Perhaps the full text of this paper provides more insight but I find none in the abstract. In fact, this quote from the abstract seems relevant, "However, the extent to which these differences are due to genetic changes caused by small breeding populations or adaptations to the different captive environments is not yet known, although morphological differences found suggest that genetic variation may cause some of the behavioural differences as well. " 

Likewise, the Margulis paper appears only to demonstrate behavioral difference between inbred and outbred mice that lead to reduced fitness. However, it is important to note that all subjects (inbred and outbred) were derived from seventh and eighth generation captive stocks. Thus, even this paper used captive bred animals as a reference for non-inbred animals.




> I respect the efforts of TWI to minimize inbreeding depression in captive populations, but the long term maintenance of genetic integrity in captive populations will require continuing collection from wild populations.


I disagree with this completely. First, one of the conservation values of maintaining genetically managed wild type stocks is that it provides a hobby supply of animals that look and act like wild animals WITHOUT resorting to recollection from the wild. There are countless examples of species that were not managed (including many referenced in this thread such as Gouldian finches) and wild type animals rapidly became unavailable in captivity. This means the only source for wild type animals left are in the wild. We would like to avoid that with frogs. Second, there is no foregone conclusion that captive populations will have to be supplemented with wild populations. In fact, the majority of captive populations can probably be managed to meet conservation objectives (which are not limited to just reintroduction) with existing stocks. To say that captive management of wild genetics is ONLY useful for wild reintroductions, and can ONLY be accomplished by supplementing with wild animals is an extremely narrow view and not warranted. Again, the goals, objectives, and strategy of ASN are laid out in the handbook.



> The difference between dart frogs and most other taxa that are subjects of captive breeding programs (like whooping cranes) is that many rare dart frog populations are already subject to over-collection.


Whoa! Are you suggesting that whooping cranes were not over collected before they went into a captive breeding program? They were collected to put pretty feathers in ladies' hats. And there were only 15 birds living at their low point. And this is a species that must master some complex learned behaviors to survive in the wild.



> I don't think we'll ever agree on this point, but I favor a conservation approach that focuses on habitat protection and an anti-collection, anti-ownership ethic, rather than an approach that potentially exacerbates collection pressure. For example, for the price of just a single D. ventrimaculatus 'Iquitos', one can protect indefinitely an entire acre of Amazonian rainforest (http://www.worldlandtrust.org/supporting/donation.htm).


We agree in part but again, I think your view is too narrow. First, TWI is trying to eliminate the negative impact that collecting has on wild populations. That means that at worst, we want only animals to be collected from the wild in ways that have no net negative impact on wild populations. At best, all collections should have a net positive impact on wild populations by supplying economic incentives and other mechanisms for protecting existing habitat and restoring degraded habitat. But we do acknowledge that carefully managed collection can be beneficial to wild populations by providing incentives for their conservation.

Second, amphibians are declining for a variety of reasons, some of which have nothing to do with habitat loss or over collecting. Presently we have no tools to combat the spread of chytrid other than to bring imperiled species into captivity in the hopes we can restore them after learning how to deal with threats like chytrid. That's why AZA is declaring next year "The Year of the Frog" and massive efforts are underway to meet this challenge. TWI is but one tiny part of this effort. It's important to realize also that TWI is not just about dart frogs. It is about all amphibians. But learning how to captively manage genetics of dart frogs can make ASN stewards well prepared for participating in conservation efforts for more imperiled species.

That said, my personal preference is also that we focus on habitat protection first and use captive breeding only as a last resort. But presently we have two realities to contend with. One is that amphibians are declining for reasons independent of habitat loss or over collection which makes captive breeding a warranted emergency measure. And we have a lot of private amphibian enthusiasts who are very skilled and knowledgeable about amphibian husbandry. It isn't rocket science to put the two together.



> Both approaches have their merits, and I'm partly playing a devil's advocate here because I think many readers of this forum could stand to be more aware of the environmental impact of their desire to own (rather than just appreciate) rare frogs.
> 
> Dan


I appreciate the efforts to raise awareness among the forum. However, I would prefer that people read the materials provided by TWI and then post questions or criticisms about out philosophy, methods, or approach. We've worked hard to put all of this information in the handbook and if it isn't in there, or isn't clear, we need to fix it.


----------



## thundergod

As long as breeders are responsible and understand genetics(Which we can not learn about without experimentation), then Hybrids won't "Destroy the hobby" Breeding hybrids is the same as "Preserving wild frogs" After all, your frogs are genetically different from wild frogs from the get go, unless of course you cought them.


----------



## zBrinks

Thundergod, care to elaborate on your statement? I must have missed something.


----------



## bbrock

thundergod said:


> As long as breeders are responsible and understand genetics(Which we can not learn about without experimentation), then Hybrids won't "Destroy the hobby"


I don't care how responsible or smart about genetics breeders are, nobody can maintain wild type animals themselves without coordinating with other. Unless somebody has the facility to maintain around 70-100 breeding animals of each species decended from at least 20 unrelated founders, then this takes a group effort which means organization and coordination.

If wild type pdf go the way of corn snakes, bearded dragons, orchids, Syrian hamsters, etc., etc., etc., etc., I will consider the hobby destroyed.

If conversations at pdf events start focusing around designer breeding and projits instead of around conservation, natural history, and ecology of the frogs, then I will consider the hobby destroyed.

If we don't organize and coordinate as suggested above, then the following two scenarios are almost foregone conclusions.



> Breeding hybrids is the same as "Preserving wild frogs"


So by breeding dogs we are preserving wolves????? I don't think so.



> After all, your frogs are genetically different from wild frogs from the get go, unless of course you cought them.


This is often stated as fact but is not practically accurate. By starting with a representative population of founders and managing breeding to minimize genetic drift and artificial selection, it is possible to maintain captive populations that are genetically very similar to wild populations. People often state that "captive populations are genetically different" as if they go from wild specimens to some type of domestic genetic mutants in a single generation. That's nonsense and the rate of divergence can be controlled a great deal. Hybridization and selective breeding cause a very fast rate of divergence from wild genetics. Managed breeding to preserve gene frequencies leads to a much slower rate of change.


----------



## thundergod

Genes will diverge anyway. I'm all for experimentation. 

I think everyone is just being paranoid.

I understand your fears, but I still find them a bit ungrounded, you seem to be exaulting yourself as the "hardcore" frogger and anyone who happens to experiment is just a "casual frogger".


----------



## Quaz

Gen 1:26
26 Then God said, "Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness; let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, over the birds of the air, and over the cattle, over all the earth and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth."
NKJV

Well, if He thought it was ok to make cool colored frogs then so do I. Maybe we just take after him. He gave us the ability. 

Do you guys see a problem with the introduction of hybrid fish into the wild for sport. Do you see a problem with domestic dogs, cats, cattle, goats, pigs, sheep, etc... 

Really, what's it going to hurt if I introduce a population of luecozeures into the wild? 


And about the money thing, that dart frog breeders or hobbyists aren't in it for the money... that's a very thin argument. It doesn't take a fifth grader to realize that if I have a pair of frogs that cost $100 and they produce 70-150 offspring a year and they can be sold between $40-$60 a piece with a stable and relatively high demand on the product and very little money goes into the care of the animals then that could bring a potential yield of $9,000 a year for one pair. Now I know that's very simplistic and there are many other factors when breeding frogs for profit but that's pretty much it. I don't think that money determines everyones motives but it has a bigger influence than what's been previously suggested.


----------



## donstr

Quaz said:


> Do you guys see a problem with the introduction of hybrid fish into the wild for sport. Do you see a problem with domestic dogs, cats, cattle, goats, pigs, sheep, etc...
> 
> Really, what's it going to hurt if I introduce a population of luecozeures into the wild?


Yes.

Is this a serious question? Have you ever heard what feral pigs, dogs and cats do on islands? Maybe you've seen a Dodo walking around? Oh wait, guess not. 
Have you ever heard of the Brown Tree Snake on Guam? How many species have been lost because of that little snafu.
How about mosquitoes spreading avian malaria around Hawaii? Yeah, not so good there, either. 

And remind me to thank your god for putting that little line out into the world. Humanity has been doing one heck of a job with that "dominion" over the animals and world thing.


----------



## pl259

> It doesn't take a fifth grader to realize that if I have a pair of frogs that cost $100 and they produce 70-150 offspring a year and they can be sold between $40-$60 a piece with a stable and relatively high demand on the product and very little money goes into the care of the animals then that could bring a potential yield of $9,000 a year for one pair.


That's true. It only takes someone who is inexperienced and incredibly naive, to believe they could net $9K a year from a single pair of frogs. The vast majority of us operate in this hobby at a loss, and are happy to learn new things, work with fasinating animals, meet and share experiences with others, and just break even. 

Like it or not, there's no market or money in breeding leucozureus, and the community in general will not find it new or fasinating, and will not be happy to hear anything about it.

But they're your frogs do what you want...


----------



## *slddave*

Introducing a captive animal into the wild would almost certainly result in their death........ pretty responsible if you ask me. 

I'm all for experimentation of hybrids, BUT:

It should be done in the hands of an experienced hobbyist who is responsible enough not to unload them on an unsuspecting neewbie.

Why not have hybrid frogs as long as that's where it ends- in a tank in your private home and not on the market.

-alright I'm ready for the bashing, bring it on


----------



## Mywebbedtoes

Quaz said:


> Gen 1:26
> 26 Then God said, "Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness; let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, over the birds of the air, and over the cattle, over all the earth and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth."
> NKJV



An alternate rendering of "dominion" is "subjection". If you read the Genesis account Adam and Eve were to be care takers of the worlds plants and animals. So if your argument is the Bible, it is an ill reasoned one. People who have pets, frogs, whatever, have animals under their subjection, but we do so to provide for them, watch over them. When humans step in to protect endangered animals they hare having animals under their subjection, to care for them, protect them. When humans are controlling, manipulating, and destroying animals they are "dominating" them, which is very different. Hybridizing anything is "domination".

But this is not a topic of Bible debate at all in my opinion.



> I think everyone is just being paranoid.
> 
> I understand your fears, but I still find them a bit ungrounded, you seem to be exaulting yourself as the "hardcore" frogger and anyone who happens to experiment is just a "casual frogger".


Thundergod - Have you read this WHOLE thread and come to your conclusions? Or did you just jump in from a few posts? Wait until you get your first frogs and see how you feel about them then. You might find you love them the way they are and would not want to see them changed. To be honest, those who are "all for experimentation" are "casual frogers" in that their concern is not with the animals or the hobby, only what they can get from it. You guys just miss the point of preservation entirely. But, to be fair, most of us are not really protecting anything by having our frogs. Sure, a few breeders are protecting wild populations, but most of us aren't. Why can't the argument be this simple: Most of us love being able to have a beautiful animal that can ACTUALLY be found in the wild, and we don't want to loose them? Why can't people simply respect that? I don't see why, with the dozens of frogs available, we need to "create" more. It does not make sense.
I wish this topic would die, but sadly I don't think it ever will.


----------



## bbrock

thundergod said:


> Genes will diverge anyway. I'm all for experimentation.
> 
> I think everyone is just being paranoid.
> 
> I understand your fears, but I still find them a bit ungrounded, you seem to be exaulting yourself as the "hardcore" frogger and anyone who happens to experiment is just a "casual frogger".


First of all, I think your are purposely trolling. But I'll stay in this for one more round. You say that "genes will diverge anyway" as if it is a fact. Sorry, but you need to put some logic behind that. I'll make it simple for you. Genes diverge through 4 mechanisms: founder effect, natural selection, genetic drift, and random mutation. Using modern methods of conservation breeding management, we can control for all of these except random mutation. Will the gene pools of managed captive populations be identical to gene pools in the wild? No, but we can maintain them within the natural range of variability of wild population for many generations and therefore preserve their genetic fitness for life in the wild. In contrast, hybrids and selectively bred animals rapidly diverge from wild populations and lose their genetic fitness. There is a half century of conservation biology backing this up.

Also, you say your are for "experimentation" but it is not clear what you are experimenting about. An "experiment" is a means of hypothesis testing under controlled conditions. So if you hybridize, what is your hypothesis and what is your control?

I will admit that I am paranoid, but that paranoia comes from experience. I was invloved in the snake hobby about the time the first albino cornsnakes and california kingsnakes started to appear. Within 5 years the entire culture of the hobby changed and quickly began resembling something more like an AKC dog show (albeit with more tatoos and pony tails) than a gather of herpetology geeks. At that time I was fascinated by species orchids but, alas, you could hardly find any for sale as they had all been hybridized. As a kid I raised golden hamsters but I don't know how many years its been since I've seen a real wild type hamster. I've seen many times over what the natural progression of a hobby is when people start "experimenting" with genes. The hybridizers and selective breeders win and the people who appreciate the organisms as products of evolution lose. In many cases hobbies have gone back tot he wild and re-extracted animals to restore the wild type lines that were lost through hybridization. Given the conservation crisis that amphbians are experiencing, I think our hobby can do better than that. And we, the private sector, can even make a significant contribution to conservation efforts of wild amphibians. 

I'm not suggesting that we dictate how everyone behaves in the hobby. If you aren't interested in preserving wild genetics, then fine. Don't join TWI and don't participate in ASN. That is up to you. But don't try to tell those of us who want to preserve wild traits that it is a waste of time. And don't expect us to share your enthusiasm for designer breeding. History tells us that designer breeding does threaten the persistence of genetically "pure" wild types unless we have a system to maintain genetic integrity. But the treat is only one way. We finally have that system for this hobby. Hopefully that system will be successful and we can let the hobby split into two camps and go our separate ways.


----------



## bbrock

Mywebbedtoes said:


> But, to be fair, most of us are not really protecting anything by having our frogs. Sure, a few breeders are protecting wild populations, but most of us aren't. Why can't the argument be this simple: Most of us love being able to have a beautiful animal that can ACTUALLY be found in the wild, and we don't want to loose them?


Actually, I believe that anyone who breeds to keep animals as they are found in the wild IS helping to protect wild populations. If you want a wild type corn snake, the only place I know where you can find it is in the wild. As the orchid hobby evolved to value wild specimen orchids, they found that the only way to obtain them was to recollect specimens from the wild. The point being that if we maintain wild type frogs in captivity, then we will continue to have a captive bred source of animals that look and act like animals found in the wild. That supplies the market demand for this type of animals WITHOUT having to put more pressure on wild populations. I think there is a misconception that ASN is only for registering and managing animals with known genetic pedigrees and locations of origin. But that isn't true. The fact is that we need to register, and begin managing, ALL genetic lines that still retain their wild characteristics regardless of what we know, or do not know, about their orgins. Who the heck knows where my D. auratus came from? But despite this mixed lineage, they still serve the same purpose in a viv as an animal that came directly from the wild. They look and act just like frogs you would find in Costa Rica. Sure, they couldn't be reintroduced to the wild, but they sure do a nice job of providing people with animals that are a product of nature to enjoy. And that saves more frogs from being taken from the wild. This is the real conservation benefit of ASN.


----------



## Mywebbedtoes

bbrock said:


> Actually, I believe that anyone who breeds to keep animals as they are found in the wild IS helping to protect wild populations. If you want a wild type corn snake, the only place I know where you can find it is in the wild...
> 
> Sure, they couldn't be reintroduced to the wild, but they sure do a nice job of providing people with animals that are a product of nature to enjoy. And that saves more frogs from being taken from the wild. This is the real conservation benefit of ASN.


I never thought of it just like that, thanks for the perspective Brent.


----------



## Quaz

> That's true. It only takes someone who is inexperienced and incredibly naive, to believe they could net $9K a year from a single pair of frogs.


I don't think I ever gave any credit to the intelligence of the average reptile or amphibian breeder. That's why I think there'll be so many people trying to breed frogs, because they don't understand what it takes to make a profit. And I was talking about dart frog breeding in general not just hybrids. I do think that a lot of people see a way to make money with them. They are the one of the most enjoyable pet I've ever kept.

About the bible excerpt: I do think that God gave us the authority and the responsibility to care for and protect the earth and it's inhabitants. I don't know though, what I've lost from not having dodo birds around, or how my life has been impacted my the lose of native species do to imported rats, pigs, dogs, and cats. I haven't, but whole civilizations have been impared by disease and lose of native crops and game animals. We adapt though, the earth adapts. Change is the only constant in this universe. We should be good stewards of the land and animals. 

Isn't the human impact always going to be up for debate. For me, personally I want to be able to see what's concreate GOOD and BAD with actions effecting nature not speculation and worry. If one species introduced by man distroys another is the world worse off because it was our intervention that caused the extinction of the species? I know that thats a very broad and general statement but I'm all for burmese pythons living in Florida. 

I don't want to just stir the fire but maybe help me or someone like me recognize, in my urban cacoon, what effects my actions have on the world. And sorry if that's already been covered in your amphibian metachondrial genome talk. that all just went over my head.


----------



## bbrock

This is an enormous topic. It's a bit like saying, "please tell me everything there is to know about biology". Here's a link to get started on the impacts of invasive species: http://www.invasivespeciesinfo.gov/ You might want to start with the International economic impacts and move out from there.


----------



## *slddave*

Quaz said:


> If one species introduced by man distroys another is the world worse off because it was our intervention that caused the extinction of the species?


Short answer yes, your answer see below



Quaz said:


> whole civilizations have been impared by disease and lose of native crops and game animals.


Let me ask you this: is it ethical, good, do you get a warm fuzzy feeling when anything suffers?



Quaz said:


> We should be good stewards of the land and animals.


Great, I'm glad it's settled!!



Seriously I don't think hybridization of dart frogs will be the folly of mankind, but respect and responsibility need to be kept in mind if it is to be done.


----------



## Quaz

I'm glad I answered that so clearly.

Thanks for helping me clear up my rambling thought.

Is it anything more than change though. Why's it bad? 

I wrote:


> If one species introduced by man distroys another is the world worse off because it was our intervention that caused the extinction of the species?


is this different or worse than a species of animal distroying or severly impacting another species? or a catastrophic storm, tidal wave, earth quake, or valcano erruption? Life is all about experimentation, distruction and rejuvination.

I wrote:


> whole civilizations have been impared by disease and lose of native crops and game animals.


And they get over it... they adapt. 

what's his face wrote:


> [quote:1ioql8s8]Let me ask you this: is it ethical, good, do you get a warm fuzzy feeling when anything suffers?


Quaz wrote: 

We should be good stewards of the land and animals. 
[/quote:1ioql8s8]

No, I do not enjoy when animals or people suffer. But I don't rescue box turtles from the side of the road anymore because theres going to be a racoon, coyote, or a sworm of magots that'll be fed when it's smashed. Animals die for the gain of other species. 

I took a trip to florida this year and was delighted to see quaker parrots, iguanas, brown basalists, and peacoc bass, all roaming free. They may change the previous environment but life goes on. 

There have been enormous change on earth because of man but that's life. It's always changing. You guys are crying not to throw the stone in the pond to cause a ripple because it'll be a tsunami on the other shore.

Man, throw the damn stone. Throw a hand full of stones. Natural law is still bigger than man. Yeah, species may die. Who's to say that if a dart frog was never kept and forests never plowed disease wouldn't wipe out dart frogs? 

I'm not an advocate for death or distruction. All I'm saying is... there will always be an order. whatever men knock out of balance they won't be the ones restoring balance. Nature will fight back and really, I'm not worried about how it's going to happen. You can't stop the tidal wave that is man or even slow it's speed so why not surf in the current? 

I'm all up for intoducing ligers into florida too.


----------



## a Vertigo Guy

Quaz said:


> I took a trip to florida this year and was delighted to see quaker parrots, iguanas, brown basalists, and peacoc bass, all roaming free. They may change the previous environment but life goes on.


And did you know the peacocK bass has wiped out many native species that would still exist had they not been introduced (this is discounting the fact that there are many other introduced fauna that dont help the case either)?

Did you know quakers destroy commercial crops, food that YOU and I eat??? Ever since quakers invaded Louisiana I had never been able to get a good crop off my grape vines, my persimmon or pear trees back when I lived there.

To say they simply just change the environment and life goes on is a very immature, narrow minded perspective. That change wouldnt have occured had irresponsible people not kicked over the balance.



Quaz said:


> I'm all up for intoducing ligers into florida too.


You ever read about the Nile Perch (Lates niloticus)? That one introduced fish has almost literally driven untold numbers of native fish to extiction. Yeah some have adapted by living in shallower water than Nile Perch will not venture into, but those that didnt adapt wouldve still been in the lake living out their lives for that next little insect larvae.

Have you read anything about the snakehead (Channa sp.) invading the northern parts of the country? That is a CLASSIC example of why NOT to introduce non native animals. The fish is like rolling thunder, eliminating anything edible thatll fit in its maw. 

Explain how thats good in ANY way, theory or what not!

You talk about throwing stones yet counter yourself with natural law. How is throwing stones natural? Its not! B/c man threw them!

When you talk about Nature fighting back, hows Nature going to fight back against snakeheads that eat everything in sight? Once all the native fish are eaten, its only snakeheads remaining. Whats left to fight back???

From what Ive skimmed of your posts, practically all of your thoughts so far look like rambling thought. You cant even make a concrete arguement. You've tried over and over to justify hybrids. Do you even give a rats ass either way or do you just enjoy stirring the pot? Since theres not going to be a slew of new blood coming in from South America, the last thing needed is hybrids.


----------



## Nuggular

This discussion just keeps going and going and going......

Quaz, you cant use the bible as a factual referance. It's not a factual book. It's a book filled with fiction and fantasy. If you are going to try to use liturature to help you side of the debate, try to find a better source. A factual source.


----------



## Tripod

If you want to create ripples, throw stones into your own pond such that mine remains unaffected.

For example:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20070927/sc_afp/sciencejapanbiologyanimal


----------



## Mywebbedtoes

Any more this debate is a joke. I for my part will side with the scientists and the conservationists. If people cannot look at the world around them and see all of the problems mentioned in the pages above, then they won't learn it from DB. 

Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former. -Albert Einstein


----------



## bbrock

Yes, this discussion has become a joke. I'll just add a couple more things and then I'm done.

Change is a part of nature. But the rate of change that humans are imposing on nature is completely new. We are changing things far faster than natural systems can adapt. It has been demonstrated that diverse and fully functioning ecosystems are more stable and productive than species depleted ecosystems. Almost everything people do leads to species depletion. If species were going extinct at about the same rate that new species evolved or adapted, there would not be a problem. But that isn't what's happening. Invasive species are a problem because they cause species depletion. Note that there is a difference between invasive species and exotic species. An exotic species is just a species that lives outside its natural range. An invasive species has the ability to fundamentally change ecosystem structure and function. This is usually done by reproducing in high numbers and competing with, or preying upon, native species. The total number of species in a habitat is almost always less after the arrival of an invasive species than before. Most exotic species are not invasive. But we have no way of predicting which exotic species will be invasive. Through habitat alteration and introducing exotic species that become invasive, humans are creating a very bleak future for themselves by creating a species depleted, and thus unstable and unproductive, world. Everything we eat and every dollar we make ultimately depends on a stable and productive natural ecosystem.

And I haven't even touched on keystone species which create cascading effects in ecosystems when they are lost.


----------



## thundergod

Woah, I didn't mean to start a flame war

Before you start lighting torches and sneaking your frogs' toxic cousins into my bedroom. I understand what you all are saying.

I don't want to see Dart frogs end up like geckos and snakes either. I have seen the proverbial light.


----------



## Mywebbedtoes

Thundergod - I don't think this was neccisarily directed towards you. I'm glad to see you have read it through and can reason on the whole topic. By the way, I know of atleat one place in LA where you can get your frogs. PM me and I will tell you, as they are not a sponsor.


----------



## IN2DEEP

> Yes, this discussion has become a joke. I'll just add a couple more things and then I'm done.


bbrock and many others, I understand what you say and I hope you don't look down upon me when I say these are my pets and never will be more than PETS.

I was hoping this thread would have taken a different path. I should have spoke again sooner. The "purist" keep preaching and others were just talkin to "egg them on". Owning ANY pet comes with a big responsability factor, especially when it comes to breeding them. If I pay good money for a particular frog, it should be what I payed for. Some of the frogs I want just cost too much (one variety is currently unavaliable) to buy a few of them to get the colors I want in a 100 gallon tank. "PIMP MY FROG" might be a cheaper way to get what I'm lookin' for and I get to see the process in action. (It's not like I'm gonna offer my collection to be released to the "wild". Someone even suggested that they might be infertile) 

I was hoping to see/hear attempts and results of keeping different breeds/morphs together. I'm building my 100 gallon tank now and plan on putting 3 red galacs and 3 azureus in it. I seriously doubt they would interbreed. How would I know of any combinations or problems? I guess I will just spend my hard earned cash and hope it's not a waste. 

I can't wait untill the "new imports" arrive. I bet they will be out of my price range too.


----------



## thundergod

That's just it, we;ll never know what traits are dominant or recesive unless we experiment.


----------



## Conman3880

I know this thread has been semi-resolved, but I'm not sure if anyone has mentioned this...

Only members of the same species can mate & produce _fertile_ offspring. For example, a Six-point & a blue auratus can mate & produce a fertile "Blue Point" auratus or something. That hybrid can go along and have babies-- BAD.

However, if an auratus and a tinc mate, they'll produce "Dendrobates tinctoratus", incapable of producing offspring, which wouldnt be a threat to the hobby.

If two different species mate, and they have fertile offspring, that actually means they're the same species. So if an Azureus & a Tinc mate and produce fertile offspring, what was formerly known as "Dendrobates azureus" should technically be considered "Dendrobates tinctorius-- Azureus morph."

Did that make sense? I'm baaad at explaining genetics.


----------



## thundergod

Actually, there are cases of creatures of different species mating and creating fertile offspring, I'd have to look them up to find them, but they do exist.



> Only members of the same species can mate & produce fertile offspring. For example, a Six-point & a blue auratus can mate & produce a fertile "Blue Point" auratus or something. That hybrid can go along and have babies-- BAD.
> 
> However, if an auratus and a tinc mate, they'll produce "Dendrobates tinctoratus", incapable of producing offspring, which wouldnt be a threat to the hobby.


Sheesh, what exactly DOESN'T threaten the hobby? How can ANY hobby be threatened? Say IN2DEEP indeed went ahead and created a hybrid with his 6 frogs. Would those hybrids hop over to your house and kill your frogs? I think you're being a baby. Everyone has to keep frogs in the same manner as you and never experiment. Stop being an elitist and just look at your damn frogs. I go back to my "Hard core" vs "casual" argument. If you don't like making hybrids or knowing more about frog genetics, then fine, don't force your powerless opinions on everyone else.


----------



## Conman3880

Are you talking to me?

Sorry =\

I havent even read the whole thread, let alone posted, and my post certainly wasnt in response to any of yours. I dont exactly see how anyone could have any sort of hostility towards my post... It seems like you didnt understand it. Or maybe you just want to start an arguement.

The ONLY THING I said was that genus x genus wont produce fertile offspring, to which I was so rudely corrected. I respect everyones opinions _and I havent even stated my own_.

(And I cant wait till the hybrids start carrying around machine guns wiping out all the purebreds  that'll be a sight.)


----------



## thundergod

sorry


----------



## Ed

One of the problems with hybrids is the multiple threads where a person posts a picture or description of a frog on line and people guess as to the lineage of the frog. This can easily and readily cause the integradation of the frogs. In addition, the problem is increased given the boom and bust cycle of the hobby, just look at the history of E. tricolor/E. anthoyni over the last 15 years...... 

With some hybrids the females can be fertile but the males have low sperm moltility which renders them basically infertile however with some fish (like the hybrid parrot cichlids (see http://www.geocities.com/parrotcichlid/breeding.html for an anecdotal account) people were able to find fertile males and work through the bottleneck. 
This is currently occuring with the "carpondros" (carpet python (Morelia spilota ssp) x Morelia (Chondropython) viridis)) hybrids where there is fine fertility if the hybrid females are back crossed to male carpet pythons or male chondropythons. 
Then there are other hybrids like Jungle corns (California kingsnake (L. g. californiae X Corn Snakes (Panthera (Elaphe) g. guttata) that are perfectly fertile from the start (please note the different genera here...) 
Then there is the nice large unisexual Ambystoma complex of triploid hybrids that are the result of various combinations several different species that are displacing the parent populations in some areas (and thus dooming themselves as they need the sperm to stimulate development in the eggs even though the male does not contribute any genetic material. 


These are a couple of examples that makes me cringe whenever I see the "hybrids" are infertile so its okay argument... 


Some comments.... 

Ed


----------



## IN2DEEP

thundergod thanks for seeing my side, Conman3880 thanks for the theories, Ed sorry about the infertile statement (I did't think it was true) I welcome your knowledge. 
I guess the "purposely trying to crossbreed" topic was just to strong of a statement. I would have like to have seen pics of accidental by-products of mixed/community tanks. (I've found a few, but most are variations of tincs or auratus, but still not what I had in mind of x-breeding) I am planning a large, complex tank, which I am possitive I can keep 2 different dendrobates species in. It would have been nice to look and say, "Boy, I don't want to do that!, " from seeing others mistakes/accomplishments. No one wants to hear of frogs dieing, but if someone was purposely trying to crossbreed their should have been atleast one horror story.


----------



## Ed

It depends on what you mean by horror story. 
The dendrobates are often "grouped" in similar species like the tinctorius group where you have D. auratus, D. tinctorius, D. leucomelas and D. "azureus (now D. tinctorius). All of these are known to readily interbreed. 
The morphs are a harder to deal with item as these are locality specific color patterns and some crosses may look like one of the other color morphs. I have seen D. auratus x D. tinctorius that had a normal green and black auratus color pattern but were the size of an adult tinct. I have also seen D. tinctorius "patricia" x D. tinctorius "azureus" where the froglets looked like D. tinctorius "Cobalt" which would make it very easy to launder them as a morph or even unintentionally pass them off as a known morph. 

There are what are called morphs that are fine to interbreed as they are simply line bred animals to accentuate a certain pattern color (for example, fine spot azureus, brown/chocolate leucs) however the person needs to be sure that they are not dealing with a color pattern that evolved to the a specific portion of the wild enviroment. Often people take the short cut and simple just say no, it isn't recommended as its easier than explaining all of the derived "morphs". 

Ed


----------



## redhawk

wow... I don't understand why there's so much hostility. 7 pages of heated, confusing debate. I have mixed tanks and if I get x breeds I always thought that'd be cool. Don't you guys think that the morphs that over lap localities cross breed anyway? or even that people may have moved them from one part of the forest to another? The indians that used their poisons may have traveled with live frogs to use their poison as needed and when they got to the other side of the forest released them. Spanish conquistidors could have captured them and moved them around the forest. Floods can move them. Look at the number of over lapping tinc. morphs along rivers like the sipilawini valley. 

Ed you said


> just look at the history of E. tricolor/E. anthoyni over the last 15 years......


What happened?


----------



## Baltimore Bryan

Alright I am not going to get too into this discussion, but here is my opinion on this whole mixing/ crossbreeding discussion:
I don't like the idea of it. I don't like it because just imagine people did create all these hyprids that were similair parents (like tincs/ azureus) or something totally different (like leucs/ vittatus), or both. Well, there would be soooooooooooooooooooooooooooo many combinations of things that you could create your own "dream frog". Example: Lets say you want a frog with blue legs, red back with black stripes, and a white stomach. Mix galac x azures with pumilio x vent. Now this is just a totally random example. And I'm not saying you could actually mix a pumilio with an azureus, just a random example... My point is everybody would want to create their own unique new color variety. In this scramble of trying to creat a fertile, but beautiful new frog, I think most people will not care for the original darts or the few people that do continue to work with them won't be able to once nobody else wants them they will run out of room from offsrping but parents will eventually die. Then, the original darts that weren't crossbred are gone.
Another thing- what would happen when the genetics of these interbred fros become so bad from so much inbreeding/ mixing that the offspring of these "mutts" won't be able to live to be froglets? My guess it that people go down and get a whole new set of wild dart frogs. Well that obviosly destroys the wild populations more, but what if there aren't any more wild frogs? What if all the rainforests have become farmland, or what if chytrid wipes out all wild frogs? Well, that means no more frogs- ever.
One last point- what if some freak accident happens down there- like a tsunami covers an entire island with a distinct pumilio morph, or a big wildfire cause by a volcano or something else destroys thousands of acres of rainforest and different dart morphs are gone? How would we reintroduce them to the wild if we don't have any true unmixed darts anymore? 
Wow this is a long post... :roll: it's just my opinion...


----------



## Ed

redhawk said:


> Ed you said
> 
> 
> 
> just look at the history of E. tricolor/E. anthoyni over the last 15 years......
> 
> 
> 
> What happened?
Click to expand...

These were one of the most common dendrobatid frogs in the early to mid 1990s and at one point they were common enough that many breeders stopped breeding them and/or dumped thier pairs/groups. Now they are a very uncommon frog and many of the original "bloodlines" (as there were multiple founders available) are gone and gone with them are the gentic diversity of the frog... Off the top of my head I don't think that they are even well represented within Zoos any more (when a lot a zoos used to have them). This happened with one of the most common frogs in the hobby before anyone had any interest in creating morphs and it was almost lost to the hobby... this is one of the problems with getting into various "designer" morphs. The hobby already is having problems keeping the frogs already present in the hobby still in the hobby due to these boom and bust popularity trends.. I think we are also seeing it occur right now with some tinct morphs and possibly with some types of auratus with all of the pumilio and other recent imports.. we'll only know for sure in a few years but it will be a real travesty on the part of the hobby is we lost one or more frogs types.... 

(This is a good reason to take part in TWI). 

Ed


----------



## Quaz

paranoid...extremists... gotta luv em... 

Sorry... not to put you down or your ideas but I just don't think they are very practical or realistic. Yet... so... what if?



> In this scramble of trying to creat a fertile, but beautiful new frog, I think most people will not care for the original darts or the few people that do continue to work with them won't be able to once nobody else wants them they will run out of room from offsrping but parents will eventually die.


Really? I don't think that's likely. The demand for the production of designer morphs would keep the numbers up. Widely undisirable color traits would disapear from the casual keeper but I don't think zoos and conservationists will be buying new blood from designer dart frog breeders.



> what would happen when the genetics of these interbred fros become so bad from so much inbreeding/ mixing that the offspring of these "mutts" won't be able to live to be froglets?


I just don't think this is a likely scenario either. The inbreeding of single morphs seems more likely to weaken the general gene pool. 



> what if some freak accident happens down there- like a tsunami covers an entire island with a distinct pumilio morph, or a big wildfire cause by a volcano or something else destroys thousands of acres of rainforest and different dart morphs are gone? How would we reintroduce them to the wild if we don't have any true unmixed darts anymore?


Ok...what if? this land wouldn't be habbitable for dart frogs for who knows how long? a tsunami or hurricane sooner then other catastrophic events. But what's the problem with reintroducing a leucozereus? or other stable designer morph? And again conservations and zoos may help this out too.

Sorry I just don't agree with these points being valid. Not just trying to keep the argument going. And I don't want to seem like I'm insulting you


----------



## a Vertigo Guy

Quaz said:


> what's the problem with reintroducing a leucozereus? or other stable designer morph?


The problem is that its not *NATURAL*. Anything not naturally found in an environment should not be put there. Especially if its been tampered with.

And you cant say "reintroduce" when something was never there to begin with.


----------



## Tripod

After seven pages of back and forth on this issue, it is readily apparent that most of those involved in this debate have firmly settled into their respective camps with little hope of switching sides.

It is also apparent (regrettably so) that cross breeding has already occurred and is going to occur again with the full intent of selling the "designer" offspring into the hobby - and let's be honest about this point - THERE IS NOTHING WE CAN DO TO STOP IT.

While debates like this may convince a good portion of beginners just entering the hobby how important it is to not let darts go the way of the reptile hobbies, there will always be some that don't care about those ideals and will choose to take the "artistic" route.

Those of us who are concerned about the inevitable slide of this hobby down the hole of hets, rainbows, ribbons, etc. need to spend less time on threads such as this more time following Brent's lead in joining TWI and the ASN so as to register and track the frogs that are already in the hobby and keep a verifiable set of genetic lines. This is truly our only option.

History gives us a clear picture of what to expect in the not so distant future for this hobby. It is up to responsible Breeders to protect and register their lines so that future hobbiests will have the choice of purebreds as opposed to designer mutts.

Steven


----------



## thundergod

What the hell is so wrong with the reptile hobby? Is it that they're not keeping "Wild Animals"? If so, that's a pretty silly reason to feel threatened.


----------



## zBrinks

Take the bearded dragon market for instance. In the past, the majority of dragons were variations of gray, white, maybe a little brown. There were a few bloodlines, but that was it. Now, look what happened to the hobby. Go to a show and try to buy a 'normal phase' beardie. There's a huge confusion to the sandfire morph/line (is a sandfire dragon any dragon that shows red/orange coloration, if so, how much, or is a sandfire dragon one that originated from Sandfire Dragon Ranch? It depends on who you talk to!). Try and trace back the lineage of a bearded dragon, and most of the time, you'll find it nearly impossible. Ask a breeder where they got their breeders, and trace it back, and find out how many times the animals were inbred to get their colors.

Or, more along the lines of darts, look at the leopard gecko hobby. You simply cannot find a wild-type leopard gecko anymore; the ones for sale are bastards of multiple subspecies/localities created to feed the demand for more outrageous morphs/colors/patterns.

The typical dart hobbyist is more oriented towards conservation, or at least keeping the animals as close to the way they exist in their natural habitat as possible. Look at the elaborate lengths many go through to mimic natural environs. Creating a small slice of rainforest is one of the pleasures of the hobby. Look at the way many of the 'popular' reptiles are kept, in plastic shoeboxes with paper towels. Im not saying there is necessarily anything wrong with this practice, its just not for me, and Im sure most dart hobbyists would agree. Most froggers (a vast majority) are not in this for profit, while profit drives many breeders and creaters of these 'designer morphs'. To create something unnatural, although your choice, is not something that is looked upon favorably by the dendro community. To think that one would be received well by voicing their favor of producing artificial bastards is naive. Its your choice, but myself, and many others, will disagree. 

Btw, I used to raise leopard geckos and still do breed bearded dragons. When it go to the point of the market demanding that new animals be created via inbreeding, hybridizing, etc, I got out of it for profit. I do NOT want to see this hobby go in that direction, and will forestall it in any way possible.


----------



## Anoleo2

tinctoritus said:


> Quaz said:
> 
> 
> 
> what's the problem with reintroducing a leucozereus? or other stable designer morph?
> 
> 
> 
> The problem is that its not *NATURAL*. Anything not naturally found in an environment should not be put there. Especially if its been tampered with.
> 
> And you cant say "reintroduce" when something was never there to begin with.
Click to expand...

Pretty much exactly what I was going to say. 

Lets say almost all leucs in the wild get wiped out. If we then introduce a population of "leucozureus" thats making the situation a whole lot worse, because now, not only do the remaining leucs have to repopulate, they have to compete with the "leucozureus" too.

I just think hybridization is a bad idea.


----------



## Baltimore Bryan

Quaz- Well I can your point when you say that mixing would keep up the numbers of original darts to create the mixes. But the way I see it, just my way of trying to guess what could happen in the future, is that once people make all these neat mixes people would mix the mixed morphs. About the zoos/ conservationists, yes I bet a lot of them would still work with the original species, but, this is sort of hard to explain... I guess I think it would almsot be like there weren't enough people working with them, so they would basicly be line breeding which can weaken the gene pool. hmmmmm I didn't explain that very well.
Also, I guess I was exaggerating a little when I said that the frogs wouldn't even make it to the froglet stage. I meant that it can weaken the gene pool so much that several years of basicly breeding brother/ sister or close to that the offspring can be very weak or unhealthy. 
Lastly, I do see your point about if there is something like a fire, it will be a while before it is even ready to have animals reintroduced. One thing that all darts down there are very vulnerable to is chytrid. So if the frogs are wiped out and we wanted to introduce them, if we just count on zoos/ conservationists to have a clean bloodline, it probably wouldn't work because chances are their frogs would even be inbred a little. 
I understand there are some people who think the right thing is x, and others who think x is the worst thing to do and y is best. I respect everyone's opinion, I just hope this doesn't become a huge argument where one side won't even listen to what the other side has to say.


----------



## Ed

quote "Quaz- Well I can your point when you say that mixing would keep up the numbers of original darts to create the mixes."endquote

This only happens until the various combinations are created, at that point, there isn't any incentive to keep the originals around as you can create new combinations from the combinations... For example look at cornsnakes. This is a species that has been captive bred for more than two decades yet they are still being collected from the wild because people did not maintain a sufficient population of "normals".... There are a number of other snake examples. 

quote " . About the zoos/ conservationists, yes I bet a lot of them would still work with the original species,"endquote 

How much would you like to bet on this? The amount of holding space in Zoos is limited. If it wasn't then E. tricolor would still be very common in Zoo populations.. If I remember correctly, there is currently one (1) zoo in the USA holding any vents... and that number is less than ten (10) frogs including metamorphs.... Zoos cannot maintain many of the dendrobatids because a lot of thier holding space is taken up by species like Wyoming toads, Puerto Rican Crested Toads and Khansi Spray toads.... 


quote "What the hell is so wrong with the reptile hobby? Is it that they're not keeping "Wild Animals"? If so, that's a pretty silly reason to feel threatened."endquote

Not much except that the hobby succombs to boom and bust cycles that can wipe out or virtually wipe animals out of the hobby due to lack of interest requiring that when they become popular again that they have to be recollected out of the wild or they are reestablished from a few enthusiasts that kept a few animals around requiring that to meet demands the population become more and more inbred. 

One of the problems with this discussion is that a number of the people do not have a good sense of the history of the reptile and amphibian hobby... I have been directly involved in it on one side of the fence or another for more than 20 years and have seen the popularity swing a number of times (and a number of once common animals disappear.. some to never really make it back...) 

Ed


----------



## waynowon

*huh?*

I believe this post started with a simple request, pre empted by the statement- I know it's not condoned but(i'm paraphrasing) does anyone have any pics of hybrids. One person posted 1 pic, yet there are 8 pages of sanctamonious b.s. about why it is frowned upon. I have only been frogging for a couple years now and, although I know why it shouldn't be done, I am very curious to see pics. Does that make me any less of a stounch supporter of proper breeding techniques? I hope not.
POST SOME OF THOSE TABOO PICS IF YOU CAN FIND EM! i WANNA SEE!!
2:0:1 AZUREUS
0:0:2 MINT TERRIBILIS BICOLOR
1:0:0 PASTEL BEARDED DRAGON (WILL TRADE FOR FROGS)
(I know sanctamonious b. s. is the wrong term for valuable insight, it just wouldn't sound like a rant with out. In other words, I learned something new on each page, and value each post, but I still want to see pics! 
Anyone else as curious as me?


----------



## Ed

*Re: huh?*



waynowon said:


> I believe this post started with a simple request, pre empted by the statement- I know it's not condoned but(i'm paraphrasing) does anyone have any pics of hybrids. One person posted 1 pic, yet there are 8 pages of sanctamonious ?


See http://www.dendroboard.com/coppermine/a ... frogs1.jpg

http://www.dendroboard.com/coppermine/a ... uratus.jpg

http://www.dendroboard.com/coppermine/a ... torius.jpg

Ed


----------



## Mywebbedtoes

*Re: huh?*



waynowon said:


> I have only been frogging for a couple years now and, although I know why it shouldn't be done, I am very curious to see pics. Does that make me any less of a stounch supporter of proper breeding techniques? I hope not.


I think there was 8 pages of posts because this thread was started right after a few other long debates about mixing, so I think this thread was taken as a "forget the rest of you, I want to support hybrids" kind of thing, hence the heated replies. I won't go into the further details about it.

As far as pictures, there is one on the tropical-experience website. Under their Tinctorious section, there is a picture of what they call "Amotopo", said to be a likely cross between Azureus x Regina. It is a cool looking frog, but you could see how it could easily be mistaken for a real morph and passed around. I will not post the link here, as they are not a DB sponsor.


----------



## kyle1745

You can post the link to someone who is not a sponsor...

I will say everything I have read that most hybrids do not live long in some cases and I have not heard of any of them breeding. So while the idea of a designer frog may seem like a neat idea it may not be sustainable like snakes. With that said lets not ruin this hobby like the snake hobby where there are very few originals around.


----------



## Rich Frye

......getting the call in from Hybrid Mission Control.......


----------



## Mywebbedtoes

kyle1745 said:


> You can post the link to someone who is not a sponsor...


Oh ok, thanks Kyle. I still don't want to post it as I do not endorse it. If people want to find it they will. Rich, that is hilarious!


----------



## Rich Frye

Mywebbedtoes said:


> kyle1745 said:
> 
> 
> 
> You can post the link to someone who is not a sponsor...
> 
> 
> 
> Oh ok, thanks Kyle. I still don't want to post it as I do not endorse it. If people want to find it they will. Rich, that is hilarious!
Click to expand...

The guy seated closest to us in the Hybrid Mission Control pic......this is a better shot.











Picard pic stolen from Brian S. Thanks Brian.


----------



## Mywebbedtoes

Ha ha ha.


----------



## Rich Frye

And poor Picard knows he has to walk past these two on his way through the employee parking lot......


----------



## waynowon

*many apologies*

 went back and you were right , thanks for the pics, and i hate to say it but i'm not impressed. now if it produced something crazy like neon purple and orange, that glowed yellow and green, i might understand why someone might do it. there would STILL be too many reason not to.(imo)


----------



## Mywebbedtoes

*Re: many apologies*

[quote="waynowon]...i'm not impressed. now if it produced something crazy like neon purple and orange, that glowed yellow and green, i might understand why someone might do it. there would STILL be too many reason not to.(imo)[/quote]

That's another good point. I have yet to see a hybrid that looks better than any real morph or species.


----------



## Mywebbedtoes

waynowon - I found a few pictures, if you want to see them PM me and I can e-mail them to you.


----------

