# Red Vents V. Iquitos Red/ Orange vents



## Baltimore Bryan (Sep 6, 2006)

I was just wondering what the main difference is between the two. My red vents looks exactly like the red/orange vents I've seen, with just a little less orange. Is it that the two morphs come from different places? If I understand correctly the true red vents supposedly came in from Europe in the late 90's/ early 2000's. I don't breed or mix the two morphs and do not plan on doing it, I was just curious what the difference is. Thanks


----------



## Catfur (Oct 5, 2004)

The world may never know...

Ventrimaculatus is an extremely widespread species, and similar looking populations occur over a wide geographical range.


----------



## Baltimore Bryan (Sep 6, 2006)

Yea, I thought the answer would be similar to that, because FG vents from Frencg Guiana (sp?) is way far away from Iquitos Peru. Just wondering if there was a specific differance. Thanks


----------



## rozdaboff (Feb 27, 2005)

The important difference is we know exactly where the Iquitos Red-Orange Vents came from (thanks to the Understory Project).

The older Red Vents (not sure I would call them "true" - as what about the Iquitos Red-Orange makes them "false"?) in the hobby may have come from the same population - but we don't know. 

So despite phenotypic similarities, the two should be kept separate to preserve the genetic integrity of the populations.


----------



## Baltimore Bryan (Sep 6, 2006)

When I say "true", I didn't mean the Iquitos were false. I just meant that sometimes I see people that say they have "red vents" when they have the iquitos red/ orange, so a red vent is really a red vent, but an iquitos is an iquitos red/orange ( at least we are pretty sure they are different ). Hmmm... it seems I didn't word that very well... I can't really think of how to say it... I just meant that when I say "red vent" I mean from the red vents that came from Europe. To me an iquiots is not a red vent, but an iquitos red/orange, and I have seen people say their iquitos are "red vents". I'd better stop typing... I'm confusing myself :wink:


----------



## Tim (Apr 22, 2007)

I've been guilty of saying red vent when in fact I meant Iquitos red/orange. I do know that they aren't the same but Its just so easy to call the red vents in the middle of a conversation


----------



## Baltimore Bryan (Sep 6, 2006)

I understand and I'm sure I would too if I owned the Iquitos as well as my red vents. What would really bug me is if people were too lazy to write "iquitos red/ orange" and sold offspring of iquitos as red vents. Next thing you know they mix and if they are indeed different populations it would be almost impossible to tell if vents were iquitos, reds, or mixed. Then, you get the problem with genetics etc. I only know of one other person who has (supposedly) red vents from the Europe import, and I don't think he has been extremely succesful with breeding them. I would be really glad to see red vents (not just the iquitos) become more common and available. In fact, typing this post has given me a new idea. If anybody with red vents (not the iquitos) could respond to this thread (if possible) so I could know a general number of how many people working with this morph are that would be great. That number would determine if I take on a big (for me whick is probably easy for everyone else :lol: ) project... I'm pretty sure there is a way to get my group breeding, but it would be so time-consuming and I've been so busy lately I never thought about doing it. Basicly I would hate to see this morph become so rare or extinct in the hobby here, so if it seems very few people have them, I'll go ahead and try to breed mine. If not, well thats also good new because that means they are more established than I thought. Thanks


----------



## Jungle_John (Feb 19, 2007)

i have a 2.2 breading group of RED vents, and just got my first tadpole this week. got around 200 eggs so far all all gone bad pretty much (i think it might be the way i got the tank set up) 
i also got a 1.4.2 group of IQUITOS vent that gave me a few good tad but they didnt make it, and they have just started breeding agin i think so hopfuly ill get them going also.
-JC


----------



## KeroKero (Jun 13, 2004)

Well, you you want to get even more confused check out the Vent morphs listed in the care sheet. There are a few "red" vent types in there.... 'red vents', 'orange amazonicus', and the 'kelly line/red amazonicus'... and that's not including the Iquitos vents. Talk about confusing... the forms in the hobby before have been kept by some as distinct bloodlines, and should probably be kept this way. There is one form in particular that looks very similar to the Iquitos, but the effort should be taken to keep the Iquitos only with Iquitos vents. The confusion over the variety of very similar forms, most of which are not very well known or represented in the hobby, has led to lots of labeling issues... which is why I like to know my frogs true bloodlines, and would prefer them to have frogtracks information... that way I know even if they call it one of the "red vents" I know which line it actually is from 

This is one of the important things about frogtracks! A good part of my collection is eligable to be registered, and I plan to do so as the animals are bred.


----------



## Baltimore Bryan (Sep 6, 2006)

Yea, I know, it's very confusing... One quick question though- what is the difference between vents and amazonicus? Thanks


----------



## KeroKero (Jun 13, 2004)

Short answer - there isn't one. 

Heh. And here comes the confusion of taxonomy lesson...

Let me start this long winded explaination by pointing out some of the rules of taxonomy (yes, there are set rules, they are online if you want to read them). First, is that the type locality (the animals originally described) of the species is the population that defines the species. The importance of this is that today, if we try to do genetic work, we basically take the type locality animals as the base line, and compare the relatidness of other populations of frogs we *think* are the same species. 

Second bit I want to bring up, is that if two populations with different scientific names are found to be the same species (say after some genetic work is done) the name that was described first is the one that is used. For example the Quagga and Plains Zebra genetically turned out to be subspecies of the same species, but were originally described as two different species (they sure LOOK it, but looks are decieving!). Turned out the Quagga was described first, so the Plains zebra name was changed to the Quagga's scientific name of _Equus quagga_.

These are two very important rules in the taxonomic discussion of the Vent complex... mostly because it truely is a complex of species, not just one, and genetics being used to sort it out. Vents traditionally have had a massive range across south america ranging from French Guiana to Ecuador, Peru, and even pockets in Brazil. Problem is, while they all look similar, they probably aren't all the same species. D. amazonicus was described thinking that it was different enough from Vents that it deserved to be its own species... and animals brought in from Peru generally got labeled as Amazonicus.

Unfotunately, their genetics didn't hold up. Amazonicus are actually vents genetically. We tend to maintain the name in the hobby to help differentiate between lines... so we don't mix the red vents and the red amazons (which are likely different populations), that type thing. "Amazonicus" is purely just a population name now, not a valid taxonomic one.

This has gotten a little complicated in the hobby due to the hobby's disjointed view on what a ventrimaculatus really is. The type locality for Vents is actually in Ecuador. Hobbyests tend to think of the FG vents as a typical vent... when that's not really the truth. In fact, our "amazonicus" are more the true vent than our FG vents! I'd hardly be suprised if the FG's were eventually reclassified. The Iquitos vents are what used to be classic amazonicus... but Mark stuck with the corrected nomenclature and sold them as vents, because taxonomically, that's what they are 

That's also why when I was doing the morphs for the Vent caresheet (notice it's not a vent/amazonicus caresheet) the only mention of amazonicus is the morph names... such as _Dendrobates ventimaculatus_ 'Orange Amazonicus', or _Ranitomeya ventrimaculata_ 'Orange Amazonicus'... talk about a big name for a small frog!


----------



## Baltimore Bryan (Sep 6, 2006)

Oh I think I finally get it. Thanks for clearing that up. Wow that's complicating. I sort of wish there were just red vents, orange vents, and FG vents, that would be so much easier (just to make it easier to keep things straight):wink: . Thanks


----------



## KeroKero (Jun 13, 2004)

Yeah, it would be :shock: it's kinda a pain when talking to some people in the hobby and being like... yeah the FG yellow vents? Very likely probably aren't. The amazonicus (which is still often mistaken as a true species) are vents. And the red vents and red amazons? Not the same thing. The Iquitos look to be dead ringers for one of the amazons, but they're a vent, not an amazon (because the amazon really isn't an amazon...). 

I usually get the whole... how the FRICK does that work! Ah, taxonomy... we get the back end confusion, especially since the taxonomy of a keeper is usually limited to what they are working with only so a bunch of changes seem to happen for no good reason that a keeper can see.


----------

