# Scientific reasons for not mixing frogs



## chuckpowell (May 12, 2004)

I've read here recently this statement: "To me there are two reasons to not mix morphs, an moral reason and a scientific reason." I fully understand the moral reasons (and there are several) for not mixing frogs in our tanks, but what is the scientific reason(s)? Our frogs cannot be introduced into the wild. So what other reason(s) are there? 

I'm not trying to start anything but an honest discussion of the scientific reason(s) behind this opinion here on Dendroboard. I believe a lot of statements are made here without foundation and I really want to know what the scientific reason for not mixing animals is. I've been keeping Dendrobatid for over 25 years now, continuously, and I can't think of one. That certainly doesn't mean there isn't one or many, just that I can't think of them. 

Best,

Chuck


----------



## rmelancon (Apr 5, 2004)

The only "scientific" reason I could think of comes with the prerequisite that the frogs in hobbyists' collections could somehow be introduced back into the wild for scientific purposes (population stabilization/reintroduction etc). I don't believe this could ever be a feasible scenario so I am left with no scientific reason that I can think of. I don't support hybridization but it's certainly not for scientific reasons and I'm not sure it's a true moral decision either. Definitely a good question.


----------



## ConFuCiuZ (Jul 13, 2011)

Ed will Chime in hopefully, if he isnt fed up with this topic. There are number of threads prbly explaining the scientific reasons. For a fact, they dont do well in vivariums and they do no survive for a long time. Being reintroduce into the wild will create problems. 

http://www.dendroboard.com/forum/beginner-discussion/85165-ideology-behind-not-mixing-morphs.html


----------



## JeremyHuff (Apr 22, 2008)

Some "scientific" reasons:
-Food size preference (ex. Terribilis vs pumilio)
-activity periods (treefrogs vs darts and some darts have different active times)
- habitat requirements
- moisture requirements


----------



## Baltimore Bryan (Sep 6, 2006)

One of the more interesting arguments I've seen against mixing species, aside from the moral aspects, that I believe Ed posted is that frogs in mixed tanks can have more stress that goes unnoticed because the difference in behavior between the species. While frogs from the same species may fight over a calling spot, there is usually a winner and loser that the frogs understand the the fighting ends. However, with different species that have different cues, they may not be able to correctly signal to one another to determine who is dominant and who is submissive, leading to ongoing and additional stress.
Bryan


----------



## ChrisK (Oct 28, 2008)

Humane reasons for the negative effects of outbreeding depression?


----------



## konton (Nov 17, 2010)

I'm confused here. Sorry, I was just curious how people are answering. But I thought the question was specific to mixing morphs. Not related to mixing genus or species. So I assume Chuck is talking about the mixing of the same species, but different morphs. Which can and often does lead to hybridization.

If I'm wrong and the subject was as broad as frogs in general, please forgive my intrusion. 

Jae


----------



## chuckpowell (May 12, 2004)

Thanks for the replays so far, but i don't see these as scientific arguments. They have to do husbandry, how we keep our animals, and most everyone can be overcome easily. I've kept a Anolis krugi with a group of Dendrobates leucomelas for a number of years now with no problems, with either species. If you define stress as interaction with other species, then they experience a lot more stress in the wild than what they experience from other animals (aside from us) in our tanks. Think about how they live in the wild and how they live in our tanks - they have it much easier in our tanks. Unfortunatelly its not scientific, but our animals, if kept right, seem to live longer in our tanks than in the wild. The only valid scientific point for not mixing seems to be to introduce the animals back into the wild and that's been pretty well debunked here a number of times. 

Mixing closely related species will result in hybrids and, personally, I'm not in favor of them. But mixing animals of different species isn't necessarily "bad." We strive to make our tanks like the jungles the animals live in - they live with a huge variety of other species. And we don't have a problem with mixed tanks if the "other" animals are food for our frogs. 

Again I'm not trying to start any problems. I want this community to think about what we do and why we do it, not just vomit up what we've learned as gospel. We need to question what we do and find better ways to do it. 

Best,

Chuck


----------



## markpulawski (Nov 19, 2004)

Chuck I think the stress factor can go under scientific reasons. I recently introduced a trio of thumbnails into a 100 gallon tank that I had 4 Luecs in, I thought with all of that space they would all find a niche but within minutes a thumb was riding the largest Luec around the tank. I witnessed this 2 or 3 more times then pulled the thumbs, there is no way this could have been considered healthy. Other than raising out some different babies together this was my first real attempt at mixing, I consider it a failure and would not try it again unless I had something about 3 times as big.
I know I could have waited a couple of weeks and let them sort it out but I could not imagine this was not a real detrimental scenario and felt to let it continue would have been cruel.


----------



## Rusty_Shackleford (Sep 2, 2010)

Chuck,
I posted the statement you referenced in your original post. I was speaking specifically about mixing morphs of the same species, as that was the topic of that particular thread in which my statement appeared. Obviously mixing morphs will create a viable hybrid which potentially could be released into the general hobby. 

Can different species be mixed? Probably, given attention to the specific habitat, food, space, and environmental criteria of all the species involved. Does it benefit the animals to be housed in a mixed species tank versus a single species tank? I can't say. Sometimes just because you CAN do something, doesn't mean that you SHOULD do it. 

My fear is that someone who is just getting into keeping dart frogs, who has never kept one before, will decide "Hey I can keep a mixed species vivarium" before they any have any practical experience keeping one species in a single species tank. 
This potentially opens up a whole new set of problems to an inexperienced keeper before even successfully learning basic husbandry techniques and best practices. This and every other forum is full of questions/problems about very basic concepts from new keepers. Openly promoting mixed species tanks will only serve to add to these problems at best and at worst may cause harm to the animals we love so much. 

I know this is not the "scientific" answer you were aiming for, but I did feel the need to explain my original post that you referenced. These are just my thoughts and I appreciate your thoughts and everyone else's as well. 
Thanks. 
Jon


----------



## Ed (Sep 19, 2004)

Okay, we can break this down into a couple of different issues that have a scientific background.. 

The first is stress where behavioral mechanisms cause some form of negative interaction. The most simple of these is the consumption of one animal by another but that is rarely an issue in dendrobatid enclosures.. so we have to look at the more complex issues.. One of these occurs when you have animals that have similar body shapes and behaviors in the same enclosure. This would be more than one species of dendrobatid housed in the same enclosure. Where this can cause stress issues are where the two species interact with territorial or resource guarding behaviors. In this case we can see two possible scenarios, 
1) where territorial displays are not recognized by one species resulting in non-stop display in one species,
2) territorial/resource guarding behaviors are recognized but submission/release behaviors are not recognized. This results in stress for both species. 

Contary to a lot of opinions, you typically do not get stress from two disparate species inhabiting the same enclosure provided that the enclosure supports the correct conditions for all species. Typically people do not design the enclosures to meet the specific requirements of all species resulting in enviromental stress for one or more species. 

The other main "scientific" reason is to avoid using species from seperate regions (ideally they should be from the exact same region) is the issues from novel pathogens jumping species. This has been seen in multiple taxa including frogs.. The evolution of chytrid into a global pathogen is probably due to more than one strain sharing genetics (http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2011/10/31/1111915108.full.pdf).... There are other pathogens that are a risk as well, for example the group of iridoviruses (including ranaviruses), are known to jump host species and taxa (see http://potomacwildlife.org/disease/ranavirus.pdf), including from/to invertebrates (see for example http://vdi.sagepub.com/content/19/6/674.full.pdf and further (short mention) http://www.biosecurity.govt.nz/files/biosec/consult/draft-squamata-aus-ra.pdf..... 

This is a real risk since few people in the pet trade take appropriate action to help reduce or prevent novel pathogens from becoming established in both the hobby and in the local enviroment even though the precautions are fairly simple (double bag all solid waste including plant cuttings and discard into the appropriate waste stream (do not plant outside or where water can run into the enviroment, do not compost), and bleach all waste water). We have seen multiple pathogens make the escape to the enviroment (for example mycoplasma infections in native tortoises and box turtles)..... 

Some comments,

Ed


----------



## SmackoftheGods (Jan 28, 2009)

Chuck, I don't know you personally, but you're revered by many, and I want to say before starting my post that I have much respect for you considering all the things I've heard. I also wanna say that I'm terribly sorry if my post isn't particularly cogent... or if it's just repeating information that has been discussed in this thread already... I've been hitting the sauce a little heavy today....

I wanna mention that everything Ed said above me I've seen in other threads around the board.

I'm not entirely sure whether or not the ambiguity in the original post has been clarified. Are we talking about different morphs of the same (or similar species) being mixed? Or are we talking about different species being mixed?

If the discussion is of different species being mixed, then the issue could be resolved by mixing those within the exact same locality, but not of the same family (I know some mention throughout the board has been of mixing certain tree frogs with dendrobatids. Assuming this were to take place, this would take care of the issues of similar body shapes inspiring aggression, as well as possibly the novel pathogens mentioned). Assuming the enclosure is designed to accomodate both species, mixing significantly distant relatives within the same locality might be alright.

If we're talking about mixing morphs, on the other hand.... Well, the way the dart frog hobby defines the word "morph" is not the same as the rest of the herp hobby (which simply focuses on color). We use the word "morph" and the word "locality" interchangably. If you're mixing morphs then, necessarily, you are mixing frogs that do not come from the same locality (and all of a sudden you have the "novel pathogen" issue Ed is discussing). You are also mixing the same species (which initiates the similar body type Ed was discussing) and as we all know, Dendrobatids can be very territorial.

I imagine your instace of the Anolis with the Dendrobates working is a combination of the Anolis not being able to eat your Dendrobates, and the fact that the body shapes are so incredibly different that it wouldn't inspire aggression from either species. I cannot, personally, attest to whether or not there is a novel pathogen issue in this situation, though, considering I am not well educated in lizards....

I hope my post has been of some minor value, at least?


----------



## Taron (Sep 23, 2009)

My biggest concern is if we start cross breeding we will lose true variations. Once those variations are gone in the wild then we are the last resort. Essentially what i tell everyone is that if you like a blue frog a green frog and a red frog. Dont mix them because eventually they will be gone from the wild. You cant redo mixing and start over with a clean genetic slate if all wild populations are extinct.

Scientifically if scientist want to study a specific variation but it is gone in the wild. Then we would be the last straw. A cross bred frog would not give correct data to study. Regardless of wc or cb origin so it doesnt matter if we sustain the population inside or outside. Obviously we would prefer to do so in its natural state of being.


----------



## Rusty_Shackleford (Sep 2, 2010)

ReptilesEtcetera said:


> My biggest concern is if we start cross breeding we will lose true variations. Once those variations are gone in the wild then we are the last resort. Essentially what i tell everyone is that if you like a blue frog a green frog and a red frog. Dont mix them because eventually they will be gone from the wild. You cant redo mixing and start over with a clean genetic slate if all wild populations are extinct.
> 
> Scientifically if scientist want to study a specific variation but it is gone in the wild. Then we would be the last straw. A cross bred frog would not give correct data to study. Regardless of wc or cb origin so it doesnt matter if we sustain the population inside or outside. Obviously we would prefer to do so in its natural state of being.


Yeah there is no concern about cross contamination or spreading a parasite or some type of nasty pathogen is there Taron?


----------



## rmelancon (Apr 5, 2004)

My original post was regarding mixing same species, different morphs, which would be creating an outcross, not a true hybrid. Mixing different species, ie terribilis and reticulatus as an example, or glass frogs with dart frogs, there are a host of "scientific" reasons to avoid.


----------



## Ed (Sep 19, 2004)

rmelancon said:


> Mixing different species, ie terribilis and reticulatus as an example, or glass frogs with dart frogs, there are a host of "scientific" reasons to avoid.


I'm not sure that there are any real scientific reasons to not house conspecific glass frogs with conspecific dendrobatids. 

Ed


----------



## Ed (Sep 19, 2004)

ReptilesEtcetera said:


> My biggest concern is if we start cross breeding we will lose true variations. Once those variations are gone in the wild then we are the last resort. Essentially what i tell everyone is that if you like a blue frog a green frog and a red frog. Dont mix them because eventually they will be gone from the wild. You cant redo mixing and start over with a clean genetic slate if all wild populations are extinct.
> 
> Scientifically if scientist want to study a specific variation but it is gone in the wild. Then we would be the last straw. A cross bred frog would not give correct data to study. Regardless of wc or cb origin so it doesnt matter if we sustain the population inside or outside. Obviously we would prefer to do so in its natural state of being.


I think the OP was fairly clear that this scenario wasn't what he was referring to...... 

Ed


----------



## chuckpowell (May 12, 2004)

All in all I don't see any scientific reasons to not mix. There are plenty of "moral" and husbandry reasons that are completely valid, but many that we spout everyday (including myself) don't seem to hold up under scrutiny. Mixing frogs of different morphs or related species is a bad idea because of potential "hybrids." I've seem what Mark described of unrelated species of vastly different size interacting and in those cases its probably not a good idea to mix as their competing for the same space and food. I don't believe stress is much of a problem with our animals, with the possible exception of us looming over their tanks - but in general many species we keep don't seem to mind that so much. Mixing is done commonly in zoos and aquariums and sometimes its out of ignorance, but sometimes they might have the right idea. 

As for our animals being the last and best hope for scientists studying these animals - if we get to that point the animals are already lost. Any decent scientists wouldn't use the animals in our tanks. SmackoftheGods thank you for your complements, but I'm not any better than anyone else, in fact there are many, many keepers today who are far better than I ever was. I've just been at it long, 25+ years of looking at the frogs almost every day teaches you things. I'm a scientists by profession, but I work as a paleontologists (dirt and dead things; USGS Professional Pages - Charles Powell). Much of the science Ed and others discuss is mostly beyond me. I ask these questions because I don't know the answer and I see that many in the hobby haven't really thought it through either. Ed once again thanks for your insight and knowledge. 

Best,

Chuck


----------



## MonarchzMan (Oct 23, 2006)

One scientific reason not to mix that has not yet been said is that frogs are still of use to scientific studies. I, for example, have recently thought of asking hobbyists to toss SLS froglets or frogs that die in ethanol and sent my way so that I can extract DNA for phylogenetic analyses or identification of genes. As far as sampling goes, the hobby has many different localities available for many different species, which are often poorly sampled in the literature, and any dead frog could be made of use to those of us studying the genetics of such animals.

Obviously, hybridization renders that use of these frogs to science useless.

My adviser, in fact, is working with a hobbyist friend of his so that we may be able to try to identify what genes control various phenotypic variations (e.g., color, pattern) in tinctorius. Knowing the parentage of these frogs we'll use is absolutely critical.


----------



## Rusty_Shackleford (Sep 2, 2010)

This is a perfect example of what I was refering to in my post. 

http://www.dendroboard.com/forum/754346-post1.html


----------



## thedude (Nov 28, 2007)

rmelancon said:


> My original post was regarding mixing same species, different morphs, which would be creating an outcross, not a true hybrid. Mixing different species, ie terribilis and reticulatus as an example, or glass frogs with dart frogs, there are a host of "scientific" reasons to avoid.


Not so, as I've said before, in biology the term hybrid doesn't just refer to 2 different species. It refers to morphs, varieties, and phenotypes. All outcrosses are hybrids, but all hybrids are not outcrosses essentially.


----------



## Scott (Feb 17, 2004)

I'd never off scientific reasons for not mixing as I'm not a scientist.

I even believe it is possible to mix - but not species that will cross breed.

My ONLY issue with people talking about mixing frogs (frogs that will not interbreed ONLY) is that it encourages people without the proper experience to give it a try.

The type of experience I'm talking about isn't something you read about - it's something you have from years of caring for, and observing, your frogs.

Interbreeding? Not a topic to be discussed here - for a number of reasons.

s


----------



## flippn97 (Jun 29, 2012)

Scott said:


> Interbreeding? Not a topic to be discussed here - for a number of reasons.
> 
> s


Not on interbreeding, but just a general question since I am new to the forum, has anyone ever considered doing "papers" on them? or forming a registry, it would help to keep bloodlines pure (as long as people are honest, or there is a way to test them genetically.)


----------



## Ed (Sep 19, 2004)

flippn97 said:


> Not on interbreeding, but just a general question since I am new to the forum, has anyone ever considered doing "papers" on them? or forming a registry, it would help to keep bloodlines pure (as long as people are honest, or there is a way to test them genetically.)


Absolutely there have been two different registries available for quite awhile now.. See 
Amphibian Steward Network | Tree Walkers International and/or

Welcome to Frogtracks


----------



## flippn97 (Jun 29, 2012)

Thanks ed, I took a look at those, they don't seem very accurate on tracking and such. I guess I am used to horses where you can track the lineage all the way back generations, has anyone thoght of that, where every frog has its own papers? It would be fairly easy to do as each frog has it own markings correct? Paint horses have a photo attached directly to their paper work. Just a thought...


----------



## Dev30ils (May 1, 2012)

flippn97 said:


> Thanks ed, I took a look at those, they don't seem very accurate on tracking and such. I guess I am used to horses where you can track the lineage all the way back generations, has anyone thoght of that, where every frog has its own papers? It would be fairly easy to do as each frog has it own markings correct? Paint horses have a photo attached directly to their paper work. Just a thought...


While having a system to track dendrobatids and their lineages back for generations would be excellent, the practicality of this is somewhat daunting. I'm sure that for horses a database or "papers" have been maintained for decades since horses are so closely tied to their human counterparts. 

However, with frogs breeding is much more prolific than with horses (or other mammals) and difficulty has arisen in tracking individuals all the way from egg clutches to adulthood. Currently WAZA is working on the difficulty of tracking individual reptiles and amphibians as they migrate from their old ISIS software to the new ZIMS software. Sadly, as individual hobbyists we have no access to this (we can play around with a demo last time I checked). 

This doesn't even touch on the fact that many hobbyists likely have no knowledge or potentially incorrect knowledge of the lineages of their frogs, so do we exclude them from the database or enter incorrect data?

Honestly, I would love to work on building an efficient way to track everyone's frogs and would consider offering my time and efforts to an organization like TWI to do that. I just don't know if we'll ever have an all-encompassing database for everyone.


----------



## Ed (Sep 19, 2004)

Dev30ils said:


> difficulty of tracking individual reptiles and amphibians as they migrate from their old ISIS software to the new ZIMS software. Sadly, as individual hobbyists we have no access to this (we can play around with a demo last time I checked).


Actually TWI is a member of ISIS and we are going to be using ZIMS... so yes, the hobby does have access to it, if they choose. 



Dev30ils said:


> This doesn't even touch on the fact that many hobbyists likely have no knowledge or potentially incorrect knowledge of the lineages of their frogs, so do we exclude them from the database or enter incorrect data?


Actually if you start entering where everyone got thier frogs, one can draw the lines back towards the original breeders.. And even in cases where that cannot be determined, that doesn't mean that the population as it stands now cannot be managed for the long-term. Inbreeding depression is known and documented in anurans both in captivity and in segregated populations in the wild... 

Some comments

Ed


----------



## Ed (Sep 19, 2004)

flippn97 said:


> Thanks ed, I took a look at those, they don't seem very accurate on tracking and such. I guess I am used to horses where you can track the lineage all the way back generations, has anyone thoght of that, where every frog has its own papers? It would be fairly easy to do as each frog has it own markings correct? Paint horses have a photo attached directly to their paper work. Just a thought...


The only reason we don't have a more complete lineage is because the hobby has shown little interest in it.... 

Ed


----------



## Dev30ils (May 1, 2012)

Ed said:


> Actually TWI is a member of ISIS and we are going to be using ZIMS... so yes, the hobby does have access to it, if they choose.


Glad to hear that, seems like a solid system so far. How do individuals gain access to it? I'm assuming a TWI membership would be required.

Or do we supply our information to TWI and they enter it for us?


----------



## Ed (Sep 19, 2004)

Dev30ils said:


> Glad to hear that, seems like a solid system so far. How do individuals gain access to it? I'm assuming a TWI membership would be required.
> 
> Or do we supply our information to TWI and they enter it for us?


Amphibian Steward Network | Tree Walkers International 

Ed


----------



## BrianWI (Feb 4, 2012)

I would say breeding different morphs or locales together could provide valuable insight (this has been done already). However, to be of the most value, it would need to be done openly and that seems to get those who have tried it shunned.

For most people, to test the differences (if any) between two locales, a mating would need to be arranged. The results could show several different things.

The part that is generally the struggle is keeping such frogs OUT of the trade population. Hence, I believe being able to do it openly is a must. Driven underground, it becomes easier for these unknown frogs to enter the hobby trade.


----------



## Ed (Sep 19, 2004)

BrianWI said:


> I would say breeding different morphs or locales together could provide valuable insight (this has been done already).....
> 
> For most people, to test the differences (if any) between two locales, a mating would need to be arranged. The results could show several different things.


Insight into what?


----------



## BrianWI (Feb 4, 2012)

Ed,

Figure it out.


----------



## dendrobateslover (Aug 18, 2010)

I can say (as ashamed as I am to admit it, since the frogs are kept at my father's office I had absolutely no control over the matter) that I have seen firsthand what mixing CAN do in certain cases. I do not have precise details as I am not there to observe on a regular enough basis, but what I can say is it likely caused the death of two froglets.

My father is a HORRIBLE pet owner. He buys ONLY on impulse. There hasn't been ONE pet that we've ever had that he's actually done research on the care of, let alone actually cares for it properly. I could go into detail with a large number of examples, many of which I still take care of, but that is besides the point. I constructed a nice little 10 gallon vivarium for my father two years ago for Father's Day, and I did plenty of research on what frogs would be best and that mixing was NOT a great idea for the above reasons as well as the other reasons covered elsewhere. My father, being the arrogant know-it-all that he is, decides that my several months of in-depth research and talking with many experienced frog keepers couldn't possibly be more accurate than his 'I want it to have many colors so it looks pretty.' As hard as I tried to convince him, he went ahead and bought two Panamanian green and black auratus froglets and one leuc froglet from Black Jungle. Shortly thereafter, one of the auratus frequently would try to escape-the other two seemed perfectly satisfied and made no attempts whatsoever. Eventually that frog went missing and must have died since we never saw it again. Then, last October, my father went to the Massachusetts reptile expo with me and against my wishes, he bought a BLUE auratus. Now he had THREE different morphs in the same 10 gallon tank. The blue auratus died from not eating-it was very shy and seemed to be slightly picked on by the other frogs. I don't know if that was because of morph or just because the other two were already established, but either way my father's lack of good judgement led to the unneccessary deaths of two froglets. Not to mention that he took such horrible care of his viv that I had to completely replace it-the entire surface was covered in mold, and the smell was awful. There were rotting plants in there that he never bothered to take out, and it was an overall mess. I have since taken over the care of his frogs while I work there this summer, and have suggested to him that he get a 'frog shelf' so he can have multiple terrariums and multiple species/localities without unneccessary mixing. He ALMOST bought a pair of blue jeans pumilio to go in his current tank with THREE OTHER DARTS. His only justification is always, 'well the zoos and aquariums all do it.'

Anyways, sorry for the rant. The moral of the story, so to speak, is that while mixing species can be okay in CERTAIN situations where people are experienced with the species they are mixing (they know species X is arboreal whereas species Y is primarily terrestrial, and they're found in the same area, so they double the terrarium size and add extra height for species X and floor space for species Y). The problem is when beginners or irresponsible people like my father think that they should do it for aesthetics without thinking of the frogs.

I'm also sure there are reasons on a genetic level, as that would be how localities form (obviously there's not one 'gene' for a specific appearance, but if localities didn't have that genetic variation their color/pattern would be very similar). Also, if you think about it, that's how new species form. First there is species A that lives in rainforest X. Rainforest X splits up into three separate environments (X, Y, and Z) over time. Since species A is originally from all three areas, populations will be isolated from one another. As habitats X, Y, and Z change, the isolated species A will adapt to survive in those isolated environments-creating species B and C (assuming one of the climates stays the same where adaptation is largely unnecessary). Since evolution isn't exactly the quickest thing in the world, I personally believe that the many different morphs of tinctorius or pumilio will branch off eventually into multiple species as their environments change (if we humans don't completely screw up their habitats) over hundreds if not thousands of years. Look at the Galapagos. Perfect example of how one species of animal would be distributed in isolated populations which would evolve separately and become separate species entirely.

While I don't know exactly HOW different localities are on a biological level, I'm only insinuating based on knowledge of evolution and intuition. I'm sure if you were to look closely enough in the field, isolated localities of the same species would have slightly different habits based on their environment. Just a thought.

Sorry for the novel!


----------



## thedude (Nov 28, 2007)

BrianWI said:


> Ed,
> 
> Figure it out.


Poor response to a very legitimate question. I'm sure many others (myself included) are interested in knowing what insight you are talking about?


----------



## Golden State Mantellas (Mar 12, 2011)

BrianWI said:


> I would say breeding different morphs or locales together could provide valuable insight (this has been done already).


This is exactly the type of baseless argument the OP is talking about.



BrianWI said:


> Ed,
> 
> Figure it out.


Is this really necessary? Being that he is an actual scientist, I'm sure Ed can "figure it out." Being that I am not a scientist, can you elaborate for my sake, because I can't fathom the insight that breeding individuals from different locales to each other could provide, that breeding an individual from one locale to another individual from the same locale could not provide.


----------



## chuckpowell (May 12, 2004)

I'm started this thread and I'm sorry its degraded into something far from what I intended. I can think of NO reason to interbreed various morphs of a frog species. It will not expand our knowledge of these frogs in the wild or aid in developing better husbandry. If someone can think of one then put it out for discussion. But, simply saying "you know what it is" is crap because no one knows what it is and I'm sure it won't hold up to scrutiny.

Best,

Chuck


----------



## BrianWI (Feb 4, 2012)

Ed likes to follow me around and cause trouble, hence why I do not talk to him outside the TD

Cross-breeding of distinct color morphs of the Strawberry Poison Frog (Dendrobates pumilio) from the Bocas del Toro Archipelago, Panama

This is a good example of what I am talking about.


----------



## MonarchzMan (Oct 23, 2006)

BrianWI said:


> Ed likes to follow me around and cause trouble, hence why I do not talk to him outside the TD
> 
> Cross-breeding of distinct color morphs of the Strawberry Poison Frog (Dendrobates pumilio) from the Bocas del Toro Archipelago, Panama
> 
> This is a good example of what I am talking about.


How is that useful to the hobby?

Further, you realize that they had facilities far larger than the capabilities then most hobbyists, so hobbyists would not be able to do a study like that to the degree that they did.

Finally, most cross breeding experiments at this point look at molecular genetics, also beyond the capabilities of most hobbyists. This study was done in 2004. Molecular techniques have advances incredibly, even in the last five years. Most cross breeding experiments that I know of that are happening now deal with QTL mapping, which involves sequencing many, many individuals across a range of phenotypes to figure out what controls those phenotypes. One of my friends is doing so with rice. And has several hundred hybrids he's working with.

I don't think that using this example has any real relevance to what can or should be done in the hobby.


----------



## Ed (Sep 19, 2004)

Brian,

You made a vague statement without any references of any form, anecdotal or otherwise, which is why I asked the question. 
If you think being asked to clarify a vague statement is harassing you, then you are probably playing in the wrong sandbox. 

In this day and age, crossbreeding populations has limited value in real research since we can now utilize DNA analysis to estimate when two populations were last in contact (for example see http://bnoonan.org/Papers/Noonan_Gaucher_06.pdf). Some things like mate selection and outbreeding depression can be determined via crossbreeding but the production of viable eggs or tadpoles in the first generation, doesn't indicate that the population is viable past the F1 generation since outbreeding depression can reduce the fitness of generations further down the road, which is a very important point (see for example this review http://dornsife.usc.edu/labs/edmands/documents/Edmands_2007.pdf). 

Some comments

Ed


----------



## Ed (Sep 19, 2004)

chuckpowell said:


> I'm started this thread and I'm sorry its degraded into something far from what I intended. I can think of NO reason to interbreed various morphs of a frog species. It will not expand our knowledge of these frogs in the wild or aid in developing better husbandry. If someone can think of one then put it out for discussion. But, simply saying "you know what it is" is crap because no one knows what it is and I'm sure it won't hold up to scrutiny.
> 
> Best,
> 
> Chuck


Chuck,

Don't be sorry. These threads can take on a life of thier own and the discussion is still relevent and valuable. 

Ed


----------



## BrianWI (Feb 4, 2012)

Hobbyists cannot DNA sequence a frog (yet). However, they may want to learn, observe and explore. And they should if they desire. The pursuit of knowledge and science is not limited to academia or commercial interests. The other thread on regina/GO is a good example. People are curious. Many have asked if they should test mate the two. The answer: yes.

Exploring science doesn't start with the latest, modern techniques. It begins by exploring the world in easy, manageable bites.


----------



## MonarchzMan (Oct 23, 2006)

BrianWI said:


> Hobbyists cannot DNA sequence a frog (yet). However, they may want to learn, observe and explore. And they should if they desire. The pursuit of knowledge and science is not limited to academia or commercial interests. The other thread on regina/GO is a good example. People are curious. Many have asked if they should test mate the two. The answer: yes.


Should people pursue knowledge and scientific interest? Of course. But it has not been demonstrated at all what use crossing morphs has to the hobby. If you're interested in scientific pursuit, fine, so be it, but realize in order to detect trends, you need sample size. Like I said, these scientists that do crossbreeding experiments do so with hundreds of individuals.



> Exploring science doesn't start with the latest, modern techniques. It begins by exploring the world in easy, manageable bites.


If that were the case, then we would still be looking at evolution in Darwin's terms. But we have advanced so much beyond that. There are some observations he made that are still important today, but for the most part, his methodology is quite antiquated. If I suggested doing a phylogeny on one gene, I would likely be rejected from just about any journal I applied to because we no longer look at phylogenies in terms of one gene. Science always builds on itself and creates more appropriate methods. If you use old techniques, then your research will be heavily criticized for not using the more modern techniques that give more accurate results and better conclusions.


----------



## BrianWI (Feb 4, 2012)

We still teach about Darwin in biology. We still dissect the frogs when we could just look it up. Science is best hands on. GO/ regina... well within the grasp of hobbyists to test them out. I say, go for it!


----------



## thedude (Nov 28, 2007)

BrianWI said:


> GO/ regina... well within the grasp of hobbyists to test them out. I say, go for it!


This has been discussed extensively and it is a good project. But that is because many believe they are from the same population and should be mixed. We are actually trying to find out something useful here. Breeding other morphs together all willy nilly brings about what insight exactly? You still haven't answered the question. Or at least you haven't answered it in a way that suffices. 

Also, what you say holds no meaning if you don't back it up with some form of evidence. So "I say, go for it!" really does nothing for us...


----------



## MonarchzMan (Oct 23, 2006)

BrianWI said:


> We still teach about Darwin in biology. We still dissect the frogs when we could just look it up. Science is best hands on. GO/ regina... well within the grasp of hobbyists to test them out. I say, go for it!


We teach Darwin as an introduction to evolution and what observations he made. We don't actually still go for the same type of methods Darwin did. Darwin's discovery is of note because it is a unifying theory connecting all biology.

Dissecting frogs is irrelevant. You're talking about using dated techniques to do scientific study. Yes, you can dissect digital frogs, but if you want to do scientific study all the digital frogs in the world won't tell you what is in the stomach of a real frog or the DNA sequence from the mitochondria of a liver of a real frog. There is no better method for conducting scientific study on internal organs than dissection.

Again, like I said before, the crosses require many individuals to see a pattern, and likely as not, doing a cross between phenotypically similar morphs won't tell you much as to whether they are the same or different. Not with methods hobbyists easily have at their disposal. You could cross a Costa Rican Blue Jeans with a Panamanian Almirante pumilio, which can have phenotypic overlap, and you would likely get one that looks like the parents. It actually will not help to determine if it is the same or different populations. Because phenotypic variation is so variable within a population, after such a cross you would have to look at DNA to examine if there is increased heterozygosity from two genetically distinct parents.

The paper you even posted shows that it would not be as simple as you claim. Color is likely polygenic, so you won't see simple presence or absence of a color trait, but more likely variation.


----------



## BrianWI (Feb 4, 2012)

> This has been discussed extensively and it is a good project. But that is because many believe they are from the same population and should be mixed. We are actually trying to find out something useful here. Breeding other morphs together all willy nilly brings about what insight exactly? You still haven't answered the question. Or at least you haven't answered it in a way that suffices.


These debates go south when so much assumption is added. Willy nilly? No one said, willy nilly. Instead, like the GO/regina case, there are times there is info to be had.

The posted study found out same basic info on colors and patterns. _"This suggests that color pattern is under single locus control with dominance, whereas coloration may be under polygenic control, or may represent a single locus system with incomplete dominance."_ There is more information to learn.

Can you pick up a frog genome, read it, and tell me what his color and pattern are?


----------



## thedude (Nov 28, 2007)

BrianWI said:


> These debates go south when so much assumption is added. Willy nilly? No one said, willy nilly. Instead, like the GO/regina case, there are times there is info to be had.


....I just said that, Read it again. I said with those 2 morphs there is a reason for mixing because of some info we have that says they are the same population in the wild. And you STILL didn't answer the question. So excluding that case, what info is there to be found by you breeding x with y? And since it isn't willy nilly...why don't you tell us what x and y are?


----------



## MonarchzMan (Oct 23, 2006)

BrianWI said:


> These debates go south when so much assumption is added. Willy nilly? No one said, willy nilly. Instead, like the GO/regina case, there are times there is info to be had.
> 
> The posted study found out same basic info on colors and patterns. _"This suggests that color pattern is under single locus control with dominance, whereas coloration may be under polygenic control, or may represent a single locus system with incomplete dominance."_ There is more information to learn.


You still have avoided the question. How is this of any use to the hobby?



> Can you pick up a frog genome, read it, and tell me what his color and pattern are?


I can pick up a frog and tell you what its color and pattern are...

But genomes are not well known for the vast majority of animals, and further, even mapping full genomes is beyond the capabilities of many genetics labs. So how is an average hobbyist supposed to do aid in that without "modern techniques?"


----------



## BrianWI (Feb 4, 2012)

What if I wanted to know how banding works in Leucs? I would test it. What if I wanted to know, between two similarly patterned, but different colored strawberry dart frogs had that pattern expressed due to the same gene? What if I used a locale where a certain color/pattern is never expressed, to determine if the color/pattern in another locale was recessive or dominant?

One often does not know how useful information is until you have the information. Collecting data could have varied uses inside the hobby. Depends on what one wants to do with it.

In the GO/ regina thread, there are some other inconsistencies with other frogs that are mentioned. Those could be tested as well.


----------



## MonarchzMan (Oct 23, 2006)

Again, your avoiding the question. What use is that to the hobby?


----------



## BrianWI (Feb 4, 2012)

Let me ask others what uses they may have:

What are you doing with your frogs? Do you just want pets? Does the genetics behind their colors and patterns interest you? Do you ever wonder why you have an offspring with a different characteristic than the parents? Is anyone interested in linebreeding successfully(powder blue)? Are you hoping to "conserve the wild diversity"? Any other things you hope to learn?

I don't define my hobbies as someone else might. I, personally do not breed any dart frogs, but since other hobbies of mine include the genetics of color and pattern, doing so would enhance my knowledge of the subject and the enjoyability of my hobby. In this case, I like the pretty frogs.


----------



## SmackoftheGods (Jan 28, 2009)

Ed really does like to police the forum and bully those who spout of foundationless misinformation. He's so mean. The forum would be a way better place if Ed just let anyone say whatever they want unchecked. The ideal forum should be a pulic place where peers can share their bad ideas, not places where well educated, experienced people can correct faulty notions....

But I guess, since the world isn't an ideal place, if you want Ed to stop causing trouble you should probably start fact checking....


----------



## Dev30ils (May 1, 2012)

BrianWI said:


> What if I wanted to know how banding works in Leucs? I would test it. What if I wanted to know, between two similarly patterned, but different colored strawberry dart frogs had that pattern expressed due to the same gene? What if I used a locale where a certain color/pattern is never expressed, to determine if the color/pattern in another locale was recessive or dominant?


I feel like the ONLY thing you could do with this information is create designer morphs, and honestly what is the point of that? There's already so much naturally occurring diversity in so many dendrobatids, why do we need to interfere with that at all?

Just my thoughts,


----------



## Ed (Sep 19, 2004)

For those who want to look at a simple record of variation in pattern from one pair of frogs, I suggest checking out the original Terrarium Animals by Elke Zimmerman, TFH Publications. The variation in pattern from one pair of frogs is pretty interesting. 
It gives some idea of how much effort would go into attempting to manipulate pattern by crosses between populations of dendrobatids... 

Ed


----------



## MonarchzMan (Oct 23, 2006)

BrianWI said:


> Let me ask others what uses they may have:
> 
> What are you doing with your frogs? Do you just want pets? Does the genetics behind their colors and patterns interest you? Do you ever wonder why you have an offspring with a different characteristic than the parents? Is anyone interested in linebreeding successfully(powder blue)? Are you hoping to "conserve the wild diversity"? Any other things you hope to learn?


You are still avoiding the question. The hobby has been going to date without knowing the genome of the frogs, and it's been going pretty well. You do realize that you need large numbers of frogs to determine what you're suggesting, right?

Zoos have been conserving wild diversity for a long time without having to know the genomes, or even particular genes, of every animal they have in their collections. We are capable of doing the same thing.

You're suggesting something that is not feasible for most hobbyists. Let's look at a simple set up where we do crosses with 2 morphs of of a species of frog where we're trying to understand the genetics behind the differences. We could have a male and a female of these two morphs, but for sample size, and to be able to find trends, we need a large sample size. Let's say 6 pairs (3 males of morph A with 3 females of morph B, and 3 females of morph A with 3 males of morph B). So, we have to house those frogs. We'll put them in 10 gallon tanks (which is probably small for them, but we'll try to be as economical about it as possible). So parents have six 10 gallon tanks. Just for ease, we'll say we bought these pairs as reproductively mature adults.

Now, we have to do the crosses. Let's say they're laying, but like most dart frogs, don't lay many eggs, so we'll say 8 eggs per clutch every two weeks. So for the first laying, we get 48 eggs, and just for kicks, we'll say all of them hatch out into tadpoles 2 weeks later. For ease, we'll say these frogs are a tinc. So they have to be housed individually. So here is what we've invested so far:

Six ten gallon tanks
Forty-eight cups for tadpoles
1 month

Two months later, the tadpoles morph out, and amazingly all survive and don't have SLS. But we have to wait until reproductive maturity for these frogs because A. color pattern changes a bit through the growth of a froglet, and B. all of the offspring are heterozygous at this point, and we need to go to F2 to determine simple heritability of traits. So we wait a year (we'll say a year, even though tincs are one of the longer species to mature) for these frogs to mature. As froglets, we could house them in larger numbers, but at reproductive maturity, we have to separate them out (especially with territorial species). Now, we can breed the F1s to each other to get a 1:2:1 ratio (or 3:1 if we're dealing with simple dominance) for those simple traits. We don't necessarily need all of the offspring, so let's make three pairs from the first type of crossing with the parents and then three pairs with the other type of crossing. We wait for those eight eggs each and two weeks for hatching tadpoles. What are we at now?

12 ten gallon tanks
Tanks for rearing froglets
48 cups for tadpoles (we'll reuse those old ones)
1 year 4 months

But like I said, we can't determine color and pattern until adulthood. So we wait another two months for morphing and then a year to reach adulthood. And now we can look at phenotypes and compare them to expected genotypes. For simple dominant-recessive single locus genes, that is simple, but it is less simple for those polygenic genes. For those you'd really have to do QTL mapping to determine that. But Summers' paper suggests that this may be far more complicated because color is polygenic, and pattern is single locus (but, let's not forget that pattern on pumilio is just spots, not stripes, oblong patterns, etc like seen in tincs), so likely as not, our frogs are going to show a polygenic variation in color and I'd bet pattern. So how much can be determined from just looking at phenotypic variation from a cross such as this? Not much. What was our final tally?

12 ten gallon tanks
Even more tanks to rear froglets
48 tadpole cups
2 years and 6 months

And let's not forget euthanizing those 96 frogs since it would be irresponsible to sell hybrids.

My hypothetical set up was probably the bare minimum and assuming that everything goes according to plan: you get eggs at 1 year, eggs don't mold, froglets don't have SLS, etc... Like I said, I know people doing hybridization experiments with hundreds of individuals. And then they're going to do molecular testing to determine where genes are. If you try to cut corners, like only using one pair or only using 10 tadpoles from pairings or whatever, you're not going to be able to reliable say what the inheritance patterns are for morphs.

So what hobbyist has the facilities to devote that much time and space to such an experiment?

And again, there is little use for it to the hobby.



> I don't define my hobbies as someone else might. I, personally do not breed any dart frogs, but since other hobbies of mine include the genetics of color and pattern, doing so would enhance my knowledge of the subject and the enjoyability of my hobby. In this case, I like the pretty frogs.


So why are trying to instigate others doing crosses that will only bring the ire of other hobbyists on them for little pay out?


----------



## BrianWI (Feb 4, 2012)

Avoiding the question? It is so obvious at this point, it is standing on the end of your nose.

The value may be in that to the people looking for such knowledge, that is what the hobby is about. You may not like it. You may not believe people should do it. You may shun those that do. However, it is already being done (the linked study). GO/regina may be looked into. Alanis/Inferalanis, Blue/Green Sips.

All questions begging to be answered. Like a mystery to be solved.


----------



## MonarchzMan (Oct 23, 2006)

Yes, people are doing these crosses. I know them. Scientists with big labs and the capabilities to investigate the questions with appropriate techniques. Not hobbyists. Like I demonstrated, it is of very little value to hobbyists for a lot of resources and time. So it is not of use to the hobby. The hobby has and will likely continue to shun designer morphs, which you seem to be advocating. And further, you admitted that you're not breeding at all, so you're just instigating for some poor soul to get reamed by the hobby, and likely as not, not coming up with any real conclusions and a lot of wasted time and resources.


----------



## BrianWI (Feb 4, 2012)

No one ever, in a hobby, sorted any genetic information because they didn't have grand resources? That is quite the erroneous statement. Along with trying to stick the make-believe about designer frogs in there. There is no fact in your post at all.


----------



## MonarchzMan (Oct 23, 2006)

There is quite a bit of fact to what I've posted. I do, in fact, know folks who are doing this, and they do need numbers and time that most hobbyists are not willing to devote to.

You are correct in saying that no one in a hobby sorted any genetic information is an erroneous statement. Good thing I didn't say it. What I did say, and did demonstrate, in order to determine inheritance patterns, for certainty, you need to go to F2, which means probably 2-4 years commitment, plus you need sample size. Doing it with two or three individuals isn't going to teach you anything.

But there is little use to that for this hobby. If you want to bastardize your animals, I'd suggest going over to corn snakes, ball pythons, and leopard geckos where it's welcomed and encouraged.


----------



## BrianWI (Feb 4, 2012)

It is hard to follow some of what you say. Since some may not have the resources, the ones that do should not try it either?

I know going to "designer frogs" and "bastardization" is something you think is cool, but it is also the logical fallacy of Appealing to Emotion. It isn't a real argument.


----------



## Ed (Sep 19, 2004)

BrianWI said:


> I know going to "designer frogs" and "bastardization" is something you think is cool, but it is also the logical fallacy of Appealing to Emotion. It isn't a real argument.


Brian, 
did you forget that you said this? 



BrianWI said:


> This is one reason I generally approve of creating new hybrids or morphs in captive breeding efforts. Desire for new morphs may take pressure of looking for new WC specimens.


 
from http://www.dendroboard.com/forum/sc...side-new-species-discovery-12.html#post702889

Seems more than a little hypocritcial of you to attempt to accuse that of JP when you are on record of having said you approve of it..... and you are directly appealing to emotion to try and get him upset..... 

Some comments

Ed


----------



## BrianWI (Feb 4, 2012)

Ed,

I know going off topic is a need when you are losing an argument, but please, none of what I am saying is about designer morphs. Completely different topic. I know you want to degrade the conversation into that, a few of you seem to always have that need. But for this topic discussion... irrelevant.


----------



## thedude (Nov 28, 2007)

BrianWI said:


> Ed,
> 
> I know going off topic is a need when you are losing an argument, but please, none of what I am saying is about designer morphs. Completely different topic. I know you want to degrade the conversation into that, a few of you seem to always have that need. But for this topic discussion... irrelevant.


How is what he said off topic? How about you quit dodging questions, making claims with no evidence, and trying to irritate people when your "argument" isn't going the way you want.

And as I have said in the past. Why would anyone trust your word over that of educated biologists and the sources they provide? This is one of many pointless arguments you have started that lead literally no where except to everyone realizing you have no idea what you're talking about. Go crawl back under your bridge you troll.


----------



## guylovesreef (May 3, 2012)

+1 ^ I'm sorry but this guy is just a troll and instigator. nothing but baseless opinions from quick google searches and his own "studies" and "research"

Then posts pathetic personal attacks and opinions on other members in hopes of others building a similar dislike towards them.


----------



## chuckpowell (May 12, 2004)

I am sorry I started this thread. Its degraded into a mess. You people should be better than this. Grow up and act like adults. There is no good reason to interbreed different morphs. We are not scientists and we shouldn't pretend we are. We're just hobbyist who enjoy our frogs. Leave the science to the scientists. Along those line it seems many here don't know what science is - does this sound familiar - just because we can do something doesn't mean we should. Science answers questions. What questions does mixing morphs together in our tanks answer - nothing. We can pretend it will but it really doesn't. Most any species within a genus can mate with any other species and produce offspring. Do we want this in our hobby - NO. Will it happen - probably yes. Hybrid Dendrobatids have been around for decades. Thank God they haven't become popular. There are many people out there that care more about the money to be made than the animals. Now lets put this to rest and discuss something interesting. Something we can do ... like how can we produce larger, more colorful frogs like wild caught animals. A few hobbyist produce large, beautiful animals, but they are few. What do they do that the rest of us don't.

Best,

Chuck


----------



## Scott (Feb 17, 2004)

On _*that *_note - thread closed.

s



chuckpowell said:


> I am sorry I started this thread. Its degraded into a mess. You people should be better than this. Grow up and act like adults. There is no good reason to interbreed different morphs. We are not scientists and we shouldn't pretend we are. We're just hobbyist who enjoy our frogs. Leave the science to the scientists. Along those line it seems many here don't know what science is - does this sound familiar - just because we can do something doesn't mean we should. Science answers questions. What questions does mixing morphs together in our tanks answer - nothing. We can pretend it will but it really doesn't. Most any species within a genus can mate with any other species and produce offspring. Do we want this in our hobby - NO. Will it happen - probably yes. Hybrid Dendrobatids have been around for decades. Thank God they haven't become popular. There are many people out there that care more about the money to be made than the animals. Now lets put this to rest and discuss something interesting. Something we can do ... like how can we produce larger, more colorful frogs like wild caught animals. A few hobbyist produce large, beautiful animals, but they are few. What do they do that the rest of us don't.
> 
> Best,
> 
> Chuck


----------

