# regina, giant orange, matecho



## tonybmw328i (Oct 4, 2009)

just want to know how to tell these apart and if anyone could post pic of the three?


----------



## frogmanroth (May 23, 2006)

There are a couple good threads about the difference, it depends on whose line you have.

I have my lines written down some where(not here at the computer), here is some pics though.

Giant Orange- bigger than my regina and have more blue flashes








Regina- mine are smaller Rich frye line








Matecho- only black and yellow


----------



## ErickG (Nov 28, 2004)

There have been much discussion over the years whether Giant Oranges and Reginas are the same frog. Best thing to do is find out which line they are from. Being that its difficult to tell even with the color patterns, its best to just keep records of where they come from.

Gabe's got some great shots above but even with those its tough to tell. Blue flashes and under chin markings are not sure indicators. I've had Regina's from Patrick with and without blue chins. 

I also have a frog from Aaron that is labeled a Regina that have no blue markings AT ALL. If put in the same tank with Matecho's, they can certainly be mistaken for one. I will take pictures of her when I get the chance.

Here are some pictures to distinguish:
Regina/GO:


















Matecho's are a different story. They're mostly a yellow frog with some black patterns. Of course, this varies. Sean Stewart's recent imports have retained more solid yellow patterns like this one:


















The slightly older Matecho line (brought in '05) seem to have more black:









I believe, however, that Matecho's will have more varied offspring like Yellowbacks. They may also have some white lining on the underside and rear.

Either way, they're beautiful frogs. Definitely my favorites.


----------



## roberthvalera (Jun 9, 2006)

How many lines of Matecho are there? Mine definately look like the last pics with the more black. Theyre also not as big as my Regina I used to have.


----------



## skylsdale (Sep 16, 2007)

I would recommend taking the time to read this thread: http://www.dendroboard.com/forum/general-discussion/22089-re-giant-orange-vs-regina.html


----------



## azure89 (Jan 5, 2009)

I love the way those frogs look, awesome orangey yellow color


----------



## skylsdale (Sep 16, 2007)

ErickG said:


> I believe, however, that Matecho's will have more varied offspring like Yellowbacks.


I think it would be interesting to see some actual population dynamics surveys done regarding some of these morphs/populations. From what I can tell, the frogs we call Matecho, Saul, Yellowbacks...they are all found in the outlying areas of villages like Saul and Regina, which don't appear to be all that far apart from one another. I wonder how many of them are distinct populations, or if they are a large, contiguous population and what we are dividing into seperate morphs is just natural (or clinal) variation and captive line-breeding that is perpetuating certain traits. Statements like "I have a Regina that looks _just_ like a Matecho" makes me wonder: maybe that's because it is?

I also wonder: if when these frogs are collected, do collectors grab a diverse group of individuals to take back as a founder colony, or do they grab some of the most unique looking frogs (e.g. ones that are almost completely yellow, etc.), skewing our understanding of what this population, at least in the wild, looks like?


----------



## Woodsman (Jan 3, 2008)

I think you are exactly right, Ron. When we say what characteristics define a morph, then only breed frogs to match that definition, we can lose just the kind of genetic diversity that everyone says is so critical to perpetuating these frogs in the hobby.

Based on the reports from Mark pepper and Marcus (at Tropical Experience), Regina and GO are from the same locality and have (in the wild) a great amount of diversity. I think it is important to recognize this and work toward making pairings of frogs to try to restore some of the genetic diversity that existed before all the line-breeding started. There are probably only three or four lines of each Regina and GO in the hobby, so creating "mixed" pairs shouldn't be too difficult.

There are photos of Sauls on several European sites that are indistinguishable from Matechos (and many of our Matechos look just like Yellowbacks), so I think you're right in supposing that these represent a contiguous population (Saul is only 24 kilometers from Pic Matecho, so not very far at all).

Take care, Richard.



skylsdale said:


> I think it would be interesting to see some actual population dynamics surveys done regarding some of these morphs/populations. From what I can tell, the frogs we call Matecho, Saul, Yellowbacks...they are all found in the outlying areas of villages like Saul and Regina, which don't appear to be all that far apart from one another. I wonder how many of them are distinct populations, or if they are a large, contiguous population and what we are dividing into seperate morphs is just natural (or clinal) variation and captive line-breeding that is perpetuating certain traits. Statements like "I have a Regina that looks _just_ like a Matecho" makes me wonder: maybe that's because it is?
> 
> I also wonder: if when these frogs are collected, do collectors grab a diverse group of individuals to take back as a founder colony, or do they grab some of the most unique looking frogs (e.g. ones that are almost completely yellow, etc.), skewing our understanding of what this population, at least in the wild, looks like?


----------

