# Prolific breeders?



## cairo11 (Jan 8, 2011)

Was simply thinking about this the other day about surrogate parents and cant decide how to conclude over this aspect.

If I have a pair of pumilio that have given ne nothing but infertile eggs fir years now, yet have raised at least 90% of the tads I have placed in with them to surrogate.... Have witnessed both male/fem immediately transport and consistently rear/feed tads and always witness healthy froglets walk out.

Now, my question is... Is it correct to label this pair as a proven and prolific breeding pair or can they only be labeled that when they go through every single stage of breeding such as courting, laying and egg Fertilization along with what they do as surrogates?

Just curious as to what you (who breed obligates)consider a pair prolific/proven.


----------



## SnakePaparazzi (Jul 20, 2008)

I would say they are not a proven pair by any means! They are not reproducing whatsoever. I guess you could call them proven foster/surrogate parents though


----------



## Pumilo (Sep 4, 2010)

My opinion.


Pumilo said:


> I think a proven pair means that they have proven themselves to be viable breeders. A viable breeder has produced good froglets. Therefor, they should be referred to as a PROVEN PAIR, only after producing good froglets.
> 
> A calling male and a female that has produced eggs should be a SEXED PAIR.
> 
> A PROBABLE PAIR is the sellers best guess. Male may be calling or it may just be body shape and behavior. Female may be body shape and/or behavior.


From this thread. 
http://www.dendroboard.com/forum/general-discussion/80670-proven-pairs.html

So I would say they are not a proven pair.


----------



## hypostatic (Apr 25, 2011)

I concur with the above post. Although I don't have any obligates, I am also under the impression that a "proven pair" is supposed to be a pair that is capable of producing viable offspring (not just rearing them). This is what the "proven" means -- the frogs have bred and produced healthy froglets, and you are able to provide *proof*. If one, or both of your frogs is infertile you should not market them as "proven" I feel.

Another side to the same argument is this: imagine yourself buying a frog advertised as "proven", only to find that it is not capable of producing offspring...


----------



## Pumilo (Sep 4, 2010)

A proven surrogate pair would have value of their own, though, and could be advertised that way.


----------



## cairo11 (Jan 8, 2011)

hypostatic said:


> I concur with the above post. Although I don't have any obligates, I am also under the impression that a "proven pair" is supposed to be a pair that is capable of producing viable offspring (not just rearing them). This is what the "proven" means -- the frogs have bred and produced healthy froglets, and you are able to provide *proof*. If one, or both of your frogs is infertile you should not market them as "proven" I feel.
> 
> Another side to the same argument is this: imagine yourself buying a frog advertised as "proven", only to find that it is not capable of producing offspring...


Im sorry.... I should have stated that these are by no means going to the classifieds or sold to someone else.

They are actually my "santas little helpers "that have done wonders and picked up the slack for other stubborn obligates. Also, I do split them up after every other batch and give them a much needed break.


----------



## JeremyHuff (Apr 22, 2008)

You could sell them as Proven surrogates but why sell them at all. It would seem that they would be incredibly valuable for what they do.


----------



## hypostatic (Apr 25, 2011)

cairo11 said:


> Im sorry.... I should have stated that these are by no means going to the classifieds or sold to someone else.


Sorry if that came across as harsh or judgmental or anything. I was just expressing an opinion, and I MIGHT have used liberal text stylization/formatting that could indicate otherwise, but this was not my aim haha


----------



## cairo11 (Jan 8, 2011)

JeremyHuff said:


> You could sell them as Proven surrogates but why sell them at all. It would seem that they would be incredibly valuable for what they do.


Correct. They are truly priceless to me. I have 2 ten gals empty to place each separately to take a break for a few months and a 20 gal to do their thing. I know it might seem like too much to pull this iff and high stress for them, but they really have now done it as a routine and always get great results. I can place a film can or leaf with tads and you can actually see the male immediately make his way down,call over the clutch and then watch the female follow and both carry out into the broms. My goal will be to record the whole process and post it next batch.


----------



## goof901 (Jan 9, 2012)

what morph are your surrogate's?


----------



## cairo11 (Jan 8, 2011)

A pair of almirante.... Who happen to be amazing breeders 99.9% of the time in all phases of breeding.


----------



## Scott (Feb 17, 2004)

To me, only the real thing, raising their own all the way - counts.

I'm also against surrogate parenting because if a pair cannot figure out how to successfully raise their own offspring - those genes are not meant to be continued.

s


cairo11 said:


> Was simply thinking about this the other day about surrogate parents and cant decide how to conclude over this aspect.
> 
> If I have a pair of pumilio that have given ne nothing but infertile eggs fir years now, yet have raised at least 90% of the tads I have placed in with them to surrogate.... Have witnessed both male/fem immediately transport and consistently rear/feed tads and always witness healthy froglets walk out.
> 
> ...


----------



## Pumilo (Sep 4, 2010)

Scott said:


> To me, only the real thing, raising their own all the way - counts.
> 
> I'm also against surrogate parenting because if a pair cannot figure out how to successfully raise their own offspring - those genes are not meant to be continued.
> 
> s


Hey Scott, How do you feel about it if the pair IS successfully raising their own offspring, but they leave many more tads than they can care for? Say they leave 20 eggs but typically only raise 3 to 5 offspring at a time. What about using surrogates to raise some of the others?


----------



## cairo11 (Jan 8, 2011)

Pumilo said:


> Hey Scott, How do you feel about it if the pair IS successfully raising their own offspring, but they leave many more tads than they can care for? Say they leave 20 eggs but typically only raise 3 to 5 offspring at a time. What about using surrogates to raise some of the others?


Exactly what I was going to get to next pumilio!

Bjs,black jeans, loma and other bigger obligates in my experience give me 1 froglet and usually the rest of the tads are neglected or simply left behind in cans and die off...

I dont see how it can be a disadvantage to let 2 frogs that have failed in stage 1 of breeding numerous times through many different combinations to simply do 80% of what theyre wired to do. I actually feel it is healthy for them to at the least go through most phases as it is what they do.


----------



## Scott (Feb 17, 2004)

Then someone needs to cut the conditions down a bit so they're not laying so often.

I really believe that obligates should do their own thing - with as little interference as possible.

I don't have a BIG opinion on it - just my stated preference.

Just my opinion. Nothing personal at all - I've expressed the same opinion elsewhere.

s


Pumilo said:


> Hey Scott, How do you feel about it if the pair IS successfully raising their own offspring, but they leave many more tads than they can care for? Say they leave 20 eggs but typically only raise 3 to 5 offspring at a time. What about using surrogates to raise some of the others?


----------



## Pumilo (Sep 4, 2010)

Scott said:


> Then someone needs to cut the conditions down a bit so they're not laying so often.
> 
> I really believe that obligates should do their own thing - with as little interference as possible.
> 
> ...


I've never used a surrogate, just curious. My Solarte would leave about 3 clutches of about 7 eggs each within about a two week period. Then they would stop and raise only a few of the tads. The rest were left to die. I'm not sure how one would go about stopping them from laying those few clutches each time they were ready to breed.


----------



## hypostatic (Apr 25, 2011)

Pumilo said:


> Hey Scott, How do you feel about it if the pair IS successfully raising their own offspring, but they leave many more tads than they can care for? Say they leave 20 eggs but typically only raise 3 to 5 offspring at a time. What about using surrogates to raise some of the others?


I think its possible that in this scenario the parents are choosing the most fit of the offspring to keep raising since there is a resource limitation and they can't raise all of them.


----------



## Scott (Feb 17, 2004)

I really understand the pain in not raising everything possible for a frog, especially a rare frog.

I'm just wondering if we're raising future generations that will ONLY be able to be raised through surrogate methods.

s


----------



## epiphytes etc. (Nov 22, 2010)

It's possible that the parents "know" which offspring are the most viable and direct their energy into just those.

EDIT: hypo beat me to it


----------



## Pumilo (Sep 4, 2010)

Good points guys. Thanks.


----------



## Scott (Feb 17, 2004)

If someone wanted to convince me this wouldn't be an issue for future generations of surrogate offspring - they'd set up a pair that were raised as surrogates to see if they can naturally raise froglets.

It would be an interesting experiment.

s


Pumilo said:


> Good points guys. Thanks.


----------



## Pumilo (Sep 4, 2010)

Scott said:


> If someone wanted to convince me this wouldn't be an issue for future generations of surrogate offspring - they'd set up a pair that were raised as surrogates to see if they can naturally raise froglets.
> 
> It would be an interesting experiment.
> 
> s


That would be a neat experiment. I'm certainly not here to argue the point, just trying to learn a little something.


----------



## JimO (May 14, 2010)

cairo11 said:


> If I have a pair of pumilio that have given ne nothing but infertile eggs fir years now, yet have raised at least 90% of the tads I have placed in with them to surrogate.... Have witnessed both male/fem immediately transport and consistently rear/feed tads and always witness healthy froglets walk out.


How do you move the eggs/tads from the original parents to the almirante viv? I would imagine that it takes great care to do so without damaging the young.


----------



## cairo11 (Jan 8, 2011)

JimO said:


> How do you move the eggs/tads from the original parents to the almirante viv? I would imagine that it takes great care to do so without damaging the young.


Normally my obligates are good about laying inside cans and or on peperomia leaves...although reluctant to transfer items from one viv to another, Do ot and remove cans or leaf as it normally takes them minutes to spot tads and pick the up


----------



## JimO (May 14, 2010)

I suppose then that you have to wait until the tads have hatched? It's cool that both the almirante transport the young and that they are so responsive.


cairo11 said:


> Normally my obligates are good about laying inside cans and or on peperomia leaves...although reluctant to transfer items from one viv to another, Do ot and remove cans or leaf as it normally takes them minutes to spot tads and pick the up


----------



## JimO (May 14, 2010)

Also, if you don't mind me asking, what morphs are the surrogates raising and how does the survival rate with the surrogates compare with that of the parents? Thanks.


----------



## cairo11 (Jan 8, 2011)

JimO said:


> Also, if you don't mind me asking, what morphs are the surrogates raising and how does the survival rate with the surrogates compare with that of the parents? Thanks.


Right now they have 2 blk jean,3 drago tads that were left behind....last time I did some sneaking around on them at night, I saw 4/5 tads very far along and clise to popping legs out. 

These drago and blk jeans for example usuallly rear 1 froglet and the rest seem to stay in water for months and months with no progression.

Im going to record them as they spot and recognize fully developed tads and how they carry them out into the broms and p0st it


----------



## Nismo95 (Jul 30, 2011)

I am so in awe over this. I do not have much experience with obligates, but this has got my full attention. at one point its true that maybe the parents should be left alone to decide which tads are important, but at the other time why should those parents decide who dies and who lives? why not let the other pums raise them.. kinda like adoption haha. so I do see both sides of this and it is very interesting to say the least.


----------



## JimO (May 14, 2010)

This is probably worth a full write up, article style.

Has anyone else used surrogate parents for obligates? It might make for an interesting thread to share success stories.



cairo11 said:


> Right now they have 2 blk jean,3 drago tads that were left behind....last time I did some sneaking around on them at night, I saw 4/5 tads very far along and clise to popping legs out.
> 
> These drago and blk jeans for example usuallly rear 1 froglet and the rest seem to stay in water for months and months with no progression.
> 
> Im going to record them as they spot and recognize fully developed tads and how they carry them out into the broms and p0st it


----------



## Pumilo (Sep 4, 2010)

JimO said:


> This is probably worth a full write up, article style.
> 
> Has anyone else used surrogate parents for obligates? It might make for an interesting thread to share success stories.


Here's one I remember from a while back Jim. http://www.dendroboard.com/forum/br...0102-sylvaticus-raised-alternative-means.html


----------



## cairo11 (Jan 8, 2011)

JimO said:


> This is probably worth a full write up, article style.
> 
> Has anyone else used surrogate parents for obligates? It might make for an interesting thread to share success stories.


I know rob M. is pretty big on it too... I see it being very healthy for these frogs as keeping them alone or separate might add a little stress no? 

a full article should get started. I actually just witnessed 2 colons walk out last night which was pretty amazing to see once more. I wish I could post a picture straight from my phone but dont know how to.

these 2 guys look as healthy as any other froglet ive seen with true parents.


----------



## yours (Nov 11, 2007)

I'm sure RICH FRYE would have experience with this particular situation as well, wouldn't you agree 'cairo11'? 

I agree with Scott though. I don't see ANY necessity what-so-ever for the surrogate parents at all. Let THE parents do their work, within their own tank, and Mother Nature in her Majesty will take care of the rest. Anything other than that seems....forced.......are we forcing for business -- monetary reasons -- I wonder? 

John and Paul said it best of The Beatles: Let It Be.


----------



## cairo11 (Jan 8, 2011)

Rich frye dies it too?!? Monetary reasons him ? No way! : )

And yes! I do it for money...I have 10babies,2 labs, 1cat, and 200 frogs to feed man! Cant a brother get a break and surrogate some frogs in peace????? ; )

I guess its safe to assume robM. Has also dOne it for monetary purposes and not as an alternative ? It was pretty genious of him, and its what I believe. If he started doing that for money, guess what? Not my problem! : )

Look, I shared this method just for those who may find it interesting and might want to learn a but more... If you dont agree with it, fine..I accept you posting about it as its a thread asking for your opinion. But is it any of your business to imply that it is done for money? Hell no. So please keep your thoughts about my financial stability or whatever to yourself as I can assure you 2-3 frogs that are surrogate every 8 months dont fatten my wallet


yours said:


> I'm sure RICH FRYE would have experience with this particular situation as well, wouldn't you agree 'cairo11'?
> 
> I agree with Scott though. I don't see ANY necessity what-so-ever for the surrogate parents at all. Let THE parents do their work, within their own tank, and Mother Nature in her Majesty will take care of the rest. Anything other than that seems....forced.......are we forcing for business -- monetary reasons -- I wonder?
> 
> John and Paul said it best of The Beatles: Let It Be.


----------



## Scott (Feb 17, 2004)

I'll actually agree with Sidney a bit on that last post.

I'm leaving monetary issues out of it - no idea if they're involved or not. No need to bring up Lord Voldemort either. 

But - where do you stop? Can pumilio raise histrionicus/sylvaticus/granuliferus tadpoles?!?

s


----------



## cairo11 (Jan 8, 2011)

Scott said:


> I'll actually agree with Sidney a bit on that last post.
> 
> I'm leaving monetary issues out of it - no idea if they're involved or not. No need to bring up Lord Voldemort either.
> 
> ...


Ooouch! My little scar on my forehead is now hurting! Apparently its possible to do so but I seriously wont go there. I might be wrong, but as histo tads progress theyre nowhere near pum size therefore fem pum feeds alot more or you get a weak histo set for failure? I dont feel right to even try.


----------



## Scott (Feb 17, 2004)

But that's how I feel about the whole concept!

s


cairo11 said:


> ... I dont feel right to even try.


----------



## cairo11 (Jan 8, 2011)

Scott said:


> But that's how I feel about the whole concept!
> 
> s


Well what about all the threads I read for feeding and rearing methods? Isnt trying to feed chicken egg yolk or tad food or whatever artificial method then denying parents from true breeding?


----------



## Scott (Feb 17, 2004)

Ah, but I don't do that either. 

s


cairo11 said:


> Well what about all the threads I read for feeding and rearing methods? Isnt trying to feed chicken egg yolk or tad food or whatever artificial method then denying parents from true breeding?


----------



## Baltimore Bryan (Sep 6, 2006)

Scott said:


> But - where do you stop? Can pumilio raise histrionicus/sylvaticus/granuliferus tadpoles?!?


Apparently they can, check this out- http://www.dendroboard.com/forum/members-frogs-vivariums/56178-sylvaticus-raised-pumilio.html

I hear some people say they don't like the idea of using surrogates because it will pass on "bad genes" that normally wouldn't survive since the parents wouldn't raise them naturally. Is there any study or article demonstrating that bad parenting- when females don't transport and/or raise the tadpoles into froglets- is a genetic problem as opposed to environmental or other factors? If a tadpoles is raised by surrogate parents because the true parents didn't raise it, is there evidence that this frog would not raise its own offspring once it matures? 
If not, what is so bad about this method for frogs that prove difficult to breed?
Bryan


----------



## Scott (Feb 17, 2004)

Like I said earlier Bryan - sounds like a good project.

Take surrogate raised offspring and put them together to see what behavior carries forward. 

Obviously that's simplistic - but I'm sure a more rigorous approach could be developed to learn more about whether the parental behavior is in the DNA or not.

s


----------



## JimO (May 14, 2010)

My interest in hearing details about the procedure is for scientific curiosity only. I have no real opinion one way or another regarding whether it should be done or not or for what reason. I do agree with Scott, however, that it would help us understand the potential effects on breeding of CB frogs raised by surrogates. However, I don't think it would directly impact the surrogate-raised frogs' ability to breed because they don't realize that their pumilio surrogate parents were of a different morph . But, there might be something to the idea that the parents select tadpoles based on their health. Perhaps the parents can detect some abnormalities that we cannot even perceive. For that reason alone, I wouldn't purchase a surrogate raised froglet or one that was raised on artificial food. I think the reason we are seeing so many non-obligate froglets with SLS and other problems is that in the wild, weak or deformed tadpoles would either not be transported by the parents or would be eaten by predators before metamorphasis.

Anyway, I'd like to hear some specific details regarding how you move the tadpoles, when you move them, whether you have problems with the surrogates rejecting any, etc. Maybe you spend more time watching your frogs than I do, but I rarely ever see mine transporting young and often don't know that the tads had hatched before they disappear.


----------



## JeremyHuff (Apr 22, 2008)

We all interfere with various stages of parental care. Eggs are taken from tinctorius and nearly every other species before the male has a chance to transport tads to water sources or even before he has a chance to guard eggs. Yet every once in a while a clutch is missed and the male is seen transporting. 

If you have a rare or hard to breed species and have had failed attempt after attempt, then why not try something new? It really sucks to see tons of tads die in broms or even before getting transferred. Captivity is not an ideal situation, so it is bound to affect parental care in some specimens. These same specimens may do everything right in the wild though. 

Also, I believe I read somewhere, that in the wild female pumilio will feed tads that are not their own and I think this has been seen in captivity as well with groups. The behavior goes both ways. Sure the male calls the female to feed the tad, but the tads also have behaviors to signal they are hungry. If the tads are exhibiting this behavior and not getting fed by the parents, it is still likely in my opinion that when the tad morphs and reaches maturity it still will "know" the behavior and be able to feed or signal females to feed their tadpoles.


----------



## cairo11 (Jan 8, 2011)

Exactly the way I see it jeremy. As soon as we put obe single frog behind glass doors...we are immediately imposing on their breeding in every aspect. I dont see how using a surrogate can affect a frog differently than one bred inside an 18/24 exo terra. I mean, are parents breeding to their full potential stress free in a small glass cage? Less stress yields healthier offspring?


JeremyHuff said:


> We all interfere with various stages of parental care. Eggs are taken from tinctorius and nearly every other species before the male has a chance to transport tads to water sources or even before he has a chance to guard eggs. Yet every once in a while a clutch is missed and the male is seen transporting.
> 
> If you have a rare or hard to breed species and have had failed attempt after attempt, then why not try something new? It really sucks to see tons of tads die in broms or even before getting transferred. Captivity is not an ideal situation, so it is bound to affect parental care in some specimens. These same specimens may do everything right in the wild though.
> 
> Also, I believe I read somewhere, that in the wild female pumilio will feed tads that are not their own and I think this has been seen in captivity as well with groups. The behavior goes both ways. Sure the male calls the female to feed the tad, but the tads also have behaviors to signal they are hungry. If the tads are exhibiting this behavior and not getting fed by the parents, it is still likely in my opinion that when the tad morphs and reaches maturity it still will "know" the behavior and be able to feed or signal females to feed their tadpoles.


----------



## Baltimore Bryan (Sep 6, 2006)

JimO said:


> I think the reason we are seeing so many non-obligate froglets with SLS and other problems is that in the wild, weak or deformed tadpoles would either not be transported by the parents or would be eaten by predators before metamorphasis.


Just playing devil's advocate here... but then how do you explain tadpoles that are transported by the parents, and still don't morph into healthy frogs? For example, pumilio froglets that are transported, fed, raised, etc. and have SLS, or even tinctorius tadpoles that are transported but aren't healthy because of dietary insufficiency in the parents. Also, how much more likely do you think a tadpole is to be eaten by a predator with SLS vs. healthy front legs? I'm imagining a tiny little tadpole in a bromeliad axil or littered soda can that can swim down into crevices when scared, regardless of front legs or theoretical "bad parenting genetics", surviving just fine on its own in the wild.
I would love to try some experimenting with this, but I only have one group of pumilio that could do it... I really need to find a popa female for my males so I can try this! My mancreeks are good at raising froglets, and have a clutch of 11 tadpoles hatching soon. I wonder how many will be transported and how many will morph out...
Bryan


----------



## Ed (Sep 19, 2004)

JeremyHuff said:


> Also, I believe I read somewhere, that in the wild female pumilio will feed tads that are not their own and I think this has been seen in captivity as well with groups. The behavior goes both ways. Sure the male calls the female to feed the tad, but the tads also have behaviors to signal they are hungry. If the tads are exhibiting this behavior and not getting fed by the parents, it is still likely in my opinion that when the tad morphs and reaches maturity it still will "know" the behavior and be able to feed or signal females to feed their tadpoles.


I think this is the paper to which you are referring Jeremy http://www.harding.edu/plummer/herp/pdf/wilhelmamp10.pdf. They will only feed tadpoles that are placed exactly where the female left them. Moving the tadpoles as little as 2 cm is enough to result in abandonment by the female. 
There can be unintended consequences of this since we are using a form of relaxed selection in allowing frogs to not rear tadpoles we are actually putting a selection pressure against parental care. This is similar to how different breeds of chickens and other birds were bred to remove egg sitting behaviors to maximize production. 
I do not think that there is any inprinting by the the tadpoles.

Ed


----------



## yours (Nov 11, 2007)

Obviously I was kidding about Rich Frye. 

As you yourself stated in your $640 million thread, you are "a man in doubt at the moment" -- which I can only speculate you would say, as it has to do with your 'monetary and business practices' that may or may not have to do with the aforementioned Mister Rich Frye there.........I don't know, "cairo11"...Sidney Ferrell.....I don't know you personally, I haven't communicated with you very much at all....but something about the way you conduct yourself on these forums, and most especially on the OTHER forum....doesn't sit well with me.......it leaves a bad taste in my mouth, you know? That's why sometimes, some of your thoughts and posts don't add up for me...and thus....I feel compelled to articulate this unsettling feeling....

The whole "in it for the money" mindset never really digested swimmingly for me either, which is why in the past....I had a difficult time swallowing the pill of antics by one Taron Langhover. But that's just me, a hobbyist's mentality versus that of a businessman. Nothing more, nothing less one would suppose. Frogs first, not money.





cairo11 said:


> Rich frye dies it too?!? Monetary reasons him ? No way! : )
> 
> And yes! I do it for money...I have 10babies,2 labs, 1cat, and 200 frogs to feed man! Cant a brother get a break and surrogate some frogs in peace????? ; )
> 
> ...


----------



## cairo11 (Jan 8, 2011)

I dont care abd I certainly dont care to impress you or convince you about me. I suggest you keep those feelings to yourself and let this thread continue fir what it is. I do recieve pms and most certainly hace a reply if you needed one.


yours said:


> Obviously I was kidding about Rich Frye.
> 
> As you yourself stated in your $640 million thread, you are "a man in doubt at the moment" -- which I can only speculate you would say, as it has to do with your 'monetary and business practices' that may or may not have to do with the aforementioned Mister Rich Frye there.........I don't know, "cairo11"...Sidney Ferrell.....I don't know you personally, I haven't communicated with you very much at all....but something about the way you conduct yourself on these forums, and most especially on the OTHER forum....doesn't sit well with me.......it leaves a bad taste in my mouth, you know? That's why sometimes, some of your thoughts and posts don't add up for me...and thus....I feel compelled to articulate this unsettling feeling....
> 
> The whole "in it for the money" mindset never really digested swimmingly for me either, which is why in the past....I had a difficult time swallowing the pill of antics by one Taron Langhover. But that's just me, a hobbyist's mentality versus that of a businessman. Nothing more, nothing less one would suppose. Frogs first, not money.


----------



## yours (Nov 11, 2007)

He who must not be named!






Scott said:


> I'll actually agree with Sidney a bit on that last post.
> 
> I'm leaving monetary issues out of it - no idea if they're involved or not. No need to bring up Lord Voldemort either.
> 
> ...


----------



## Scott (Feb 17, 2004)

So can we keep it that way?

s


yours said:


> He who must not be named!


----------



## frograck (May 1, 2005)

I don't have a string opinion one way or another on this... But just to stir the pot a bit...
For those of you who don't think surrogacy is a good idea. How is this very different than pulling eggs from say, a tinc, and feeding the tads a diet of commercial flake food. This is a widely practiced and accepted method that allows weaker animals to "unnaturally" thrive.

Food for thought.?!


----------



## Rusty_Shackleford (Sep 2, 2010)

This is a fascinating topic!! I would like to see the results of a long term study to see if fostering does affect parental behavior. One thing no one has mentioned in pumilio fostering histos/grannies/sylvatica etc. is there a nutritional difference in the eggs of the different species? So that one species fostering another might not get the exact nutrients it would recieve had it been raised by it's parents. Just curious.


----------



## cairo11 (Jan 8, 2011)

Rusty_Shackleford said:


> This is a fascinating topic!! I would like to see the results of a long term study to see if fostering does affect parental behavior. One thing no one has mentioned in pumilio fostering histos/grannies/sylvatica etc. is there a nutritional difference in the eggs of the different species? So that one species fostering another might not get the exact nutrients it would recieve had it been raised by it's parents. Just curious.


Thats what i was trying to get to on a previous post... How alike can pums eggs ve compared to other obligates nutriotionally? Are panamanian pums eating exact same bugs as grannies in cr? Or how much more should a pum stress itself to feed suffiently to a larger histo?


----------



## Ed (Sep 19, 2004)

cairo11 said:


> Thats what i was trying to get to on a previous post... How alike can pums eggs ve compared to other obligates nutriotionally? Are panamanian pums eating exact same bugs as grannies in cr? Or how much more should a pum stress itself to feed suffiently to a larger histo?


Whether they eat the same bugs or not shouldn't matter... since there is good evidence that they don't eat the same things over time or geographically see for example ScienceDirect.com - Toxicon - Spatial and temporal patterns of alkaloid variation in the poison frog Oophaga pumilio in Costa Rica and Panama over 30 years (not free access) 

http://1857973224678849443-a-180274...UNFiQaR4TgSGrDasFHpfdkzvtTf2-X&attredirects=0 (free access) in the case the link doesn't work google the following title 
Geographic and Seasonal Variation in Alkaloid-Based Chemical Defenses of ​​​​​​​​​Dendrobates pumilio from Bocas del Toro, Panama) 

There are reports of success using Cynops eggs as well as other anurans however in most of those cases the membrane surrounding the eggs had to be removed. There can be considerable differences between one species in the membrane layers some of which were anecdotally reported to be difficult for the tadpoles to penetrate them... 

Ed ​


----------



## Ed (Sep 19, 2004)

jmailhot said:


> I don't have a string opinion one way or another on this... But just to stir the pot a bit...
> For those of you who don't think surrogacy is a good idea. How is this very different than pulling eggs from say, a tinc, and feeding the tads a diet of commercial flake food. This is a widely practiced and accepted method that allows weaker animals to "unnaturally" thrive.
> 
> Food for thought.?!


]

I would counter with on what basis do you see that a diet of fish flakes doesn't meet the need of the tadpoles? 

Ed


----------



## frogmanroth (May 23, 2006)

> . I think the reason we are seeing so many non-obligate froglets with SLS and other problems is that in the wild, weak or deformed tadpoles would either not be transported by the parents or would be eaten by predators


So many with SLS? I haven't heard of many in the last few years. 

It is survival of the fittest in the wild like you said.

And of the 100+ obligate egg feeder froglets I have morphed I only had one with SLS it all goes back to husbandry practices. nutrition. 

Please feel free to pm for my phone number to talk in detail. Anybody.


----------



## frograck (May 1, 2005)

Ed said:


> ]
> 
> I would counter with on what basis do you see that a diet of fish flakes doesn't meet the need of the tadpoles?
> 
> Ed


I was mostly referring to an argument against surrogacy based on it being "unnatural" rather than an argument based on meeting the physiological needs of tadpoles.


----------



## JimO (May 14, 2010)

I guess my point is that many hobbyists go to almost herioic efforts to make sure that as many of their tadpoles survive to morph into froglets as possible. So, in many cases the survival stresses have been greatly reduced and frogs that would not have survived in wild populations grow and are bred, passing on potentially bad genetic traits.

More specifically, we have eliminated the selection process involved in the parents of non-obligates guarding eggs, and transporting the tadpoles to a good deposition site as well as the selection pressures of the entire tadpole stage.

Just as an example, imagine if a male tinctorius did not have good instincts related to selecting an appropriate tadpole deposition site. In nature, his tadpoles would not survive and his genes would not be passed on. In captivity his genes could be in a large percentage of the morph's population.



frogmanroth said:


> So many with SLS? I haven't heard of many in the last few years.
> 
> It is survival of the fittest in the wild like you said.
> 
> ...


----------



## goof901 (Jan 9, 2012)

JimO said:


> I guess my point is that many hobbyists go to almost herioic efforts to make sure that as many of their tadpoles survive to morph into froglets as possible. So, in many cases the survival stresses have been greatly reduced and frogs that would not have survived in wild populations grow and are bred, passing on potentially bad genetic traits.
> 
> More specifically, we have eliminated the selection process involved in the parents of non-obligates guarding eggs, and transporting the tadpoles to a good deposition site as well as the selection pressures of the entire tadpole stage.
> 
> Just as an example, imagine if a male tinctorius did not have good instincts related to selecting an appropriate tadpole deposition site. In nature, his tadpoles would not survive and his genes would not be passed on. In captivity his genes could be in a large percentage of the morph's population.


that's why we aren't releasing any frogs back into the wild. if we were to do so, then we would have to change our ways.


----------



## Ed (Sep 19, 2004)

JimO said:


> I guess my point is that many hobbyists go to almost herioic efforts to make sure that as many of their tadpoles survive to morph into froglets as possible. So, in many cases the survival stresses have been greatly reduced and frogs that would not have survived in wild populations grow and are bred, passing on potentially bad genetic traits.
> 
> More specifically, we have eliminated the selection process involved in the parents of non-obligates guarding eggs, and transporting the tadpoles to a good deposition site as well as the selection pressures of the entire tadpole stage.
> 
> Just as an example, imagine if a male tinctorius did not have good instincts related to selecting an appropriate tadpole deposition site. In nature, his tadpoles would not survive and his genes would not be passed on. In captivity his genes could be in a large percentage of the morph's population.


 
We have not eliminated the selection process. We altered it by emphasizing other traits (for example productivity over parental behaviors).. 

Ed


----------



## Ed (Sep 19, 2004)

goof901 said:


> that's why we aren't releasing any frogs back into the wild. if we were to do so, then we would have to change our ways.


 
And start over with frogs that would be able to be released.. even if we look past the genetic issues, the frogs would still not be suitable for release since they have been exposed to aniamals from seperate geographic locations. 

Ed


----------



## JimO (May 14, 2010)

Agreed, and I like your chicken analogy. It's common practice to use a "broody" hen to hatch clutches laid by hens who have been bred for showing and who don't sit on the eggs. My kids showed different types of bantams for 4-H and certain varieties would not hatch their own eggs, plus you got a higher hatch rate if you had a broody old mutt to hatch and raise the chicks.

Anyway, back to frogs. It's a shame the average hobbyist won't be able to donate frogs for reintroduction, because that would be an incredibly worthwhile endeavor. However, as a group, the dart frog hobby has resisted the pitfalls of so many other animal husbandry hobbies and have emphasized keeping unique populations separate and housing frogs as naturally as possible. 

I suppose I'm in agreement with those who have advocated leaving at least the obligates to do their thing. I have heard of at least one reliable ongoing effort to produce artificial food for obligate tadpoles that would closely match the composition and texture of an obligate egg. I know many would celebrate this, but I'm not sure it would be good for the hobby.



Ed said:


> We have not eliminated the selection process. We altered it by emphasizing other traits (for example productivity over parental behaviors)..
> 
> Ed


----------



## Baltimore Bryan (Sep 6, 2006)

JimO said:


> I have heard of at least one reliable ongoing effort to produce artificial food for obligate tadpoles that would closely match the composition and texture of an obligate egg. I know many would celebrate this, but I'm not sure it would be good for the hobby.


Can you elaborate on this a bit? I haven't heard about it and would be interested in learning more about it. I don't think I would necessarily use it, my pumilio produce just fine for me on their own, but I would still be interested in more info. You can PM me if you prefer in case you feel it would get things off-topic here.
Thanks,
Bryan


----------



## JimO (May 14, 2010)

I really hate to plead the fifth, but I was told this in confidence by someone who is investing financially in the development of the product and I promised not to identify him or give any specifics. I hate being vague, but I simply can't elaborate on this.

However, I bet there are many efforts being made to develop artificial food for obligates and I think it's only a matter of time. Imagine the potential market. Like I said, I'm not big on the idea, but I'm sure many would be and it might actually help with producing more of the rare obligates in the hobby. I am strictly a hobbyist and although I love it when I get a few froglets, I have no intention of deliberately trying to increase production, because I don't have the desire or the time to become a frog breeder/supplier. Occasional froglets to trade or sell for more frog money is plenty for me.



Baltimore Bryan said:


> Can you elaborate on this a bit? I haven't heard about it and would be interested in learning more about it. I don't think I would necessarily use it, my pumilio produce just fine for me on their own, but I would still be interested in more info. You can PM me if you prefer in case you feel it would get things off-topic here.
> Thanks,
> Bryan


----------

