# Escudo De Veraguas Pumilio



## Jason (Oct 14, 2004)

Well, I would be more than happy if someone puts me on the list for some F1's. I don't think I can get these from SNDF cause I live where it seems to be a little too cold to ship now, even though I said I would fly down and get them  or have them shipped same day when temps are higher!

Hopefully this spring something may happen!


----------



## Reptiledan (Nov 23, 2004)

*Pums*

Jason
Be patient they will be around for a while..


----------



## sbreland (May 4, 2006)

Not likely... inside info says this is the last shipment of Escudos coming in the forseeable future. Apparently the ones SNDF has now was the last batch the farm in Panama had.


----------



## Frogtofall (Feb 16, 2006)

sbreland said:


> Not likely... inside info says this is the last shipment of Escudos coming in the forseeable future. Apparently the ones SNDF has now was the last batch the farm in Panama had.


I'm shocked you actually believe that one. Go figure. :wink:


----------



## stchupa (Apr 25, 2006)

Frogtofall said:


> sbreland said:
> 
> 
> > Not likely... inside info says this is the last shipment of Escudos coming in the forseeable future. Apparently the ones SNDF has now was the last batch the farm in Panama had.
> ...


It surely makes them money to make you 'believe'.

I find it unlikely that if they were "farm raised". 

Supply and demand and this is their way of determining the value by the demand. Tricky bastards.

If everyone knew this and held back the prices would be reasonable.


----------



## snmreptiles (Feb 26, 2004)

Apparently you haven't ever had the chance to get an animal you've wanted forever but passed to wait for "Better Circumstances". If you don't think they are worth that, then DON'T BUY THEM. I myself have loved this frog for years, and will have 3 here when the weather breaks. I have learned LONG ago that if you let something pass that your really want, you will be disappointed more often than not!! I had blue jeans 6 years ago, and have wanted more since...They used to come in by the hundreds, can't remember the last time I saw them available!!

Mike
http://www.snmreptiles.com


----------



## Frogtofall (Feb 16, 2006)

snmreptiles said:


> *Apparently you haven't ever had the chance to get an animal you've wanted forever but passed to wait for "Better Circumstances". * If you don't think they are worth that, then DON'T BUY THEM. I myself have loved this frog for years, and will have 3 here when the weather breaks. I have learned LONG ago that if you let something pass that your really want, you will be disappointed more often than not!! I had blue jeans 6 years ago, and have wanted more since...They used to come in by the hundreds, can't remember the last time I saw them available!!
> 
> Mike
> http://www.snmreptiles.com


*Cough*







*Cough*


----------



## sbreland (May 4, 2006)

stchupa said:


> Frogtofall said:
> 
> 
> > sbreland said:
> ...


Hmm... gee, well, I guess one of the more if not most respected names in this hobby just lies to make money. Wow, how could I have been so guilible to believe them. I guess I should have thought about all the Escudos that have come in over the years to know that this is just the beginning of the flood. I guess I should just sit back and wait for a few more months until these guys start coming in like auratus and not believe the "marketing hype" surrounding these soon to be common frogs... :?


----------



## snmreptiles (Feb 26, 2004)

ANTONE...LMAO

My wife's FAVORITE frog (Standard Lamasi), we have been on a waiting list since 03, however had the chance to buy them recently, and haven't taken it. She saw the pums available and called me at work. Man I love my wife. LOL 

My father always said "Different Strokes for Different Folks". I don't know if I like the looks of a frog better than these pums, they are amazing, and if I have to spend more money to work with them, so be it. There's only 15 available (12 with our 3 out). I am sure there will be more coming in in the next few months, but in case there isn't I'm willing to pay the extra to have the opportunity to work with them!

Mike
http://www.snmreptiles.com


----------



## Frogtofall (Feb 16, 2006)

Hey Stace, no one ever said it would be the last shipment from THAT vendor. There are other sources too. Now straighted out your pigtails and wipe the tears from your face. Big ol' baby. :lol:


----------



## sbreland (May 4, 2006)

Sorry to sound so cynical, but I agree with Mike, believe whatever floats your boat and if you don't want to pay the price they are offered for, then wait and hope they come in again. For everyones sake, I hope they do...


----------



## dmatychuk (Apr 20, 2005)

> There are other sources too.


Do you actually know of another vendor? Who?


----------



## Dendro Dave (Aug 2, 2005)

I ofcourse cant say who has them, and it isnt me (i wish) but there were already some escudos here, before the SNDF shipment.

I think its very likely that SNDF was told by their suppliers that this would be the last, or might be the last shipment, and that they may have told that to people asking about these frogs. They dont know the source is lying, probably dont have any reason to think they are. Likely just relaying the info they got.

Like many people in the buisness i doubt its uncommon for these "farms" or collectors to lie, or atleast bend the truth to ensure a sale, or for that misinformation to trickle down to us. Dont know how many times I've heard "these might be the last mantellas to come in EVER!" from various sources, some i think honeslty thought that and others i think were just full of crap. To get technical though, if you dont know for sure another shipment is coming, and say that this might be the last...you arent being dishonest....maybe just a good salesman 

Hard to tell one way or the other and if you arent sure its best to error on the side of caution and not potentially damage the rep of a legitimate buisness person.


Anyways back to the frogs themselves....very cool. Hope those buying get several like snmreptiles to have a decent chance at a pair. I also hope that anyone who gets just 1 eventually sells it or trades it to someone else working with them if they cant get it paired up. No reason to hang on to a lone frog for several years when others could be breeding it and getting more of them into the hobby. 1 maybe 2 was all i would have been able to afford so i didnt bother to try.

Good luck to those who get em....mark me down on any lists


----------



## Jason (Oct 14, 2004)

Well to thoes who may or may not have some :lol: please put me on the list! I hear they like Barry White music to get them in the mood. :wink: 

Moderaters, this thread is going in a different direction than anticipated. It is OK by me. Move it if you want, but please don't lock it.


----------



## snmreptiles (Feb 26, 2004)

Jason,

Sorry we hijacked your thread...I wish I could say, Hey I'll put you on my list, however I don't even have them in my hands yet. We don't work that way, sorry. If I do get them healthy and acclimated, I will shoot you an email!

Mike
http://www.snmreptiles.com


----------



## Roadrunner (Mar 6, 2004)

these are small delicate(well somewhat) pumilio. there were losses. if you would like to take over medicating them and housing them individually for a month and spending money out of your pocket to go down there and learn about what they are doing and trying to supply legit information to the hobby and work on bringing in other rare frogs which may not be around in the future go right ahead, till then till you know what we go(well marcus and valentina) thru, till you`ve done it yourself and know the costs involved i`d keep the vendor feedback to yourself.
the burnout rate on dealing with such delicate frogs is hi, not too many people do it right. because of them (pics)i was able to get 1 and possibly up to 3 pairs. before them there was no chance of getting acclimated, treated frogs that have a good chance of producing. I`ll stop now and you can read the rest in the vendor feedback section.


----------



## MJ (Jun 16, 2005)

Ok I Moved this here... Jason if you want to repost the wanted add go ahead and if any one replies it will be moved here unless it is a "I have some" post.

I keep Escudo and find them very bold active and some what hardy.
The hardest thing about them is feeding as they are tiny so if you plan on keeping them make sure you can produce springtails by the bucket full.


----------



## Roadrunner (Mar 6, 2004)

ya, that`s what makes them somewhat delicate. w/ their size i couldnt call them hardy, even though it does apply.
they are very bold, breeding right out in the open and don`t run for cover when i feed like a lot of other pumilio do. they get accustomed to their surroundings very quick and seem to be out exploring often. my favorite pumilio by far! the ability to get variable amounts of blue and red in the offspring is also a big plus. it`ll be like christmas everytime a clutch comes out!


----------



## Afemoralis (Mar 17, 2005)

Just a little reminder

For those of you who are interested in the Escudo pumilio, I urge you to get involved in the conservation issues of the area. I've said it before, but the island is at serious risk. An endemic wren, hummingbird, salamander, and a terrific little frog. All at risk. Please take your interest in the pumilio as an opportunity to find out more about where your frogs come from, and how you can help.

Cheers,

Afemoralis


----------



## verbal (Sep 8, 2004)

An excellent comment on this thread. Makes me proud to be a DBer.


----------



## stchupa (Apr 25, 2006)

I never said anyone lied, but rather they tell just enough. What they want you to know to make you jump.


----------



## stchupa (Apr 25, 2006)

Dendro Dave said:


> I ofcourse cant say who has them, and it isnt me (i wish) but there were already some escudos here, before the SNDF shipment.
> 
> I think its very likely that SNDF was told by their suppliers that this would be the last, or might be the last shipment, and that they may have told that to people asking about these frogs. They dont know the source is lying, probably dont have any reason to think they are. Likely just relaying the info they got.


Precisely

]


----------



## stchupa (Apr 25, 2006)

Amazing frogs like any their entitled to guaranteed survivabilty, none the less people are making bank due to low #.

Those of you getting them now/from there, the more power to you and certainly to them.

I think I'm at fault for steer of this and if it happened to bother anyone, my bad.


----------



## ETwomey (Jul 22, 2004)

Afemoralis said:


> ...endemic wren, hummingbird, salamander, and a terrific little frog.


Not to mention, an endemic sloth, _Bradypus pygmaeus_, discovered in 2001, listed as critically endangered on the IUCN red list.

-Evan


----------



## stchupa (Apr 25, 2006)

Every thing that shares this rock is in a sense under the same roof.
Humans are no exception, but some still think they're special.


----------



## Dendro Dave (Aug 2, 2005)

sloths are cool....meaner then you might think though. I'd be pissed to though if i had alge growing on me.


----------



## Dancing frogs (Feb 20, 2004)

Dendro Dave said:


> sloths are cool....meaner then you might think though. I'd be pissed to though if i had alge growing on me.


 :lol:


----------



## dmatychuk (Apr 20, 2005)

> i`d keep the vendor feedback to yourself.


next time you want an opinion you like, just make sure you beat it out of me.  :lol:


----------



## Roadrunner (Mar 6, 2004)

i just want to point out this isn`t a walk in the park. these frogs don`t sell themselves or take care of themselves. there is a point where your quality control ends(shipping) and your STILL responsible for the frogs and you have absoluttely no control over how they are treated. i could care less if they paid $25 for them. Bringin in frogs is a business and needs to make money to bring in more rare frogs. the more money the business makes the more chance there is of more rare frogs being "saved from their fate" and becoming more established in the hobby. i look at it as a "donation" to being entrusted w/ a frog that may not be there in 20,50 or 100 years(most likely the first). 
the only reason you would mention price is if you were jealous you couldnt afford them. darklands are $375 a freakin colon sold for $375 as a juvi and your complaining about $350 for ready to breed frogs and pics you can sex them by?
is there any idea about how many lines are here from europe or were they all just brought in as escudos w/ no division to how they were related?
i `d have to say there are more people breeding colons and darklands in the country then escudos at the moment and they are cheaper.
you want rare, unrelated, adult frogs, ready to breed w/ data on them and they are here, i don`t see the problem.
they listen to you as to what you want out of the hobby, sustainability, new morphs, adult frogs, pics and then people complain when they see the price. i think this country has gotten too used to walmart.lol
not trying to piss anyone off but think about it. people make more on the sale of 1 house in a day then these guys are making on this shipment and i`m sure it`s a hell of a lot more work than selling a house(well maybe not in this market). :lol:


----------



## sbreland (May 4, 2006)

frogfarm said:


> darklands are $375 a freakin colon sold for $375 as a juvi and your complaining about $350 for ready to breed frogs and pics you can sex them by?
> is there any idea about how many lines are here from europe or were they all just brought in as escudos w/ no division to how they were related?
> i `d have to say there are more people breeding colons and darklands in the country then escudos at the moment and they are cheaper.
> you want rare, unrelated, adult frogs, ready to breed w/ data on them and they are here, i don`t see the problem.


Absofreakinlutely. IMO, SOME of the people that are bitching and saying the prices are unfair are the same ones who bought or sold the Darklands or Colons for more than these Escudos and are sore about competetion with their rarest of rare frogs. Others are people that, like both Mike and Aaron said, either can't afford them and are sore about it or think the price isn't worth it. If you TRULY believe that these frogs will be arriving in droves soon, then you would be smart to sit back and wait for a price drop. I personally don't think that is going to happen. I don't doubt that someday a few more may come in, but to think this is the beginning of the flood similar to what happened with the Bastis and Man Creek in rather naive. Like Sea (Afemoralis) said, these guys come from a tiny island that is at serious risk with all it's species not just these frogs and to think that they are going to be cherrypicking out there for several more months or years in an unstable population just doesn't make sense. These frogs are defined by natural borders unlike many of the other pumilio species in the hobby, so if the chytrid infects the island or something else depletes the population, you can't just go down the road and find more. Congrats to those that get these guys as you WILL be working with a rare frog. I would tend to agree with Aaron when he says there are probably more people working with darks and Colons here than Escudos right now (probably even after these shipments) and to be able to CHOOSE which ones you want by picture is an incredible opportunity. Tell me the last time you saw 15 pics of darks or Colons AS ADULTS that you could pick and choose from? In the end I do hope more come in but I am not going to hold my breath and for those that are only concerned aboutthe pricetag attached to the frog, maybe it's time to reevaluate your reason for being in the hobby. I understand cost can be prohibitive for some, but you shouldn't bitch and stir the pot just because the price is a little too rich for your blood. Sorry if I come across like an ass, but that's just what I believe.


----------



## trinacliff (Aug 9, 2004)

sbreland said:


> IMO, SOME of the people that are bitching and saying the prices are unfair are the same ones who bought or sold the Darklands or Colons for more than these Escudos and are sore about competetion with their rarest of rare frogs.


Personally, I have only heard a few complain about the price...and those were the same ones that said they wouldn't ever pay $350 for a Darkland or Colon. That is their choice, totally and completely. However, I'd be very surprised to hear of someone that bought Darklands or Colon for around $350 complain about the price of a very rare and beautiful adult pumilio. I, for one, would be right there handing over money if I had the opportunity and feel that the price is right in line where it should be. It seems to me that with that high price tag, they must know there will not be many other shipments (at least from that supplier) since even when the first shipment of rio branco, cristobal and uyama river landed, their prices were not that high...obviously, they knew there would be plenty of those to go around which is not the case with the Escudo.

The law of supply and demand, at it's best. 

Kristen


----------



## sbreland (May 4, 2006)

> It seems to me that with that high price tag, they must know there will not be many other shipments (at least from that supplier) since even when the first shipment of rio branco, cristobal and uyama river landed, their prices were not that high...obviously, they knew there would be plenty of those to go around which is not the case with the Escudo.


I concur completely.


----------



## dmatychuk (Apr 20, 2005)

I agree I haven't heard too much complaint of price, either you pay or you make a decision not too. In fact the only real mention of the price at 350.00 on this post are two of the previous posts that say don't complain about the price.

I personally didn't care about the price and spent 1400.00 plus shipping to get four.

Whats the big deal if someone thinks the prices are high? All the better for those who bought them. Doesn't seem like a battle that needs to be fought, let people have an opinion without getting a spank.

I am not going to cry over SNDF losses because of financial reasons for them. their in business and I am sure they are making money, and should be. Whats more important is that if they are bringing in frogs this special every effort needs to be made to help establish the morph in the US and to keep as many as possible alive and producing.


----------



## Roadrunner (Mar 6, 2004)

everyone can have their opinion i just want to put it in perspective. some people will always think $350 is too much for a frog for them, that`s not a problem. trying to make them look as if they are only doing it for money or not showing all sides of the issue is my only concern. 
from not in this post i talked to someone on the phone who DOES sell rare frogs for $300+ and they said paying $350 is going against everything i stand for and they may trade for them on down the road.
it`s not just this post. 
and i`m not trying to shell out a spanking, although it looks like i am, i`m only trying to defend what i think has actual worth in this world. 
most people would think i can get this much money for a frog i think all i have to do is hand over a worthless piece of paper and i have a chance to work w/ these awesome animals. let`s see a couple grams of colorful paper in one hand and 6 edv pumilio in the other, i`m taking the frogs and running before they find out i gave them paper. you can find money in any pocket on any street but these frogs sure aren`t everywhere.
i guess i just look at the world a little differently.
when marcus came to me and said there were only a few available i almost didnt leave any for you guys, i seriously contemplated it. i thought that would be kinda jerky though.


----------



## dmatychuk (Apr 20, 2005)

Aaron I appreciate your in put and focus. And they are gorgeous and worth it IMHO. I do think having bought these in one group wouldve been good in order to get the most and best pairs out of the group and not having any go to waist.


----------



## Dane (Aug 19, 2004)

I think having a higher price on something so rare and delicate is both a benefit and a hindrance. On the plus side, most people who are just starting out would think that that price is outrageous, and not give it a second thought. But there are also those who are short on experience, but not on cash, and would love to have the newest coolest frog, regardless of the outcome.


----------



## Dendro Dave (Aug 2, 2005)

If people will pay 350....they are worth 350. Thats supply and demand, free market, Its the American way...etc, etc...  

If i had enough EXTRA cash to get several, i would have


----------



## Jordan B (Oct 8, 2004)

Dane said:


> But there are also those who are short on experience, but not on cash, and would love to have the newest coolest frog, regardless of the outcome.


I agree completely Dane, and that is _my_ main concern.


----------



## Dendro Dave (Aug 2, 2005)

Kind of an unusal situation here....a new, very rare frog. And People being public about having got them....similar to the recent peru import situation. People seem more protective of the thumbs though, and not with out some good reason since they often are less hardy or not quite as easy to care for/breed then some of the larger frogs.

I personally like seeing people being more public...means more pics, more info for the masses  It would be nice if people were a little less judgemental though, and less quick to make assumptions as to why someone is being public. I know some people are quick to assume bragging...not that such things have become an issue in these escudo related threads, yet. Hopefully wont be either. 

With atleast 3 buyers having revealed themselves, and knowing how many they got and how many came in...The pressure is on though 

WE'RE WATCHING YOU........(Muhahhahaa) :twisted: 

Just thinking out loud, this really isnt in response to anything anyone else has said in this thread or others... just to be clear.


----------



## dmatychuk (Apr 20, 2005)

Just because frogs were ordered, paid for, and promised does not mean frogs will end up in the hands of these individuals.


----------



## sbreland (May 4, 2006)

Dendro Dave said:


> Kind of an unusal situation here....a new, very rare frog. And People being public about having got them....
> With atleast 3 buyers having revealed themselves, and knowing how many they got and how many came in...The pressure is on though
> 
> WE'RE WATCHING YOU........(Muhahhahaa) :twisted:


Well, I just want to be out in the open and say that despite how it may look from my posts and many people's assumptions to the contrary, I am NOT getting these guys. My reason for my posts in this thread are simply as they are posted, not because I was defending my decison to get some. I think in reality the issue of whether or not they will ever come in again is kind of a moot point because we will never know until they arrive, so saying that anyone is trying to drive the price up is unfair. I'm happy to see these guys coming in and am glad that those that are getting them will get the chance to change the hobby if they can get them established. Good luck.


----------



## Darks!de (Nov 16, 2004)

Jordan B said:


> Dane said:
> 
> 
> > But there are also those who are short on experience, but not on cash, and would love to have the newest coolest frog, regardless of the outcome.
> ...


Well in my opinion, a seller that was lucky enough to be able to bring in a very rare frog, should take the time to "interview" the buyer and at least make sure that they have some experience with more difficult frogs under their belt. Rare frogs (that may not be coming in anymore :roll: ) should be offered publicly, but only to those individuals capable of providing them the proper parameters and possibly breeding them. Excluding wholesalers, the majority of privateers that bring in rare frogs (who I have talked to) are concerned about the hobby and take care in keeping imported animals healthy, medicated, and comfortable. They are not just trying to move as many frogs as they can for a quick buck. These importers are also hobbiests, and that makes a huge difference in the survival rates of the frogs and ultimately the evolution of the hobby. It is in their best interest to sell these few frogs to people that know what they are doing (not that I'm saying that the ones who bought them don't). Thats what I think anyway.

Luke


----------



## Roadrunner (Mar 6, 2004)

they were offered to a good # of people who have sold rare offspring in the past and most of them passed them up. the price is meant to work to the effect of if you have bred enough rare frogs in the past and sold them you should be able to use that to buy these. 
if the people who are good at breeding pumilio have passed on them then they are made available to the general public. 
my first offspring are going to trade and i probably won`t be selling any IF i can get any trades for them. if not, they go up for sale. if you have been breeding rare frogs and have offspring available i have no problem trading frogs, that should prove their experienced enough.


----------



## dmatychuk (Apr 20, 2005)

> should take the time to "interview" the buyer and at least make sure that they have some experience with more difficult frogs under their belt


Good post Luke

I hardily agree. I started writing a post on the need for Breeder/Importer responsibility 2 hours ago and just decided to forget it. The fact remains there are a lot of issues that need to be address about the providers but we don't say anything or criticise the process or vendor because we are not allowed to or we don't want to be neglected if anything else comes in. This looking the other way hurts our hobby and in some cases rightfully gives imports and breeders a bad name. The AKC has the same issues with "puppy mills" but they are in the open about the negatives and attack them viciously. Good breeders also require a very involved process to get a good pure breed dog, especially if its something a little more unusual. It took me 5 years to acquire a lakeland Terrier and a lot of talking, paperwork and yes money. Here are just some of the issues that we really should be demanding of B/Is to better the hobby and when we see problems call them out on them. I would love to see an objective 1-10 rating scale of B/Is based on some basics. I believe in the long run if we can support a B/I that has a higher rating the better for the hobby and certainly the frogs.

-Import and Location data incomplete or none
-No breeding line information provided
-Shipment of poorly feed animals
-Shipment of diseased animals
-Poor packaging to Importer from S.A. and from Importer to purchaser
-Poor packaging from Breeder
-No shipping tracking provided
-Deformed animals
-Undersized animals
-Hybrid animals
-No communication to purchaser of individual morph needs
-Animal poorly or wrongly identified
-No quarantined period for imported animals
-No medication for imported animals
-No guarantees on animals or guarantees not fully honored

I am sure there is a lot more others could add.


----------



## dmatychuk (Apr 20, 2005)

Aaron I believe is correct about SNDF in this case and it seemed that they made a worthy effort. My previous post was not direct to any B/I in specific


----------



## Darks!de (Nov 16, 2004)

Well I wasn't really aware of the effort SNDF made, but I have talked to Valentina on a few occasions and I would only expect a good effort from them. They are the kind of people we want more of in the hobby. I wasn't singling out SNDF with my post though, I was just generalizing.

Luke


----------



## c'est ma (Sep 11, 2004)

It is predictable, though, that these discussions do seem to all end up referring to the same vendor, and there are definite reasons for that. The main one is, of course, that they are one of the most regular obtainers and offerers of cool new imports. But the other is that they seem to only want to be reachable from time to time. The fact that people who have dealt with them always rise to their defense does certainly incline one to give them the benefit of the doubt, but on the other hand, it's sort of the "urban legend" way of rec'g info--second hand, at least.

Developing some kind of central database or collection of evaluations along the lines that Dave was suggesting a few posts ago would go a long way toward improving/insuring the quality of the new imports and cementing the vendors' reputations.

When looking at reptile importers, for instance, I prefer those who have sites with pages (esp. with pics) about their importation/quarantine procedures. Some even spell out their holding times/testing/medication regimes. This gives one a better feeling than just seeing the occasional listing of animals for sale...In this day and age, one almost expects at least some kind of rudimentary, but permanent, website presence from those in the import business...

Additionally, I should think it would end up saving the importers/breeders a lot of time in not having to repeat the same info over and over via the telephone!

Just one observer's viewpoint...


----------



## Paul E. Wog (Jan 2, 2005)

I'm glad to see that Aaron was able to get a couple of pairs so that they won't just be sitting in a tank looking pretty but doing nothing for the hobby.

I have one question about the new imports or WCs in general. Say that Aaron starts breeding his Escuados and starts selling them. Are they considered SNDF line or Aaron's Frog farm line? It would seem to me that it would be called Aaron's line because they are indavidual pairs from a "larger" group of imports. Furthermore, because he has two pairs would it be futher broken down into Aaron's frog farm line A and Line B?


----------



## Darks!de (Nov 16, 2004)

I believe they would both be Aaron's Escudo line. I think...


----------



## sbreland (May 4, 2006)

Paul E. Wog said:


> I have one question about the new imports or WCs in general. Say that Aaron starts breeding his Escuados and starts selling them. Are they considered SNDF line or Aaron's Frog farm line? It would seem to me that it would be called Aaron's line because they are indavidual pairs from a "larger" group of imports. Furthermore, because he has two pairs would it be futher broken down into Aaron's frog farm line A and Line B?


Honestly, nothing agansit you, but this is the whole reason why I hate the whole "line" idea. So by this thought, everyone that buys these Escudos and gets a pair and sells offspring should get their own line?? How many lines will we end up with then? Take for instance the Christobals that came in awhile ago... how many people bought those? If they breed them should they all be given their own line?? I don't even think they should be called SNDF line either, but that's just my opinion. I honestly wish we could do away with "lines" and focus more on species as it seems to just further dilute the gene pool when we try to always pair up lines. Like I said, I am sorry if this came across as an attack of you because it really is not, I just really don't like the whole line issue.


----------



## sbreland (May 4, 2006)

Furthermore, technically, by this arguement if Aaron ends up with an extra non paired frog, he would never be able to pair it except with his own offspring unless he wanted to cross lines. To me this just doesn't make any sense. 20 or 30 or more Escudos came in and now he can only breed his between the 6 he has and never bring in another frog without crossing lines?? Sorry, just doesn't work for me and is one of a number of reasons why I seriously dislike lines unless they identify DISTINCTLY different groups...


----------



## snmreptiles (Feb 26, 2004)

I believe I would call them "From the SNDF shipment #2".

Mike
http://www.snmreptiles.com


----------



## Darks!de (Nov 16, 2004)

Stace, I agree with you about the whole line thing. I believe it would be more beneficial for the hobby to focus on species rather than lines. It is extremely impractical and often very confusing when strict lines are involved.

Mike, I think that "SNDF Shipment #2" is a much better way to label them. It provides much more info than naming a line after the breeder.

Luke


----------



## sbreland (May 4, 2006)

Darks!de said:


> Mike, I think that "SNDF Shipment #2" is a much better way to label them. It provides much more info than naming a line after the breeder.
> 
> Luke


Sounds like the most logical arguement to date.


----------



## trinacliff (Aug 9, 2004)

Darks!de said:


> Mike, I think that "SNDF Shipment #2" is a much better way to label them. It provides much more info than naming a line after the breeder.
> 
> Luke


Ok, did someone spill the beans? Or am I missing something? Are the escudo from SNDF their second shipment that they brought in? LOL Or is that hypothetical? hahaha

Kristen


----------



## sbreland (May 4, 2006)

Yes, these are the second. The first was a very small shipment that only went to a few people privately and weren't advertised and these available now are the second.


----------



## Paul E. Wog (Jan 2, 2005)

sbreland said:


> Honestly, nothing agansit you, but this is the whole reason why I hate the whole "line" idea. So by this thought, everyone that buys these Escudos and gets a pair and sells offspring should get their own line?? How many lines will we end up with then? Take for instance the Christobals that came in awhile ago... how many people bought those? If they breed them should they all be given their own line??


I actually completely understand the dilema and agree with it to an extent. I have thought about the whole Rio bronco/San Christobol thing. It seems crazy to have a thousand different lines of the same frog out there. Furthermore, I think that it is dificult when dealing with pumilios because of the lack of local info. I do however, think that in some instances it may be more fitting to have certain frogs identified with lines and others not. For instance I believe that the two lines of Amazonicus in the hobby, one being Todd kelly line and the other being Randy Strann's, came from two completely different locals. I do not believe that these should be mixed, and so I think that in that instance it is good to have distinct lines. Feel free to try and change my mind though.




> I don't even think they should be called SNDF line either, but that's just my opinion. I honestly wish we could do away with "lines" and focus more on species as it seems to just further dilute the gene pool when we try to always pair up lines.


Not sure that I see how it is diluting the gene pool. Narrowing yes, but not dilluting.



> Like I said, I am sorry if this came across as an attack of you because it really is not, I just really don't like the whole line issue.


I didn't take it harshly. I feel that you have a very legitament point, and are welcome to your opinion. I won't ever take a difference of opinion harshly when it is presented in a reasonable way and backed up with some good info. It's the bad idea, nuff said comments that get under my skin.


----------



## trinacliff (Aug 9, 2004)

sbreland said:


> Yes, these are the second. The first was a very small shipment that only went to a few people privately and weren't advertised and these available now are the second.


Ah, guess I'm out of the loop...I knew some where here, but I wasn't aware that SNDF brought those in, as well.

Kristen


----------



## frogcal (Mar 13, 2005)

*Escudo*

You guys are right on this is a sencond shipment, because I am the one that got most of Escudo from the first shipment 3 months ago. They are bold, beautiful but small frogs. My group contain 1.3 frogs. They eat fruit flies with occasionally springtails as a treat. I was able to get one batch of bad egg.
Ben


----------



## Paul E. Wog (Jan 2, 2005)

^ It would probably help to add a date to the "2nd shipment" so people don't confuse it with the Rio/Cristo/Uyama 2nd shipment.


----------



## Lancejr (Mar 25, 2006)

With respect to the line thing I agree with Mike. At most they should be called SNDF '06 #2. Or something to that effect. I might be wrong but all these Escuados came from the same island. So we do have location data for these guys, unlike the Cristos and Rios. There maybe some color differences with the Escuados but I "presume" we are dealing with the same species and morph from a limited range, hopefully not requiring further lineage. Good luck to those with these frogs. I'd love to see them established as CB.


----------



## Darks!de (Nov 16, 2004)

> I actually completely understand the dilema and agree with it to an extent. I have thought about the whole Rio bronco/San Christobol thing. It seems crazy to have a thousand different lines of the same frog out there. Furthermore, I think that it is dificult when dealing with pumilios because of the lack of local info. I do however, think that in some instances it may be more fitting to have certain frogs identified with lines and others not. For instance I believe that the two lines of Amazonicus in the hobby, one being Todd kelly line and the other being Randy Strann's, came from two completely different locals. I do not believe that these should be mixed, and so I think that in that instance it is good to have distinct lines. Feel free to try and change my mind though.


I totally agree, however the reason these two "lines" should be kept seperate is because they are from different areas. This is the same as not breeding two different morphs of auratus. I still don't like the whole line concept and think that breeding within species is fine as along as they are from the same locale. With the amazonicus; they should obviously kept seperate as they are from different locales and may be sub-species.



Lancejr said:


> With respect to the line thing I agree with Mike. At most they should be called SNDF '06 #2. Or something to that effect. I might be wrong but all these Escuados came from the same island. So we do have location data for these guys, unlike the Cristos and Rios. There maybe some color differences with the Escuados but I "presume" we are dealing with the same species and morph from a limited range, hopefully not requiring further lineage. Good luck to those with these frogs. I'd love to see them established as CB.


Escudos all from the island Isla Escudo de Varaques. Even though we don't have locality info for them, we do know they are from a small island, so at least that's something. However, why then is there so much confusion with the Cristobals, they also come from an island, yet people complain that there is no data for them. Escudos and Cristobals are both from limited ranges.

Luke


----------



## Paul E. Wog (Jan 2, 2005)

Darks!de said:


> I totally agree, however the reason these two "lines" should be kept seperate is because they are from different areas. This is the same as not breeding two different morphs of auratus. I still don't like the whole line concept and think that breeding within species is fine as along as they are from the same locale. With the amazonicus; they should obviously kept seperate as they are from different locales and may be sub-species.


Exactly my point, and that is why I believe that there is a time and place for lines to be established.

My first question was just a general question as to how to properly name a line in the event that it is needed. I just used this thread as a springboard for the question. Probably would have been better to use amis as an example instead of Escuado to begin with. I was trying not to hyjack the thread and just hoped for a single quick answer.


----------



## Dendro Dave (Aug 2, 2005)

Darks!de said:


> > Escudos all from the island Isla Escudo de Varaques. Even though we don't have locality info for them, we do know they are from a small island, so at least that's something. However, why then is there so much confusion with the Cristobals, they also come from an island, yet people complain that there is no data for them. Escudos and Cristobals are both from limited ranges.




If im not mistaken the rio/cristis didnt have definate locale data...i mean we dont even know for sure what island they are from. As far as i know the idea that any of these frogs actually came from the locale we would expect they would, was....at best an assumption.

Basti island has populations of frogs that resemble cristis(was it old points? some morph there looks an awful lot like cristis), but then cristibol has real cristis on it... the uyama 2s and rios are both variations found on basti island arent they? Couldnt access tropicalexperience morph guide to check.


As far as the escudo go, and granted im not a frog researcher so alot may have changed that i didnt hear about....but arent there basically 3 morphs? the blue, the red, and the red/blue?

arent these one of the few that we know interbreed naturally and pretty regularly?

even if thats the case though i would advocate that each morph be kept seperate(except in a few cases i'll mention in a moment), but that there is no reason to keep off spring from different breeders of the same morph seperate. Also it shouldnt be a big deal if the reds and blues are bred together to produce the Red/Blues. They could be used to produce the red/blues and offspring of their own respective morph.

But probably shouldnt breed the red/blues back to the blue or reds?

And with the locale date, shouldnt it be pretty safe to breed the same morphs to the few frogs already here that represent that morph. Since a few escudo were already here before the SNDF shipments.

My thinking here from what i know (and i may not know as much as i need to)....is that as long as we have breeding pairs that represent each morph thats all we need. If you had 2 morphs and say one morph was very hard to come by or didnt even exist here(outside what you have)...like the blue????? as far as i know, no solid blues came in?

I dont see any ethical reason why you couldnt produce frogs from that morph and breed them back to each other to keep that morph in the hobby ie the blues(you want fresh blood other wise, but even in breeding any of these morphs given how few there are shouldnt be a big deal)......but also use the parents or off spring to breed with the red morph if it was avialable to you, producing the red/blues. Then no reason not to breed those red/blues to the Red/blues that arrived in the shipment or were already here.... or their offspring.

Thats assuming though that all frogs have the locale data. I think (given what i've read about escudo) that doing it any other way wouldnt do us or the frogs much good. I think this would also fit with the recent idea of breeding populations and not lines, since cant we be pretty sure that there is geneflow between all these frogs? (although technically according to that way of breeding we could breed all 3 mophs together any way we wanted because of the gene flow right?....maybe my suggestion would be the middle ground)....if i understood that post right, or remember it correctly. http://www.dendroboard.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=20874


----------



## Paul E. Wog (Jan 2, 2005)

Dendro Dave said:


> As far as the escudo go, and granted im not a frog researcher so alot may have changed that i didnt hear about....but arent there basically 3 morphs? the blue, the red, and the red/blue?
> 
> arent these one of the few that we know interbreed naturally and pretty regularly?
> 
> ...


I'm not sure that I quite agree with this. It seems to me that after so many years of crossbreading in the wild that any of the frogs have the ability to throw any or the distinct colors types. e.g. a red Escuado probably has the genetic information to throw a red/blue, blue, as well as a red.


----------



## Roadrunner (Mar 6, 2004)

what the heck happened, i was only out hunting a couple hours. wow, i can`t catch up but will say this:
if i end up w/ 3 pair and all breed and produce offspring you need to identify that the offspring are unrelated(#`s 1 2 3 or lines 1 2 3 aaron`s frog farm). these can be bred to anyone elses offspring or back to any of the unpaired individuals. these "lines" will go in frogtracks and if you end up w/ 2 males from my lines #2 and #3 you would pair a male up w/ line #1 or someonoe else`s line or lines to make sure your pairs are unrelated. you would then have line #2 male x female from import or female from aff #1 or #3 or female from who else was getting some say sndf #1 or 2 or 3 if they get have that many pairs or anyone else who got them. you want to be able to tree every frog to try and cross it to an unrelated frog or very distant related frog. say aff #1x#3 and aff #1 x #2 this way there only half related. if i understand correctly this is why we want to track them w/ such a limited founding group. all my lines would be from sndf 09/06 edv pumilio.


----------



## Paul E. Wog (Jan 2, 2005)

^You bring up an interesting point when it comes to keeping frogs unrelated. It seems that when we talk about keeping lines, it is for the purpose of inbreeding within said line. However, I find keeping line info established for the sake of *NOT* inbreeding is quite compelling.

I tell yah, there are so many variables to this stuff that it makes my head spin sometimes. Maybe we simply can't say what is and isn't the right way to do things because they vary under different circumstances.


----------



## Dendro Dave (Aug 2, 2005)

Paul E. Wog said:


> [quote="Dendro Dave":1k489nav]
> As far as the escudo go, and granted im not a frog researcher so alot may have changed that i didnt hear about....but arent there basically 3 morphs? the blue, the red, and the red/blue?
> 
> arent these one of the few that we know interbreed naturally and pretty regularly?
> ...


I'm not sure that I quite agree with this. It seems to me that after so many years of crossbreading in the wild that any of the frogs have the ability to throw any or the distinct colors types. e.g. a red Escuado probably has the genetic information to throw a red/blue, blue, as well as a red.[/quote:1k489nav]


I agree that its probable that these frogs could throw multiple variations....but i think it should be handled like aaron is handling the superblues and turq/bronze auratus. Yes one can throw the other but they MOSTLY throw this...or that. And for that reason should be kept seperate and sold/traded along with that info and sentiment. People buying these frogs should understand they might not get a frog colored exactly like they think, even if that frog is likely to produce offspring that are. How much this will apply to the escudo remains to be seen.

Time will tell ofcourse wether these guys breed true.

I am also infavor of keeping the line information in order to promote breeding between unrelated animals....just not in favor of only breeding arraons line A...with other offspring of aarons line A. But having said that...given the limited number of animals to work with i think its going to be hard to avoid sibling pairs and such. Should TRY to minimize it though.

I still dont see a problem with breeding these with the escudo that were already here, assuming they all have locale data. Again tracking the bloodlines for the sake of putting together likely unrelated pairs would be good.


----------



## Roadrunner (Mar 6, 2004)

ah, i see. your getting it confused. the kelly line of imitator should be inbred because they are most likely from a population of imitators that only the kelly line is left from that population in captivity. if tors line was from the same import and population than you should breed tors to todd(kelly line) and not todds to it`s siblings or tors to it`s siblings. always outbreed if the populations are the same. lines just denote related animals and the population area was not available for todds line, to the best of my knowledge. the import(shipment) is the tag for a population of frogs from the same place.


----------



## sbreland (May 4, 2006)

Hehe, and to think how far this thread has come form a simple wanted post for some Escudos... LOL. Sorry, just guess I was looking in retrospect for a second. :lol:


----------



## Paul E. Wog (Jan 2, 2005)

sbreland said:


> Hehe, and to think how far this thread has come form a simple wanted post for some Escudos... LOL. Sorry, just guess I was looking in retrospect for a second. :lol:


I was just thinking the same thing lol.


----------



## Paul E. Wog (Jan 2, 2005)

frogfarm said:


> ah, i see. your getting it confused. the kelly line of imitator should be inbred because they are most likely from a population of imitators that only the kelly line is left from that population in captivity. if tors line was from the same import and population than you should breed tors to todd(kelly line) and not todds to it`s siblings or tors to it`s siblings. always outbreed if the populations are the same. lines just denote related animals and the population area was not available for todds line, to the best of my knowledge. the import(shipment) is the tag for a population of frogs from the same place.


Was that directed at me? I don't dissagree with that.


----------



## Catfur (Oct 5, 2004)

Why do you need to create, ex nihilo, "lines" for these frogs, isn't Escudos de Varaguas sufficient labeling for them?


----------



## *GREASER* (Apr 11, 2004)

I think this thread opened alot of peoples eyes.It seemed like alot of people with vague ideas on how lines work were quick to put them down when they really didnt have a solid idea on how it worked until Aaron broke it down. I have also questioned the idea of lines in certian cases but until you have a good idea on how things work its hard to build a case against it.


----------



## sbreland (May 4, 2006)

Catfur said:


> Why do you need to create, ex nihilo, "lines" for these frogs, isn't Escudos de Varaguas sufficient labeling for them?


I agree that this should be sufficient. I feel like disecting it more than that just unnecessarily narrows the gene pool for a frog with limited numbers in the hobby and that has locality data. For those that think we don't have data on these guys, were do you think they came from? The island is tiny and had had minimal human contact, so what other information do you need? That this particular frog was collected 150 yard north of the big tree on the beach where the sloths always poop? Escudo de Veraguas is sufficient and denoteing the shipment date (SNDF 06 #2) only helps to keep like populations together but in reality you should easily be able to breed together any two frogs that are confirmed to be Escudos.


----------



## sbreland (May 4, 2006)

*GREASER* said:


> It seemed like alot of people with vague ideas on how lines work were quick to put them down when they really didnt have a solid idea on how it worked...


To be quite honest, I'm not sure many people understand how lines work. If you just browse threads here on DB for a bit you will quickly see how nearly every person has a different idea of what a line is or how one is defined. :lol:


----------



## Jason DeSantis (Feb 2, 2006)

My 2 cents

I believe Aaron and the others who bought these frogs have the right to call them their line of frogs. Aaron and the others have bought these guys fair and square. If I had the money I would have bought some myself. Just because frogs came in in a certain shipment does not mean they are related by any means. They are obviously distant relatives of each other because of evolution but they are not directly related. So in my opinion Aaron has 6 different bloodlines at this point. When he breeds them he will potentially have 3 different lines which I believe should be called Aarons frog farm line 1-3. Regardless of who brings them in they are the person who bought thems, frogs. Its like saying Patricks bastis lines should now be called importer Xs 1-100 shipment. Thats not right! Alot of the people in the hobby if they know it or not are breeding frogs from the same line or multiple lines and or shipments. No thought seems to be put into most of the past shipments. I think to much thought is being put on these frogs because of the price. I do however think all shipments and site data should be recorded for future knowledge.

Another point I wanted to make was about SNDF. SNDF were the ones who brought these frogs in. They took the time to travel and to do site research. IMO they have the right to charge whatever they want for these frogs. They know what was involved and how much time was involved with bringing them in. It upsets me to think people have the right to tell others what they should charge. We dont know how much they paid for them or how much dead loss they may of had. If someone wants to sell a frog for $1000 thats what they feel there time was worth and if you dont want to pay then dont. But dont try to tell someone else what there time is worth. Just to let you all know I have not had any dealings with SNDF so my opinion is not partial.

I hope this may have helped some people look at this whole situation from a different point of view.
Jason


----------



## sbreland (May 4, 2006)

Jason DeSantis said:


> I believe Aaron and the others who bought these frogs have the right to call them their line of frogs. Aaron and the others have bought these guys fair and square. If I had the money I would have bought some myself. Just because frogs came in in a certain shipment does not mean they are related by any means. They are obviously distant relatives of each other because of evolution but they are not directly related. So in my opinion Aaron has 6 different bloodlines at this point. When he breeds them he will potentially have 3 different lines which I believe should be called Aarons frog farm line 1-3. Regardless of who brings them in they are the person who bought thems, frogs.


Everybodies entitled to their opinion, but.....
by your design, there would end up with no less than 6 different lines (and probably more) if everyone that bought these frogs got a line named after them out of such a small shipment of frogs. With the hundreds of imis that were brouhght in in the past, there only ended up with a few lines... do you think this is right? Plus, if Aaron sells them as line one to somebody and that person wants to "keep the line pure" they would be loking to breed with another Aarons line 1. What does that accomplish except a horrendous level of inbreeding? Now, if you want to make the arguement that people should denote each person that ends up with more than one pair as BLOODline 1 or 2, that is good. That way you know if you have Aarons line 1 that you need to breeding back against a different bloodline. Think about how Patrick claims to have several unrelated bloodlines of azureus... he's not claiming them each as a different line. In all honesty, I think Aaron is a great guy and deserves his own line for all he has done, but this is not the time or place. IMO, the way to get your own line (not that anyone is angling to have a line named after them) is to import a fresh group separate from other previously recognized lines.


----------



## rozdaboff (Feb 27, 2005)

Doesn't happen too often - but I agree with Stace on this one :wink: 

The line should be SNDF Escudos 11/06 - or something along those lines.

Then each person who had the opportunity to purchase these frogs has their own bloodline. Swapping between the bloodlines should be extremely encouraged. This is exactly where a system like FrogTracks become indispensable.


----------



## Dancing frogs (Feb 20, 2004)

I belive the "lines" from each pair should be kept track of, for the purpose of allowing people to get at least distantly related (preferably non-related) animals...not to promote inbreeding as others may have suggested.

For example, someone could aquire (x) line (1), and breed it to (x) line (2), or to  line (2) and so forth...

That way, even if there were only say ten pairs in the hobby to start with, there could be many generations of offspring produced before having to breed with something that had the same great grandparents or something like that...I think that would be way better than just having a name to go by.
Also, I don't feel that way just cause the frogs are high buck...I feel that way about any animal breeding.


----------



## trinacliff (Aug 9, 2004)

I haven't even read the last few posts, but just one point before I dig deeper into this...it seems to me that it has never been the case that the people that purchase the frogs denote their frogs as their own line. That would mean that anyone who purchased rio branco, cristobal, uyama river could call any offspring of theirs their own line. Then, all you are doing is, like other said, narrowing the gene pool if you are going to not cross lines. The Escudo that were brought in should not be made into different lines as it is very likely that they all came from the same or similar populations. 


Kristen


----------



## Homer (Feb 15, 2004)

rozdaboff said:


> Doesn't happen too often - but I agree with Stace on this one :wink:
> 
> The line should be SNDF Escudos 11/06 - or something along those lines.
> 
> Then each person who had the opportunity to purchase these frogs has their own bloodline. Swapping between the bloodlines should be extremely encouraged. This is exactly where a system like FrogTracks become indispensable.


Exactly. Bloodlines are just another tool that can be used to either broaden the genetic variability or limit it. Just like any tool, if it is used improperly, the results aren't the best.


----------



## Jason DeSantis (Feb 2, 2006)

No matter how much you argue the point a bloodline consists of 2 frogs breeding. With that being said how can you say that SNDF has a bloodline without them even breeding the frogs. I am not arguing the point about bloodlines and combining bloodlines. All I am saying is bringing in a shipment does not mean they are your bloodline. Breeding the frogs establishes a bloodline. The whole idea is that if the frogs are all brought in together they are all the same line, when in reality they most likely have no relation to the others in that shipment ( which would mean not the same BLOODLINE). I agree with you that this narrows the breeding field but you can always breed the F1s with another line of F1s. Or you can breed your F1s with F1s from another breeder who also got the frogs from the same shipment. Either way these frogs should only be bred with other known Escudos. :lol: With this being said, hurry up and breed these so I can get some.
Jason


----------



## rozdaboff (Feb 27, 2005)

Jason - 

I am not arguing that each breeding pair represents a bloodline - but when referencing them - they should not be broken down into "Bob's line" or "Bill's line" or "Frank's line". They should be grouped as the shipment - and then the people breeding them should be proactive about swapping bloodlines - but if/when these frogs get established - then it will become an incredibly confusing situation if all the offspring are designated from 6 lines. This is not the case if they are all referred to as originating from the SNDF import. Frogtracks will allow precise tracking of which bloodlines were crossed to ensure as much genetic variability as possible.


----------



## Jason DeSantis (Feb 2, 2006)

See I can agree with that Oz. My whole argument is saying the word ''bloodline''. I think this word is being used to loosely. I am fine with people saying 0.0.2 escudos for sale SNDF 06 shipment. But when people use the words bloodline and SNDF to mean the same thing then thats not right. A bloodline refers to the person who bred them not the person who imported them. The purpose for me to write on this thread was basically because the word bloodline was not being used in the correct manner.
Jason


----------



## Catfur (Oct 5, 2004)

Why do they even need to be grouped by the importation, we have the real deal info that we need on these frogs: locality. Grouping them by importation (other than keeping pedigrees in frogtracks or another studbook), implies that they shouldn't be mixed with say, escudos from a later importation, or from Europe, which seems pointless, it's not like the island is big enough to support multiple, long-term valid populations.


----------



## rozdaboff (Feb 27, 2005)

I guess in this case it doesn't really matter - but was speaking from the point of maintaining frog info in FrogTracks.


----------



## sbreland (May 4, 2006)

Catfur said:


> Why do they even need to be grouped by the importation, we have the real deal info that we need on these frogs: locality. Grouping them by importation (other than keeping pedigrees in frogtracks or another studbook), implies that they shouldn't be mixed with say, escudos from a later importation, or from Europe, which seems pointless, it's not like the island is big enough to support multiple, long-term valid populations.


Bingo... kinda what I was argueing but nobody seems to listen.



> Doesn't happen too often - but I agree with Stace on this one


Hehehe. Well, I may not be the most agreeable person, but I try to make sense.




> See I can agree with that Oz. My whole argument is saying the word ''bloodline''. I think this word is being used to loosely. I am fine with people saying 0.0.2 escudos for sale SNDF 06 shipment. But when people use the words bloodline and SNDF to mean the same thing then thats not right. A bloodline refers to the person who bred them not the person who imported them. The purpose for me to write on this thread was basically because the word bloodline was not being used in the correct manner.
> Jason


Maybe I'm reading it wrong, but I think that you are getting the word line and bloodline confused. A bloodline is two frogs and the descendants they produce. A line really has nothing to do with that in the respect that a line is a group of frogs brought in by a person that either has locality data (or maybe even the lack thereof) that is different than any other imports of the same species. There are many other small variable factors that can be thrown in that will make this post much longer, but it just seems to me that you're getting hung up and confusing the idea that when people say bloodline or line they really mean 2 different things. Sorry if I read you worng, but by your past several posts, that's what I got out of it.


----------



## Jason DeSantis (Feb 2, 2006)

Stace,
I am not getting anything confused. There are to many people out there using the term line to mean bloodline. If people would either just say bloodline or group of imports I think there would be alot less to debate on dendroboard.

Sorry for the debate earlier, I was in an argumentative mood. Im back to my old self now. :shock: 
Jason


----------



## sbreland (May 4, 2006)

Hehe, no problem and sorry I read you wrong. I think these things need hashed out every once in awhile and appreciate hearing others views on it.


----------



## Roadrunner (Mar 6, 2004)

kelly line imitators are his bloodline. if he had more than one pair it would be kelly #1 and kelly line #2. if someone else had a line of imitators from the same population they would be x line #1 or 2. if these were all from the cianarachi valley imitators than you could breed any combo of kelly line 1 or 2 to each other or to x line 1 or 2 in any combo as long as you didnt get 2 of the same persons line. there is only population(or species/morph) and bloodlines. bloodlines only start w/ the 1st importation breeders. if someone gets line 1 and 2 escudos from me and breeds them they are still aff line 1x2 escudos. it eventually gets really confusing after the 6th or 7th gen and then everything is related if it hasnt been inbred. but your always looking for the first couple gens for breeding. if they all mature at 6 mos and breed you have 12 gens in 6 years and your family tree for each frog is going onto 2 sheets looking like
male-aff1x2 female-aff2x3
male - aff1x2x2x3 female - joe`s1xstace2
male-aff1x2x2x3xjoe`s1xstace2 female-joe`s 2 
male-aff1x2x2x3xjoe`s1xstace2xjoe`s 2
but it would work. this is the only way i could think of to keep a division on related unrelated offspring. i didnt think beyond seperating who was related from my 2 pairs. i did want to enter these guys into frogtracks though.
i havent really looked over the setup on frogtracks yet.


----------



## Dendro Dave (Aug 2, 2005)

Catfur said:


> Why do they even need to be grouped by the importation, we have the real deal info that we need on these frogs: locality. Grouping them by importation (other than keeping pedigrees in frogtracks or another studbook), implies that they shouldn't be mixed with say, escudos from a later importation, or from Europe, which seems pointless, it's not like the island is big enough to support multiple, long-term valid populations.





sbreland said:


> Bingo... kinda what I was argueing but nobody seems to listen.


Yep thats what i said too a few posts back...

I got no problem calling these the SNDF 06 shipment or whatever....but really there isnt much point to it. The reason this was done with the rio, cristi, uyama 2s was because we didnt have locale data....Who brought them in and when was all we had to go on, and the only way we had to seperate them from other frogs coming in. Some of it i believe was in the hope that the next batchs would have locale data...so then we'd know not to mix "batch WTF" with "batch(known locale data)".

Basically the idea is to only breed one batch of imports to others in that same import batch, because we dont know for sure that another batch is from the same locale or population. 

It seems we kinda gave up on this, and are now just breeding our best guesses together. Which honestly i think is about all we can do if we want these frogs to remain in the hobby. And why shouldnt they? They are great frogs even if they dont have info with them.

Also i'd like to point at that the line info for some frogs in the hobby also represents the import/export batch or whatever....because the people with these frogs are also the same people that brought them into the country. 

It was later offspring that mainly populated the hobby....where as SNDF is mostly just bringing them in and selling them, not breeding them (as far as i know)....if they do breed them then their pair/pairs would represent more lines, then no prob calling them SNDF line 1, or 2 etc... Nothing wrong with just selling them BTW.

I still think some are confused about the purpose of line info. Ideally the line info is used so that you can increase the genetic diversity not limit it. 

We want to know about line A so we can be sure of what we are breeding to line B and vise versa....we only use the line A info to make sure we are breeding line A's to other line A's when we have no other choices. (ideally)

Some frogs may only have a few different KNOWN lines to choose from...and some frogs only have 1...thats why many of those frogs are bred back to each other, so the genetics dont get muddied. That way later if another line is available you know what you'll be breeding to what. Or at the very least so the frogs dont go extinct in the hobby.

If you really want to increase and keep the geneitc diversity over the long run you will have to do the work and keep up with lines A-Z(or more)...so you can pair the most unrelated animals. The founder stock wont last forever,


----------



## Roadrunner (Mar 6, 2004)

exactly.


----------



## Homer (Feb 15, 2004)

sbreland said:


> Catfur said:
> 
> 
> > Why do they even need to be grouped by the importation, we have the real deal info that we need on these frogs: locality. Grouping them by importation (other than keeping pedigrees in frogtracks or another studbook), implies that they shouldn't be mixed with say, escudos from a later importation, or from Europe, which seems pointless, it's not like the island is big enough to support multiple, long-term valid populations.
> ...


With the Escudos, you are probably right, because the frogs are so distinctive and seem to be from such a small geographic area that the entire population interbreeds (but this is an assumption on my part). Locality information may not make any difference if the "locality" is so large that it does not define a population. It's the difference between saying the "Staten Island" morph and the "Australian"morph. Both have locality information naming the island they are from, but one is more likely to describe an interbreeding population than another. 

Since importations likely contain individuals from a discrete location (point location), I think it is a good practice in general to include import info when you have it.



> [quote:2njn35mh]See I can agree with that Oz. My whole argument is saying the word ''bloodline''. I think this word is being used to loosely. I am fine with people saying 0.0.2 escudos for sale SNDF 06 shipment. But when people use the words bloodline and SNDF to mean the same thing then thats not right. A bloodline refers to the person who bred them not the person who imported them. The purpose for me to write on this thread was basically because the word bloodline was not being used in the correct manner.
> Jason


Maybe I'm reading it wrong, but I think that you are getting the word line and bloodline confused. A bloodline is two frogs and the descendants they produce. A line really has nothing to do with that in the respect that a line is a group of frogs brought in by a person that either has locality data (or maybe even the lack thereof) that is different than any other imports of the same species. There are many other small variable factors that can be thrown in that will make this post much longer, but it just seems to me that you're getting hung up and confusing the idea that when people say bloodline or line they really mean 2 different things. Sorry if I read you worng, but by your past several posts, that's what I got out of it.[/quote:2njn35mh]

I have to disagree here. I do not see a distinction between "line" and "bloodline". If we are going to be our own lexicographers here, I think we need to choose two words that sound a lot less identical. If you want "line" to mean "population", then let's use the term "population," as Brent suggested in an earlier article/post. Otherwise, it's going to get really confusing.


----------



## Roadrunner (Mar 6, 2004)

how big is escudo de varaguas and how big is bastimentos? an island doesnt have to be big to support more than one population it only needs the geographical barriers to seperate populations. there still may be a blue morph from the east coast and they may be more red towards the west. most likely the whole island exchanges gene flow though.
i`ve heard there is an all sky blue "morph" people are breeding in europe. i don`t know if these are a subpopulation or not or if they breed true or are line bred.


----------



## Jason (Oct 14, 2004)

Wow this post has grown.
:lol: Look, I just wanted frogs! :wink: :lol:


----------



## Catfur (Oct 5, 2004)

Escudos is not much bigger than Central Park in NYC, Bastimentos is about 10 miles long.


----------



## stchupa (Apr 25, 2006)

Jason DeSantis said:


> My 2 cents
> 
> I believe Aaron and the others who bought these frogs have the right to call them their line of frogs.


This is precisely why we are so (much) high(er) on the # of lines (than we should be).
An uneccassary division when we need all the diveristy we can get. Dumbest mistake that has been made so far.
People have to label things as their own. Is this greed or what?
A name means what to you (to me it's Jack)? That tells me nothing. A track must be kept for this to work out later on and we've surely been veering from it since the start.
Everything must be traced back to SNDF and *all *data recorded by them.
Forget making your own line, that's ludicrous, not to mention devistaing to the "hobby".
It's ok to say so and so bred these from this line which is now spread out, but to switch your name with the original line title and forget the rest...
This is again familiarized with the 'red' Amazonicus which the detail of the locale was more or less switched/thrown out/forgotten with the first two people names that had acquired them.

If someone had previously set this basis, I apologize for the repeat as I've not read the whole thread as of yet.




> I do however think all shipments and site data should be recorded for future knowledge.


OK, exactly but don't give it different names for each person that breeds them. Were just going to end up right (behind) where we started after we make this full circle for the however manyith time. A track goes forward.


----------



## Roadrunner (Mar 6, 2004)

it`s not greed it`s a way to trace lineage. i don`t care if you call them joe shmoe # 1 or whatever. do you have another suggestion? if i read right we should let sndf do all the recording of what? i`m suppposed to call them and tell them when my pairs produce and let them know who i`m selling them to?
i think you skipped the line/bloodline part of the thread. it seems like you still think we are talking about line breeding(breeding all w/in the same bloodline). we are talking about naming bloodlines so as to recognize who CAN`T be bred w/ who(or how they are related to each other so to breed as unrelated and diversely as we can).


----------



## stchupa (Apr 25, 2006)

frogfarm said:


> it`s not greed it`s a way to trace lineage. i don`t care if you call them joe shmoe # 1 or whatever.


Jack stood for Jack shit as I agree names mean/tell nothing.



> do you have another suggestion?


What I just gave. Did you miss it?


> if i read right we should let sndf do all the recording of what?


Absolutely not, if someone knows valuable/credible info we shouldn't discount it. But I also think that what ever data (SNDF has) shouldn't become lost and perpetuate confusion by replacing it w/ a breeders name.
The name of the breeder should be given to whoever buys them from that breeder (if they want) but the line should remain SNDFs'.



> i`m suppposed to call them and tell them when my pairs produce and let them know who i`m selling them to?


Why would they care, at some point our (yours & mine) lines got crossed (no that's not a pun). You heard me differently than I intented.


> i think you skipped the line/bloodline part of the thread.


I'm way behind so sorry for bringing up what may have already been discussed. I wasn't sure and still am not as I haven't read more than since the last post. I'm getting to it. I'm slooooow.



> it seems like you still think we are talking about line breeding(breeding all w/in the same bloodline).


I think your right.



> we are talking about naming bloodlines so as to recognize who CAN`T be bred w/ who(or how they are related to each other so to breed as unrelated and diversely as we can).


[/quote]

All I was saying is the trace is lost when names are considered over true lineage.

I added that too so I guess I'm a little bit everywhere. Great organization I have.


----------



## stchupa (Apr 25, 2006)

Yep, sure enough it's all been said/done.

I'm just glad everyone is one the same page now I wasn't sure, I fell right behind the next dozen post said nearly the same things I meant.


----------



## Catfur (Oct 5, 2004)

I would say that for maximal, long term breeding success, you should register the frogs & offspring in a studbook, like frogtracks (which is essentially an online studbook). To most people here in dartfrog land, when you say "lines" people then think that frogs from different "lines" shouldn't be mixed, and we get all sorts of problems when artificial lines are created. I didn't create the terminology mishmash, I just get to suffer through it like the rest of us.


----------



## Jason DeSantis (Feb 2, 2006)

What about with other imported frogs. Anyone can buy imports from understory. What do you suggest the hobby calls the frogs that come in a couple at a time a hundred times a year?
I to find all this tracking of bloodlines a waist of time, but if we dont where will the hobby be in 10-20 years. All the frogs out there will be related in some form or another. Then what do you do? I am not being argumentative just curious what others feel. Please dont use quotes and say there point is dumb. There is a way of getting points across without belittling others.

I would like to see a poll on this situation.

Jason


----------



## stchupa (Apr 25, 2006)

Catfur said:


> To most people here in dartfrog land, when you say "lines" people then think that frogs from different "lines" shouldn't be mixed, and we get all sorts of problems when artificial lines are created. I didn't create the terminology mishmash, I just get to suffer through it like the rest of us.


Yes, doesn't that hurt. I hate it. To many words w/identical meanings and to many meaning used with same word. Drives me nuts.

Another term that need to go is "hobby" sice this seems to let people be less serious on the issue.


----------



## Homer (Feb 15, 2004)

When do we split this thread off? We haven't been talking about the original post for quite some time now.


----------



## Paul E. Wog (Jan 2, 2005)

Jason DeSantis said:


> Please dont use quotes and say there point is dumb. There is a way of getting points across without belittling others.


Agreed, it is unproductive and unnesesary.


----------



## Roadrunner (Mar 6, 2004)

blah, blah blah(edited because it didn`t make much sense, see next post)

so all you need is 2 things, where they came from(or population, rather) and how are your frogs related to the original pairs that came in and bred. not who brought them in, who bred them anything else. i think the generic # of all offspring from a single pair is good enough though. we are basically treating them as if they are all the same animal anyway, genetically.


----------



## Roadrunner (Mar 6, 2004)

ok, this should explain the whole situation, short and sweet. well maybe not so short.
when 20 pairs of imitators came in, todd kelly and 19 others had a pair. everyone else`s pairs died(hypothetical, but gets the point across. happened something like this). todd was the only one w/ a pair from that import(since we have no site data, same as the rios,uyamas,christos; no SPECIFIC site data, it`s general area for these pumilio possibly from more than one population in each place as humans can cross barriers frogs can`t). another shipment of imitators came in possibly from a different area and tor got a pair and 19 other people. everyone else`s died and tor now had a bloodline of imitators from a different import and possibly a different population. people who got frogs from them just said i have kelly line or tor`s line and that became the name for a "location" of imitators because that is the only data we had. kelly line was short for bloodline and everyone who said don`t cross kelly line w/ tor`s line MEANT don`t cross the populations, if there were more than 1 bloodline it wouldn`t have gone that way, the only data we have is they were bred by todd kelly or tor linbo so they now inadvertantly had a "line" named after them. line meaning both bloodline AND site data for a specific morph of frogs. we now have site data and who`s breeding them and those old terms of line can now be done away w/ on these animals. line only refers to things brought in in the past w/ no data other than who bred them attached. different situations have different terms attached to refer to what happened for these frogs to get here.
if you have kelly line imitators and cianarachi valley imitators bred by stace and he has 2 pair how do you know if your animals are related and should they be bred to tor`s "line" or kelly`s "line". no they should only be bred to unrelated cianarachi valley imitators which you know came from differnet pairs. if you have kelly and tor line imitators should you breed them together? if you think they are from the same population i would breed from one line to another and not inbreed so as to get genetic diversity and LABEL them as tor linexkelly line and let other people choose what they think. i bred both nabors and tom horm line imitators and under the same conditions tom horn line imitators came out of the water bigger, the pair was nowhere near as prolific and they were almost all green when they came out and nabors line was gold and black, smaller, more prolific. they looked like different populations to me but i really have no clue.


----------



## bbrock (May 20, 2004)

frogfarm said:


> so all you need is 2 things, where they came from(or population, rather) and how are your frogs related to the original pairs that came in and bred. not who brought them in, who bred them anything else. i think the generic # of all offspring from a single pair is good enough though. we are basically treating them as if they are all the same animal anyway, genetically.


This is bang on Aaron. This has been an interesting thread that yet again rehashes what has been argued about in this hobby for 10 years. The problem, and I'll say it again, is that what we really want to manage are populations but we've been using substitute units like morphs and lines to do it. So why don't we just focus on our real target which is the population? From everything I have read here, the Escudo pumilio appear to be one of the few no-brainer cases of a single population among any imported frogs. So that should solve the question of how to label these frogs right there. Just call the Escudo pumilio. Why do you need any other label?

Managing these things by "lines" seems very goofy to me and here is why. Suppose you designate lines for the purposes of outbreeding. So you have line A, B, and C. When you breed within a line, you are sudividing the gene pool into narrow little puddles. Yes, you can mix them back together but you can't get around the fact that you have already altered the frequencies of those genes. Second, when you breed lines together, what do you get? You get mixed lines. So you get AxB, BxC, AxC. Then you mix these and what do you get? You get AxBxC. And now you are done. All frogs from that point on are AxBxC. What have you really gained? Why not just randomly breed ALL of the founders and their offspring from the start? At least with random breeding, alleles are likely to be passed through the population more proportional to their frequency in the founding stock. In other words, the relative abundance or rarity of genes will remain more representative of the wild population for longer.

So like Aaron says, all you really need to know is which population the frogs belong to and how they are related to the original founders. But the other thing you need is organization in the hobby. To put this in perspective, Ben Chan (and I hope I'm not spilling the beans) has been working with TWI to model how we can best manage frogs to preserve wild genetics. This is VERY preliminary but the most recent runs indicate that to maintain 95% of the wild genetic diversity in a captive population for 20 years will require a population of about 400 frogs. And this assumes completely random breeding among individuals in the population. That's daunting but doable IF we have the organization and discipline as a hobby. Ben's analysis is far from complete and will result in some methods guidelines that will help better preserve the genes of the animals we have. Very likely TWI will set up a voluntary breeder exchange program within the Amphibian Steward Network to make it easier for people to randomize the genes within populations.

Finally, I doubt the line concept will die anytime soon in the hobby. But how about making a pact that lines will no longer be named after people? Such names tend to bring personal ambition into the whole practice of tracking lineages. Most of the folks who's names are already attached to frog lines did not name those lines themselves and are a bit unsettled by the practice.


----------



## Darks!de (Nov 16, 2004)

Just something I was thinking about. If we try to increase the outbreeding of populations (which we should), hobbyists will need to aquire unrelated pairs from breeders. More often than not, a person just buys either a sexed pair or a few juvis and then pairs them up. These pairs are all related; being siblings. Therefore, for outbreeding to be accomplished, one will need to setup pairs by purchasing a male from one breeder and a female from another breeder. 

Just like frogtracks and TWI not having as much membership as is needed for them to be successful, I feel that people are lazy with outbreeding also. Instead of searching for a matching pair from different breeders, it is much easier (and cheaper) to just buy a related pair from one person. 

There are many beneficial and important programs and practices that can greatly better the hobby and the conservation of these animals, however the one problem they all face is a majority of hobbyists who find them too troublesome and timeconsuming to actually get involved.

Luke


----------



## defaced (May 23, 2005)

We need to model our record keeping after the Killifish hobby. They have solved all of the problems we're having just be substituting the name of the location with a code. The collectors get to keep their collection sites secret, the hobbiests get local data in the form of a code, thus they can keep populations seperate.


----------



## Homer (Feb 15, 2004)

defaced said:


> We need to model our record keeping after the Killifish hobby. They have solved all of the problems we're having just be substituting the name of the location with a code. The collectors get to keep their collection sites secret, the hobbiests get local data in the form of a code, thus they can keep populations seperate.


The killie issue is a bit different, as you can be certain or nearly certain that an individual or group of annual killifish collected from a particular pool on the side of a road constitutes a complete population of a particular fish. We cannot say the same for frogs.

Plus, the killies collected are often collected by hobbyists or researchers, so you have more reliable data. On the other hand, we are receiving imports from local businessmen who may or may not be concerned about locality data. However, even if you have locality data you can rarely be certain that the locality defines a population in the frog setting (Escudos being an exception). So, what is true for killies does not necessarily work for frogs.

Plus, having been in the killie hobby, I can tell you that there are a lot of fish in the hobby that do not have good locality information with them, and people use the equivalent of "morphs" to match up pairs (e.g., the two "strains" of Fp. sjoestedti). If you check the AKA BNL, I think you will find that locality information on many species is rarely, or at least infrequently, listed on the fish offered.


----------



## defaced (May 23, 2005)

Sorry for the poor wording of my post. I should have said we should use codes to designate populations, not locations. 



> However, even if you have locality data you can rarely be certain that the locality defines a population in the frog setting (Escudos being an exception).


Then will it ever be possible to ascertain if a group of frogs is a population without significant observation on the part of the collector(s)?


----------



## ETwomey (Jul 22, 2004)

[/quote]Then will it ever be possible to ascertain if a group of frogs is a population without significant observation on the part of the collector(s)?[/quote]

Not really. Field observations combined with genetic studies (many useful ones have been published) are always going to be important, but there are enough people with enough field experience to help make these designations. With the INIBICO frogs, Sean Stewart and I have been concerned with formulating coding systems to keep this stuff straight and basically provide a key where people can see what can be bred with what. Regarding imitator, if you have a Cainarachi line, or Todd Kelly line, or a darn Texas Pete line, as long as they are the standard spotted with blue-green background, you've got yourself an imitator from the Cainarachi valley north of Tarapoto. One population. Unfortunately locality data was missing from some of the old imports, but there are a handful of people working with these frogs in the field that know exactly where they're from. Fortunately with the newer imports (INIBICO, Understory), much more emphasis is being placed on locality information and proper designation of populations, or at least 'distinct' morphs.

-Evan


----------



## bbrock (May 20, 2004)

defaced said:


> We need to model our record keeping after the Killifish hobby. They have solved all of the problems we're having just be substituting the name of the location with a code. The collectors get to keep their collection sites secret, the hobbiests get local data in the form of a code, thus they can keep populations seperate.


As a matter of fact, with some help from Chuck Powell, we were able to get a copy of the Aquatic Conservation Network breeding guidelines and these formed a very good start for ASN. I agree 100% that populations should be labeled by locality. To have multiple sympatric populations within a species is unheard of as far as I know. So location should be all that's needed.

And what Evan said about what is already known about the origin of these frogs is extremely important. Collectively, a LOT is known and can be known about origins of our frogs. But again, we need organization to get all the information together in one place and in a format that is useful. I remember one late night/early morning session at IAD where Chuck Nishihira took us on a vicarious tour of the auratus morphs of Middle America. It was fascinating to hear him describe from memory how the morphs changed from location to location beginning in Panama and working south.

At another IAD, or perhaps the same one, we had some of the vittatus that are now the common ones in the hobby. I don't know how many people know but those animals were originally sold in the hobby as P. lugubris. The identification was questioned so several folks pitched in some cash and I had the DNA sequenced and matched to known GENBANK samples. They were a perfect match for one vittatus sample and only a couple base pairs off from another. I believe they were 6 base pairs off from lugubris. So the evidence was very strong that the frogs were vittatus but not proof positive. Brian Kubicki was at this particular IAD and I had him take a look. He took one glance and said "Yes, that's vittatus for sure. I've collected that morph at the eastern edge of their range." And that's how the so-called "thin-striped" vittatus were identified.

The point being that a lot of people have spent time in the wild habitats of these frogs and contain a wealth of information about the variety that can be found. They can tell us a lot about when a morph could be reliably assigned to a location and when they may be just variable morphs found in many populations. That information is waiting for us, as a group, to pull it together in one place.


----------



## Dendro Dave (Aug 2, 2005)

*hmm...*

They're Back........Escudo!, red, red/blue, blue....act now while supplies last!!!!!


----------



## dmatychuk (Apr 20, 2005)

> sbreland wrote:
> [quote:7p6irm1j]stchupa wrote:
> [quote:7p6irm1j]Frogtofall wrote:
> [quote:7p6irm1j]sbreland wrote:
> Not likely... inside info says this is the last shipment of Escudos coming in the forseeable future. Apparently the ones SNDF has now was the last batch the farm in Panama had.



I'm shocked you actually believe that one. Go figure. Wink[/quote:7p6irm1j]


It surely makes them money to make you 'believe'.

I find it unlikely that if they were "farm raised".

Supply and demand and this is their way of determining the value by the demand. Tricky bastards.

If everyone knew this and held back the prices would be reasonable.[/quote:7p6irm1j]


Hmm... gee, well, I guess one of the more if not most respected names in this hobby just lies to make money.[/quote:7p6irm1j]

Hmmm....was anybody else lied to by this most respected name?


----------



## MJ (Jun 16, 2005)

dmatychuk said:


> > Frogtofall wrote:
> > [quote:ft894pww]sbreland wrote:
> > Not likely... inside info says this is the last shipment of Escudos coming in the forseeable future. Apparently the ones SNDF has now was the last batch the farm in Panama had.
> 
> ...


[/quote:ft894pww]

Amen :lol:


----------



## Afemoralis (Mar 17, 2005)

Can anyone shed some (more/recent...I've read the previous threads) light on this farm in Panama? Has anyone been there? Is this an INIBICO style farm? This rush for what is obviously an endangered population of D.pumilio concerns me. I'd love to hear more about how the Panamanian collection/export systems work. 

I think as a group we need to be much more aware about this sort of thing, and careful not to create a market for threatened frogs.

Any representatives of SNDF on here who can set my concerns to rest? No intentions of blame or accusations implied. Just genuine curiosity and concern.


Cheers,

Afemoralis


----------



## snmreptiles (Feb 26, 2004)

I don't think that this is another group brought in. They didn't sell all of what they had from the beginning. We were asked before any were posted if we would want to buy any of the all blue Escudos. They were going to hold them back for themselves, but decided not to.

-Shelley


----------



## Dendro Dave (Aug 2, 2005)

Just to be clear i wasnt trying to stir anything up. They have a good rep for holding and treating animals, so in my mind it was obvious that these came in quite awhile ago, they just werent released yet..

Even so, if another batch comes out a few weeks or months later from them or someone else, that probably means that farm/s were just being good sales people more then anything else and likely doesnt reflect on the vendor.

I almost jumped on them this time, since i actually have money now...but im gonna sit back, wait for Some CB, see if any more imports do come in. If there is no legal reason why they wouldnt and the farm still exists, then i think its likely that down the road more will eventually show up. Plus i'd like to see the price come down still. I dont think its unfair, nor that they arent worth it... just more then i wanna spend right now on that number of frogs. I'm also waiting to see what the next peru shipment brings....i still need to pair up my bassleri.

It seems that these breed fairly easy, given that many with them have already gotten eggs. So maybe in a few months, a year, i'll have some of my very own and hopefully for around the 200dollar range  

Feel free to hit me up when any of you with them have some ready to go.

So anyways is the consensus still that we can mix and match these morphs?(in this particular frogs case)


----------



## sbreland (May 4, 2006)

snmreptiles said:


> I don't think that this is another group brought in. They didn't sell all of what they had from the beginning. We were asked before any were posted if we would want to buy any of the all blue Escudos. They were going to hold them back for themselves, but decided not to.
> 
> -Shelley


Exactly. I have talked to Marcus since these came in and these are the leftovers from the first posting, not a new shipment. For all of you who think you know something and think that these are coming in hand over fist, you should put your money where your mouth is and show proof. If you really think this is a new shipment then back up you claims with proof rather than slandering SNDF and calling them liars in public forum and essentially accusing them of shady business practices. Appearances are not always as they seem and just becaue these were reposted doesn't mean that they got more, but rather didn't sell the whole batch the first time around and are reoffering them now to try to move the rest out. If you want the frogs, buy them, if you don, don't, but the several people who have made it a point to say "Haha, told you there would be more" need to know the facts rather than showboating when they know nothing. Sorry if this pisses you off, but it pisses me off to hear this BS from people that know nothing about the situation and only see a classifieds post to form their impression and I have talked to the source and know that's not the way it is.


----------



## jeffreyvmd (Oct 16, 2004)

*completely baffled....*

Well said Stace. I wish people would just have a little faith in the people who are working to help our hobby. For years everyone wondered why we were not getting any new frogs but now with inibico, understory and SNDF we are finally getting our wish and now all some people do is moan and bitch about it. I honestly do not understand some people.


----------



## roberthvalera (Jun 9, 2006)

oh wow an escudo that is completely blue for a "few" bucks more! :? I like the fading of the red back into the blue belly. Is an all blue escudo special because its more rare? Is it more expensive because its prettier? I wonder what the other escudos think of the classy blue freaks...


----------



## costaricalvr12 (Oct 5, 2006)

Remember this......


sbreland said:


> Not likely... inside info says this is the last shipment of Escudos coming in the forseeable future. Apparently the ones SNDF has now was the last batch the farm in Panama had.


Well the next shipment is in with 3 morph's of the escudos, Check it out.

http://www.dendroboard.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=22191


----------



## snmreptiles (Feb 26, 2004)

WOW, read the link before you post it...It says right in it "We did not get another shipment of Escudo de Veraguas in. " 

This is exactly what my wife was talking about, we had a chance to buy these a few days after we got our red/blue escudos!! It isn't another shipment!!

As far as what makes the blues more expensive, you got me, I prefer the red/blues myself!!

Mike
http://www.snmreptiles.com


----------



## sbreland (May 4, 2006)

costaricalvr12 said:


> Remember this......
> 
> 
> sbreland said:
> ...


Yeah, I do remember this and if you would read everything rather than just what you want you would see that this is not a new shipment, like Mike said. You know, if all everyone wants to do is bitch about the new stuff when it comes in and bitch when it doesn't come in, then what is going to make you happy and what do you want?? THEY ARE LEFTOVERS FROM THE SAME SHIPMENT. If that doesn't get your attention, maybe we should go back and have some reading lessons.


----------



## sbreland (May 4, 2006)

sbreland said:


> costaricalvr12 said:
> 
> 
> > Remember this......
> ...


Once again, sorry if that sounds harsh, but people seem to be more interested in debating whether SNDF is trying to screw people and that these may or may not ever come in again than the fact that we have some awesome frogs here now. If your only point is to try to rub it in the faces of those that have supported SNDF's claims when they post their leftovers, you might as well save your breath because those that have kept in touch with SNDF know things that you apparently don't and it's just making you look silly.


----------



## stchupa (Apr 25, 2006)

Much tired that of those so willing to speak for others (squeeze in what they can).
Quit assuming/putting words of mine (yours) before 'mine'.
If you prefer to/must elaborate on someone else's comment, presume under your own, add not as if said, pinpoint under your own discretion and don't pin those (who gave an indirect negative event) down w/ you.
Now I look back (those who brought it up/back) and I can see very easily how such a mountain can be made from a former mole hill.
Those that saw a problem and confronted me w/ it, I felt I explained it and did (w/ basis) to the best of my ability, but didn't realize it was such a common view. Now that I do, I see I must take the opportunity (I should have done at first) to set straight. I didn't do it prior since I figured by the time I had (knew people seen it as such) this thread was going to remain dead. So who would see it.
I said what I said then (thinking of 'others/those' I've dealt w/ while not thinking of how it could become exacerbated/directed towards those I have never dealt with). So yes for not seeing as others see I'm very much at fault. I didn't give names then (so naturally I 'assumed' to not be seen as SNDF) and am not about to now, though tempting, so is life.
SNDF/affiliates seem honorable. Then again so did 'others' before relaying their true nature. "Tricky bastards," unfortunate as it is the 'bad' inevitably comes w/ the 'good,' spinning the simplistic to complexity for all.


----------



## sbreland (May 4, 2006)

Uhhhh.... can I get a paraphrase on that?


----------



## stchupa (Apr 25, 2006)

How do you mean? I wasn't referencing you, if that's what you're thinking?


----------



## sbreland (May 4, 2006)

I'm not really sure what I mean... I was just kinda having a hard time following all of your post, so I just thought a paraphrase might help


----------



## Dancing frogs (Feb 20, 2004)

removed


----------



## Frogtofall (Feb 16, 2006)

sbreland said:


> Once again, sorry if that sounds harsh, but people seem to be more interested in debating whether SNDF is trying to screw people and that these may or may not ever come in again than the fact that we have some awesome frogs here now. If your only point is to try to rub it in the faces of those that have supported SNDF's claims when they post their leftovers, you might as well save your breath because those that have kept in touch with SNDF know things that you apparently don't and it's just making you look silly.


You sure got a big mouth for someone who doesn't have Escudos... :wink: 

I think that the main thing here is that SNDF may have implied that the first batch of Escudo they had for sale was IT. No more to be sold. Now a few weeks later and there are more. It just looks bad. I don't care if its from the same batch or not, it was misleading. Am I mad at them? Hell no. Do I REALLY care? Not really. Is it funny as hell? Sure is. :lol:


----------



## sbreland (May 4, 2006)

Frogtofall said:


> sbreland said:
> 
> 
> > Once again, sorry if that sounds harsh, but people seem to be more interested in debating whether SNDF is trying to screw people and that these may or may not ever come in again than the fact that we have some awesome frogs here now. If your only point is to try to rub it in the faces of those that have supported SNDF's claims when they post their leftovers, you might as well save your breath because those that have kept in touch with SNDF know things that you apparently don't and it's just making you look silly.
> ...


Well, I talk to them pretty regularly so I hear quit a bit about it, but you know how that goes...

I see what you mean, but let's put it in this context... Say you got 10 broms that were impossibly hard to get and posted them on here for sale and said how hard they were to get and these were it and there would be no more after this, but didn't say how many you had. Now, you put a sizeable investment in and after your two week ad ran on here and the post got deleted, you still had six left and a sizeable investment in them... would you just eat em or repost them? When people saw you repost them they would think you got more, but really you were just trying to liquidate your investment and make your money back. You can't tell me you wouldn't do the same...


----------



## Frogtofall (Feb 16, 2006)

sbreland said:


> Well, I talk to them pretty regularly so I hear quit a bit about it, but you know how that goes...
> 
> I see what you mean, but let's put it in this context... Say you got 10 broms that were impossibly hard to get and posted them on here for sale and said how hard they were to get and these were it and there would be no more after this, but didn't say how many you had. Now, you put a sizeable investment in and after your two week ad ran on here and the post got deleted, you still had six left and a sizeable investment in them... would you just eat em or repost them? When people saw you repost them they would think you got more, but really you were just trying to liquidate your investment and make your money back. You can't tell me you wouldn't do the same...


So are you saying SNDF never sold all they had initially? Then the situation would make sense. Although I don't remember seeing the blue ones before...


----------



## sbreland (May 4, 2006)

That's right. The blues were a few they held back for themselves and eventually decided to release. In the example above, if you had one or two of those broms that were extremely nice you decided to keep for yourself but for whatever reason later changed your mind and decided to sell them, that would be the blues...


----------



## Frogtofall (Feb 16, 2006)

sbreland said:


> That's right. The blues were a few they held back for themselves and eventually decided to release. In the example above, if you had one or two of those broms that were extremely nice you decided to keep for yourself but for whatever reason later changed your mind and decided to sell them, that would be the blues...


Okay then yes, I would sell them. Then I would expect there to be some bitching just like there is now. Go figure. :lol: 

Like I said earlier, I don't really care. I just think its all funny. Hopefully all of you that are paying Visa, MC, Discover or Amex back for those frogs are enjoying them. :lol:


----------



## sbreland (May 4, 2006)

It is funny, actually, but frustrating at the same time. I have talked to Marcus many time about it for various reasons but mainly because I wanted to get these guys and have followed up with them about them ever since, but one personal pet peeve of mine is people going off half cocked and post stuff that isn't true or accuses someone I like of deception when it simply is just them not knowing the whole story. Personally it's no gain or loss for me, but it still chews on me just the same. BTW, these comments aren't directed to anyone in the particular but meant to cover all the comments by everyone that posted.


----------



## Paul E. Wog (Jan 2, 2005)

I want to stear this topic away from SNDF for a moment and ask an escuado question. Given these very specific circumstances that the escuado come from a very small island and the three morphs being red, blue and red/blue all readily interbreed, would it be wrong to cross a blue with a red or a red/blue with a blue or red/blue with a red? I personally still wonder whether or not they will breed true due to the fact that they probably have been mixing for many, many years. I would not be surprised if the any of the morphs could or will throw red, blue and red/blue babies, although I could be wrong. Only time will tell. what do you all think?


----------



## sbreland (May 4, 2006)

Hard to say until we start seeing offspring from the new imports, but I wouldn't be surprised if they fall along the same lines as Bastis. Like you said, they have most likely interbred in the wild and will probably throw all variations of colors in their offspring. My personal opinion would be until these guys are stable inthe hobby the different morphs shouldn't be mixed, but in reality much like the Bastis it may not matter.


----------



## a Vertigo Guy (Aug 17, 2006)

They could be polymorphic. Theres a line of cichlid in africa where males have either a blue or yellow tail and when bred, produce babies that can develop blue or yellow tails.


----------



## Roadrunner (Mar 6, 2004)

in my opinion, although i haven`t been there, and for the size of the island, i imagine they all interbreed. i think the tropex.nl just states there are 3 morphs meaning 3 different looking frogs.
and as for the comments about price and how many are coming in, if you don`t like the price, wait till it drops, if it does, for cb. the market WILL decide price no matter what anyone thinks. if enough aren`t being produced the price will stay hi. if someone tries to sell them at 100 ea. they will be scooped up and the list will be a mile long and the other people breeding them will decide the price. 
if anymore come in than that will also factor into the price and we will be the suckers i guess. i could care less. $700 for a pair just means i have to sell 2 at 350, 4 at 175 or 7 at 100 to make my money back. besides the last thing i was thinking about was how much they cost more of how much was left on my card. i`m not risking that they won`t come in again. if they don`t then the people griping should keep quiet indefinately. if not then you can give us an i told you so.
as far as justifying the price, darklands and colons are selling for $375 ea and there are only what 1 or 2 bloodlines in the u.s. that doesn`t seem good for long term viability w/ the genetics involved. these animals are as close as it gets to the genetic variability needed to sustain a captive population. not to mention they can be all blue like darklands and the colons are brown and green. these guys have 3 shades of blue and 2 of red to choose from and varying amounts of each to boot. that and they don`t need very much to stay fat because of their size and their boldness makes them second to none in my book.
i just wish they wouldve released the all blues BEFORE i spent all my money i don`t have on the first ones.


----------



## trinacliff (Aug 9, 2004)

Paul E. Wog said:


> Given these very specific circumstances that the escuado come from a very small island and the three morphs being red, blue and red/blue all readily interbreed, would it be wrong to cross a blue with a red or a red/blue with a blue or red/blue with a red? I personally still wonder whether or not they will breed true due to the fact that they probably have been mixing for many, many years.


In my opinion, taking frogs that look alike, when they do come from a very small island and most likely interbreed, and breeding only frogs with the same coloration together is selective breeding. I feel that our goal should be to try to let what would occur naturally in the wild happen in our care...obviously, that can only be done to some extent given the size of our vivs and that we can only have a few frogs in one viv...but choosing based off of similar coloration is going down the road to selective breeding.

Also, based on most of the pictures I've seen, most of the frogs have some amount of both red and blue on them...some are mostly red and some are mostly blue, but except for a few here and there, they seem to have both red and blue on them.

I say be careful to not start selectively breeding these frogs to "create" in our minds different morphs when they are all, in fact, the same morph.

Kristen


----------



## Paul E. Wog (Jan 2, 2005)

^That's basically the way that I feel about it. Thanks


----------



## sbreland (May 4, 2006)

trinacliff said:


> Paul E. Wog said:
> 
> 
> > Given these very specific circumstances that the escuado come from a very small island and the three morphs being red, blue and red/blue all readily interbreed, would it be wrong to cross a blue with a red or a red/blue with a blue or red/blue with a red? I personally still wonder whether or not they will breed true due to the fact that they probably have been mixing for many, many years.
> ...


I agree completely and if I was to someday have access to a "red" Escudo male and a red and blue female (orwhatever color/sex combo you want), then I would not hesitate to breed them. I don't know if I would necessarily call it selective breeding because you aren't breeding an anomoly or dysmorphism like an albino or fine spot, but in a small way I guess it could be. Most likely these frogs ae genetically diverse eventhough two red and blues may look the same it is very likely they came from different lineages and would a completely different set of genes rather than very similar. I think in these frogs where populations interbreed, similar to Bastis, it doesn't matter if you breed like pairs or unlike pairs as the recessive allele is going to be so varied that you will often throw a different colored offspring, much the same way 2 blond hair people throw a brown haired child. If these were completely separate populations on the island then I would say lets keep them apart and breed them independantly, but from what I have read there are no natural barriers on that island except the ocean that surrounds it so they should be one completely intermingled population. Maybe I'll try to dig a little deeper and find out to be sure...


----------



## Roadrunner (Mar 6, 2004)

much the same way 2 blond hair people throw a brown haired child.

i love it when people refer to ourselves like the animals we are. reminds me of steve irwin`s wife(sorry her name escapes me at the moment) when she exclaimed " i can`t believe we threw a girl"


----------



## sbreland (May 4, 2006)

Hehe, I just kinda like the idea of throwing kids! J/K I guess it does dehumanize us, but we are just mammals afterall


----------



## KeroKero (Jun 13, 2004)

I don't think breeding like animals with like animals is an attempt (purposefully) to line breed animals, a lot has to due with lack of understanding and the use of "hybrids" as the dirty word you say in hushed tones... it is so ingrained in new comers that when they are offered a variety, they'd take the two most alike animals just because they thought it was right, and so they wouldn't get skinned. In many cases they just don't know that the variation is normal...

Take the "fine spot"/"sky blue" azureus for example. Many people thought they were an actual morph, when in fact they were just line bred animals. They didn't *know* that there was such variation in the species that these animals just pop up occassionally... especially when they a) don't see many of these animals pictured and b) don't have an easy to access resource to tell them otherwise.

This debate just came up in a thread I just posted in about Bastimentos pumilio... a newer keeper thought breeding the differen colors of pumilio together was hybridizing... when in fact bastimentos just come in a crap load of colors and two like animals can toss out an animal that looks very little like mom and pop. Escudos are the same way, tho not to the same degree. They range from solid blue to just about solid red, and everything in between. Likely the solids are not the norm, and are a smaller percent of the population, thus the pics of all these animals that are "half and half". Its like the bastimentos... red/orange animals with spots are more the norm, but there are animals with huge blotches, or no spots, or super fine sprinkles of spots, or white/dust/greenish/stop sign red animals. These are not MORPHS, just VARIATION. The US hobby seems to have a serious issue with animals showing variation... in some cases we've actually taken steps to breed it out of them :shock:


----------



## Dancing frogs (Feb 20, 2004)

I know there is a paper out there describing visual mate selection in pumilio.
I would really only feel comfortable mating a blue to a red if I bred two of the same and got something different...then you could be fairly certain they all naturally interbreed.
It is entirely possible that they live together and breed with mates that look close to the same, and not the others.

I'm not condoning selective breeding (I don't think) but until you know they all "get it on" with no preference of mate, or like I said, got a red from a pair of blues, I'd say play it safe, and stick with fairly similar looking animals.

[/code]


----------



## KeroKero (Jun 13, 2004)

Brian, I'm not trying to be mean, but I must point out that this way of thinking that you've stated beautifully is exactly the thinking I was referring to. It's not a deliberate "this frog occurs rarely and I'm going to make it occur more by line breeding" way of thinking, but its a way of thinking that negatively affects the variability of animals in our hobby.

And yes, there is, it's by Kyle Summers and was his attempt to explain the variation of pumilio phenotypes in panama by looking at behavior. As a biogeographer that looked into the geologic history of Panama as way of explaining the same phenomenon (that also occurs in the auratus in a similar fashion) I don't buy it, and it really doesn't prove much. He took a couple animals with low phenotype variability and proved that they like frogs that look like themselves best. Ok... but what about the populations with significant variation? Would bastis be so picky as to choose an animal with its same colors and patterns, or would it have other, stronger preferences in mate selection (which, due to the way the study was conducted, were neutralized a good degree so that the only variable was the visable phenotype of the "male" so we don't really know how much color mattered in the overall scheme of things anyways)?

Even with people getting the wide range of bastis from bastis, people still insist on "playing it safe" by getting similar looking animals. Escudos is a tiny little island (and I mean tiny, makes bastimentos look big), and these animals show no significant differences in anything other than some color on their back. With the huge variations in size in pumilio, if they were truely not breeding with each other, why aren't we seeing a greater range in size, or other characteristics? These other differences would likely be enhanced with two such closely related animals near each other, so that they could take advantage of different niches.

I realize much of the community does not have a strong background in biology and stuff like the species concept and what not, but this is taking it to the point that could be negative to our animals in the long term, and the hobby isn't willing to listen to what little information is coming in about them.


----------



## Paul E. Wog (Jan 2, 2005)

Brian, it is my understanding that the red/blue variation is due to the crossing of a solid red and a solid blue.


----------



## trinacliff (Aug 9, 2004)

Dancing frogs said:


> It is entirely possible that they live together and breed with mates that look close to the same, and not the others.
> [/code]


Yes, possible...yet unlikely. Have you seen the photo of the two very different colored bastimentos courting in the wild? The male is obviously calling right to the female below which is a completely different color.

Kristen


----------



## Paul E. Wog (Jan 2, 2005)

^ Wouldn't mind seeing that photo just for the heck of it.


----------



## Dancing frogs (Feb 20, 2004)

Don't worry, I don't take offense...
But I will defend (or try to define) what I was thinking...

So, just because there are blue and red on the same tiny island, does that mean we should pick a red and blue pair, stick them in a tank with no choice of mate (as is the norm in dendrobate breeding)? Just to increase the variability?

I wasn't meaning to say that reds should be mated to reds period. What I said was I'd have to see some F1 or F2 (from like looking parents) that were way different, to belive that it is fine to get a blue and a red right from the get go.
If the offspring (from a red pair) come out blue or with some blue, then sure by all means go for it...

I guess all I am trying to say is "what if" 

...The only "mixed tank" that is ok? Because they live on the same island? What else lives on the same island that I can mix them with? 
I would only be able to afford 2 anyway...can't make up my mind, so I'm going to get a blue male, and a red-blue female...sure nice to have both in one tank!

Not really, I wouldn't go that route...just a hypothetical situation trying to make a point.

I'm sure I may have "stirred the coals" with some of those ideas, but as soon as someone can prove they all breed together with no preference as what pairs to what in nature...I'll courtsy to you!


----------



## sbreland (May 4, 2006)

Well, the only way you're going to prove that really is to either have a huge viv with a large number of frogs taht you can constantly keep an eye on, or visit the island yourself. It's too hard to get into the situation of "what would happen if" because it most likely will result in more questions. If you stick two redand blue Escudos together with an all red and an all blue and the like kinds pair up, did they do it because they were like kind or because it was the one that "strutted it's stuff" the best. I mean, how are you really going to test if one frog actually prefers another?? Just because a red picks a red or a blue picks a blue does not necessarily prove visual mate selection since so many other factors go into mate selection. In order for you to be able to prove this theory that you proposed, you would need to do a large scale experiment with more frogs than are likley here in the US or go observe them for an extended period in their natural environment, neither of which is probably going to happen. In short, if you want proof that the populations interbreed in order to make it agreeable to breed the different color morphs together, you are not likely to get it in any truly verifiable way anytime soon so the next best option is to follow what makes sense and let them do their own thing. If it wasn't natural for them, they wouldn't do it...


----------



## defaced (May 23, 2005)

Which one is it? Your final sentence shoots a nice sized hole in the argument you present at the beginning of your pst. 


> If you stick two redand blue Escudos together with an all red and an all blue and the like kinds pair up, did they do it because they were like kind or because it was the one that "strutted it's stuff" the best.





> If it wasn't natural for them, they wouldn't do it...


Visual mate selection would be a large part of which frog strutted its stuff the best. 

Brian provided a non-observation based method of determining if the different colored frogs interbred or not: the appearance the offspring. This does not require large sums of frogs in a single environment, but can be done with a relatively small number of frogs in different environments - like what's occuring in the US as we speak with people purchasing just a few of these frogs at at time. It is possible to find out if the frogs do interbreed, but it will take time. 

Wasn't an experiment like this (visual mate selection) done for another kind of frog? Bastis stick out in my mind, but I'm not positive.


----------



## Dancing frogs (Feb 20, 2004)

Yes, the Kyle Summers paper that Kero pointed out.
Good to see someone understands what I'm getting at.

Quote from Stace's post:

If you stick two redand blue Escudos together with an all red and an all blue and the like kinds pair up, did they do it because they were like kind or because it was the one that "strutted it's stuff" the best. 

End quote.

Not really proving anything at all...because they are stuck with what they've got...they only have one choice or the other.

Put another way, if you were the last man on earth, and the last woman on earth, under normal circumstances, you would find so hideous you couldn't stand to look at her, let alone mate. Would it change you're idea if you knew that was the only choice...probably.

Also, at this point (working with imports) I don't think trying to keep the lines diverse (something I am all for) dictates that one should seek out frogs that look diferent from each other to breed with one another.

I'm thinking pair up the like looking ones, if the offspring are way varied, throwing all blues, blue and red, mostly red, all from the same pair...then go ahead and breed whatever to whatever from the F1's...perhaps somewhere down the road, when we see if there is a tendancy or not, mix up the imports a little more...I don't see anything being lost that way.

One the flipside, if everyone went with breeding reds to blues to ensure wide gene pools, and it was later found out that there is a preference in the wild that results in the variabiliy in the population...would't that be sad?

Not that I am saying anyone is suggested doing so...

That's about all I have to say about that!


----------



## Roadrunner (Mar 6, 2004)

most of them are varying amounts of blue and red. it`s going to be hard enough to get pairs. if anyone gets a red female and blue male or red and blue male and blue female or whatever pairing in which they don`t look the same and doesn`t try and breed them i`ll presonally kick your ars. :lol: :lol: :lol: 
most people can`t afford more than 2 or 3 so try and pick a male and female. what if the males are mostly to all blue and females all red to mostly red. half these frogs will have to be shipped twice and you`ll have to risk quarentine twice. worry about getting pairs first. if they can identify one calling male get him and 2 that they haven`t seen call. 
worry about getting them breeding first.


----------



## Dancing frogs (Feb 20, 2004)

Ahhh...thanks for the dose of reality Aarron!

Yeah, even the pic of the "all blue" doesn't look quite all blue to me...not saying it is misleading, or should be called mostly blue with a tinge of redish purple...just an observation, and backing up what Aaron pointed out.

So anyway, to those that were fortunate enough to get some, how much variation is evident with the frogs you have?
...shamlessly trying to tease more pics!


----------



## c'est ma (Sep 11, 2004)

There's a brief online summary of Summers's paper here:

http://core.ecu.edu/biol/summersk/summe ... choice.htm


----------



## Ben_C (Jun 25, 2004)

> As a biogeographer that looked into the geologic history of Panama as way of explaining the same phenomenon (that also occurs in the auratus in a similar fashion) I don't buy it,


As a biogeographer who has looked into the geologic history of Panama, what do you propose is the source of phenotypic variation in these species?



> I realize much of the community does not have a strong background in biology and stuff like the species concept and what not,


I often wonder how many people WITH strong backgrounds in biology understand the 'species concept' :roll: 

I agree though, we need a standard set of 'rules' discussing the proper genetic management of all species... (see treewalkersinternational for all interested in this stuff)

Just my 2.32 Yen,
B


----------



## sbreland (May 4, 2006)

Wow, too many posts to address ach one individually, but when I said "strutted his stuff best" I did not mean that appeared the most attractive, but rather courted and followed through the best. Therefore, the thought that if it is natural for them to interbreed they will do it. And no, the four frog experiment I proposed would provide the "choice" necessary, for instance if you had a 1/2 red 1/2 blue female in the viv and then a 1/2 red 1/2 blue male, an all red male, and an all blue male it still wouldn't mean that the reason the female chose any of the males was based on color, but it would provide an equal opportunity for the female to choose between the colors. For that reason, the last woman on Earth idea doesn't really apply. 
Now, as a couple of people above suggested, the colors are all variations of the red/blue coloration but there are no 100% blues or 100% red but rather they just have a very small bit of the off color in them. That itself should be reason enough to assume these populations to interbreed. Like Aaron said though, with so few available people ought to be more concerned with getting pairs raher than narrowing their options evenmore by saying it should ba a certain color.


----------



## Dancing frogs (Feb 20, 2004)

I must have misread, I thought you said...something more along the lines of one of each...my bad!


----------



## defaced (May 23, 2005)

Wouldn't indescriminately breeding these guys before we have info to back up our pairings be doing the same thing we've been doing? It seems backwards to me to talk about population preservation on one hand, and then just being concerned about getting a pair reguardless of population on the other. If we're going to reform we have to start some place and new imports is a pretty good place IMO.


----------



## sbreland (May 4, 2006)

OK, but here's there problem...populations are usually separated by distinct borders whether they be geographic type, distance, or some other factor that keeps one population from another. In everything I have read and have been told about the island, none of these barriers exist except the ocean on every side. What would keep these frogs from being one population? If we could show any reason why they might be different populations or why they wouldn't interbreed in the wild I would say your ideas would be correct, but with the varying degrees in color and lack of natural barriers, I can't see anything to tell me this would be a good idea...


----------



## edwardsatc (Feb 17, 2004)

sbreland said:


> OK, but here's there problem...populations are usually separated by distinct borders whether they be geographic type, distance, or some other factor that keeps one population from another.


Sorry, not entirely true. This is only telling half the story ... you defined allopatric populations quite well, but what about sympatric populations? How would you apply a sympatric model to these pumilio?




> What would keep these frogs from being one population? If we could show any reason why they might be different populations or why they wouldn't interbreed in the wild


Again, they could be sympatric populations. I personally don't believe that they are, but it is an possible argument against your stance. Two similiar looking frogs in the same area, at the same time does not neccesarily make them the same frog.


----------



## Homer (Feb 15, 2004)

edwardsatc said:


> Two similiar looking frogs in the same area, at the same time does not neccesarily make them the same frog.


Maybe not, but you had better have some pretty good proof otherwise unless you want to get laughed out of a room making an assertion otherwise. Not saying you are making that statement, just making the point.


----------



## sbreland (May 4, 2006)

edwardsatc said:


> sbreland said:
> 
> 
> > OK, but here's there problem...populations are usually separated by distinct borders whether they be geographic type, distance, or some other factor that keeps one population from another.
> ...


Well, since sympatric speciation is a hotly debated topic that has been, as Homer said, laughed out of the room due to the lack of a large amount of empirical evidence, it probably shouldn't even be in this conersation, but since you brought it up I'll address it. One piece of empirical evidence for a sympatric population is allochrony, and most common occurence of allochrony is observed when it a season issue (not likely in this situation) and a greater degree of probability of it's occurence is when the two species share a common resource that they would otherwise be in competetion with (also not likely, unless we are talking about competetion for the frogs themselves). Since these criteria don't fit it is likely not a sympatric population. Besides, the most common examples and probably the only logical cases of a sympatric populations occur in the plant kingdom, so it's not just a fit here. So, now sympatric and allopatric populations are checked, so I think I'm back to where we left off...


----------



## bbrock (May 20, 2004)

Wow, nice thread. Too bad Yeager is too busy to chime in because he gives a very nice breakdown of what is happening on Bastimentos morph-wise. But as to the comment about populations usually being separated by distinct barriers - the word "distinct" is problematic in this context because the "strength" of the barrier can vary. For example, distance can be such a barrier with identifiably distinct populations located at the extremes of a species range with every conceivable gradation found in between. This is also know as clinal variation. My favorite example of this is the common kingsnake (Lampropeltis getulus) in North America. There is little question that the California kingsnake, the speckeled kingsnake, and the eastern 'chain' kingsnake all represent different populations yet genes flow between them across an entire continent resulting in an infinite amount of intergradation. Another barrier may be time as in what appears to have happened in Panama. Current observed populations are the result of past separation but those barriers no longer exist. However, the legacy of the effect of those barriers on population genetics are still observable.

I prefer to think of the barriers that create populations as semi-permeable whereby animals within a "population" are more likely to breed with each other than they are to breed with animals from a different population (and likely on the other side of some semi-permeable barrier like river, a dry grassland, or a thousand miles). This causes gene frequencies of one population to drift differently than they do in other populations which leads to genetic, and often morphological, differences between populations. If the barriers are strong enough, then the drift may actually result in speciation.

So to get back to the Bastimentos. From what I have gathered from the folks who have been there, the pumilio might best be described as subpopulations (I know - what a nasty term). Apparently Red Frog Beach is dominated by red morphs (of course) and there is some rather inhospitable terrain separating that area from other occupied habitats. But over long periods of time, the pumilio habitat on this island has likely oscillated between contiguous and fragmented according to variability in climate. Also, even today's fragmentation may not be enough for the occassional animal wandering across the abyss during the rainy season to make a bootie call in another neighborhood. The dividing line between a subpopulation and a population, or a population and a species, is gray but my tendency is to think that there is enough gene flow throughout the island of Bastimentos to consider them a single population but with local subpopulations.

Mate selection likely plays a major role in all of this. I do think we take it for granted in the hobby. In the ideal world, we would import animals en mass into a central fascility where they could be set up in greenhouses and allowed to form their own pair bonds. These pairs would then be sold as units to customers. This isn't the ideal world though but I am in favor of allowing the frogs to choose their own mates to whatever extent is possible. But I think we can also temper our enthusiasm for free choice mating by thinking about the consequences of not allowing free choice. In the case of Bastimentos, I'm not sure the consequences are very bad. I've heard from numerous sources about many of these bastimentos throwing rainbows of colors regardless of the morph of the parents. Clearly color and pattern are determined by a complex of alleles and it would appear that each frog carries a mix of these alleles and the colors and patterns expressed by offspring depend on the particular combination of these alleles they receive. So the question is that if you pair a red and a blue basti together, are you creating new gene combinations that would not normally be found in the wild population? It's hard for me to think of a reason to answer yes, so I'm inclined to say no.

My personal feeling is that the "proper" way to treat these frogs is to breed them however you want. If you want to pair red with red to have your own Red Frog Beach, then do it. Pair yellow with yellow if you like, or red with yellow. The only thing I think would be wrong would be to line breed the animals to try to "fix" a true breeding orange (or whatever morph) which would create selectively bred animals that are clearly not representatives of wild genotypes. At least not until we have everyone registering their frogs so we can keep the selective bred animals out of the "wild type" populations.


----------



## edwardsatc (Feb 17, 2004)

Did I say sympatric _speciation_? I believe I said sympatric _populations_. Not always one in the same. I understand the workings of sympatry, I'm an ecologist. I could probably go into a long rant here about speciation, sympatry, phenotypic plasticity, etc... But none of it is relevant here. I wouldn't say that it is hotly debated either. It _used to _be hotly debated but is much more widely accepted in the community today.

My point was simply --- one can't just tell half the story when presenting evidence to support a hypothesis - that will certainly get you laughed out of the room in my line of work. A good argument addresses all of the issues, not just the ones that support it.

I’m not arguing against your opinion, just the lack of a complete line of evidence. I my opinion, they are one interbreeding population. Do I have anything but anecdotal evidence to support this opinion -- no. 



> Maybe not, but you had better have some pretty good proof otherwise unless you want to get laughed out of a room making an assertion otherwise. Not saying you are making that statement, just making the point.


This was not a reference to the frogs in question. Replace the word frogs with any organism you wish. What I should have said is that if I look into an area and see two organisms that appear the same, I can't make the assumption that they are the same just because they inhabit the same place at the same time. _Peromyscus maniculatus_ and _P. leucopus_ are species of mice that I frequently work with in the field. Same place, same time, appear nearly identical, but not the same mouse.


----------



## bbrock (May 20, 2004)

edwardsatc said:


> _Peromyscus maniculatus_ and _P. leucopus_ are species of mice that I frequently work with in the field. Same place, same time, appear nearly identical, but not the same mouse.


Ah, but leucophus will kick maniculatus butt at climbing in the shrubbery! I miss those little guys. And by the same token you can't assume that two animals at different places that look different are different species. Oh the ambiguity!


----------



## sbreland (May 4, 2006)

edwardsatc said:


> Did I say sympatric _speciation_? I believe I said sympatric _populations_. Not always one in the same. I understand the workings of sympatry, I'm an ecologist.


Unfortunately, I am not an ecologist and cannot debate this any further than what I was able to above. While my knowledge is limited on the subject, I was pretty happy to present an explanation that I thought and still think makes sense. Drawbacks of debating a complex topic when you aren't an expert with someone who is or is at least much more versed in the subject. Fortunately though, I believe my arguements are logical and as you stated later there is no hard evidence to prove it wrong... unfortunately I don't know of any to prove it right either although there may be some. 




> My point was simply --- one can't just tell half the story when presenting evidence to support a hypothesis - that will certainly get you laughed out of the room in my line of work. A good argument addresses all of the issues, not just the ones that support it.


I agree and it's what often gets forgotten in forums like these so I am glad you brought up the other side for me to address(in the limited fashion that I was able to). Like I said before though, my field is human biology and not ecology so my description may not be up to ecologist or taxonomists standards, but I think it's still difficult to poke holes in.



> I’m not arguing against your opinion, just the lack of a complete line of evidence.


Unfortunately, I don't know that we have a complete line of evidence or ever will and without that we are left to our best judgement until someone goes to the island and does the studies and proves it one way or another. That's the bad thing about the "hobby" is that we are left to assumption in cases like these all to often and are seldom provided with concrete evidence. In this way, I can relate it to my field because in medicine all too often you don't get a 100% direct answer and have to make gut or judgement calls based on all the compiled evidence in front of you. I think the arguements that most above me have made is that all the factors that we know come together to lead us to believe that these all come from one interbreeding population, but as you stated there is just not a complete line of evidence one way or another right now, or at least nobody has layed ut out there yet that I have seen.



> What I should have said is that if I look into an area and see two organisms that appear the same, I can't make the assumption that they are the same just because they inhabit the same place at the same time.


Very true, but as Brent pointed out you also cannot say that they are not. I completely understand your point and the idea that you were driving at with sympatric populations, but unfortunately we don't have enough evidence to prove it one way or another. Since I am not an ecologist I am curious what one would do in a situation like this where there is no answer one way or the other... The obvious answer would be to go down and do a population study to get the answers, but since one hasn't been done and is likely not to be done, what evidence or theory do you work off of? In my limited line of thought, until you can get the evidence to prove one side of the arguement or the other, the only thing that you have is limited empirical evidence to form a _theory_ of what you believe the evidence is going to show. The only other option (as it pertains to this situation) is to not breed the frogs at all under the fear of being wrong and I for one don't think that's a very good idea. Obviously if the evidence is brought to light and contradicts your theory then you must modify your breeding program, but until we get that we have to do the best we can with what we have.

Trust me, I'm not really trying to shoot down any points or debate something that I don't have extensive knowledge on, but rather trying to learn myself and help all those that were lucky enough to get the Escudos come up with a breeding plan for these great frogs to help get them established (or at least get a foothold) in the hobby. If anyone with knowledge or evidence to the contrary sees any glaring mistakes with the suggestions and theories I have presented, please fell free to correct me as I want to make sure everyone is on the same page and working towards the same goal.


----------



## a Vertigo Guy (Aug 17, 2006)

People are still goin at it on this topic? what more possibly is there to say on the matter?


----------



## sbreland (May 4, 2006)

If you asked the question then apparently you didn't take the time to read any of the more recent posts in the thread. There's always more to discuss and learn... anybody that is interested in getting this right should know that.


----------



## a Vertigo Guy (Aug 17, 2006)

Please forgive my ignorance, I stopped reading when there was constant bitching about SNDF's supplying of Escudos. Apparently the conv has shifted from that now.


----------



## c'est ma (Sep 11, 2004)

Well, I've been keeping up and just wanted to say that I've enjoyed the scientific discussion of late.


----------



## Dancing frogs (Feb 20, 2004)

Me too...really like hearing from the pros!


----------



## sbreland (May 4, 2006)

Dancing frogs said:


> Me too...really like hearing from the pros!


Me too... I am just hoping that my limited knowledge is enough to raise some thought and drag them in to confirm, deny, or supplement my rambling.


----------

