# Inbreeding



## Danny Lee

question-
is it bad to have frogs inbreed? would it cause problems down the road as it does in people or other animals? and if so would that mean that i'd have to get frogs from multiple breeders for them to have healthy offspring?
thanks, any info appreciated
-dan


----------



## azure89

I think that inbreeding in frogs probably happens in the wild with no ill effects but it probably couldn't hurt to try and breed frogs that are not too closely related


----------



## Danny Lee

has anyone bred offspring of the same parents together successfully?


----------



## hexentanz

I have 4 azureus from the same parents and they all happily reside in the same vivarium and have produced offspring without issue. However they are F1's, so maybe that has helped.


----------



## Baltimore Bryan

I have a pair of leucs from 2 different breeders and I held back two of their offspring. Those two turned out to be a pair and now both pairs are breeding, and I have not had any problems with the offspring. However, I would not breed offspring of that second generation I have now, I would trade them for a new bloodline.


----------



## Danny Lee

thanks a lot for the info


----------



## chuckpowell

Inbreeding and poor husbandry have already caused lots of problems with the quality of frogs we keep. How many people produce frogs the size and color of wild caught frogs? How many people even know what wild caught frogs look like or how big of clutches they produce? How many people produce frogs the size, color, and breeding ability of wild caught animals. I've run across less than a half dozen in over 25 years in this hobby. The quality of frogs produced is in many cases nothing near the quality of wild caught animals. In addition, we strive to save every frog we produce - so much for survival of the fittest. Give it 50 years and I doubt there will be much left in this hobby unless wild caught animals continue to be imported. Lucky for me I won't be around to see it. 

Best,

Chuck



DrSumptuous said:


> question-
> is it bad to have frogs inbreed? would it cause problems down the road as it does in people or other animals? and if so would that mean that i'd have to get frogs from multiple breeders for them to have healthy offspring?
> thanks, any info appreciated
> -dan


----------



## Philsuma

Wow. reading that make's me just wanna shoot myself now 

I don't agree with all that doom Chuck. I'm producing MANY quality animals and I know at least 6 other people that are as well.

No need to rush to the import line....


----------



## Woodsman

Line-breeding (the worst form of inbreeding) has the greatest potential for creating breeding suppression. For example, even though Blue-legged and Gray-legged Powderblue tincs come from the same population, breeding them as seperate morphs reduces the genetic diversity that would exist if we bred them back together. The same is true for Giant Orange/Regina tincs and (probably) Alanis/Inferalanis tincs. By carefully breeding the line-bred lines back together, it should be possible to restore some diversity back to the frog lines.


----------



## Mikembo

How do you know it isn't there diet in the wild vs. captive frogs that are causing these problems?

-Mike-



chuckpowell said:


> Inbreeding and poor husbandry have already caused lots of problems with the quality of frogs we keep. How many people produce frogs the size and color of wild caught frogs? How many people even know what wild caught frogs look like or how big of clutches they produce? How many people produce frogs the size, color, and breeding ability of wild caught animals. I've run across less than a half dozen in over 25 years in this hobby. The quality of frogs produced is in many cases nothing near the quality of wild caught animals. In addition, we strive to save every frog we produce - so much for survival of the fittest. Give it 50 years and I doubt there will be much left in this hobby unless wild caught animals continue to be imported. Lucky for me I won't be around to see it.
> 
> Best,
> 
> Chuck


----------



## tachikoma

Mikembo said:


> How do you know it isn't there diet in the wild vs. captive frogs that are causing these problems?
> 
> -Mike-


Diet could fall under poor husbandry if indeed it is the cause of said problems.


----------



## Danny Lee

someone should setup a place where people can go and swap frogs of the same species to increase genetic diversity. perhaps if chuck is right then this can improve health/quality?


----------



## tonybmw328i

I have two pairs of wild caught cobalt which male and female are same size. And a pair that are brother and sister which female is bigger than male. All three pairs produce a clutch every week to week and a half and an average of 5 eggs sometimes clutchs are as little as two eggs. Could be the way I take care of my frogs but I see no diffrence in the wild caught froglets and the inbreed froglets also lots of variations in the wild caught froglets with some having thin yellow lines on back and some having thick Light green/yellow green lines on back with yellow heads.


----------



## Mikembo

I shoud have worded my question better...... I am talking about the diversity in food in the wild vs. captive frogs. I wouldn't consider poor husbandry feeding our frogs a stable diet of fruit flies.

-Mike-



tachikoma said:


> Diet could fall under poor husbandry if indeed it is the cause of said problems.


----------



## tachikoma

Mikembo said:


> I shoud have worded my question better...... I am talking about the diversity in food in the wild vs. captive frogs. I wouldn't consider poor husbandry feeding our frogs a stable diet of fruit flies.
> 
> -Mike-


No worries man I was just giving you a hard time


----------



## Shockfrog

I have had my best clutches after a three month dry period. Maybe poeple should stop breeding their frogs all year round.


----------



## Rain_Frog

> How do you know it isn't there diet in the wild vs. captive frogs that are causing these problems?


I was just going to ask this question. We're just starting to learn more about proper supplementation. For many people, including myself, frogs were NOT given straight Vitamin A because of the fear of poisoning. We now know that the claims for Vitamin A poisoning are exaggerated and frogs more likely suffer from hypovitaminosis.

The clay idea is another new approach to the hobby which has proven useful for egg feeders.

It is true that many captive bred frogs do not exhibit the wild caught coloration. E. anthonyi and tricolor are good examples. Many mantella species do not develop red orange flashmarks. Instead, you get orange ones that are close, but still different than the wild caught ones.

I think Ed K. said that there are over 500 carotenoids and there are ones that we don't have access to in the wild. However, astaxanthin and other carotenoid mixes get it close.

True, we should not be compelled to save "every" animal. But if you're not careful, you could start artificially selecting frogs for the hobby by itself, whereas the "runts" may have traits that would do better in the wild but you wouldn't know because you're raising them in captivity. If you're too diligent with culling animals, you could actually be increasing the problems of "inbreeding" by removing too many alleles.

I do "prune" or "cull" mantella tadpoles / froglets. I remove newly morphed froglets from the water, and release them onto dry land with springtails and food. There are major problems with spindly leg in mantellas. Since SLS is a spectrum disorder, I'll know which frogs are healthiest by which ones survive on their own feet on land.

What evidence has there been of inbreeding depression in frogs? Many populations in the wild are tiny (but of course, the frogs are only a fraction of our size, so the area could seem exponentially larger to them relative to us).


----------



## Roadrunner

A stable diet of ff`s is a type of poor husbandry as frogs fed nothing but ff`s , no matter what your dusting regime, aren`t as healthy as frogs w/ a diverse diet. Definately not a "good" husbandry practice.



Mikembo said:


> I shoud have worded my question better...... I am talking about the diversity in food in the wild vs. captive frogs. I wouldn't consider poor husbandry feeding our frogs a stable diet of fruit flies.
> 
> -Mike-


----------



## Mikembo

Wow!!! I'm 2 for 2 on poor wording on this post..... Anyways Rain_Frog understands what I am trying to say!

in the hobby we only use no more than 5 type of feeder insets, fruit flies being the majority of the frogs diets, while in the wild they have a wide varitey of insects. When I said stable diet of FF I didn't mean exclusively a diet of fruit flies but a large part of our frogs diets. I still wouldn't consider that being poor husbandry.

-Mike-


----------



## Ed

Rain_Frog said:


> I was just going to ask this question. We're just starting to learn more about proper supplementation. For many people, including myself, frogs were NOT given straight Vitamin A because of the fear of poisoning. We now know that the claims for Vitamin A poisoning are exaggerated and frogs more likely suffer from hypovitaminosis.


While the frogs are likely to be suffering from hypovitaminosis of A due to a number of unquantified reasons, the risk of toxicity of vitamin A has not been exaggerated and is well supported in the literature... the reason it hasn't been commonly seen for a number of years is more due to it not being present in the supplements commonly used... 




Rain_Frog said:


> I think Ed K. said that there are over 500 carotenoids and there are ones that we don't have access to in the wild. However, astaxanthin and other carotenoid mixes get it close.


There are over 600 known carotenoids but many (if not most) are probably never going to be encountered by virtually all amphibians in the wild (like piprixanthin which is a carotenoid that is synthesized by Pin-tailed Manikin (see Plumage carotenoids of the Pin-tailed Manakin (Ili... [Comp Biochem Physiol B Biochem Mol Biol. 2007] - PubMed result) for its breeding plumage from precursor caretenoids).. there are a number of carotenoids which are known to be important but were insufficiently supplied by many supplements (like zeaxanthin, lutein, astxanthin..). One has to keep in mind that there are also non-dietary pigments that are used by anurans (pterins) and these systems are to some extent under hormonal controls so the difference may be due to other enviromental factors as much as it could be due to diet... 




Rain_Frog said:


> What evidence has there been of inbreeding depression in frogs? Many populations in the wild are tiny (but of course, the frogs are only a fraction of our size, so the area could seem exponentially larger to them relative to us).


Inbreeding depression is known in anurans for example see Hitchings, S. P. and T. J C. Beebee. 1998. Loss of genetic diversity and fitness in Common Toad (Bufo bufo) populations isolated by inimical habitat. Journal of Evolutionary Biology 11:269–283 

There was an increased mortality in embryos based on loss of genetic diversity. In addition, if you are working with populations that are widely seperate you can see what is known as outbreeding depression (See SpringerLink - Journal Article )


Ed


----------



## Ed

frogfarm said:


> A stable diet of ff`s is a type of poor husbandry as frogs fed nothing but ff`s , no matter what your dusting regime, aren`t as healthy as frogs w/ a diverse diet. Definately not a "good" husbandry practice.


I don't know that this has been shown to be true. How is this different than say a premixed standard diet like dog chow? 

Ed


----------



## Rain_Frog

Ed, I thought you said at one time that our "monoculture" food regimes are some of the potential problems with current husbandry practices? 

http://www.dendroboard.com/forum/science-conservation/13363-poor-quality-frogs-8.html

http://www.jstor.org/pss/3891438

I do think that certain trace elements, carotenoids, antioxidants, etc., could be lacking with a limited diet that standard supplements may not contain. I realize that bullfrogs are not dart frogs, and I realize that the study is not comparing wild bullfrogs to captive ones. However, the abstract says that different "staples" may cause different growth rates.


----------



## Ed

Rain_Frog said:


> Ed, I thought you said at one time that our "monoculture" food regimes are some of the potential problems with current husbandry practices?
> 
> http://www.dendroboard.com/forum/science-conservation/13363-poor-quality-frogs-8.html


My statement was that it was a potential problem in the context of the discussion of reponding to the question quote "So how do we know we are choosing the ones that would make it in nature? Even passive culling is in a way selective breeding"endquote. 

Can you show me where it has been shown that a diet of 100% fruit flies with a decent (I won't use the word proper here) supplementation regimen results in poor husbandry practices? 



Rain_Frog said:


> JSTOR: An Error Occurred Setting Your User Cookie
> 
> I do think that certain trace elements, carotenoids, antioxidants, etc., could be lacking with a limited diet that standard supplements may not contain. I realize that bullfrogs are not dart frogs, and I realize that the study is not comparing wild bullfrogs to captive ones. However, the abstract says that different "staples" may cause different growth rates.


Doug,

I really have to ask you this question. Have you read that entire article? Do you understand the results in that study? Do you understand the problems inherent in that study from 1974? At this point it really is a apple and oranges comparision as for example, there was no supplementation of D3 or calcium in those tests which is why there was the disaparate results based on the food item.


----------



## Roadrunner

Just what I see w/ my eyes. Sorry.
I didn`t say it was any different than a premixed dog chow. or tv dinners for that matter.
Has it been shown that ff`s are a well balanced diet in and of themselves?


----------



## Rain_Frog

> I really have to ask you this question. Have you read that entire article? Do you understand the results in that study? Do you understand the problems inherent in that study from 1974? At this point it really is a apple and oranges comparision as for example, there was no supplementation of D3 or calcium in those tests which is why there was the disaparate results based on the food item.


No, I am not allowed to download the full article, so I could only read the abstract. But I do remember you mentioning a similar article about bullfrogs and feeder fish-- about the growth rate-- because someone was asking if they could feed livebearer fry to terribilis. However, that assumed the person was still using fruit flies or crickets with supplementation.



> Has it been shown that ff`s are a well balanced diet in and of themselves?


That's what I wonder too-- yes, we don't have comparative studies using different feeder insects *with* supplementation on dart frogs, or do we?


----------



## Ed

frogfarm said:


> Just what I see w/ my eyes. Sorry.
> I didn`t say it was any different than a premixed dog chow. or tv dinners for that matter.
> Has it been shown that ff`s are a well balanced diet in and of themselves?


Hi Aaron,

No need to apologize. We do know that virtually all invertebrates are not a balanced diet in and of themselves. As we (and others) have discussed, secondary nutrient sources and other factors play into the success of the diet of wild frogs. Currently we are unable (and often unwilling) to totally mimic those parameters in captive situations. 
However it should be noted that people have been successful in keeping and breeding frogs on diets of nothing but fruit flies dusted with a commercial supplement or supplements. 

Ed


----------



## Ed

Rain_Frog said:


> No, I am not allowed to download the full article, so I could only read the abstract. But I do remember you mentioning a similar article about bullfrogs and feeder fish-- about the growth rate-- because someone was asking if they could feed livebearer fry to terribilis. However, that assumed the person was still using fruit flies or crickets with supplementation.


You can download it the same way I did, by paying for it. There is a option to purchase the article right on that opening page... 

And the answer is that they can and whether or not they are/were feeding dusted insects doesn't matter.. One needs to know the nutrient profiles of livebearers.. as they 
1) contain D3
2) have a positive calcium to phosphorus ratio
3) contain many other needed nutrients





Rain_Frog said:


> That's what I wonder too-- yes, we don't have comparative studies using different feeder insects *with* supplementation on dart frogs, or do we?



On what basis do you think that comparative studies specifically on dart frogs are required? Why do you think that thier metabolic needs are different than any other anuran or many/most vertebrates for that matter? 


Ed


----------



## Rain_Frog

> Why do you think that thier metabolic needs are different than any other anuran or many/most vertebrates for that matter?


Because we'd be comparing apples to apples? I'm not sure if I'm understanding what you mean by "metabolic needs." If you're referring to dietary needs, my dietary needs as a member of **** sapiens is going to be very different than what a dart frog requires for good health.

Just because we have seen "success" raising frogs on a diet of solely fruit flies, could there be something better out there for them? Has there been ANY results showing that fruit flies are better than the tiny mealworms WITH supplementation that zoos used to use before the "fruit fly revolution?"


----------



## Rain_Frog

X tropicalis Husbandry Protocol

I do not see a table of comparisons, but the husbandry protocol mentions that supplementing with live blackworms plus the xenopus standard diet (the dog chow), and feeding six times a week, caused frogs to sexually mature in a little over 3 months. I believe S. tropicalis take six months to mature on a standard diet of xenopus food?

Yes, I realize Silurana are not dart frogs, but the reason why I mention this article is because of the addition of other foods besides the "standard" diet-- which is a "balanced" diet for frogs. I'm not sure if its best to cause frogs to mature in as little as three months, but my point is-- how do we know that fruit flies with vitamin supplements is the best diet without comparisons?


----------



## Roadrunner

What is considered successful? Producing offspring that live, but don`t grow well? Even the stimulation of learning, seeing different movements and going after different foods stimulates the health and wellbeing of captive frogs. Some frogs "like" certain foods better than others. Are we trying to mimic wild counterparts or produce animals that will live and breed on the bare essentials?
A lot of dogs have food allergies and certain foods produce a terrible coat. I`m sure sugar, starch and yeast are missing some essentials and all ff`s probably aren`t created equal.
I`m not talking about field sweeping every day(I`d be more worried about parasites then food diversity there) I`m talking about breeding crickets once a month, a couple springs here and there and termites a couple times a year and having isopods in the tanks you start. Wax worms are also a great addition a couple times a year.



Ed said:


> Hi Aaron,
> 
> No need to apologize. We do know that virtually all invertebrates are not a balanced diet in and of themselves. As we (and others) have discussed, secondary nutrient sources and other factors play into the success of the diet of wild frogs. Currently we are unable (and often unwilling) to totally mimic those parameters in captive situations.
> However it should be noted that people have been successful in keeping and breeding frogs on diets of nothing but fruit flies dusted with a commercial supplement or supplements.
> 
> Ed


----------



## Roadrunner

So you`ll take others words, who haven`t written papers on it, that they were successful breeding frogs w/ nothing but ff`s and sups, but I need a paper to show that`s poor husbandry. I`ve raised frogs on just ff`s and sups and bred them and i wouldn`t personally call my experience a success. I guess it depends on your standard for success.
Personally, I thought we were talking about poor husbandry, not can frogs live on ff`s and supplementation.
Also, was there any microfauna in the tank or were they raised on paper towels when they were fed nothing but ff`s and sups?



Ed said:


> Hi Aaron,
> 
> No need to apologize. We do know that virtually all invertebrates are not a balanced diet in and of themselves. As we (and others) have discussed, secondary nutrient sources and other factors play into the success of the diet of wild frogs. Currently we are unable (and often unwilling) to totally mimic those parameters in captive situations.
> However it should be noted that people have been successful in keeping and breeding frogs on diets of nothing but fruit flies dusted with a commercial supplement or supplements.
> 
> Ed


----------



## markpulawski

I have springs and those little roll up bugs in all my tanks but I still feel I feed my frogs exclusively on ff's, i feel bad about it and to me keeping the supplements fresh I now realize is as critical as ever. I do believe the statements that after 5 or 6 months the stuff is worthless as a nutritional aid. Keeping all thumbs and pumilio however is pretty limiting in what the frogs can eat, I do need to try my frogs on the smaller termites.
As for inbreeding, I had this conversation many times during the 90's with several institutional friends. I know I was told that there was a study done by 1 institution that had bred 20 generations of related frogs together without seeing detrimental effects....perhaps this was urban legend? I never saw anything in print, but i heard this from more than 1 very respected and trustworthy keeper.
In my opinion there are so many factors in what goes into successfully breeding our animals, where they came from (lineage), how they were fed when raised, how many clutches they have produced (this to me is really critical as i would rather have 3rd or 4th clutch offspring than 20th clutch offspring), even what type of enclosure they are in and the water that is used in spraying, keeping tads etc..
Hopefully we are all doing the best we can and keeping only what we can take care of.


----------



## Rain_Frog

> A lot of dogs have food allergies and certain foods produce a terrible coat. I`m sure sugar, starch and yeast are missing some essentials and all ff`s probably aren`t created equal.


Also, not all dog foods are created equal. They say you're supposed to choose a brand that does not list corn as the first ingredient.


----------



## gluedl

Hi,

I know a guy in switzerland who is currently inbreeding auratus and has F17 (!) offspring, always using a male and a female of the same generation to go on to the next.

To resume what I've red so far in this interesting thread: 

- we are talking about standards here.- I totally agree that not all offspring in the dartworld is a good ones. See the swiss F17 auratus are only half the size then the original parents were. They do not live as long as well. Same goes for food, the more different the better. That way deficencies are easier to contain and the hunting instinct is better stimulated. 

Everyone is free to choose his own standard, but:

answering the original question is quite tricky as "bad" has also different standards. I wouldn't mind if someone inbreds and keeps the offspring for himself (what never happens by the way), but everyone who knows how much offspring only a pair can produce should really consider only getting different bloodlines for the parents. 

Have a nice day 

gluedl


----------



## james67

Woodsman said:


> Line-breeding (the worst form of inbreeding) has the greatest potential for creating breeding suppression. For example, even though Blue-legged and Gray-legged Powderblue tincs come from the same population, breeding them as seperate morphs reduces the genetic diversity that would exist if we bred them back together. The same is true for Giant Orange/Regina tincs and (probably) Alanis/Inferalanis tincs. By carefully breeding the line-bred lines back together, it should be possible to restore some diversity back to the frog lines.


as this has been discussed repeatedly i would like to just clarify that many hobbyists including myself do not believe that this is a wise course of action and that we should keep morphs separate, based on the KNOWN lineage and imports, rather than mixing (not what this thread was about in the first place) while it would undoubtedly create diversity within the then polluted line, the effects of using new individuals to add new genetics to the existing lines, could be very detrimental, and furthermore i have the suspicion that those who breed frogs together based on hearsay, (or worse, and i have heard this reasoning used, on their similarities based on B&W images) are likley to avoid disclosing this information, for whatever reason. this is the exact action that can be such a problem, since those offspring will likley be distributed throughout the hobby, and generate even more confusion. 

i would much rather have the offspring of 2 F1 siblings then the offspring of an F1 (of known lineage) and a wild caught specimen, since i was not there to determine if in-fact these are the same population, regardless of what my , or anyone's beliefs are on the topic, i feel we must refrain from such experimentation disguised as fact and stick to what we know. there is so much speculation in this hobby that at least personally i believe we can be rewarded for playing it safe.

james


----------



## Ed

Sorry for the long time before I got back to this but I've been really busy... 



Rain_Frog said:


> Because we'd be comparing apples to apples? I'm not sure if I'm understanding what you mean by "metabolic needs." If you're referring to dietary needs, my dietary needs as a member of **** sapiens is going to be very different than what a dart frog requires for good health.


So Doug, outside of the differences needed to maintain a metabolism at a mammalian rate versus a amphibian rate what are the differences? 

Are different vitamins required? Do the vitamins have to be in a different ratio? Are the essential amino acids different for a frog than a human? How about fiber? Does the requirement for fiber for either species fall out of the fiber ratios needed for the other? 





Rain_Frog said:


> Just because we have seen "success" raising frogs on a diet of solely fruit flies, could there be something better out there for them? Has there been ANY results showing that fruit flies are better than the tiny mealworms WITH supplementation that zoos used to use before the "fruit fly revolution?"


Doug, Fruitflies were used in zoos as feeders for well over 30 years... I'm not sure where you got the idea that there was a "fruit fly" revolution. 

Why don't you look into the literature and see if you can find any results that show supplemented little mealworms are better... 

Ed


----------



## Ed

Rain_Frog said:


> X tropicalis Husbandry Protocol
> 
> I do not see a table of comparisons, but the husbandry protocol mentions that supplementing with live blackworms plus the xenopus standard diet (the dog chow), and feeding six times a week, caused frogs to sexually mature in a little over 3 months. I believe S. tropicalis take six months to mature on a standard diet of xenopus food?
> 
> Yes, I realize Silurana are not dart frogs, but the reason why I mention this article is because of the addition of other foods besides the "standard" diet-- which is a "balanced" diet for frogs. I'm not sure if its best to cause frogs to mature in as little as three months, but my point is-- how do we know that fruit flies with vitamin supplements is the best diet without comparisons?


Doug,

I suggest that you take some nutrition courses and animal behavior and ecology... as shortening the age at which a species matures does not indicate that the diet is a better diet as there are all kinds of potential consequences. For a real classic example I would suggest reviewing the literature on hatchery trout and compare it to natural trout. 

One of the main problems is that you are still trying to compare historical anecdotal data that doesn't take into account some of the rapid changes in our understanding of nutriton. That is one of the things I have been researching and passing along here for as long as I've been on here and on frognet... 
There is a lot of nutritional analysis out there on inverts both the commonly cultured ones and the ones that can be collected as field sweepings... (I don't have all of them but I have a lot of them...) and there are universal similarities in the profiles. Only the differences in the amount of fat and protein are different and those can be resolved via quantity fed (which is a moot point given that many if not the majority of people feed their frogs into obesity). The only real values we can control and change are those supplied by the dusting and to a lesser extent by gut loading (not dietary calcium loading). With respect to items like carotenoids, well pretty much all cultured feeders are not that good of a source, nor are they good sources of vitamin A.. with respect to meal worms, the ratios of fatty acids has been linked to corneal lipidosis (see Elsevier: Article Locator).. which has not been the case with fruit flies (so I don't need a study to show that mealworms in many respects are not better..) 

Ed


----------



## Ed

frogfarm said:


> What is considered successful? Producing offspring that live, but don`t grow well?.


This may have nothing to do with the condition that the adults are kept or the offspring raised. There is a lot of evidence that this can be set via the conditions in which the female was reared to maturity. If you are working with wild caught frogs, then this can be totally outside the control of the keeper regardless of the diet fed. 
This is also something that if not due to epigenetic effects, is better addressed via supplementation than feeding multiple feeders as this has the greatest probability of being due to insufficient vitamin A, E or D3... 

In addition, the conditions in which the frogs are kept can trigger adaptive phenotypic plasticity (which has been seen in many animals). A heavily planted tank kept at "optimal" conditions for reproduction and selecting against a larger size due to movement constraints could produce a smaller frog at sexual maturity. Overfeeding which allows continual clutch formation and supports more calling on the part of the male would result in further resource allocation away from growth.. 



frogfarm said:


> Even the stimulation of learning, seeing different movements and going after different foods stimulates the health and wellbeing of captive frogs. Some frogs "like" certain foods better than others. Are we trying to mimic wild counterparts or produce animals that will live and breed on the bare essentials?.


Well given that dendrobatids do not demonstrate any sterotypical behaviors.. there is a strong question as to the validity of this sort of stimulation for them. In addition, what can they learn given that we do not offer them unpalatable prey items to teach them what they can and cannot eat, otherwise all we have taught them is that everything that is added to the cage that moves is food... that is all the enrichment we provide. 

So how does feeding them only on different but palatable prey mimic wild counterparts? 




frogfarm said:


> A lot of dogs have food allergies and certain foods produce a terrible coat. I`m sure sugar, starch and yeast are missing some essentials and all ff`s probably aren`t created equal.


With respect to the sugar, starch and yeast, fruit fly comment.. what proof do you have that this is lacking in amino acids, sugar, and/or fats? Outside of those parameters, a decent supplement will correct it.. 

What do you mean about not all flies being created equal? This is exactly what a decent supplement would correct... 

So how does that indicate the dog food is still not a complete food? If a dog or even dogs have food allergies then that is often an enviromental effect of the dog becoming sensitized to the allergens in the food than that the food is insufficient. 

Given that until the broad utilization of commercially prepared foods, dogs were historically fed a mixture of some form of processed grain (usually bread) (for bulk) and table scraps, and the more common appearence of these issues with dogs raises other questions.. and still doesn't indicate that in general comemercial dog foods are not a complete food... 

I`m not talking about field sweeping every day(I`d be more worried about parasites then food diversity there) I`m talking about breeding crickets once a month, a couple springs here and there and termites a couple times a year and having isopods in the tanks you start. Wax worms are also a great addition a couple times a year.[/QUOTE]

While adding these is fine, this still doesn't indicate that a properly supplemented fruit fly is insufficient. 

Ed


----------



## Ed

frogfarm said:


> So you`ll take others words, who haven`t written papers on it, that they were successful breeding frogs w/ nothing but ff`s and sups, but I need a paper to show that`s poor husbandry.?


I'm not sure where you got this and I'm not even going to address it further. 



frogfarm said:


> I`ve raised frogs on just ff`s and sups and bred them and i wouldn`t personally call my experience a success. I guess it depends on your standard for success.
> Personally, I thought we were talking about poor husbandry, not can frogs live on ff`s and supplementation.
> Also, was there any microfauna in the tank or were they raised on paper towels when they were fed nothing but ff`s and sups?


See my comments above to Doug on maternal effects as well as my comments on adaptive phenotypic plasticity. Nothing I have seen so far can rule out fruit flies as being adequate for husbandry purposes. 

And I've reared frogs on nothing but fruitflies in containers where we excluded any microfauna and if microfaua got into the enclosure, the frogs were removed and sterilized... so I can personally state that it can be done... 


Ed


----------



## Ed

Rain_Frog said:


> Also, not all dog foods are created equal. They say you're supposed to choose a brand that does not list corn as the first ingredient.


How does not being created equal mean that it isn't a complete food? 

Ed


----------



## Ed

gluedl said:


> Hi,
> 
> I know a guy in switzerland who is currently inbreeding auratus and has F17 (!) offspring, always using a male and a female of the same generation to go on to the next.
> 
> To resume what I've red so far in this interesting thread:
> 
> - we are talking about standards here.- I totally agree that not all offspring in the dartworld is a good ones. See the swiss F17 auratus are only half the size then the original parents were. They do not live as long as well. Same goes for food, the more different the better. That way deficencies are easier to contain and the hunting instinct is better stimulated.
> 
> Everyone is free to choose his own standard, but:
> 
> answering the original question is quite tricky as "bad" has also different standards. I wouldn't mind if someone inbreds and keeps the offspring for himself (what never happens by the way), but everyone who knows how much offspring only a pair can produce should really consider only getting different bloodlines for the parents.
> 
> Have a nice day
> 
> gluedl


Maternal resource allocation can explain the decrease in size as well as the survivorship but diet (and genetics so I'm not downplaying genetics here) may be just as important. 

Ed


----------



## Roadrunner

I didn`t say ff`s weren`t a complete food, I said that frogs fed only ff`s and sups produce froglets and frogs that aren`t as healthy as frogs fed a diverse diet. I then said feeding ff`s and sups only is poor husbandry. I never used the term complete food. If "complete food" means enough to sustain life then we`re arguing past each other.
Whatever studies you come up w/ isn`t going to sway my opinion on this as I`ve bred 100`s of pair of frogs and some that are very "hard to produce". I never had the success` I did w/ feeding only ff`s. Anything that received only ff`s and sups didn`t produce well or their froglets didn`t fare well. This is what I was arguing. 

There can always be other reasons for growth such as tank size but I`ve seen enough examples over the years to know that frogs fed only ff`s and sups aren`t as healthy as frogs fed a diverse diet. If sups are starting to contain hibiscus flower and whatever leaves, bee pollen, etc, well then that`s doing the same thing as frogs fed insects that eat different things.




Ed said:


> I'm not sure where you got this and I'm not even going to address it further.
> 
> 
> 
> See my comments above to Doug on maternal effects as well as my comments on adaptive phenotypic plasticity. Nothing I have seen so far can rule out fruit flies as being adequate for husbandry purposes.
> 
> And I've reared frogs on nothing but fruitflies in containers where we excluded any microfauna and if microfaua got into the enclosure, the frogs were removed and sterilized... so I can personally state that it can be done...
> 
> 
> Ed


----------



## Ed

frogfarm said:


> each other.
> Whatever studies you come up w/ isn`t going to sway my opinion.


Then regardless of the cutting edge changes we have nothing to discuss.. 

Ed


----------



## Roadrunner

Huh? Are you trying to say that there is some new literature that says ff`s and sups are as well rounded a diet as a diverse spectrum of feeders?



Ed said:


> Then regardless of the cutting edge changes we have nothing to discuss..
> 
> Ed


----------



## Ed

DrSumptuous said:


> question-
> is it bad to have frogs inbreed? would it cause problems down the road as it does in people or other animals? and if so would that mean that i'd have to get frogs from multiple breeders for them to have healthy offspring?
> thanks, any info appreciated
> -dan


Back to the inbreeding comment.. inbreeding over time can be a problem if there isn't any attempt to maintain the maximal number of alleles in that population (and I'm currently defining population as animals from one locality or if the locality is unknown importation). In most cases, inbreeding depression is the first item that becomes apparent and this is often indicated by reduced production of offspring (either a reduction in eggs produced, fertilized eggs and/or survivorship to metamorphosis). 
Now one of the things in our favor with the frogs is that they are relatively long-lived which means that if people start paying attention to the interrelatedness of thier frogs, the problem may be able to be fixed. I would suggest those who are concerned with inbreeding consider joining working with the Amphibian Steward program with Tree Walkers International (Tree Walkers International).

Ed


----------



## Roadrunner

Be careful not to mistake bad diet for inbreeding depression. It seems the symptoms are the same for both. Personally, I bred dwarf Fr. Guiana tinctorius for 7 generations w/ no difference in size or breeding ability.



Ed said:


> Back to the inbreeding comment.. inbreeding over time can be a problem if there isn't any attempt to maintain the maximal number of alleles in that population (and I'm currently defining population as animals from one locality or if the locality is unknown importation). In most cases, inbreeding depression is the first item that becomes apparent and this is often indicated by reduced production of offspring (either a reduction in eggs produced, fertilized eggs and/or survivorship to metamorphosis).
> Now one of the things in our favor with the frogs is that they are relatively long-lived which means that if people start paying attention to the interrelatedness of thier frogs, the problem may be able to be fixed. I would suggest those who are concerned with inbreeding consider joining working with the Amphibian Steward program with Tree Walkers International (Tree Walkers International).
> 
> Ed


----------



## Roadrunner

Ed, What do you mean by the first item to become apparent? I didn`t see any other items. Was there a bigger list of problems this statement was cut from?



Ed said:


> Back to the inbreeding comment.. inbreeding over time can be a problem if there isn't any attempt to maintain the maximal number of alleles in that population (and I'm currently defining population as animals from one locality or if the locality is unknown importation). In most cases, inbreeding depression is the first item that becomes apparent and this is often indicated by reduced production of offspring (either a reduction in eggs produced, fertilized eggs and/or survivorship to metamorphosis).
> Ed


----------



## Ed

frogfarm said:


> Ed, What do you mean by the first item to become apparent? I didn`t see any other items. Was there a bigger list of problems this statement was cut from?


Hi Aaron,

If there is sufficent inbreeding, then other problems such as deformations can occur.. as a further complication if there is sufficient inbreeding, attempts to cross different groups of the same line of frogs can result in outbreeding depression.. 

Ed


----------



## Woodsman

Hi James,

I'm sorry I didn't see your post sooner.. The folks that have been out to the localities where the tinctorius morphs I mentioned occur indicate that Blue and Gray-legged Powderblues are the SAME frog. We created the two different "bloodlines" based on our own selections from WITHIN the population. That's why I suggest putting the ORIGINAL population back together as a means of increasing genetic diversity within the frogs in the hobby. This is the opposite of pollution, it is restoring "clarity".

Take care, Richard.



james67 said:


> as this has been discussed repeatedly i would like to just clarify that many hobbyists including myself do not believe that this is a wise course of action and that we should keep morphs separate, based on the KNOWN lineage and imports, rather than mixing (not what this thread was about in the first place) while it would undoubtedly create diversity within the then polluted line, the effects of using new individuals to add new genetics to the existing lines, could be very detrimental, and furthermore i have the suspicion that those who breed frogs together based on hearsay, (or worse, and i have heard this reasoning used, on their similarities based on B&W images) are likley to avoid disclosing this information, for whatever reason. this is the exact action that can be such a problem, since those offspring will likley be distributed throughout the hobby, and generate even more confusion.
> 
> i would much rather have the offspring of 2 F1 siblings then the offspring of an F1 (of known lineage) and a wild caught specimen, since i was not there to determine if in-fact these are the same population, regardless of what my , or anyone's beliefs are on the topic, i feel we must refrain from such experimentation disguised as fact and stick to what we know. there is so much speculation in this hobby that at least personally i believe we can be rewarded for playing it safe.
> 
> james


----------



## james67

don't get me wrong, there is some definite line breeding going on in the hobby, but there is also a large amount of speculation involved in these discussions about the true identity of the morphs that were imported so long ago. powder blues were some of the first frogs i kept in the late nineties. many of us, like myself, who have not been to South America to see with our own eyes, or who don't personally know the importer who may have separated the frogs, can only do just that. speculate. i prefer to err on the side of caution when it comes to these matters because there is simply so little room for error. one misguided report or perhaps comment from a friend of a friend who's in the field, COULD do a lot of damage to the lines and that's what i'm concerned with.

also please excuse me as i didn't intend to sound offensive in the first post however in retrospect it may have come off that way.

james


----------



## npaull

> don't get me wrong, there is some definite line breeding going on in the hobby, but there is also a large amount of speculation involved in these discussions about the true identity of the morphs that were imported so long ago. powder blues were some of the first frogs i kept in the late nineties. many of us, like myself, who have not been to South America to see with our own eyes, or who don't personally know the importer who may have separated the frogs, can only do just that. speculate. i prefer to err on the side of caution when it comes to these matters because there is simply so little room for error. one misguided report or perhaps comment from a friend of a friend who's in the field, COULD do a lot of damage to the lines and that's what i'm concerned with.


I think this perspective is very misguided, or at least overstated as it applies in the long-run (decades-centuries span) of the hobby. 

Without very careful management (which I hope the ASN will be able to implement increasingly) virtually all populations of captive dart frogs, with the probable/possible exception of those that are most common (some tincs, leucomelas, auratus), are so incredibly small and isolated that they are virtually doomed to go extinct as so many little "islands." This problem exists not just because the total numbers of certain species are small (though that is certainly the case) but also because the populations of even some more common species are profoundly isolated.

For example, think of standard lamasi. I don't know how many individuals are in the country, but I'd be stunned if it were over 2,000. Now, how many of those animals are actually exchanging genes? The total population is actually made up of many dozens of tiny little islands.

And the history of small isolated populations is so well known as to be a theorem - THEY GO EXTINCT.

This is one problem (and perhaps the biggest) that the ASN strives to counter.

I am not advocating crossing animals from known geogrpahically distinct populations. I think that would be a bad course in the long-run as well, ultimately depleting diversity.

But on the other hand, I think there should be a strong effort to ENCOURAGE FORCEFULLY the crossing of phenotypically different organisms that are nonetheless sympatric. It may well be essential to the long-term health of captive dart frogs.


----------



## dendro-dude

I don't mean to interrupt the discussion but... Inbreeding is where you breed your frogs, then breed the offspring with their fellow offspring??And this can result in deformations and creating newbloodlines??

Also, this F1 and F17, these are morphs numbers or something??


----------



## earthfrog

dendro-dude said:


> I don't mean to interrupt the discussion but... Inbreeding is where you breed your frogs, then breed the offspring with their fellow offspring??And this can result in deformations and creating newbloodlines??
> 
> Also, this F1 and F17, these are morphs numbers or something??


Inbreeding is breeding siblings or close relatives with each other, but in the frog world there is more laxity on this issue due to the resilience of frogs' genes, and the fact that in the wild they often breed in isolated groups and do not outcross (dependent on species, research your own to determine if this is true for your own). Inbreeding may result in genetic deformities if a group started from close relatives is allowed to inbreed for many generations. Remember that a terrarium is far less space than a few yards of rainforest, and there may be far fewer specimens to allow for comparable genetic diversity in a terrarium when compared to rainforest.
Line breeding is done with specific knowledge by selecting specimens that are genetically sound, as far as can be seen, and by breeding said individuals you are deliberately trying to reinforce desirable traits. Not in as much as breeding for the sake of appearance, since emphasizing this over hardiness is frowned upon, but breeding for hardiness is a good practice.

The F numbers refer to direct descendants of wild-caught species, and are numbered in ascending order according to the generation spawned from the original parents.


----------



## Ed

There is new data coming out with respect to inbreeding and out breeding that indicated inbreeding in insular populations is not as big a problem as out breeding between insular populations of the same species. 
I suggest those interested should read http://www.montana.edu/~wwwbi/staff/creel/bio480/edmands 2007.pdf as this article does a good job of comparing the risks.. 

Ed


----------



## npaull

Hey Ed,

Thanks for that link, I will check it out when I have some more time this weekend. Sounds fascinating.

I would love to be wrong about this. My limited personal experience and conversations of course have led me to think that I am not, but it would be great news if that were the case.

-NP


----------



## earthfrog

I am still getting through the article, but so far have a few ideas:

If such a program were implemented for dart frogs, it would need to be a formally-organized trial through ASN and start out with frogs whose 'genetic purity'---that is, F-status---is known, so that inbreeding within a pair could be observed for several generations until mutations could be observed. 

Furthermore, the 'line-breeding' as a practice is bound to fall through (and valuable specimens have already been lost) if captive-raising guidelines are not mandated. External mutagens should be eliminated from captive-breeding programs which would be dedicated to the trial in order to accommodate the linear equation (referenced in the paper) as closely as possible. Testing for chytrid and parasites should be done and animals should be in pristine health, and precautions should be made to ensure that such items are not introduced in the trial (such as through plants or feeder insects brought in from the field or a third-party vendor).

Of course, then you have the conundrum of the equation itself---linear equations do not very well fit the normal outcomes, only the predicted average---as we see in weather models and studies of natural occurences of many kinds. 

I'm only on page 4 of the reading---is any of this sounding OK? I don't have any formal scientific education, so take it with a grain of salt...


----------

