gillsy
Very Well-Known Member
Graig and Gab Latta, release Mary River turtles back into the wild... took alot of hoops to jump through.
Are we creating weaker animals through the hobby?
- Thread starter Jeffa
- Start date
Help Support Aussie Pythons & Snakes Forum:
- Status
Graig and Gab Latta, release Mary River turtles back into the wild... took alot of hoops to jump through.
I have a similar comparison... how many of the people on here could go back to living in the wild? we breed traits for looks, we ger morphs, snakes and reptiles evolve to blend in to attack to feed and to stay safe. We breed them as centrepieces. We have to be having some effect?
B
Bluetongue1
Guest
The question was raised as to whether temperament and non-feeding are inherited characteristics. A couple of points worth thinking about... Snakes have both innate behaviour and learned behaviour. Innate must originate in their genetic makeup. Whether it is influenced during development in the egg is highly unlikely. However, once born, learned behaviours can take the place or at least modify certain innate behaviours. Where you have a clutch of snakes raised under identical conditions, it is reasonable to assume that any observable differences in their characteristics, including behaviour, are genetically based.
I think you really need to look at things on genetic level. We are selecting for particular genes when we choose a breeding pair. What we are hoping to get are animals that display the characteristic controlled by those genes. Where you are breeding individuals that are not related, you are making no difference to the phenotypes expressed for all the other characteristics. These are the same characteristics that have been selected over eons to suit an animal to its environment. It is only when we start altering the phenotypes of some of these other characteristics that we potentially affecting an organisms overall ability to survive in its environment. This occurs when you in-breed and get double recessives for otherwise extremely rare mutations. Responsible breeders will outcross their breeding lines in an attempt to get rid of these double recessives. The success of this is very much dependent on whether the gene is carried on the same chromosome as a desired characteristic and the distance between the gene loci if that is the case. If on separate chromes, then independent assortment of chromatids will see an approx. 50-50 split. If on the same chromosome, separation is dependent on crossing-over, which becomes increasingly less likely to occur, the closer the loci. So while responsible, knowledgeable breeders will do their best to maintain genetic vigour in a breeding line, they cannot always be guaranteed of success.
Blue
There also seems to be a misconception that we need to keep snakes in a sterile environment. This comes from being told you need to remove faeces ASAP. The reason for cleaning up ASAP is that there is a variety of pathogenic bacteria in low concentrations in the gut. Some of these are capable of reaching high concentrations when expelled in the faeces, due to the environmental conditions of an enclosure (warm and humid). Should the snakes protective layer of skin be broken anywhere, it could contract a serious infection. This is not an issue in the wild as it will simply poop and move on. It is interesting to note that given the occasions where snakes have been neglected and there were multiple defecations in cage, none of the captives had developed infections from gut bacteria.
With bush litter, you are not going to pick up mites parasitic to snakes. You might be extremely unlucky and pick up a tick. If left in the sun to get warm, the tick will soon vacate. Even if it did attach that is no big deal – it happens all the time in nature with zero consequences. There are no other parasites that can be transferred in this way – only the odd unwanted house guest with 6, 8 or more legs. A bit of raking and spreading out on a warm brick paved area will get rid of those.
Blue
I think you really need to look at things on genetic level. We are selecting for particular genes when we choose a breeding pair. What we are hoping to get are animals that display the characteristic controlled by those genes. Where you are breeding individuals that are not related, you are making no difference to the phenotypes expressed for all the other characteristics. These are the same characteristics that have been selected over eons to suit an animal to its environment. It is only when we start altering the phenotypes of some of these other characteristics that we potentially affecting an organisms overall ability to survive in its environment. This occurs when you in-breed and get double recessives for otherwise extremely rare mutations. Responsible breeders will outcross their breeding lines in an attempt to get rid of these double recessives. The success of this is very much dependent on whether the gene is carried on the same chromosome as a desired characteristic and the distance between the gene loci if that is the case. If on separate chromes, then independent assortment of chromatids will see an approx. 50-50 split. If on the same chromosome, separation is dependent on crossing-over, which becomes increasingly less likely to occur, the closer the loci. So while responsible, knowledgeable breeders will do their best to maintain genetic vigour in a breeding line, they cannot always be guaranteed of success.
Blue
Concerned about using bush litter as substrate... why? Plenty of captive snakes get out and are recovered some length of time later in places far from sterile, including bush litter on occasions. I reckon the essential difference with captive snakes it they cannot move away from things they normally would in the wild. Ants are a classic. They can spell disaster in an enclosure. A snake that wanders through the middle of an ants nest in nature is going to step on the gas and get out of there in a hurry.
There also seems to be a misconception that we need to keep snakes in a sterile environment. This comes from being told you need to remove faeces ASAP. The reason for cleaning up ASAP is that there is a variety of pathogenic bacteria in low concentrations in the gut. Some of these are capable of reaching high concentrations when expelled in the faeces, due to the environmental conditions of an enclosure (warm and humid). Should the snakes protective layer of skin be broken anywhere, it could contract a serious infection. This is not an issue in the wild as it will simply poop and move on. It is interesting to note that given the occasions where snakes have been neglected and there were multiple defecations in cage, none of the captives had developed infections from gut bacteria.
With bush litter, you are not going to pick up mites parasitic to snakes. You might be extremely unlucky and pick up a tick. If left in the sun to get warm, the tick will soon vacate. Even if it did attach that is no big deal – it happens all the time in nature with zero consequences. There are no other parasites that can be transferred in this way – only the odd unwanted house guest with 6, 8 or more legs. A bit of raking and spreading out on a warm brick paved area will get rid of those.
Blue
That's a sweeping statement Pog, not all breeders do that. Ask Jack if he is trying to "improve" his Broad-headed snakes or myself with native GTPs.
B
Bluetongue1
Guest
Sorry,
Wrote this not knowing it had been answered...
Humans have around 10,000 genes that are present in every single cell. Together, they form the blueprint for our entire body. If you are a builder and you have various tradies working for you, you don’t start tearing up the blueprint and giving different people bits. You give each one whole copy. They then use only what they need of it. The cells of the body work the same way. Every cell gets a full copy of the blueprint.
Now, if you have 10,000 pairs of genes floating around separately in a cell and you have to make a copy of each and make sure that one copy goes to each half when the cell divides... too hard. So the genes are organised into specific groups called chromosomes. The easiest way to visualise them is like beads on a necklace. Let’s say Chromosome 1 contain 485 genes. Gene No.1 will be first, attached to Gene No. 2, attached to Gene No.3... on so on, with Gene No.485 at the end of Chromosome 1. Chromosome 2 will start with Gene No. 486, attached to Gene No. 487 and so on. As was mentioned, there are 23 different chromosomes. It does not matter which cell you look at or from which human being, they will all have 23 chromosomes and Chromosome 2 for example, will always start with Gene No. 486.
Genes are made up of DNA. DNA is an interesting molecule because it shaped like a twisted ladder. Each rung on the ladder is made of a particular pair of chemicals that fit together. There are only two differ pairs, which means four different chemicals. The order in which these four chemical occur is the code for making proteins. Structural proteins are what build cells and enzyme proteins are what operate cells. The other import thing about the DNA ladder is that the rungs can split down the middle like a zipper and new bits of chemicals can be added to each half, to make two identical copies of the original DNA strand. Under normal circumstances, the DNA strands of chromosomes are really long and thin like an unwound reel of fishing line. Before the chromosomes divide in a dividing cell, the DNA strand winds up, Like line on a hand cork or a slinky spring when pushed together, so they can separate properly.
Because you have one copy of each parent’s chromosomes, you will have 2 of Chromosome1, 2 of Chromosome 2, 2 of Chromosome 3 etc. This means you will have two genes for every inherited characteristic.
The degree of blending apparent in a characteristic controlled by two co-dominant genes can vary. In cases where the effects of each gene cannot be seen separately, they are sometimes referred to as incompletely dominant. For example, if you crossed a red lower and a white flower and got pink flowers.
EDIT (Additional info):
The above provides a basic overview and the examples given are made up and not from nature. In reality, most inherited characteristics we see, such as length, are controlled by more than just one gene (i.e. by more than one matching pair). Several genes (several matching pairs) are involved. This is referred to as being polygenic.
Proteins can be thought of as the basic chemicals of life. They form the basic structural components of cells – walls and membranes etc. They also control all the chemical activities of cells in the form of enzymes. And they act as messengers that can control activities of body parts, called hormones. DNA contains a chemical code for the formulae of proteins. So when a gene is active in a cell, it will make that particular protein. In this way, DNA determiness the structure and function of a living thing.
Blue
Wrote this not knowing it had been answered...
Humans have around 10,000 genes that are present in every single cell. Together, they form the blueprint for our entire body. If you are a builder and you have various tradies working for you, you don’t start tearing up the blueprint and giving different people bits. You give each one whole copy. They then use only what they need of it. The cells of the body work the same way. Every cell gets a full copy of the blueprint.
Now, if you have 10,000 pairs of genes floating around separately in a cell and you have to make a copy of each and make sure that one copy goes to each half when the cell divides... too hard. So the genes are organised into specific groups called chromosomes. The easiest way to visualise them is like beads on a necklace. Let’s say Chromosome 1 contain 485 genes. Gene No.1 will be first, attached to Gene No. 2, attached to Gene No.3... on so on, with Gene No.485 at the end of Chromosome 1. Chromosome 2 will start with Gene No. 486, attached to Gene No. 487 and so on. As was mentioned, there are 23 different chromosomes. It does not matter which cell you look at or from which human being, they will all have 23 chromosomes and Chromosome 2 for example, will always start with Gene No. 486.
Genes are made up of DNA. DNA is an interesting molecule because it shaped like a twisted ladder. Each rung on the ladder is made of a particular pair of chemicals that fit together. There are only two differ pairs, which means four different chemicals. The order in which these four chemical occur is the code for making proteins. Structural proteins are what build cells and enzyme proteins are what operate cells. The other import thing about the DNA ladder is that the rungs can split down the middle like a zipper and new bits of chemicals can be added to each half, to make two identical copies of the original DNA strand. Under normal circumstances, the DNA strands of chromosomes are really long and thin like an unwound reel of fishing line. Before the chromosomes divide in a dividing cell, the DNA strand winds up, Like line on a hand cork or a slinky spring when pushed together, so they can separate properly.
Because you have one copy of each parent’s chromosomes, you will have 2 of Chromosome1, 2 of Chromosome 2, 2 of Chromosome 3 etc. This means you will have two genes for every inherited characteristic.
The degree of blending apparent in a characteristic controlled by two co-dominant genes can vary. In cases where the effects of each gene cannot be seen separately, they are sometimes referred to as incompletely dominant. For example, if you crossed a red lower and a white flower and got pink flowers.
EDIT (Additional info):
The above provides a basic overview and the examples given are made up and not from nature. In reality, most inherited characteristics we see, such as length, are controlled by more than just one gene (i.e. by more than one matching pair). Several genes (several matching pairs) are involved. This is referred to as being polygenic.
Proteins can be thought of as the basic chemicals of life. They form the basic structural components of cells – walls and membranes etc. They also control all the chemical activities of cells in the form of enzymes. And they act as messengers that can control activities of body parts, called hormones. DNA contains a chemical code for the formulae of proteins. So when a gene is active in a cell, it will make that particular protein. In this way, DNA determiness the structure and function of a living thing.
Blue
Last edited by a moderator:
J
junglepython2
Guest
Just for the record a single gene can control numerous characteristics and length like most traits is polygenetic.
benjamind2010
Well-Known Member
Simple way to reduce these problems - weeding out non-feeders is a good place to start - selecting breeding will get you 90% of the way there. Breeding only the best feeders, the healthiest animals, will ensure that future generations will be healthier. Genetics plays a big role in this, and there is plenty of proof in other classes of animals, and reptiles are no exception.
I see the opposite. Selective breeding will eventually lead to demise, particularly if inbreeding is involved or the genetic pool is small. To add vigor and fitness to captive populations will requite out-breeding with wild individuals. That's my opinion.
B
Bluetongue1
Guest
Genes are also interactive in different ways to those mentioned dependening upon the what part of any given biochemical pathway they code for and whether these are funtional or strutural. Sex-linked genes are not paired, therefore not donated one from each parent etc There are many technical shortcomings in the information provided but it was only ever meant to be a simplistic introduction to assist the discussion. One has to learn to walk before one can run.
Nonetheless I will add a bit. Thanks,
Blue
Last edited by a moderator:
hrafna
Well-Known Member
imo yes we are. for starters we have done a fair bit to eliminate natural selection with piping eggs, assist feeding etc etc. also look at morphs being created/bred, there is a very good reason why there are not alot of albinos (for example) in the wild. when we breed something for colour or pattern we are changing the animals ability to blend into their environment. does anyone really believe a jag would survive long in the wild? albinos? oh sure maybe 1 or 2 would survive but the majority wouldn't. do you think a bumblebeepoosoulsuckerkuflumina ball python would survive for long in the wild?
Not with reptile people walking around LOL
waruikazi
Legendary
Hrafna, i really don't think that jags and most other colour variants of carpets would do that badly in most of the carpet range. I have seen some huuuuuuge variation in colour and pattern in darwin carpets along with escapee exotic carpets that were living quite happily in the bush.
Matt74
Not so new Member
Ive never thought to ask Craig anything about the Mary river turtle release program on the turtle forum but there's some interesting questions that need answering. Do Craig and gab choose certain turtles for release? Or are all the offspring released regardless of feeding habits, survival potential etc etc. in the off chance that predators will feed on the weakest giving the strongest better odds at survival.
Bit like when I went surfing and I'd look around at the pack of surfers out in the water and think that if a shark surfaced who would be the last person to make it to shore in the mad dash to get out of the water. Beleive me, surfing on the west coast of South Australia, these thoughts enter your mind!
Back to the subject though, it would be interesting if one of the herps that is commonly kept by people in Australia was to become extinct in the wild, what would the government and authorities do?. If breed and release programs occurred could the state authority demand that hobbyists hand over their animals for breeding?. How would they judge which were the most suitable specimens?.
Would they even bother if the situation that caused the extinction, ie habitat loss, still posted a problem?
So many questions, and I'm certainly no expert, and this is straying along way from the original question posed at the start of the thread
J
junglepython2
Guest
Having a neuro attack while under stress from a predator wouldn't go down too well, unless it freaked the predator out and it buggered off
hrafna
Well-Known Member
so a jungle that has been line bred for high bright yellows could just as easily fit into a habitat like it duller wild counterpart? can i have some of what you are drinking? as stated a jag having a neuro attack would easily outlive any other carpet out there. come on!
J
junglepython2
Guest
To be fair, some of the best and brightest jungles and I imagine other forms are wild and would leave a lot of the better captives for dead in terms of appearance.
waruikazi
Legendary
Ok ok ok a jag with neuro issues would have a rougher time of it but i really doubt that the colour would be that big of an issue. But yes Hrfana i have no doubt that a bright yellow and black jungle would go just as well in dull grey coastal territory. Infact i'm pretty sure i have a paper somewhere that shows cheynei and mcdowelli being found in the same locations.
hrafna
Well-Known Member
no, i am meaning a jungle that has been line bred for a high yellow, a brighter yellow compared to a natural occuring dull jungle. or do you believe that some of the almost fluro jungles in collections today that some breeders who have spent years and years putting in hard work to breed generation after generation of jungles, to get that high yellow have been doing it for nothing because they are already naturally occuring? man whoever took the first jungles from the wild sure did pick the butt ugly ones for breeders to start working with!
waruikazi
Legendary
Then you need to talk to some of the long time jungle breeders. The best you have seen in captivity has its wild counterpart.
I had this conversation years ago with one fella and he produced pictures of wild jungles that would slam your jaw to hard on the ground. Striped, 50/50, high yellows they all exist in the wild.
I had this conversation years ago with one fella and he produced pictures of wild jungles that would slam your jaw to hard on the ground. Striped, 50/50, high yellows they all exist in the wild.
hrafna
Well-Known Member
what about (leaving jungles as the basis for my example) black and white jungles that have been bred for a reduction in pattern? (let's leave rpm out of the discussion) just a genuine non-jag animal that has been bred for the pattern loss, thus leaving the animal with more white in it than what is typically found in the wild? i am not trying to say that every animal would die in the wild, but i believe that more of the "designer" animals would have a harder time in the wild than their more "normal" counterparts. hell i could be wrong but i guess the only way to find out for sure would be with radio tracking released animals.
- Status
