I'sn't it a beauty?

This is a Elaphe guttata guttata X Lampropeltis getula nigra.

What do you think? Isn't it a beauty?

No.

I knew that was coming.

Originally posted by Seamus Haley
No.

Ok, that's clear

Some explanation from my side.
I got this snake from a friended snakebreeder.

I sometimes am in doubt of hybrids.
But I do not mind it when people keep to the following rules:

1. Always be honest about what you did. Tell people who buy a snake from you what is in it. So you have to keep clear records.

2. Only do this with species that are close related (as I think guttata and californiae are).

3. Make sure those hybrids cannot mix with snakes in free nature. (That is not a problem in Holland, but maybe in the US).


Hybrids between guttata and californiae are known from the wild, I am told.
Hybridisation (spelled ok? ) can be the start of a complete new species (in million years).
Darwin would have loved it (he told me).

But... you don't have to like the above shown snake (which now is very depressed ).

The snake can't help it that it was born.

1. Always be honest about what you did. Tell people who buy a snake from you what is in it. So you have to keep clear records.

There exists an uncertainty about what the animal will be represented as after it passes out of your hands... or the hands of the one who obtains it next... or it's offspring. genetic contamination of the entire species only takes ONE person being less than honest.

2. Only do this with species that are close related (as I think guttata and californiae are).

They are not even in the same genus.

Hybrids between guttata and californiae are known from the wild, I am told

The ranges don't even overlap. Not even close.

Interfertility in captivity isn't a legitimate indicator of natural production of hybrids, there exist intrinsic isolating mechanisms in the snake's behavioral patterns and instinctive mate choices which prevent them, in addition to physical problems.

If animals were crossing in the wild, then the taxonomy would need to be revised in such a way so that the two current species both became subspecific designations of the same species.

Hybridisation (spelled ok? ) can be the start of a complete new species (in million years

A single species may split into a number of subspecies that have reccognized differences which may then further adapt and cease to interbreed... leaving two species where there existed only one before. The reverse is not true.

The snake can't help it that it was born.

No, but it's owner can. Euthanize it as a precautionary measure to ensure the safety of the larger gene pool.

Originally posted by Seamus Haley
There exists an uncertainty about what the animal will be represented as after it passes out of your hands... or the hands of the one who obtains it next... or it's offspring. genetic contamination of the entire species only takes ONE person being less than honest.

That is the case with every animal that is bred in captivity. Boa constrictor and its subspecies is a good example. Most of these boa's are crossed subspecies. This has not harmed the wild populations.

And you assume I will breed with this snake. That is not the case.

They are not even in the same genus.

That is something which is not important. Genera are made up by humans. Look how often these generic or species names are changed.
My guess is that extensive dna-research will show that they are very closely related.

The ranges don't even overlap. Not even close.

I agree. But I was talking about escaped specimen from both species.

Interfertility in captivity isn't a legitimate indicator of natural production of hybrids, there exist intrinsic isolating mechanisms in the snake's behavioral patterns and instinctive mate choices which prevent them, in addition to physical problems.

Where do you base this on? When two species interbreed and their young are fertile (I know they are at least for five generations), they must be very closely related.

If animals were crossing in the wild, then the taxonomy would need to be revised in such a way so that the two current species both became subspecific designations of the same species.

This is only a matter of time, I guess. Look at the recent change in generic namegiving in American Elaphes. This will never stop.
As I said... it's the work of human.

A single species may split into a number of subspecies that have reccognized differences which may then further adapt and cease to interbreed... leaving two species where there existed only one before. The reverse is not true.

I don't agree with this. This would mean that evrything in the wild goes as if it is planned. There is chaos out there. I agree with your opinion above about splitting up in subspecies and becoming species.
But this does not rule out oyher possibilities. There is no proof for this, as far as I know.

No, but it's owner can. Euthanize it as a precautionary measure to ensure the safety of the larger gene pool.

This is rubbish. One should NEVER kill a healthy animal for no good reason. And being an interbred specimen IS NOT A GOOD REASON.
The Germans wanted to do something like this (ensure the safety of the larger gene pool) sixty years ago.
Blond and blue eyes... remember?

Friendly greetings from the Netherlands

Another pic of the beauty

Fons,

You may agree or disagree with Seamus' stance as you see fit, of course. However, putting the euthanization of intergrades and hybrids on the same moral level as Hittler's attempt at exterminating an entire race of PEOPLE is way beyond good taste and common sense! Surely, upon more cool-headed reflection, you don't see these two instances as moral equivalents, do you?

Originally posted by Darin Chappell
Fons,

You may agree or disagree with Seamus' stance as you see fit, of course. However, putting the euthanization of intergrades and hybrids on the same moral level as Hittler's attempt at exterminating an entire race of PEOPLE is way beyond good taste and common sense! Surely, upon more cool-headed reflection, you don't see these two instances as moral equivalents, do you?

OK, I admit that I over-acted.

I apologize for that.

But... the fundamental idea has points of contact.
Eventhough they are two entire different things!
You do not kill something because you think it is wrong! That's the point I wanted to make.

I do not agree with sentencing a healthy animal to death purely because of it's parentage, but I feel that comparing other posters to Hitler is not only horribly rude, but disrespectful to those who died in WW2. Apology accepted.

I hate to be devils advocate here, but I think this is an important point:
A species is defined as a group of organisms that can breed to produce fertile offspring.

So killing the hybrids would do nothing for the gene pool, since such hybrids cannot reproduce anyway. They would be the serpent equivalent of mules, harmless but possibly okay pets as long as they were healthy snakes.

Hellfire