Questionable Reproductive rate

This is a discussion I've been having with a buddy of mine over an offer that was made to him by one of his local herp specialty shops. It's pretty much been hashed out and we agree on the answer but I figure it's both good discussion and never hurts to have some additional confirmation.

He successfully produced very nearly a full clutch of Veiled Chams and was offered trades from a local shop. 1.1 Ackies or 0.1 Dumerils Boa or 0.1 Diamond x Jungle carpet or 1.1 Blue Nose Be Panther Chams. He was discussing the reproductive potential of the Nose Be's seince he has never bred them before (General husbandry isn't an issue, this isn't a neophyte keeper) and the individual offering the pair in trade told him that Panthers can produce six to eight clutches of twenty five to thirty five eggs a year with a decent hatch rate when incubated properly. Further he stated that he would purchase any offspring he produced for $110 each for resale. Using the most conservative estimates listed there with six clutches of twenty five eggs each that's 150 neonates at $110 each for a total of $16,500 with a much higher potential (accoring to the person looking to trade).

It seemed to both of us that this was pure garbage since nobody in their right minds would trade away animals with a $16,500 a year potential for a bunch of neonate Veileds.

It also seemed highly questionable that a single pair would produce 150 neonates (or more) annually based off the market value of the animals, if the production rate were that high, they would be somewhere in between beardies and leopard geckos in price which obviously isn't the case.

Using what little (very little, I have never had a strong interest in chams) I knew combined with what he knew and a very short bit of research we concluded by consensus that the average female will produce two clutches of between fifteen and thirty eggs (on average) a year, with around four clutches of thirty five being about the extreme that could possible be worked towards (but not expected).

Having come to this tenuous conclusion I figured I would verify it with some individuals who have personal experience with the animals (or direct and clear first hand knowledge) to see how far off I was in my estimates. Since these discussion boards can use a bit of discussion and I may not be able to post on KS at the present time (wander over to the BOI, the threads are cropping up like weeds as to why) or possibly just having browser difficulties, I figured I would come here. I tend to trust the responses here quite a bit more as well.

I think my buddy has decided to go for the ackies (Because Ackies are amazingly nifty animals, profit be damned) but I'd like to set my mind to rest on the topic anyway.

Thanks in advance to everyone who responds.

Seamus,
You are absolutely right to question that kind of output. If by some odd chance a female did produce these kinds of numbers she would only do it for one season as she would soon be dead.

Your estimate of 2 clutches per year is right on. and the amount of eggs to expect is usually in the low to mid twenties, but it can be as high as 30.

The ackies are a great choice but panthers are hot sellers right now and your friend would have no problem selling CB babies for $200 or more. Which ever they decide I think they'll be pleased.

Seamus,
I am skeptical of anybody selling a pair of panther chameleons(or adults in general for that matter). Finding two of the same locale, of the right age and size, in good enough health, that will actually copulate and reproduce successfully can be a challenge. Most shops end up with pairs, or single adults, that someone has tried everything with to get them to mate/reproduce and have given up on. No libido, Sterility, agressiveness, skittishness, and non impressive colors are the top factors I have found to be the real reason someone is getting rid of "breedable" panthers. I have come to realize, I have better luck getting cb babies from a reputable breeder and raising them myself to a breeding size.

The math on the panthers is a bit far fetched. Although it is possible to have that many offspring, I would not advise aiming for anything close to it. In my opinion, producing more than a couple of clutches of eggs per year puts an extreme burden on the females health. It will lead to an early demise. The resulting offspring are weaker too. With lower hatch/survival rates. I only breed my females no more than twice a year. Getting 20-30 offspring each time. Sometimes, the female will produce a second clutch from retained sperm. In that case I wait a full 10-12 months before breeding again.

If done ethically, breeding chameleons is not all that lucrative. After figuring in the time invested, proper caging needs, food expenses(ensuring a wide variety), vitamin supplements, vet care, and natural die offs, the figure comes down considerably. Dont get me wrong, I do more than break even on them, but the $16,000 profit figure is laughable and is a pipe dream.

A few questions to consider also:

Are they wild caught or captive born?

Approximate age?

Are they a "true blue" Nosey Be? Or a green Nosey labeled as a blue?

The math on the panthers is a bit far fetched.

The same way a 20 foot 'tic is "a bit" different than a neonate corn...

Dont get me wrong, I do more than break even on them, but the $16,000 profit figure is laughable and is a pipe dream.

Yeah, it was a really absurd sales pitch so the guy could get rid of some panthers that weren't selling and get in some neonate veileds (Juveniles so they're "cute" and sometimes you really can sell twenty $30 lizards before you sell two $200 lizards). My buddy is experienced enough to easily spot it as being just what it was, nonsense, but it sparked a discussion about exactly what the reproductive rate averaged as the texts I had laying around varied by a substantial amount (Not eight clutches of thirty five a year amount, but from one clutch of fifteen up to four clutches in the low thirties) and I figured it was best to go to the source.

Thanks for the responses guys, you confirmed my thoughts on the matter. Just to answer the questions though...

Are they wild caught or captive born?

My understanding was CB but I would have to double check.

Approximate age?

Subadults.

Are they a "true blue" Nosey Be? Or a green Nosey labeled as a blue?

I don't trust myself to be knowledgeable enough to tell the difference and I didn't see the animals in question. I was told "Blue Nose Be panthers" but we didn't discuss the validity of locales, bloodlines, genetics and subspecies...

I have read a few things of a cursory nature that seem to lend evidence to the proposal that panthers might represent multiple subspecies or even species but I don't know enough about chameleons to really verify the small tidbits of attempted taxonomic revision that I have seen. Any thoughts on that issue at all? Are the different patterns of panthers different subspecies or just locale specific breeding populations?

Thanks again for the answers and I look forward to any additional thoughts.

There hasnt been adequate research, as far as I know, that proves that the different locales of panthers are indeed different subspecies. Probably genetic testing could lend some answers to this mystery.

It is my own belief that they are only different in color for some unknown reason in evolution. I also dont believe that the different locales are all that distinct. Its not as cut and dry as allot of people think it is. There is too much diversity in color/ patterns in chams even from the same locales. There are general colorations, but a multitude of variations.

My questions have always been...How do the chameleons know they are on the outskirts of their locale? and... How do they know that they shouldnt mate with another bordering locale?

The different locales of panthers will readily hybridize in captivity, so I am skeptical that they recognize any difference.

My questions have always been...How do the chameleons know they are on the outskirts of their locale? and... How do they know that they shouldnt mate with another bordering locale?

Now that's something I can answer in general terms if not specifics with the panthers in question.

A species is loosely defined as a naturally interbreeding group of animals. This doesn't apply just to those animals capable of successfully producing offspring with one another but to those which physically and naturally mate on a regular basis. An easy example of two species that can interbreed and produce viable offspring that simply don't being say... Lions and Tigers. They do share a range throughout chunks of India but do not naturally reproduce. There are behavioral differences and the instinctive drive isn't there in wild animals.

A subspecies is defined as something of a subset within the larger range. Animals that are clearly the same biologically but differ in some slight physical characteristics. Oftentimes a bit of geography can split the animals up, island forms of Galapagos torts are all separate subspecies but a single species for example. Or they can animals that alter characteristics across their range- i.e. the two Gila monster subspecies that change gradually from H. s. suspectum into H. s. cinctum (Or vise versa depending on which direction you approach it from) with most the animals in the center being considered intergrades.

The debate as I understood it with the chams is in making the determination if a subspecific designation was validated by the natural borders of the breeding population OR the physical characteristics displayed by animals with significant distance to break up the breeding population at the extreme ends and cause anomalous features to evolve.

Basic darwinistic evolutionary theory would work off the assumption that the animals at the extreme ends of the range would evolve to meet differing environmental stimulus over successive generations given a large or diverse enough range, eventually leading to features which would cause the cessation of interbreeding between the multiple populations. Since most people tend to look at species in a fairly cut and dry manner, including some taxonomists, the debate about locality specific animals becomes muddled. Many people will make a determination that animals of the same species are fine to cross regardless of the mixed subspecies, others (Myself being one of them) feel that with the exception of species displaying frequently occurring natural intergradiation over substantial chunks of their range, captive crossing of separate subspecies is damaging to the bloodlines maintained in captivity. The same holds true for locale specific animals where there is substantial evidence of multiple isolated breeding populations in my view. Look at green tree pythons, the animals from the outlying islands and even many of the mainland animals form breeding populations that do not interbreed with the other populations due to geography but because of poor importation records and the tendency of many people to begin their breeding projects with these (fairly pricey) animals with the first male and the first female they can obtain, the locale designations on many animals that are the product of long term captive bloodlines are meaningless.

Again, I just don't understand enough about the natural history of the panther chameleons, their range and the likely hood of their interbreeding to personally make the distinction until someone provides me with some evidence.

It sounds from what you have said though that there are no significant natural barriers in the breeding population and that the animals in the wild tend to breed pretty indiscriminantly, the range isn't really large enough to qualify for the argument of animals at the extreme edges of the range developing in semi-isolation with different natural pressures so I would tend to agree that, given what you have said, the subspecific designations are not warranted unless there's a major behavioral deviation that I'm unaware of.

Thanks for the replies.

Further research is needed to answer allot of those very questions. Both biological and behavioral data is definitely at a minimum on the subject.

There are some natural barriers between some of the locales of panther, but not all of them. I believe there to be a large number of "intergrades". The areas between these locales are somewhat vast, but nonetheless they are inhabited by panther chams. What "locale"? who knows?

As far as environmental stimulus, the vegetation found throughout their range is very simillar, with little variance. From my research, it seems as though you are either in temperate rain forested areas or in somewhat arrid scrub type vegetated areas. The panthers seem to be predominantly in the larger more arrid regions that have very little diversity in insect and plant life.

Predators are rather the same across the board as well.

I have noticed very little behavior differences between my
locales. Any differences have actually seemed to be more individual differences, rather than being connected to color phases.

I cant find one detail that would even point in the direction of an answer as to why and how there are different color phases of pardalis.

I breed Panthers, several locales and this is the deal... They could possible lay up to about 5 clutches a year, with about 20-36 eggs each clutch, BUT panther eggs have to incubate for almost an entire year, my last clutch took 10 1/2 months. Another thing to consider is that breeding greatly reduces the life span of a female chameleon. I would not have one female breed that often in one year, I feel it would be too much for her. Just a bit of a thought.