Inbreeding = weaker species?

[diablohogs]

In my case, when I referred to "starting a new morph", I mainly meant selective breeding to enhance an existing trait, or the combination of mltiple morphs (ex. Garrick's Blazing Blizzard, Carrot-tails that have like 80% carrot-tail, ect)

yeah double mutations and selective breeding... thats true. i was refering to single mutations. like albino or hypo.

breeders that create new single allelle morphs either gather wild caught specimens themselves or purchase them from people who do. some get LUCKY and pop out with a new morph from seemingly normal hets sometimes many generations later and some find the morph in the wild (as i said the odds of finding an albino isnt likely but there are other morphs).

anything that is created from environmental causes is not a morph it is a defect.

You read my thread wrong easy on the replies buddy read before you have a temper tantrum.

im far from one of those.

Also, it is possible to create a morph...how do you think tangerines, snows, and red stripes came about?

ive already commented about that. i was pretty clear in listing all co dominant or recessive genetic traits i dont see why this keeps getting brought up.

Actually coming from the wild has NOTHING to do with producing new morphs...being wild or captive has nothing to do with it...ALL genetic abberancies (basically all alleles) besides normal come about from mutations...which have nothing to do with whether the parents are wild or captive or orange or patternless or white or purple...whatever...doesn't matter. A mutation is a fluke that produces a new allele and it can happen any time, anywhere. Even in line-bred traits...the individual genes that make up the trait first had to mutate at some point along the line to create the number of alleles that create the appearance. Just because a trait is first observed in the wild or in captivity has nothing to do with the trait itself.

uhm... name one.

name one trait that is a mutation that took place in captivity as a fluke. a situation where an albino or some other single allelle mutation appeared from nowhere and popped out of normal non heterozygous parents.

And I dont' believe that leopard geckos are at all an exception to the rule that inbreeding brings out undesireable traits.

once again, give me an example. a proven example in leopard geckos.

a lot of breeders will breed that animal, and then breed its offspring back to it, and then start inbreeding the animals to keep perpetuate the trait.

and that, my friend, is how recessive genes pop up from wild caught specimens or the introduction of wild blood to an exsisting line and than inbreeding the offspring back to thier parents.

the odds of breeding back an animal that is het to its mother or father (the carrier) when you never even knew one of the parents was a carrier to begin with is slim.

a het to normal breeding will give you 50% hets (on paper) than you have to breed that back to the parent (which would have to be the parent who was het to begin with) and if it was the carrier of the single recessive gene than from a het to het breeding you will get 25% what ever they are het for. thats where the luck comes in and where introducing wild stock to your already inbred/linebred stock can create a morph.

than again i hear plutonium works. just kidding...

 

[hill4803]

Almost every morph that is

readily available (and I mean the ones that so many breeders are trying to get now) are the result of inbreeding (selective breeding) & NOT the result of wild caught stock. It is fairly expensive to import / treat animals, not even to mention the high mortality rate.

"and that, my friend, is how recessive genes pop up from wild caught specimens or the introduction of wild blood to an exsisting line and than inbreeding the offspring back to thier parents."

And that is also how the other (bad) recessive traits get bred into the line. I don't think I got the whole quote, sorry about that. But the point is, when you inbreed, you will also get some of the less desirable traits.

"the odds of breeding back an animal that is het to its mother or father (the carrier) when you never even knew one of the parents was a carrier to begin with is slim."


Not true! Here's how that works: incubate the eggs at mid temps (85* or so) and get about 50/50 - males/females. Breed back all the females to "dad" and one or more males (the ones who seem to show the phenotype or close to it) to "mom" or even to some of "mom's" sisters, if they are available. Then the odds of getting the right het are much better than "slim".

Any animal (this is especially true of vertebrates) that uses sexual reproduction as the main mode of reproduction has a better chance of producing viable & "fit" offspring if there is a "mixing in the gene pool". The more similarites (genetic) organisms in a population have with each other, the weaker (more prone to disaster) that population will be. This is a biological fact. This is one of the major reasons several organisms are so endangered, example the cheetah. This is a concept widely taught in high school level biology classes. Genetic diversity is vital to the success of a species.
Having sais all that, I guess it is agreed that we all think inbreeding sucks.

 

[StinaUIUC]

uhm... name one.

name one trait that is a mutation that took place in captivity as a fluke. a situation where an albino or some other single allelle mutation appeared from nowhere and popped out of normal non heterozygous parents.

As I said...it doesn't matter where it originally came from...a new allele occuring has NOTHING to do with where the animal comes from...I just finished a genetics course this past semester...and that was one of the things we learned. The chances of a mutation occuring to produce a new allele DOES NOT CHANGE between captivity and wilderness...plain and simple. I'd give you an example, but I honestly can't...I don't know, because I dont' know the exact details as to all of the traits that have popped up in any animals. Talk to the people who first discovered all of the leo morphs...maybe they can tell you what happened...if they happened to take the offspring with the traits back to the parents and did not get the trait in the offspring...than it was the result of a mutation and not a hidden recessive trait.

As far as leos not being an exception...KINKED TAILS!! If it was due to incubation and not genetics, it would not occur the way it does. I believe it's patternless leos that are most prone...with a MUCH higher occurance than that of any other morph. You just prove to me how that could be because of incubation and NOT genetics! Inbreeding brings out detrimental traits in any sexually reproductive species.

 

[Blazin]

There is Still plenty of Diversity For Leopard Gecko Breeding.

Period! Hands down. For instance my tangerine Patternless project just bore fruit the other day. Two beautiful Pattys with new blood introduced into them. No kinked tails and a appetite and growth that I have not seen in most Pattys. Plenty of diversity even in the limited morphs and varieties that we have in the Leo world without importing wild caughts. People just have to be responsible. There is soooooooo much still left to accomplish in the Leopard gecko world its not even funny. For an example think about cornsnakes. WE HAVE'NT EVEN SCRATCHED THE SURFACE YET!!!

 

[diablohogs]

The chances of a mutation occuring to produce a new allele DOES NOT CHANGE between captivity and wilderness...plain and simple.

where did i ever say gene mutations were a product of transfering a wild animal into captivity? thats ridiculous.

i'd give you an example, but I honestly can't...I don't know

i figured that much.

As far as leos not being an exception...KINKED TAILS!! If it was due to incubation and not genetics, it would not occur the way it does

i cant agree or disagree with that statement because it hasnt been PROVEN either way. maybe as your thesis you can prove that kinked tails are a genetic trait.

readily available (and I mean the ones that so many breeders are trying to get now) are the result of inbreeding (selective breeding) & NOT the result of wild caught stock. It is fairly expensive to import / treat animals, not even to mention the high mortality rate.

are you talking about simple recessive traits or selective breeding because i stated in my last post that YES im aware that selectively bred traits exsist and NO thats not what i was refering to. i was talking about simple recessive and dominant/co dominant traits. single locus mutations.

And that is also how the other (bad) recessive traits get bred into the line. I don't think I got the whole quote, sorry about that. But the point is, when you inbreed, you will also get some of the less desirable traits

i completely agree with you on this...but with leopard geckos we have seemingly been lucky.

Not true! Here's how that works: incubate the eggs at mid temps (85* or so) and get about 50/50 - males/females. Breed back all the females to "dad" and one or more males (the ones who seem to show the phenotype or close to it) to "mom" or even to some of "mom's" sisters, if they are available. Then the odds of getting the right het are much better than "slim".

yeah honestly on second thought its not that slim but thats only if your looking for simple recessive traits and following your little recipe for success.

Any animal (this is especially true of vertebrates) that uses sexual reproduction as the main mode of reproduction has a better chance of producing viable & "fit" offspring if there is a "mixing in the gene pool". The more similarites (genetic) organisms in a population have with each other, the weaker (more prone to disaster) that population will be. This is a biological fact. This is one of the major reasons several organisms are so endangered, example the cheetah. This is a concept widely taught in high school level biology classes. Genetic diversity is vital to the success of a species.

i said that same thing in my argument in favor of hybridization of colubrids. adding new blood to the gene pool is detrimental to the survival of the species.

i agree that inbreeding can be bad and in turn line breeding as well however weve been pretty lucky with leopard geckos with inbreeding from what i understand. i could be wrong but if i am its because people are keeping those sorta things under wraps.

 

[diablohogs]

For an example think about cornsnakes. WE HAVE'NT EVEN SCRATCHED THE SURFACE YET!!!

oooooooo....visions of the blood red leopard gecko....

im not saying we have to depend on wild caught to make new color and pattern morphs, thers been tons of great linebreeding and we have tons of single locus mutations to play with and combine. but those single locus mutations came from wild caught specimens. or am i wrong? albino was (ron tremper), hypo was(ray hine), giant was(ron tremper)...i mean really...what wasnt? thats how most the morphs we know of came about. i cant think of a single one that didnt...can you?

 

[Intense Herpetoculture]

Tangerine was developed in captivity, no doubt about that one. In a way so was stripe, reverse stripe, jungle, giant, Bell albino, and Leshock albinos (still up in the air on the Leshock). All those mutations above were first seen in captive bred animals. We don't really know if those mutations were present in WC specimens and later floated down the gene pool, or if the mutation occurred in captivity.

Also, it is VERY likely that kinked tail is a genetic trait. So far my research into kinks leans towards it being genetic.

As for inbreeding, it has more then taken it's tool on leopard geckos. Simply put, they are not as resistant to many diseases as WC specimens. I'll get into this more in depth in the future, but I need to do a little bit more research on this before people are quoting me on it.

 

[StinaUIUC]

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The chances of a mutation occuring to produce a new allele DOES NOT CHANGE between captivity and wilderness...plain and simple.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
where did i ever say gene mutations were a product of transfering a wild animal into captivity? thats ridiculous.

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
i'd give you an example, but I honestly can't...I don't know
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
i figured that much.

When did I ever say that you said gene mutations were a product of transfering wild animals to captivity??....I didn't mean for an individual... I just meant the origin of genetic mutations MEANS NOTHING because it is equally likely to happen ANY WHERE...any time... And as far as leopard gecko examples of inbreeding results...why does it even matter if I know the specific examples? (which I did give kinked tails as an example...) It doesn't...I dont' need an example to know that they are suffering results of inbreeding...it's basic knowledge (to most people....) that all species of sexually reproductive animal are subject to it...how could they not be? Are you saying there are no deleterious genes in leopard geckos????....that's just absurd.

Blazin...no one has said that leopard geckos are doomed because of inbreeding...its just that there are breeders out there that are inbreeding them...and if people continue to do so we may end up with a big problem... As of right now I totally agree with you, there is plenty of genetic diversity in captive leos, it just needs to be kept that way!

 

[diablohogs]

Christina,
it was from your quote unless you missed that part. maybe you need to learn to be more clear in your posts.

 

[StinaUIUC]

What are you talking about?.....I know I included your quotes of me...I was responding to your responses...I think you're a little confused...

 

[Snakebyt]

i have tried to get stock from as many people as possable to reduce the chance that they are closley related. In some cases i have bought siblings and such, but i am trying to do as much outcrossing as possable.

 

[Xelda]

Justyn - Weakened immune systems is more along the lines of what I was looking for. I'm interested in hearing what you come up with.

 

[diablohogs]

yeah okay cristina. whatever you say. im not going to argue for the sake of arguing. the statements you are making about mutations are obvious and common sense but i asked you to name any incident where a mutated neonate came from WT normal non het parents and you cant. you have the internet and a university library at your disposal and you cant... so that pretty much proves it. these mutations happen in the wild and are brought into captivity. all of the (single locus) morphs we have are at least 4 or 5 years old if not more. when im sure a lot more importing was done and im sure even if it was EXPENSIVE certain breeders could afford and did afford to import these wild caughts into thier collections in hopes of discovering a new morph. ecspecially after seeing how much RT made off his albino morph which WAS from hets brought in from the wild.

and wasnt the carrot tail hypo actually found in the wild. ray hines purchased them from wild stock.

outcrossing and adding new blood is better for the animals gene pool. ive already stated that, however ive never heard of any negative affects from inbreeding leopard geckos with the exception of MAYBE kinked tails.

 

[Golden Gate Geckos]

Olivia...

Weakened immune systems is more along the lines of what I was looking for. I'm interested in hearing what you come up with.

Although I cannot prove it, I feel that in many cases 'weak' geckos could definitately be genetic as result of irresponsible inbreeding.

 

[StinaUIUC]

yeah okay cristina. whatever you say. im not going to argue for the sake of arguing. the statements you are making about mutations are obvious and common sense but i asked you to name any incident where a mutated neonate came from WT normal non het parents and you cant. you have the internet and a university library at your disposal and you cant... so that pretty much proves it. these mutations happen in the wild and are brought into captivity. all of the (single locus) morphs we have are at least 4 or 5 years old if not more. when im sure a lot more importing was done and im sure even if it was EXPENSIVE certain breeders could afford and did afford to import these wild caughts into thier collections in hopes of discovering a new morph. ecspecially after seeing how much RT made off his albino morph which WAS from hets brought in from the wild.

My point was that that doesn't matter where it was first found...it has nothing to do with the mutations...and having been wild caught wouldn't really matter as far as inbreeding anyway since its the inbreeding that occurs AFTER a new mutation is found that becomes a problem. As far as me finding an example, I can't because I didn't even look...and I'm not at school so I don't have a university library at my disposal (not most of it anyway), and I didn't look because it wouldn't be supportive or detrimental to my argument.

 

[hill4803]

Chad your argument is circular...

i.e. doesn't make sense. The morphs I think you are talking about are not from wild caught stock. Name one breeder who imports or buys imports (leopard geckos). These morphs are the result of finding (usually within their own breeding stock or from another breeder) a gecko with a particular pattern or color that was unusual & inbreeding the stock to get the trait to show up in a higher percentage of offspring or to intensify the trait (like carrot tail or carrot head or whatever). Leopard geckos are so prolific and various (as far as colors & patterns) that there is no need for importation.
I would agree with Justyn on all of his points as well as with Marcia, both are reputable breeders with years of experience. They are right on the money with their take on the pitfalls of inbreeding. There are lots of problems we are seeing right now, just check the forums, hatchlings without eyelids, missing limbs, reduced fertility, kinked tails...some of these MAY be from other factors or they MAY be the result of inbreeding. If you look at other animals that have been inbred, they have similar issues!

Many of the desirable pattern traits are the result of a RANDOM MUTATIONS. In other words, the trait was not passed down from parent to offspring, but now the gene exists and it may be passed down to that particular animal's offspring. You can increase the odds of that happening by inbreeding. I think that is the point you are missing...random mutations happen more frequently than one might think and it doesn't matter if the animal is in captivity or in the wild.
I also need to add about the weakened immune system thought. I think some of that maybe a side effect of captive breeding. If you think about it, most keepers try to reduce the amount of exposure of their stock to pathogens. Over time it is possible that the lack of exposure has reduced the need for a "strong" immune system. My geckos live a pretty comfortable life...no extremes in climate, no exposure to predators, quarentine procedures, clean enclosure, clean water, relatively clean food supply (knock on wood, no problems with Armstrong's feeders to date!). I think that may have some impact on the immune functions of leopard geckos. Is anyone doing research on this? I think looking at immune functions of captive bred exotics would be a great area to look into!

 

[StinaUIUC]

Great post!

Many of the desirable pattern traits are the result of a RANDOM MUTATIONS. In other words, the trait was not passed down from parent to offspring, but now the gene exists and it may be passed down to that particular animal's offspring. You can increase the odds of that happening by inbreeding. I think that is the point you are missing...random mutations happen more frequently than one might think and it doesn't matter if the animal is in captivity or in the wild.

That's exactly what I was trying to say! It doesn't matter where the leo with the new mutation comes from (and where the leo comes from has no impact on the mutation having occured)...it's the inbreeding that occurs after finding the mutation that can cause problems.

Anyways...fantastic post and great points

 

[Golden Gate Geckos]

agreed...

If you think about it, most keepers try to reduce the amount of exposure of their stock to pathogens. Over time it is possible that the lack of exposure has reduced the need for a "strong" immune system.

I agree with this completely. If you have ever had the opportunity to actually see a WC Leopard Gecko, they are quite large and robust, and yet can carry huge parasite loads and have strong immune systems that are resistant to indigenous pathogens. Their bodies have naturally adapted to prevent these diseases or infections from posing any health risk.

However, once in captivity their immune systems and metabolisms will change, and the geckos become subject to the affects of weakened immune systems. After years of captive keeping and breeding, it would be possible for these weaknesses to become inherent.

 

[geckosurfer]

I love genetics. I'm sure many have read this book: The Beak of the Finch: A Story of Evolution in Our Time by Jonathan Weiner. It won a Pulitzer Prize and discusses the evolution of finches on Galapagos.

Thank you all for the great posts.

I've already said too much.

 

[Intense Herpetoculture]

First, the Tremper line of albino was not imported by Ron Tremper, two brother's aquired the WC parents and produced an albino in 1996. Ron then got a hold of the albino genes at a later date.

Yes, Hine's hypo stock was imported. He later crossed tangerine stock into the mix when he bred his WC hypos with Gourmet Rodent lines.

There are MANY negative effects of inbreed stock. Big eyes, kinked tails, lowered immune systems, pug noses, etc.

ecspecially after seeing how much RT made off his albino morph which WAS from hets brought in from the wild.

and wasnt the carrot tail hypo actually found in the wild. ray hines purchased them from wild stock.

outcrossing and adding new blood is better for the animals gene pool. ive already stated that, however ive never heard of any negative affects from inbreeding leopard geckos with the exception of MAYBE kinked tails.