Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

O. pumilio "Darklands" vs. "Cauchero" morphs
#1

After talking to a few friends who have seen, worked with, whatever, Darklands (mostly mine) and seen worked with , whatever , "caucheros" there is a huge difference in size and I am sure a few other variables between the two "morphs".
Time to start asking questions about when and where some in the hobby got their "darklands' . I would REALLY hate to see any Darklands that I produce breed with any "best guesses" or "darklands", or "caucheroes" out there.


Rich

Darts with parasites are analogous to mixed tanks, there are no known benefits to the frogs with either.


If tone is more important to you than content, you are at the wrong place.

My new email address is: rich.frye@icloud.com and new phone number is 773 577 3476
Reply
#2

Can't believe nobody has jumped in here.
I have been in contact with a number of people who have been down to Panama and am still collecting info on the two of these.
As it stands now , what I am guessing is that there is one collecting spot (where the Caucheros are much larger than what I have that are know to be Darklands) that is easy for the "FARM RAISERS" to grab Caucheroes off the ground, ship them up here and have an importer look up Tropical's site or Chris van L's site , look at a Darkland pic and put a Darkland label on a Cauchero.
I would guess that there is SOME natural barrier between the Cauchero and Darkland territories. Chris from Dendro's post and my emails, has stated that the walk from one site to another is no longer than 40 minutes. A Pum's range would NEVER be that wide and a 40 minute walk for them is not going to happen, so while the two may be very much alike, like different populations of Popas, Aquas, and many other morphs, I do not like seeing Darklands and Caucheroes or best guesses mixed.
I do have a bit more info for those who would like to read up on the two or for those who may think they just may have both different morphs.....

Darts with parasites are analogous to mixed tanks, there are no known benefits to the frogs with either.


If tone is more important to you than content, you are at the wrong place.

My new email address is: rich.frye@icloud.com and new phone number is 773 577 3476
Reply
#3

Quote:I do have a bit more info for those who would like to read up on the two or for those who may think they just may have both different morphs.....

I would love to read it. If it's too long to post, could you send via PM or I can send you my private email address (via PM).

Rob

E. anthonyi, D. imitator, C. azureiventris, D. amazonicus, D. lamasi (pan & pan gl), P. aurotaenia, D. variabilis, D. quinquevittatus, D. reticulatus, D. matecho, D. pumilio cauchero & escudos
Reply
#4

Here (dendroworld)is another post with a bit more info and my thoughts. I am still waiting on a couple guys input and first hand experience before I elaborate too much more. Hopefully soon though.

I guess one of my points I am trying to make is that even if a frog looks like another frog ,and even if those two frogs are in some way related ,and even if those two frogs MAY be linked somehow in a huge population of frogs, and even if they are both Pumilio , there may be a very good reason for NOT breeding the two frogs with each other.......


http://dendroworld.co.uk/forum/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=4448


Rich

Darts with parasites are analogous to mixed tanks, there are no known benefits to the frogs with either.


If tone is more important to you than content, you are at the wrong place.

My new email address is: rich.frye@icloud.com and new phone number is 773 577 3476
Reply
#5

Quote:very good reason for NOT breeding the two frogs with each other

I haven't heard a single person argue that these two frogs should be mixed so I don't think it will take much to convince us that this is a bad idea. Big Grin

Rob

E. anthonyi, D. imitator, C. azureiventris, D. amazonicus, D. lamasi (pan & pan gl), P. aurotaenia, D. variabilis, D. quinquevittatus, D. reticulatus, D. matecho, D. pumilio cauchero & escudos
Reply
#6

Rob,
Did you not read Tom's post on dendroworld about them (darks and caucheroes) being the same genetic animal?
In my mind his statement would give the greenlight to everyone in question, with either or both , to breed ahead.......

This is not an issue of splitting hairs, but an issue of not mutting when locals are offered.

Rich

Darts with parasites are analogous to mixed tanks, there are no known benefits to the frogs with either.


If tone is more important to you than content, you are at the wrong place.

My new email address is: rich.frye@icloud.com and new phone number is 773 577 3476
Reply
#7

Sorry, my last post was made before I read the link you sent.
Reply
#8

Yup, pretty relative to my post. Smile

Rich

Darts with parasites are analogous to mixed tanks, there are no known benefits to the frogs with either.


If tone is more important to you than content, you are at the wrong place.

My new email address is: rich.frye@icloud.com and new phone number is 773 577 3476
Reply
#9

This is part of the Dendroworld post and relative to the post,
The reason this issue has come up recently is that there are a few different breeding groups of either Darklands or Caucheroes here in the States.
This is my interest and take on the situation. Evolution has seen to the fact that darts can line breed and sustain themselves with a very small population without any genetic problems. Darts have a small range of movement and need to be able to breed within a smaller group than animals with a huge range farther up the evolutionary chain. Therefore a Dart population that has been essentially line breeding within the same 200 square meters will absolutely have different genetic traits that other Darts that been limited to another 200 square meter local , even if that local is only 5-10 miles away. In our hobby we see labels of Nancy, Basti, Popa, Colon, Aqua, ect. each an island unto itself and each with EXTREMELY varied populations of frogs on each given island. Genetically similar, yes, identical, no. I work with Pums with VERY specific site locals and have got quite a few out to the U.S. hobby. I am of the belief that Cayo de Aquas, Bastis, whatever Pum should not be bred , if local data is available (and here is the major problem both over here and over there) if they were collected on opposite ends of the Island, just the same as I believe that two blue frogs should not be bred if they were collected on opposite ends of the rage of the Darkland and Caucheroes as this would never ( thousands of year possibly) happen in nature . It should be our goal to keep our collections as true to what would be found in nature.

Rich

Darts with parasites are analogous to mixed tanks, there are no known benefits to the frogs with either.


If tone is more important to you than content, you are at the wrong place.

My new email address is: rich.frye@icloud.com and new phone number is 773 577 3476
Reply
#10

To add to that....

As I mentioned in a recent PM to you (Today Big Grin ) I have a pretty good feeling there are many isolated populations in geographic areas. I know the Cayo de Agua site where I stay for several days was certainly split off as the development in the area created barriers. I have noted that the area I was in contained no frogs (that I could find in 3 days) with the blue on their legs. This population in fact looked very similar to alot of the darker green animals you find on Popa with the exception of more yellow on the bellies than Popa.

So unfortunately without a very complete study of these sites with GPS information we will never know exactly what we are dealing with. I have my own opinions on just how far we should go in attempting to keep these apart. I also know that myself and at least one other person who are in the process of setting up these types of surveys. What is really critical to me is that this is done with good scientific method and meaningful statistical relevance. I am amazed at much of the information that circulated (even in peer reviewed journals) that simply is not good science.

If you speak with Brian Kubicki in Costa Rica he will tell you of his frustrations where "scientific experts" in group meetings are reclassifying species and ranking them "endangered or extinct" without doing the proper science and often without ever setting foot in the field! It seems that much of the good data I see now are coming from not the "scientific opinion leaders" but from folks like us who are passionate. The only problem there is many of the people are not familiar with proper scientific method which will give their results credibility and being truly deserving of publication.

It is my hope that we will be able to establish a reputable base for people who want to do this research to carry it out in a accurate and most importantly, consistent manner. It really does need to be apples to apples.

Anyhow...just some thoughts but I highly agree with Rich in that the current situation makes it extremely difficult for those who do want to not mix geographic populations as the number of animals collected with accurate data (and the ability to be sure of that) is extremely rare. It only takes one person to mislabel (even unknowingly not to mention those who just want to make money) a frog to forever render the efforts of those maintaining a certain importation etc frivolous.

Chris
Reply
#11

Some good info from Rich F:

Darklands , Buena Esperanza, and Caucheroes

There are by far, more blue pumilio in the U.S. hobby which are labeled Caucheroes (correctly) than any other locale. Many U.S. ‘Darklands’, in my mind, are mislabeled and are in fact, Caucheroes.

In the wild there may seem to be one somewhat continuous population of these blue pumilio, sometimes referred to as “Aguacate”, but there are quite a few natural barriers to inhibit a free flow of genetics, and as such, there is a fuzzy line as to what constitutes a locale within this morph. The locales of Darklands, Esperanza and Cauchero are one 'contiguous' population, but the outer opposite ends of the population absolutely will not interbreed; there are too many natural barriers. This has created a population of blue pums which start at one end to have certain traits like smaller size with much red , gradually moving to the other end and finding much larger solid blue...very fuzzy as to exactly where to draw the line, and that's only one example.
If you have one frog from one population and another frog from the same population, but 50 miles away from the first frog, those frogs will never breed in the wild, and it would take genetic drift how long to move the genes 50 miles?
Esperanzas happen to be closest to another local of frogs which usually shows more red than blue, or at least much more than the standard Esperanza, but less than Darklands. The progression from very large (Caucheros are about 15%, on average larger than Darklands) solid blue frogs to frogs which are smaller and have often red markings is something which should throw up a red flag when considering the mixing of any of these three 'blue pum' locales. Simply put, these three locals are quite different enough to raise the question of exactly where we draw the line on mixing any of these locals.
There are at least three froggers here in the U.S. who have advertised their blue pums as 'Darklands'. The information that I have collected from them and others has led me to the conclusion that many of the blue pums here are not darklands, but rather caucheros.

https://www.facebook.com/dartden/

https://twitter.com/DartDen


"Time flies like an arrow, fruit flies like a banana".
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 2 Guest(s)