"Hybridizing”,Cross-breeding and Mixing Dart Frogs

[new2fatherhood]

I am extreamly new to the hobby still in the building stages of my viv. why can i mix frogs i still dont get it i just want all sorts of colors and dont plan on breeding anything (sounds to complicated for my taste) but just the colors might be cool to have. what if i had all females or maybe all males?? Would it still be a problem????

[ChrisK]

I am extreamly new to the hobby still in the building stages of my viv. why can i mix frogs i still dont get it i just want all sorts of colors and dont plan on breeding anything (sounds to complicated for my taste) but just the colors might be cool to have. what if i had all females or maybe all males?? Would it still be a problem????

Yeah - cross-contamination between species, same sex aggression (that you won't always see or recognize), overcrowding, and they will still breed even if you don't want them to if there are males and females together.

[Rusty_Shackleford]

I am extreamly new to the hobby still in the building stages of my viv. why can i mix frogs i still dont get it i just want all sorts of colors and dont plan on breeding anything (sounds to complicated for my taste) but just the colors might be cool to have. what if i had all females or maybe all males?? Would it still be a problem????

I agree with everything Chris said above. Plus the fact you are new to dart frogs and you don't yet know what normal behavior patterns look like. A frog in a mixed tank may show signs of stress or bullying. You might not be able to recognize those signals until it's too late. If you're interested in having a group of frogs, try a single species tank with one of the frogs that can do well as a group.


Sent from my iPhone via Tapatalk

[Stu&Shaz]

Me I'm in agreement with Jon and Chris aswell.

I'll try another angle to try and get our collective point across for you

New' there are many frogs that don't all look identical to each other within the same morph. granted darts frogs are colourful and stunning to look at,but believe me when i say they are so much more than just pretty frogs.

Their behaviour is fascinating and absorbing to observe breeding behaviour is amazing rearing tads and watching them turn into little tiny replicates of their parents is one of the most wonderful facets the natural world has to offer. All this can be seen from one morph of one species in a viv.

Your sig here is new 2 fatherhood.show your children this it will amaze them they will fall in love with nature and grow up caring.Let your offspring see dad carrying a tadpole on his back,I'm sure in years time when they can really articulate to you,they'll tell you how important this was to them.Oh and yes you'll understand our passion.why we want to keep what mum nature gave to us as it occurs in the wild. We might be somewhat alone in the herp world in really trying to keep our frogs as close to nature as possible,it's very simple to me why we are like this,just stare and absorb what she gave to us.

Oh and one viv of pure same morph dartfrogs,will give you enough momentum to grab another tank of another colour I'm sure,but grab that chance of a one morph viv first.
best

Stu

[Philsuma]

“Hybridizing”,Cross-breeding and Mixing Dart Frogs for personal pleasure or participation in the Dart Frog Hobby Community.

We need to start this discussion by realizing that it is not solely a matter of educating new hobbyists, when it comes to this issue. “Educating” implies that hobbyists are doing something wrong and need to be corrected, when in reality, they are just doing something that goes against someone else’s beliefs. This is large hobby and there is enough passion, interest and energy for all, provided we do not adversely affect things for future hobbyists down the road.

We all need to provide good, truthful reasons for why we personally choose not to mix or breed different species or morphs. We must be civil in our attempts to persuade others with opposing viewpoints and realize that not everyone is going to agree and/or change their mind right away or possibly ever.

The majority of the Dart Frog Hobby Community believes that mixing is bad for the hobby because it can lead to hybrid or cross morph frogs being produced and transferred to many other people and places. The reason we feel this is bad is because most Dart Frogs have a long life span and could enter and stay in the hobby - not labeled properly, for a long time. If mislabeled and questionable Dart Frogs circulate in the hobby, they can destroy attempts at trying to manage pure blood lines. The Hobby community realizes that its breeding efforts are unlikely be able to be used for species re-population in the event of extinction, but there are still valid reasons why we want to be able to maintain an accurate representation of what a certain species of dart frog looks and acts like, in nature. The more mixing, hybridization or even the threat or mention of it occurs, the more it will drive many hobbyists to seek to acquire wild caught stock. This definitely hurts conservation efforts. Many older and experienced hobbyists may even “shut their doors” and refuse to help or provide frogs to those seeking to create hybrids or mixed enclosures.

Even though it has been shown that success with mixed species enclosures is achievable, newcomers to the hobby should still start out with a single species, in order to gain the experience that is essential to basic Dart Frog care before trying to attempt a mixed species enclosure. Simply put, when a second or third separate species is added to an enclosure, the chance of something going wrong is accelerated 2 fold. That is the main reason that we direct all new hobbyists to a single species enclosure and not a mixed one.

If, however, you do decide to mix species or morphs, please take into consideration not creating hybrids and to use frogs that cannot breed with one another, like all males. Be prepared to cull any eggs that are produced. Research all the necessary information regarding mixed species enclosures well before attempting same (most information is found online in Forums) in order to make sure you have the best possible setup to be successful, and for the health of your frogs.

Here are some answers to a few questions that inevitably get brought up anytime there is a "mixing" or "Hybrid" discussion:

"I will cull every egg"....You won't find every egg and even froglets I never knew I had, pop up all the time in my vivs.

"Then I will cull those froglets or keep them, but I won't breed them"....In time, you will be overrun with froglets and won't be able to keep every one. Killing small froglets is not an easy thing to do for most people, as well.

"I will only transfer hybrid or crossed offspring to those hobbyists who specifically want then and they all will be informed as to what they are"....It is inevitable once someone gets bored/goes university/has children/moves house/passes away/needs money,then these frogs will have to go somewhere else. The easiest way to do this is to fail to disclose or even lie about what your frogs are (if hybrid). This is the core of the issue - the recirculation of unknown lineage animals at best, or at worst - the direct falsification or missrepresentation of certain dart frogs.

And finally,as Corny and trite as this may sound : The Frogs can’t speak to us. They are truly at our mercy when it comes to housing and caring for them. We all need to consider what is best for them, and not just what we selfishly want and desire.

[TheLordsPorter]

Hi gang! This discussion seems to confuse some issues for me based on nomenclature and I just want to be sure I am thinking correctly. The proper meaning of "Cross-breeding" is the interbreeding of species. For example, an Auratus and Leucomelas mix can be done according to the experts, but ill-advised because of the hybrids and other anomalies. I hope we are all in agreement on this definition, but what about the experts like Lotters who say, and have proven, tincs and auratus are polymorphic meaning: tincs are tincs, and auratus are auratus? (This does not go beyond these two and the thumbnails are a different bag altogether. Still, are Leucs just Leucs and the banded, find spot, etc., varieties are just man's designer inbred/line bred versions?)

Then we see the Sip and other frogs that we know are simply mixed tincs otherwise we live a lie and fool ourselves. Does it matter if the tinc w/ tinc, or auratus w/ auratus, mix WITHIN species occurred in the wild or a university lab, etc.? The purest says wild only, and then say "yeah a new tinc is found" when in reality it's just a polymorph genetic mixture of two tincs not the same variety albeit found under a jungle tree and not in a university study lab.

Lotters and their genetic comments show Polymorphism is exactly what prolongs, and is the root of, the survival of the species! THIS IS the reason for tinc or auratus evolutionary survival. Geography in the wild limits the degree of the mixture, not the impossibility or desirability of it in the context of desirability for species survival anywhere (wild or captive bred). This is why “new tincs” are found. NOT because they are new as tincs per se, but new mixes of tincs, i.e., tinc w/tinc and not of the same variety of tinc. This is what drove Lotters to make the harsh "utter nonsense" remark, because they do not relate to a new species or subspecies in the context of taxonomy at all, and are only new brand names for the varieties (poly-morphs) within the species.

For example, does anyone say a Sip is not a mixed tinc, or a Western Bakhuis not a cobalt? How about the Alanis and Inferalanis and yet line breeding Alanis variety of tincs clearly shows a trend TOWARD hybridism. Hence, the hybrid issue is about staying true to the Alanis as a variety, but misses the mark by prohibiting the tinc to be naturally polymorphic. The facts and science are opposite the thinking unless I misunderstood.

Every experienced breeder knows tincs in mixed tinc groups do NOT prefer a mate that looks identical to them and this is polymorphism by definition, so why do we try to think like a frog parent and say that color of mate is not good for you. Seriously, their natural selection and desire to survive is rooted in polymorphism and mixtures just like Lotters et al said. Studies show and prove polymorphic tinc w/ tinc mixes, for example, yield bigger, stronger, more social, and likely more prolific frogs as to offspring. THIS IS evolutionary survival at its finest and yet the hobby seems to avoid it while opting for a more dictorial set of operating rules based on guess that contradicts the science.

Also, does this thread say tinc/tinc and auratus/auratus same species variety mixes is bad? For example, and clarity, Giant Orange with Regina, or Cobalt with Azureus, etc. Assuming their offspring would not be hybrids and could propogate the species, is this evidence of them being OKAY and acceptable in the mind of the hobby? If so, why then are people quick to say they are bad IF IT COULD be proven they are genetically polymorphs by definition, and thus could occur naturally in the wild to survive? Isn't the hobby missing the beauty of the tinc and auratus because of thinking against the experts? I simply want the truth and thanks for suffering the question.

TheLordsPorter

[Philsuma]

Hi there,

You are Dillon Wascher's father right ? Dart Frog Warehouse ?

Using a pseudonym aside, I must admit that I was more than a bit miffed by reading your complex post. I feel very strongly that we have contributors to this very thread /topic that have provided an excellent effort towards explanation of our hobby definitions and reasoning behind mixing, crossbreeding,hybridizing and line breeding. To me, it seems like you have either not read this very thread or are purposefully posting your questions in a cognizant attempt to create the basis for drumming up support or permission to actively mix, crossbred, line breed or hybridize dart frogs.

I have looked at your website and business model, and it was clear that you wish to market 'new and specific' dart frogs- the various made-up names. I'm pretty sure you read the dozens of posts on the other forum directly relating to all of your questions above, as well....so I am left just as perplexed as to what more to say here, as well.

All the answers to your questions are in the various posts above...but I'll capsulate some here, with no mal intent.

1. The Lotters book is written by a German / European hobbyist. The U.S dart frog hobby is decidedly different in many aspects of husbandry, chiefly mixed species enclosures and cross breeding of different species and populations.

2. The U.S dart frog hobby is also very different , unlike the reptile hobbies - Ball pythons, leopard geckoes ect. There is no profit driven enterprise (as of yet) looking to make a pyramid or ponzi scheme out of getting people to invest in man-made or designer morphs of frogs.

3. Nature 'breeds' it's dart frog populations in hectares of wilderness and not in little Timmy or Johnny's basement. Using the argument that 'it occurs in nature so it can occur in our glass boxes' is weak and doesn't warrant effort to further discuss.

4. The hobby doesn't trust Timmy or Johnny playing frankenstein or Mendel and creating 'stuff'. We just aren't accepting or accommodating of it -see above posts as well.

Lastly, please don't take personal exception to my 'spirited' response. This is one topic that I feel strongly about. Please continue to post questions and add to the discussion if you are still inclined...I do NOT want to scare you away.

[RichFrye]

This is only one reason why , in my mind, an intro should be the first thing coming out of a person's first posting here.
There is more than enough (hundreds and hundreds over the decades...) well written posts here, there and everywhere allowing those who wish to do the slightest bit of studying to come away with good FACTS before drumming the mixing beat once again.
Generally it is not someone asking for info, rather someone asking permission or telling us that mixing is OK.

[Ghostvivs]

I see it now, designed morphs with this ™ after its made up name... once again these folks hobby is shown to be $ driven...

[edwardsatc]

I agree wholeheartedly with the responses given by Phil, Rich, and Ghostvivs.

Additionally:

I can't tell if you're just incredibly ignorant to the concepts of natural selection, polymorphism and populations or whether you are just trying to twist them to fit your agenda. Either way, you're way off the mark.

1. You discuss polymorphism as if it is a process. It is not. It is the result of evolutionary processes within a population.
2. Polymorphism is a term that is applied to the phenotypic variation within a panmictic population, not between one or more distinct populations.

But what about the experts like Lotters who say, and have proven, tincs and auratus are polymorphic meaning: tincs are tincs, and auratus are auratus?

What exactly are you trying to say they have "proven" and how have they "proven" it? If you're trying to say that all tinc populations are the same species then ...well duh? But, this ignores the differences in allopatric populations. And, this is where you seem to be disconnected from the general thinking within the hobby. Many (most?)of us are interested in preserving the integrity of lines which represent a population (locality).

This does not go beyond these two and the thumbnails are a different bag altogether.

Why would your version of evolutionary processes not extend beyond tinc and auratus populations? What makes thumbnails species any different from an evolutionary perspective? Are thumbnails somehow excluded from the basic tenets of evolution?

Still, are Leucs just Leucs and the banded, find spot, etc., varieties are just man's designer inbred/line bred versions?

...or just in name like SUNBEE?

Some may be line bred, others may not. There are certainly very distinct and widely geographically isolated populations which would suggest that there could be differences in phenotype.

Then we see the Sip and other frogs that we know are simply mixed tincs otherwise we live a lie and fool ourselves. Does it matter if the tinc w/ tinc, or auratus w/ auratus, mix WITHIN species occurred in the wild or a university lab, etc.? The purest says wild only, and then say "yeah a new tinc is found" when in reality it's just a polymorph genetic mixture of two tincs not the same variety albeit found under a jungle tree and not in a university study lab.

Bullshit ... Do intergrades exist where populations may occasionally overlap? Sure. Does this mean that all tincs are intergrades? Absolutely not, and to suggest that distinct non-interbreeding populations don't exist is just pure bull or incredible ignorance. In one sentence you question the existence of new populations of tinc yet in the very next sentence acknowledge that different tinc morphs exist. Which is it? I would suggest that you are the one living the lie and fooling yourself (or possibly trying to fool us).

Lotters and their genetic comments show Polymorphism is exactly what prolongs, and is the root of, the survival of the species! THIS IS the reason for tinc or auratus evolutionary survival. Geography in the wild limits the degree of the mixture, not the impossibility or desirability of it in the context of desirability for species survival anywhere (wild or captive bred).

The three sentences above clearly show your lack of understanding of evolutionary processes.

1. Polymorphism doesn't DO anything. It is a result NOT a process.

2. It is NOT the reason for evolutionary survival. Polymorphisms may or may not be a contributing factor depending on many genetic and environmental factors. Genetic variation does not always (in fact rarely) results in increased fitness or survival. Is an albino or six legged frog a genetic trait that would be beneficial to the survival of the species or would those traits be selected against?

3. A species does not "desire" survival and does not act in a conscious manner towards genetic variation (or stability) that may increase fitness and resulting survival. For the most part, genetic variation is random and has nothing to do with the "desire" of the organism or the population in which it resides.

This is why “new tincs” are found. NOT because they are new as tincs per se, but new mixes of tincs, i.e., tinc w/tinc and not of the same variety of tinc.

Again, how can there be "mixes" if, as you claim, they are all one in the same?

For example, does anyone say a Sip is not a mixed tinc, or a Western Bakhuis not a cobalt? How about the Alanis and Inferalanis and yet line breeding Alanis variety of tincs clearly shows a trend TOWARD hybridism. Hence, the hybrid issue is about staying true to the Alanis as a variety, but misses the mark by prohibiting the tinc to be naturally polymorphic. The facts and science are opposite the thinking unless I misunderstood.

Clearly, you've misunderstood.

Every experienced breeder knows tincs in mixed tinc groups do NOT prefer a mate that looks identical to them and this is polymorphism by definition, so why do we try to think like a frog parent and say that color of mate is not good for you.

Not every experienced breeder knows this ... because most experienced breeders do NOT mix populations! And, the empirical evidence is to the contrary. See Summers et al.

Seriously, their natural selection and desire to survive is rooted in polymorphism and mixtures just like Lotters et al said.

Huh? Seriuosly? Again, there seems to be no understanding whatsoever of evolutionary processes here. If there was an understanding, you what see how ludicrous that statement is ...

Studies show and prove polymorphic tinc w/ tinc mixes, for example, yield bigger, stronger, more social, and likely more prolific frogs as to offspring.

Really? Could you cite any of these studies that provide "proof"?

More social? I can't wait to read that "study".

Again, you use the word polymorphic in a way that in nonsensical. Polymorphism exists within a population ... so one would expect them to breed together.

THIS IS evolutionary survival at its finest and yet the hobby seems to avoid it while opting for a more dictorial set of operating rules based on guess that contradicts the science.

While more fit and fecund individuals may be beneficial to species survival, it is NOT "evolution at its finest" in the context in which you are trying to define it.

Also, does this thread say tinc/tinc and auratus/auratus same species variety mixes is bad? For example, and clarity, Giant Orange with Regina, or Cobalt with Azureus, etc. Assuming their offspring would not be hybrids and could propogate the species, is this evidence of them being OKAY and acceptable in the mind of the hobby? If so, why then are people quick to say they are bad IF IT COULD be proven they are genetically polymorphs by definition, and thus could occur naturally in the wild to survive? Isn't the hobby missing the beauty of the tinc and auratus because of thinking against the experts? I simply want the truth and thanks for suffering the question.

I'm exhausted from this post and regret wasting as much time on it as I have. The points you're trying to make in this paragraph have been addressed thousands of times in the forum. If the reasoning provided in all those posts is not enough for you, then debating it in this thread will not change anything.

[edwardsatc]

Also, does this thread say tinc/tinc and auratus/auratus same species variety mixes is bad? For example, and clarity, Giant Orange with Regina, or Cobalt with Azureus, etc. Assuming their offspring would not be hybrids and could propogate the species, is this evidence of them being OKAY and acceptable in the mind of the hobby? If so, why then are people quick to say they are bad IF IT COULD be proven they are genetically polymorphs by definition, and thus could occur naturally in the wild to survive? Isn't the hobby missing the beauty of the tinc and auratus because of thinking against the experts? I simply want the truth and thanks for suffering the question.

TheLordsPorter

One point of clarification;

I don't think anyone will deny that there are some questionable morphs in the hobby, but to infer that all tincs are just one big polymorphic population is just plain ignorant.

Cobalt and azureus a polymorphic population? Have fun providing evidence for that. You should look into the habitat in which azureus is found before trying to make that inference. Azureus probably the most geographically isolated tinc and only through recent DNA evidence were lumped into tinctorious.

[TheLordsPorter]

Wow! Thank you all! I am happy to see there is supervision and decorum over here.

EdwardSATC,
you are right, polymorphism is the result in the wild which means the species varieties do intermix, and Lotters et al., who spent years in the jungle observed this too as fact! You are absolutely wrong when you say Lotters said or intended "Polymorphism is a term that is applied to the phenotypic variation within a panmictic population, not between one or more distinct populations." Lotters et al. never said or intended that. They said the species is prone to variation because of the intermingling of the isolated populations with polymorphism being the result.

I never said there are not isolated populations out there. Of course there are.

I also never said tincs are one big polymorphic population so please, be more accurate, and do not obfuscate.

Now let's consider what you said, if Polymorphism is NOT the result of One or more (ONE? seems odd) isolated populations as you advocate and only a single "enclosed" (panmictic) population, then the names of the tincs Lotters et al., referenced as “utter nonsense” as being the result of polymorphism, are all from the same panmictic population as you advocate. If this is what you mean you proved my point better than me. Is that the reason for your last clarification, to try and pin your own erroneous statement on me? Relax, that cannot be what you mean and so you cannot be right in what you said. You do not get both.

When I said evolution, I mean adaptation in the context of evolving as to change over time in response to just about anything. By what you wrote you definitely and ardently agree with me, i.e., the populations started isolated and then they are not over time. Polymorphsim is that result we have today in the hobby and that is the context of Lotters comment, the hobby. As the result it must be evolution in the context of adaptation (e.g., even population movement / migration over time), simply because it exists (survived) now and not before, or time ceased. If they started as mixed populations, the issue is done. If they did not start as mixed populations then they mixed over time. To take your approach, i.e., they are polymoprhic within a population means they spawned variations from within, so why the fuss over keeping lines separate? In the context of progression and polymorphism being the result, this is not an either or, but a both I suspect as the result of evolution from the Garden. They both exist. I was trying to say that with my Sip reference. True Sips have always been debated. Thank you for clarifying in the way you did!

This hobby is awesome and yet there is no one level of purity.The question is: is what we see in the hobby today all from an isolated population or the exhibition of dominant traits of the mixed specimens? We are finding out which lines are the “purest”, but are you saying it is possible for an isolated population to spawn all of the varieties from within? Again, you prove my point better than me.

On your Summer reference, please give me the full citation, or tell me where I can get it. I may need to cite it as bogus or something disproved. We do hope to publish some papers on what we learn and thought the hobby (this board) might like a sneak peak, and credibility for peer review.The RESEARCH proves a much larger than statistical variation prefers a non-like variety as a mate. We know not everybody has done it, that is my point. People spout facts, sling references, and have no actual knowledge and it is difficult at times to parse it out, just reread your rebuke of me.

Admirably, Lotters and the gang are scientists, not swayed by popular opinion. Their position is Tincs are tincs, auratus are auratus, as the result, albeit polymorphic and IRREVERSIBLE, and genetic variation is benefited not by line/inbreeding but mixture (same variety or not?). Then hobby names are nonsense because they do NOT relate to taxonomy! Fo that metter, our own names are nonsense too, but franky Timmy and Johnny like the Apollo Tinctorius Oyapok better than having Oyapoks!

To say tincs never mix in the wild says isolated populations cannot mix. Mixtures between isolated populations (same variety or not) means they are no longer isolated. The question is, can the mixed offspring reproduce? The opinions are all over on that one. The posts and threads do not answer all the questions with facts and data. Has anybody proved or disproved the hybrid theory? We will! Any in species mixing we do is NOT cross-breeding. WE NEVER CROSS SPECIES AND NEVER WILL, NEVER EVER. To know our business model advancing the hobby, is to embrace the need for research of proven, reliable, facts and resultant products, not supplements that are half used and throw aways. (With that said, do we use the pure lines for this research or a mix to have isolated correlation to the data results. Again, how can we know, not merely say, Methylparaben is bad for breeding and stunts the growth of frogs without research. Mixed offspring is the best place to test stuff like that, not pure lines. BTW, don't use MP!)

Yes, as we said from the beginning and never hid this fact, we are Phenotyping tincs right now, and plan to move onto auratus. The conventional lines will ALWAYS be maintained as the baseline so purity in this way is paramount to us too. Our quality stands behind nobody, alongside some sure, but not behind. Fault me for my like for investigation, but not Dillon's quality in frogs, no way! We were stunned to learn the egg production we get out of our classical pairs because of how and what we feed and supplement, and yes you can gut load flies to a trace amount that does have an impact!! (Hence the no MP.)

This is the US Trademark registration application field in mid 2012 for our research is as follows:
Mark Image
Word Mark COLOR
Goods and Services IC 042. US 100 101. G & S: Scientific study and research in the field of reproduction, husbandry, and general health of captive bred reptiles and amphibians. FIRST USE (of the mark): 20130601. FIRST USE IN COMMERCE (of the mark): 20130901
Standard Characters Claimed
Mark Drawing Code (4) STANDARD CHARACTER MARK
Serial Number 85689544
Filing Date July 28, 2012
Current Basis 1B
Original Filing Basis 1B
Published for Opposition January 8, 2013
Owner (APPLICANT) Rick Wascher
Type of Mark SERVICE MARK
Register PRINCIPAL
Live/Dead Indicator LIVE

Spirited debate is fine, but guys, in the future please leave my sons out of this. Dillon is a genius at breeding and frog quality. We have Giant Orange he nurtured from egg through tad phases, all from the conventional lines, that are nearly three inches at 9 months old, azureus with legs so blue they look purple or black until they are hit with flash photos, and cobalt eye crests as orange as an orange terribilis! Yes we do keep our mainstay conventional frogs near and dear as our primary purpose, and we like the research and learning a lot. We hope you do too!

[RichFrye]

There is no debate here, a debate generally means that all parties comprehend (hopefully at least a base understanding) what they are talking about, and you do not.
When a total and absolute stranger blows in and drops some of the doosies you just have, expect to get blunt responses.
If your son was not selling on this very site I would have guessed you a troll. And, I agree with Donn in that long and well written answers here are a waste of time, being that there are hunndreds and hundreds and hundreds of posts through the years disproving what you are trying to sell us. And it is obvious you have not digested their meaning.

[edwardsatc]

1. The Lotters book is written by a German / European hobbyist. The U.S dart frog hobby is decidedly different in many aspects of husbandry, chiefly mixed species enclosures and cross breeding of different species and populations.

Actually, Dr. Stefan Lotters is a well known amphibian researcher with well over 100 peer reviewed publications.

Unfortunately, TheLordsPorter took things out of context and/or didn't understand what he was reading. For example:

This is what drove Lotters to make the harsh "utter nonsense" remark, because they do not relate to a new species or subspecies in the context of taxonomy at all, and are only new brand names for the varieties (poly-morphs) within the species.

Here is the actual verbiage from Lotters:

"Furthermore, there are terms such as variety, variant, race and others more. These are not systematic categories but only serve to express the variability within a species (e.g., Dendrobates tinctorius). This practice may sometimes lead to misunderstandings and misconceptions, and from a viewpoint of nomenclature it is utter nonsense."

Notice that they say from a "viewpoint of nomenclature". This is NOT implying that there are not separate and distinct populations with distinctive morphology.

If TheLordsPorter is indeed who we think he is, I think we should all continue do debunk the crap he is throwing out there. Because, as has been mentioned on both forums, this appears to be an attempt to justify designer frogs to which they can give fancy names and trademark.

[RichFrye]

Who do "we" think "he" is?

[edwardsatc]

Oh for cripes sake, now we're trademarking research? Well ,that's an insult to those of us who actually carry out real research. Not to mention the fact that it screams out "bias".

I've got to get away from this thread. My head hurts from bashing it against my desk ...

Luckily, I think we know that the backlash from admitting to designer frogs will doom this venture very quickly.

[edwardsatc]

Who do "we" think "he" is?

DartFrogWarehouse

[TheLordsPorter]

Hi there to you too!

Pseudonym? No. It is a board name as required. Not everyone uses their real name like Dillon.

We did not read all the stuff on the other board. We just quit.

In the context of what you wrote below:
1. The US and EU differences do not undermine the truth and power of Lotters, et al. work.
2. I do not understand the pyramid or ponzi scheme reference, but if you are seeking to name call or disparage us, then you are the board boss and can do what you wish. Man made, CAPTIVE BRED, designer morphs never suited for re-population is a cool idea, but some people hate glofish. I liked them until I found out most die before the juice sticks. Designed frogs will be superior genetically. Designer Frogs is a great name too! I am a big fan of trademarks. For example, aspirin was a trademark that somebody lost.
3. Nature breeds in the open, Captive Bred is in a box. Wow, I get it now, everyone has a drive for the wild and yet some refuse to admit the necessity of the box for health, purity, cleanliness, life span, etc. of the frog, and enjoyment for the owner. Dart frogs are still pets, box bred and raised.
4. Agreed, timmy and johnny probably should not breed if inexperienced, but having a cool frog pet in a box on your dresser in your room would have been awesome. I wish it were me decades ago!
5. I like this board. Toughness is good, being viscious and personally attacking is nonsense anywhere.

Yes, we are selling conventional pure line tincs at great prices, and will sell a Premium line too.

Our business model, and I would think the hobby, includes research that will, no doubt, benefit the captive bred sector. Captive bred frogs are not the same as wild caught. Captive bred quality is way better! The wild and imported wild caught ones are poison and disease prone, and they hurt the pet trade.

TheLordsPorter (Rick)

Hi there,

You are Dillon Wascher's father right ? Dart Frog Warehouse ?

Using a pseudonym aside, I must admit that I was more than a bit miffed by reading your complex post. I feel very strongly that we have contributors to this very thread /topic that have provided an excellent effort towards explanation of our hobby definitions and reasoning behind mixing, crossbreeding,hybridizing and line breeding. To me, it seems like you have either not read this very thread or are purposefully posting your questions in a cognizant attempt to create the basis for drumming up support or permission to actively mix, crossbred, line breed or hybridize dart frogs.

I have looked at your website and business model, and it was clear that you wish to market 'new and specific' dart frogs- the various made-up names. I'm pretty sure you read the dozens of posts on the other forum directly relating to all of your questions above, as well....so I am left just as perplexed as to what more to say here, as well.

All the answers to your questions are in the various posts above...but I'll capsulate some here, with no mal intent.

1. The Lotters book is written by a German / European hobbyist. The U.S dart frog hobby is decidedly different in many aspects of husbandry, chiefly mixed species enclosures and cross breeding of different species and populations.

2. The U.S dart frog hobby is also very different , unlike the reptile hobbies - Ball pythons, leopard geckoes ect. There is no profit driven enterprise (as of yet) looking to make a pyramid or ponzi scheme out of getting people to invest in man-made or designer morphs of frogs.

3. Nature 'breeds' it's dart frog populations in hectares of wilderness and not in little Timmy or Johnny's basement. Using the argument that 'it occurs in nature so it can occur in our glass boxes' is weak and doesn't warrant effort to further discuss.

4. The hobby doesn't trust Timmy or Johnny playing frankenstein or Mendel and creating 'stuff'. We just aren't accepting or accommodating of it -see above posts as well.

Lastly, please don't take personal exception to my 'spirited' response. This is one topic that I feel strongly about. Please continue to post questions and add to the discussion if you are still inclined...I do NOT want to scare you away.

[TheLordsPorter]

Wrong again Ed!

Dillon is DartFrogWarehouse, and does not pay for the sins of the dad!

Be a mench and go after me, not my kids!

BTW are you the same Ed that wrote the article on how to kill frogs and throw away Repashy supplement?

Who do "we" think "he" is?

DartFrogWarehouse

[edwardsatc]

^^^ I don't know about anyone else but what I see here is someone flipping the big middle finger to all of us ...