What is "line Breeding" ?

[RichFrye]

Rich,

That is the main purpose of the topic, To increase understanding. Throw in the terms you think should be used.

I know froggers like to go by locales. What differentiates these populations? How significant is it? I for one would test the differences. I would breed them together. Would these "mixed" locale offspring have any differences from aither of the two "pure" offspring. If not, why would we treat them as separate "lines".

Did you read the study by Dr. Summers ( the most known/noted pum/dart scientist I know) I posted last week specifically for you? The one that reported negative effects from out crossing pums ?

Large bodies of water can be barriers, mountains, dry patches of plains, altitude, ect., ect. One island to the next is pretty significant. So are very tall mountains. Darts don't like dry areas, so those count too. I guess big rivers unswimmable by humans , much less a tiny dart would also present a problem.

[BrianWI]

Did you read the study by Dr. Summers ( the most known/noted pum/dart scientist I know) I posted last week specifically for you? The one that reported negative effects from out crossing pums ?

Yep. But they tried it, just as I would want to. I am betting their are other species that the opposite would be found. Test matings are valuable.

[RichFrye]

Rich,

That is the main purpose of the topic, To increase understanding. Throw in the terms you think should be used.

To define terms used in the hobby, we need to use terms used in the hobby;



Wiki;
A stock of animals or plants within a species having a distinctive appearance and typically having been developed by deliberate selection.

Dictonary.com;
relatively homogenous group of animals within a species, developed and maintained by humans.

Webster's;
a group of usually domesticated animals or plants presumably related by descent from common ancestors and visibly similar in most characters




The common thread with all these definitions is the breed is created by man. So, no breeds out there in the wild.
Most of us want to make sure there are no dart breeds .
Again, this is a definition thread, so the correct use of breed is important. Use it as a verb and we are all fine.

[RichFrye]

Did you read the study by Dr. Summers ( the most known/noted pum/dart scientist I know) I posted last week specifically for you? The one that reported negative effects from out crossing pums ?

Yep. But they tried it, just as I would want to. I am betting their are other species that the opposite would be found. Test matings are valuable.

Would these "mixed" locale offspring have any differences from aither of the two "pure" offspring. If not, ([b]there are, as pointed out why would we treat them as separate "lines".[/b]

Hmm, you asked if there would be negative effect/s, and you already knew the answer?
Yes, there have been negative effects found, so they should be treated different (your words, not mine) , in our hobby, hobby, hobby...

If , if you do genetics , as a scientist, for a living, then by all means, experiment away.

[Rusty_Shackleford]

Rich,

That is the main purpose of the topic, To increase understanding. Throw in the terms you think should be used.

I know froggers like to go by locales. What differentiates these populations? How significant is it? I for one would test the differences. I would breed them together. Would these "mixed" locale offspring have any differences from aither of the two "pure" offspring. If not, why would we treat them as separate "lines".

Ok now Brian I'm sure you're looking for an argument like always. To mate two frogs of the same species but different locales is akin to mating two entirely different species together. Yes technically they are the same species, however they are from two completely different locales. So to mate them together would essentially from that point forward destroy the gene pool from the two very seperate, very distinct locales. Let me give you an example one that works very well. In Lake Malawi in Africa Cichlids dominate the ichthyofauna. Millions of years ago when the lake was young and just filling up there was just a few species of cichlid, they spread around the lake and enjoyed life. As the lake filled up the cichlids got separated from each other. They are now stuck in isolated pockets of rocks along the shore line, separating those "islands" of rock are vast stretches of sand. Now these rock dwelling cichlids won't cross these sandy stretches because of no cover from predators. So the populations became isolated and evolved over millions of years to separate species. Now you have a species of cichlid found around one group of rock and nowhere else in the lake. There are some species that managed to cross some of the sandy barriers to spread around the lake, and they have evolved into separate color morphs. Evolution is handing at an astounding rate, to the point ichthyologists are almost seeing new species evolve before they're eyes. Currently there are 450+ species of cichlids in Lake Malawi, each perfectly adapted to it's habitat and to the niche it fills. It has been said that had Charles Darwin studied Lake Malawi instead of the Galapagos Islands he would have written Origin of Species 20 years earlier than he did. Now here's where it comes back to frogs. The same thing is happening with dart frogs. These frogs, even the same species but different morphs are in separated populations. They are in "islands" of habitat. These frogs are evolving, eventually over time what we will have is not morphs, we will have entirely separate species. There will be no more Oophaga pumilio Isla Pastores and Oophaga pumilio Salt Creek for example, they will be renamed as totally separate different species. All of this is why the responsible frog keepers keep locales separate. They don't feel the need to play God and create some abhorrent monster frog. We are trying as best we can to keep the wild blood line as true as we can in captivity. Now either you're in, or you're out.

[Rusty_Shackleford]

Did you read the study by Dr. Summers ( the most known/noted pum/dart scientist I know) I posted last week specifically for you? The one that reported negative effects from out crossing pums ?

Yep. But they tried it, just as I would want to. I am betting their are other species that the opposite would be found. Test matings are valuable.

Would these "mixed" locale offspring have any differences from aither of the two "pure" offspring. If not, ([b]there are, as pointed out why would we treat them as separate "lines".[/b]

Hmm, you asked if there would be negative effect/s, and you already knew the answer?
Yes, there have been negative effects found, so they should be treated different (your words, not mine) , in our hobby, hobby, hobby...

If , if you do genetics , as a scientist, for a living, then by all means, experiment away.

Just stating for public record so everyone can take BrianWI with a grain of salt...or a salt mine.
Brian has only had his two frogs for about a month now. In fact he's not even keeping them properly as he has the two frog in a 12x12x18 used exo. I have questioned him several tiimes on his expertise and he refuses to provide any information backing up his claims, all the while refuting the likes of JP and Ed Kowalski, two noted frog scientists and frog hobbyists. He's certainly not an experience frog keeper, much less any type of geneticist.

[Philsuma]

I don't know if I'd put anyone on these forums on such a high pedestal Jon. I like much of what they say, but I also like to judge everyone by a large sample of their postings. Brian is putting out a lot of info and opinion and it's being consumed, filtered, examined and judged by the hobby. No problem there. There is also a large amount of rebuttal to his postings - also good for the hobby.

Rich has posted what I believe to be substantial pillar of the hobby. The majority of the hobby does not wish to see hybrids, crosses or line breeding. Franken frogs were made in the 90's, so if they would have been so popular...where are they now? I've been attending the largest East Coast Reptile show for over 20 years and I have NEVER seen a blatant engineered dart frog for sale - advertised. Are they afraid of retribution from a silly forum and that's why / Hiding or underground. No freaking way they would be scared of us and our silly righteous forums. The truth is, people really aren't that interested in designer frogs. Gecko's, ball pythons, corn snakes, yes...frogs....for some reason, no.

[Rusty_Shackleford]

I agree that a majority of the hobby absolutely wants no part of any designer, trait bred, hybrid, crossed frogs. Have you seen the April issue of Reptiles magazine? There was a huge article about the number of designer morphs of Madagascar Day Geckos now available. I was horrified. It's only a matter of time before people start doing it to frogs no matter what the majority of the hobby thinks. I'm worried about people mixing locales, then releasing those to the general frog public. I'm worried about the newbs who just want a pretty frog. If anybody does buy one of these frogs it only encourages the person that created it to make more. As far as this thread goes, I'm happy this is a good discussion, and very useful for pointing out that frogs are not dogs or any other domestic, line bred animal. Frogs in our hobby have a completely different management plan and comparisons should not be made.
I apologize if I made it seem like JP and ED are frog Gods. That was not my intention. It was to merely point out that while I don't take anything I hear or read as gospel there are times I do defer to people that are in a position of knowledge because of schooling or experience greater than myself.
Thanks Phil, great job as always.

[Philsuma]

No worries Jon...this is a good discussion. It's refreshing (to me) that Brian is presenting his points in an intelligent and thoughtful manner as opposed to the usual 'younger' mentalities that argue, lash out and storm off.

Thanks for the kind words as well.

[Rusty_Shackleford]

I'm just of the opinion that we should keep our captive wild animals as wild as possible. I'd like to know who was the first person to breed a lion and tiger together to come up with a liger. That's just ridiculous.

[Philsuma]

yep...I saw a Ligor in SoFL....saggy, obese as they are so prone to get. Unhealthy.

[RichFrye]

The problem, as always, is the fact that most all who want to "experiment" or "do a scientific study" do not have the training or facility or capacity to do so. They don't really want to do a scientific study. They just want mix up populations, create new colors or troll.

Let me ask this of anyone who would say they plan on, want to, should, would, do a mixing or selective experiment which purposely goes away from as natural a dart environment as possible...
Can you show me a peer reviewed scientific study which you have lead? Or would this be your very first scientific study , done in a scientific manner?
If the answer is the latter, chances are slim this will be your first.

[BrianWI]

To define terms used in the hobby, we need to use terms used in the hobby;

No, hobbies can evolve. They can strive to learn more than they know now. They can hope to overcome misconceptions. They can be better.

I reject that dart frogs in captivity have much to do with wild populations. People seem to always say something like "preserve the wild diversity", yet that isn't what they are doing. They are keeping pets.

If you want to learn the genetics, doing some selective breeding, crossing some locales, etc., will tell you valuable information.

Selection, despite popular belief, isn't bad. It is already being done, whether you want to admit it or not. When you begin to talk about combinations of two parent frogs and what genetics will come out in the offspring, it is like talking about grains of sand on a beach. If you breed for a trait, you may lose half those grains, but you still have more than you can count. There is not this line you cannot cross where if you do it, the frogs will be bad. Responsible selection can be better than random mating.

TI see people talking about how they don't know certain locales of imports, etc. Test matings may even help you there. If you breed them, see no noticeable differences, maybe you aren't bringing all frogdom to an early demise

Used to be a small rescue zoo nearby, they had a Lyger. BIG PUSSY CAT!

[BrianWI]

I know some of the "experts" like to try to do nothing but take away from these discussions, prove some tiny point to discredit the information. I am going to start ignoring those more and more. You can quibble the use of breed and its equivalency in dart frogs. But the translation to the morphs or locales from the term breed is part of the issue when relevant literature refers simply to "breed". I don't suggest they are breeds, rather that people are replacing that with various differentiators that may or may not be valid.

[RichFrye]

To define terms used in the hobby, we need to use terms used in the hobby;

No, hobbies can evolve. They can strive to learn more than they know now. They can hope to overcome misconceptions. They can be better.

You get "better" by using correct terms. Especially in a thread all about definitions.
There is no such thing as a dart "breed". Very simple ( multiple definitions provided) , yet you don't seem to understand...

If you want to learn the genetics, doing some selective breeding, crossing some locales, etc., will tell you valuable information.

Really? Tell me how exactly you personally would run a multi-generation test.
If you want to run real, actual scientific genetic testing, make sure you have the tools, and schooling, and facility. Most do not. You do not Brian.
Unless you have run one of those peer reviewed scientific studies I spoke of. Do you brian?

If you want to learn about genetics, go to school and learn.

Selection, despite popular belief, isn't bad.

It absolutely can be , and in the hands of those who simply wish to play around, this has been proven.

It is already being done, whether you want to admit it or not.

Did you read where I said we all selectively breed every time we select two frogs to breed together?

[
When you begin to talk about combinations of two parent frogs and what genetics will come out in the offspring, it is like talking about grains of sand on a beach. If you breed for a trait, you may lose half those grains, but you still have more than you can count. There is not this line you cannot cross where if you do it, the frogs will be bad. Responsible selection can be better than random mating.

In your personal dart frog experience, what exactly constitutes responsible selection? Because in my experience when someone has zero dart experience they also have zero experience in responsible dart frog selection (they simply don't what what they are looking at or what to look for) for genetic "testing"...

TI see people talking about how they don't know certain locales of imports, etc. Test matings may even help you there.

How, exactly? DNA testing , or mixing locales?

If you breed them, see no noticeable differences, maybe you aren't bringing all frogdom to an early demise

For how many generations? See? Aesthetics are all you care about? How about other non-visible effects? Do you know dart husbandry enough to know what a non-aesthetic effect is?
As stated earlier, I have provided proof of negative effects in both aesthetics and breeding from mixing locales , much less species.

[RichFrye]

I know some of the "experts" like to try to do nothing but take away from these discussions, prove some tiny point to discredit the information. I am going to start ignoring those more and more. You can quibble the use of breed and its equivalency in dart frogs. But the translation to the morphs or locales from the term breed is part of the issue when relevant literature refers simply to "breed". I don't suggest they are breeds, rather that people are replacing that with various differentiators that may or may not be valid.

Brian, you can ignore valid points all you like, but it does not change the fact that you are wrong on a lot of points.
You are not a scientist, nor do you have formal genetic schooling to the point of running any peer reviewed studies.
You are extremely new to darts, so you don't know much about them, the hobby, the wild, at all really.
And, you want to either argue or complain when someone explains you are wrong in your new hobby views.
You are not teaching anybody, and it's clear you don't want to learn anything either.
So, address the scientific points we bring up or and stop complaining when people point out you are not the genetic expert you claim to be.

You used the term breed. You now know it's totally moot in our hobby. Live and learn.

[Rusty_Shackleford]

To define terms used in the hobby, we need to use terms used in the hobby;

No, hobbies can evolve. They can strive to learn more than they know now. They can hope to overcome misconceptions. They can be better.

I reject that dart frogs in captivity have much to do with wild populations. People seem to always say something like "preserve the wild diversity", yet that isn't what they are doing. They are keeping pets.

If you want to learn the genetics, doing some selective breeding, crossing some locales, etc., will tell you valuable information.

Selection, despite popular belief, isn't bad. It is already being done, whether you want to admit it or not. When you begin to talk about combinations of two parent frogs and what genetics will come out in the offspring, it is like talking about grains of sand on a beach. If you breed for a trait, you may lose half those grains, but you still have more than you can count. There is not this line you cannot cross where if you do it, the frogs will be bad. Responsible selection can be better than random mating.

TI see people talking about how they don't know certain locales of imports, etc. Test matings may even help you there. If you breed them, see no noticeable differences, maybe you aren't bringing all frogdom to an early demise

Used to be a small rescue zoo nearby, they had a Lyger. BIG PUSSY CAT!

Wow! Cross breeding different locales? Really? Brian, the whole point of trying to obtain locale data and keeping locale specific frogs separate is to keep the blood line pure, something you obviously care nothing about. Crossing two separate locales together is not selection, it's a travesty. Locale specific frogs do not, nor will they ever interbreed in the wild with other locale specific frogs. They are identified as a population that occurs in one specific area. They are not ever ever ever mixed with other same species frogs from a different locale. To do so would ruin what nature too millions of years to accomplish. Who do you think you are to play God? Please please do share what valuable information you will be learning by crossing two locales? I suppose a Lyger or Liger whatever, is ok in your book too? Two animals that would never ever ever come across each other in the wild and mate. If that's the way you think, go buy some parrot cichlids, they are perfect for you. Created in a petri dish, just what you're looking for. As for myself and 99.999% of the rest of the dart frog hobby, we'll keep our darts pure and wild thank you.
I'm gonna call it like it is. IMO you're a troll and no good for this hobby. But keep talking so the rest of the hobby will know too.

[BrianWI]

Rich,

Before I start ignoring your rants, I'll post to you one last time. Your assumptions are all wrong. I know in order to "feel" important, you need to try to bring me down. I do not have any need to prove anything to you. I am correct. I know I am correct. And I know you just want a pissing contest to make you feel better. But I don't care about your ego in the slightest.

I have already told people more than is necessary. My degrees are in Engineering and Mathematics. I will give you yet one last clue. Look up biomathematics. Last time I identified a study I was in, the now-retired department head got phone calls from nosey people asking stupid questions. Since some of you like to be stalkers, I no longer give out that info.

I will continue to work within the limits of terminology and what exists. If you don't understand the links between breeds, landraces, morphs, locales, etc., I do not care. I suggest you just don't participate at all. I will help others that want to learn and you hopefully can control yourself. Don't even read my posts.

For everyone else... most of what you read will talk about breeds. There just is more information on domestic animals and genetics. Some will say domestic animals are irrelevant; they are wrong. Just replace "breed" with what term you are working with. In dart frogs, the two most common I have seen are locale and morph. 99% of the genetics information will still apply.

One other thing I think is helpful: if you do see a trait you are interested in (like a tone or color depth) record it. Even if you don't directly breed for it (and you could if you wanted to, a single mating isn't even distinguishable between selection and random), if you see it pop up again, you may be able to look back at your records and identify what you saw. This is where you will start picking up knowledge. Visible traits tend to be much easier to work with, but after you learn them, other things will make sense, even if harder to identify.

[RichFrye]

Without picking apart this ^ nonsense , as a bunch of us have already done , here and elsewhere (and wasted our time agreeing with each other, but get incorrectly thought out, bad, bad BS back for our rewards from Brian) I'll just point out again the points we have made, which Brian dodges, cannot fix or can not address.

Brian does not know the hobby, the terms, the frogs, the wild, the genetics, nor the science behind what he attempts to speak to.
Please don't listen to those who play at being scientists. If this is a "rant" so be it. It would be a milder one from me.
Pretty much somes it up without too much energy wasted again.

Rich

[Rusty_Shackleford]

I'm done with work for the day and unlike Rich I have PLENTY of energy to waste. Frogs, are fed, tads are fed, cultures made, I've got all day.

Brian, you have absolutely no clue, not one iota of what you're talking about. Sure certain crosses could be valuable to science, certainly not to the hobby. Brian, you are no scientist. You have no clue of the scientific procedures, terms it would take to do a study that would produce any viable results. You don't have the facility, means, resources or the 200 plus frogs it would take to make such a study even yield relevant results. Leave science to the pros.
I strongly encourage you to come to Frog Day in Chicago and LEARN!!! We would all love to meet you, ok not really.
Just be warned, we do random checks at the IL/WI border looking for Packer fans lol.