Posts: 10,389
Threads: 871
Joined: Oct 2008
Breeding 'behaviour' , courtship or whatever you want to call it does not 100% make a sexual determination.
Calling = 100% male (for all intensive purposes)
NOT calling could still be a male...a suppressed male or a male frog that is not healthy.
and
Eggs = 100% female
Posts: 10,389
Threads: 871
Joined: Oct 2008
Seeing a lot of people advertise 'proven' without saying how many froglets were produced. I'm thinking there are still many people wanting to claim 'proven' when they have not gone the full measure to also state that they have produced froglets - a necessary component of using the word 'Proven".
Also...saying 'Very' proven is like saying....someone is 'Very' pregnant. The frog pairs or groups are either 'proven' - raised tadpoles to froglets or not proven. Neither are they 'very' proven.
Posts: 173
Threads: 17
Joined: Nov 2012
Should I refer to mine as a "we're trying" since I've had calling for a month and found a single clutch of 3 unfertilized eggs so far =)
Josh
Posts: 10,389
Threads: 871
Joined: Oct 2008
if you have just two frogs in that example,then you're lucky...and can at least say 1.1 !!
Posts: 173
Threads: 17
Joined: Nov 2012
I think I have a 1.2 because 2 of them are really plump and I've watched the other one call. I don't know for sure though, just a guess.
Josh
Posts: 10,389
Threads: 871
Joined: Oct 2008
I see these hobby definitions are becoming mainstream - one of the good things about forums. Forums are excellent at developing the hobby.
Posts: 10,389
Threads: 871
Joined: Oct 2008
yeah...like 'very pregnant'. What, are we talkin' the frog version of Octomom here ?
Posts: 10,389
Threads: 871
Joined: Oct 2008
still seeing people wanting SO badly to call their frogs 'proven' when they have not produced froglets.
Eggs = female
Calling (most species) = male
together = 1.1 or 'sexed pair'......not proven until froglets metamorph.
Another reason to take this extra step, is to try to help the new hobbyists. Often, people will embellish the breeding status of the frogs in order to make a quick sale or get rid of frogs they don't like. It's easier to say 'hey they laid eggs, or hey they have a tad in the water " ect, but until we have a froglet involved...they should not be considered proven.
Protect the hobby
Protect the newbies
Posts: 10,389
Threads: 871
Joined: Oct 2008
I'm seeing where all this terminology is starting to stick, and I couldn't be happier !
Now we need to work on 'very' proven. Same as 'Very' pregnant ? lol...not really a bad one there, I just like that one as it's pretty funny IMO.
Posts: 10,389
Threads: 871
Joined: Oct 2008
'Courting' is a descriptive term that needs to be Destroyed from the Hobby lexicon IMO. 'Courting' is one of the 'middle ground' terms that could in fact, mean nothing or be horribly wrong and it's just bad either way.
Posts: 10,389
Threads: 871
Joined: Oct 2008
Seeing a lot of people on the 'other board' saying they have a 'PAIR' of frogs or a 'TRIO" of frogs and man o man is this just plain wrong.
0.0.1
0.0.2
0.0.3
Anything else is downright deceptive and bad for the hobby.
Posts: 10,389
Threads: 871
Joined: Oct 2008
I see Patrick Nabors is selling 'pairs' of O. Pumilio on kingsnake.com.
I really hope they are 1.1 and not just 'two frogs'....
Posts: 10,389
Threads: 871
Joined: Oct 2008
Let's please not use the words 'likely pair' or 'courting' ect. Those are terribly vague and misleading.
