Poll - How should 'Paru' oophaga sylvatica be managed ?

[goods]

Phil, who's Adam?

[Philsuma]

Phil, who's Adam?

lol...who knows? ...I probably got the name wrong. So many people (you too) don't use names and it's so hard to carry on a conversation of meaning and depth when you have no idea of the name of the human being you are addressing.

and then you have the 'Brotherly Monkey/Bobby/whatever stuff screwing things up....

Sorry. Pardon the 'name mix-ups', now and in the future.

[goods]

No worries...I was just making sure I wasn't missing out on pictures from Adam H. (thedude), and just added my name to my signature...been meaning to do it for a while. I just took the time to figure it out.

Phil, who's Adam?

lol...who knows? ...I probably got the name wrong. So many people (you too) don't use names and it's so hard to carry on a conversation of meaning and depth when you have no idea of the name of the human being you are addressing.

and then you have the 'Brotherly Monkey/Bobby/whatever stuff screwing things up....

Sorry. Pardon the 'name mix-ups', now and in the future.

[ChrisK]

http://notiwikiri.blogspot.com/

[SmackoftheGods]

We're still on this subject, huh?

One thing that I like about Rich is his dedication to finding out the truth. I've also met him in person and we've had disagreements in person that didn't get nearly this out of hand. I know that Rich is capable of having a reasonable discussion, even when he's upset or disagrees about things, but I don't know why he chooses the role of antagonist on the boards.

I've been working with Chris (that's Tuckinrim8, by the way) for seven years now. He sold me my first dart and I've never gone back. His tanks are amazing and he has a magic touch with darts... even the "hard to breed frogs" breed like rabbits for him.

Chris, awesome pictures. And I can personally testify to how similarly your second group (submissive female and new male) look. I'll be interested to see how they turn out. Some people here don't know, but I'm heading to Seattle for law school at the end of the summer and I'm entrusting Chris with many of my frogs, including two male Paru. One of the males I offered looks very similar to his dominant female (the difference only really being the size of spots). I'd be very interested to see how those frogs, bred together would work out. Just for the sake of science.... As I recall, I think you expressed some interest in that project as well.

Rich, I'm going to disagree with your stance on the Paru. I feel like WIKIRI has been very transparent with us. They've published multiple articles discussing the Paru and why they think there's so much variability. They have stated that the locale of Otokiki is a cross section of the Lita and San Lorenzo locales. Whether the two locales were introduced accidentally by human intervention or whether it's natural, it doesn't matter. It's you yourself who said "you can't unmix." It reminds me of the white-banded fantasticus. Mark Pepper is convinced that the white-banded are a cross between summersi and fants caused by human intervention. But that doesn't keep us from working with them, and we're certainly not encouraged to keep summersi-looking white banded together and fantastica-looking white banded together.

Ultimately I look at the creators of this project. Mark Pepper and WIKIRI are both active conservationists assuring us that this is a natural (or semi-natural) founding stock. I believe that we can breed them however we like because I believe in their projects. Just the same way that when Rich says he has site-specific pumilio I believe him, even though I don't have the locale data and he hasn't published any articles (scientific or otherwise) about his projects.

I usually subscribe to this mentality, but in this case I think it's applicable "they're your frogs, do what you want."

[RichFrye]

We're still on this subject, huh?

Yes, before the scientific studies prove what's going on, yes, Phil bumped a bunch of paru threads.

But that doesn't keep us from working with them, and we're certainly not encouraged to keep summersi-looking white banded together and fantastica-looking white banded together.

It most certainly keeps some of us from wanting to work with hybrids, yes.

Just the same way that when Rich says he has site-specific pumilio I believe him, even though I don't have the locale data and he hasn't published any articles (scientific or otherwise) about his projects.


You sir have never read the Jason Juchems' FOIA revolving aroud the proof and it's world wide broadcasting????

I usually subscribe to this mentality, but in this case I think it's applicable "they're your frogs, do what you want."[/quote]

Whatever makes people happy, huh?

In the mean tinme, here, once again, is exactly how "transparent" WIRIKI has been, and continues to be;




by RichFrye » Mon Oct 08, 2012 9:59 am

Here are the emails sent and email received and dates.
As of yet I have not received any replies to my second or third emails. There was no info sent on how these should be bred. The two papers mentioned pertain to general breeding info (not Paru specific at all) when good info about founding groups have been provided. Not relevant to this case at all.
Simple questions asked to those who should know the answers and be able to give out info on how we should breed these frogs.
I must say I am disappointed with the lack of information given.




De: richfrye@comcast.net [mailto:richfrye@comcast.net]
Enviado el: martes, 18 de septiembre de 2012 13:27
Para: info@wikiri.com.ec
Asunto: Paru Sylvaticus


To whom it may concern,

I will be acquiring at least a pair of your 'Paru' Sylvatica, and would hope to work with even more in the near future,

I would very much love to get any and all information you may have concerning the process in which the frogs were collected, divided for breeding and any other information not already being put out to the general public.

I inquire for the purposes of the combining best and most natural breeding groups due the many morphs being presented and sold.
Thank you in advance for any and all information,

Rich Frye




From: info@wikiri.com.ec
To: richfrye@comcast.net
Sent: Wednesday, September 19, 2012 5:01:48 PM
Subject: RV: Paru Sylvaticus




Dear Rich,

Glad you are interested in breeding frogs of the "Paru" morph farmed by Wikiri SA at the Otokiki Reserve near Alto Tambo, Provincia de Esmeraldas.


Below we answer some of your questions.

We have provided Understory Enterprises a note entitled: "Insight into the natural variation of the "Paru" Oophaga sylvatica" written by Dr. Luis A. Coloma (See below).


Founder individuals were not selected by their color or any other features for breeding in controlled quadrats.


The frogs farmed (as metamorphs) by Wikiri represent the natural variation (at the metamorph stage) occurring at the exact same site and no artificial selection processes were carried out.


Metamorphs are being ranched in an aleatory manner. They may well be considered founders (of one group representing a highly variable population) for your breeding purposes.


Dr. Coloma and others will be publishing results of their work in scientific papers. Gathering data and publishing the papers will certainly will take not less than a couple of years from now. As you might understand, until the papers are published they prefer to keep the details and most of the information of their work in private. Nonetheless, they just provided Wikiri SA some references which might help on your work.


Regarding making appropriate combinations in trying to keep most of the variation of this natural population from the Otokiki reserve; they suggest the attached two articles (and references therein) for breeding guidelines and population management:


Frankham 2008
AARK Amphibian population management guidelines.


Best regards,

Ecn. Lola Guarderas
Gerente General
WIKIRI S.A.
Quito - Ecuador


Insight into the natural variation of the "Paru" Oophaga sylvatica - By Luis A. Coloma

de Understory Enterprises Inc., el El Martes, 8 de mayo de 2012 a la(s) 18:58 ·Individuals of the the Paru morph of Oophaga sylvatica (= Dendrobates sylvaticus) exported by Wikiri come from the Otokiki reserve. Otokiki reserve is located at the Alto Tambo region at an altiude of about 600-700 meters above sea level. Amount of color pattern variation within this Otokiki population, which occurs naturally, is perplexing.

At Otokiki, similar large variation in colors and patterns is seen in 3 enriched closed quadrats as well as in one enriched open quadrat, and in the control (not enriched) quadrat.

We have documented a great amount of intrapopulation variation towards the east of Alto Tambo, at Guadual (near Lita, Esmeraldas province), as well. Less color pattern variation is seen in lowland populations at Durango and Playón de San Francisco in Esmeraldas province, which depict more uniform colors.

How to interpret this variation and which are its causes?

Underlying causes of this intrapopulation variation are largely unknown and currently are a matter of speculation. For now, I am reluctant to interpret this variation as the result of hybridization, a phenomenon that can occur between species as a result of primary or secondary contact (after a period of isolation). Underlying factors behind the observed variation probably are in the evolutionary history of this population (somehow the historical human intervention in the area could have played a role as well) (not Wikiri manipulation).

Understanding the mechanisms that promote intra population divergence (such as the one observed at Otokiki reserve) and interpopulation divergence (such as the one among popualtions of O. sylvatica in the pacific lowlands of Ecuador and Colombia), and ultimately speciation is one of the most challenging and intriguing tasks in evolutionary biology. Geographical barriers, ecological gradients, genetic drift, and sexual selection are the main mechanisms (currently speculative for O. sylvatica populations, as I mentioned before) invoked to explain these processes, which are shaping the variation observed.

Centro Jambatu is very interested in explaining the evolution of coloration, morphology and behavior within and among populations of Oophaga sylvatica. We have begun a study in that sense in cooperation with a researcher at Texas, who is currently moving to Harvard University. At this time we are in the planning process and hopefully we will be doing field, molecular, and experimental work, beginning next year. The Otokiki population will becritical because of its huge coloration variability.

For a better understanding of this variation and its evolution, we need to conduct fine-tuned studies including morphological descriptions in relation to behavior, geography, and molecular population genetic structure. Also, we need to conduct lab controlled experiments to see its results. We will need to set up crosses between color morphs in order to identify color specific SNPs (single nucleotide polymorphisms) and then examine the expression bias of parental alleles in the offspring. We will study behavioral issues and also we will address questions of color determination.
Finally, I think the people who love these frogs are very lucky to have Wikiri providing farm raised frogs from a population that depicts such a great intrapopulation variation, which include dull and bright colored individuals, spotted and non-spotted frogs, orange, red, yellow and brown colors. Hopefully this variation can be preserved at the site (Otokiki). Backup populations under care of hobbyists are also important as an ex situ tool helping integrative conservation strategies. Elicio just came back from Otokiki and told us that the piece of jungle (about 140 acres) adjacent to the reserve has begun to be destroyed.

Luis A. Coloma
Centro Jambatu de Investigación y Conservación de Anfibios
Fundación Otonga



Sent By:
richfrye@comcast.net On: Sep 09/28/12 8:43 PM

To: info@wikiri.com.ec

Hello Ms. Guarderas,

I sent this email below a week ago and had not yet received a reply. My first email was answered so fast I thought I should re-send this email to you to make sure you had received my second inquiry.

Thanks once again for taking time to try to answer all my questions. I very much look forward to your reply and more info on these frogs;







Thank you for your fast reply.


I had read Dr. Coloma's report in the past a number of times. My concerns are the lack of understanding why this may be the only vastly polymorphic population of dart frogs reported in the world. And his writings that they may have been manipulated by others (not WIKIRI) and the fact he could not rule out hybridization as one possible explanation.


So my mains questions remain, how exactly were frogs chosen from the natural areas of the preserve? If one group was collected on one end of the property were other groups also collected on opposite ends of the 140 acres ? How exactly were groups chosen and place in controlled quadrant/breeding pens? I understand they were not selected by color, but how exactly were they collected and divided? Are there islands within the 140 acres with certain phenotypes? And what thought process was used before scientific studies have been completed?


There is really no scientific information/write up on how exactly to bred the frogs. I would suggest like phenotype to like phenotype until genetic testing has been completed and written up. Does this sound a proper breeding situation?


I again thank you greatly for the quick reply and hope my questions can be answered . I am very much looking forward to breeding these frogs we now have in country as natural as possible,


Rich Frye









Now, as I have stated for about the tenth time in as many posts...science, when in doubt is a great tool to actualy find the truth.
WIRIKI has stated (see above email chain) that they are doing studies to find out the answers about these frogs, be they humanly manipulated more or less than some speculate, and I'll be 100% fine with a peer reviewed paper or hopefully papers.
Why you trust me, or trust Chris or trust both of us or neither really does not play into where most of us are at in the head scratching department today , at this stage. Opinios have been repeated and repeated until all we have left to do is wait, yes wait.
If anyone can definitely answer my pointed questions (email chain, again) with any accuracy at all, including WIRIKI, please , please for the love of god do so, or wait for real info , as I am.
I understand that those who have already started working with these before the questions have all been answered may have other feelings as to what exactly happens after, after real studies have been completed...but that's just one simple reason why I have chosen to pass on these until my simple, pointed questions get answered in a scientific peer reviewed paper which has been promised, at a later date. What has been broadcast is a sales pitch for a for profit company, not a scientific study. Clear as day.
Opinions or speculation on people or situations revolving around the paru frogs? I'm not interested at this point.

[SmackoftheGods]

That's fine, Rich. Allow me to elaborate on a point apparently missed by you in my last post without referring to the reputation of anyone.

You're "picking nits" as you so eloquently put it in this thread. They gave you ample information in their responses to you, it seems to me that they expected you to figure out what to do with your frogs.... With as much information as they gave you, I probably wouldn't have bothered to respond to your second e-mail either. Not with as much on their plate as I'm sure they have. You want to be spoon-fed the answers, and until you get it you won't be satisfied with the logical conclusions the rest of us have already been willing to make.

The "why" no longer matters. It's a very interesting question, but it holds no place in the determination of which frogs to breed with which. Not anymore. Why these frogs appear this way just doesn't matter. The founders of the project didn't export any of their founding stock. They bred their founding stock amongst each other and shipped the offspring out. So, whether there is a natural phonetypic gradient in a smallish space, or whether WIKIRI agents intentionally put one Lita and one San Lorenzo together intentionally (no, I don't believe that's what happened), it does not matter. You said it yourself, what's been mixed cannot be unmixed. When I got my box, I got a few intermediaries, and then I got a frog that looked very much like a Lita, but it obviously wasn't a Lita, and I got one that looked very much like a San Lorenzo, but it obviously wasn't a San Lorenzo. If the variation we're seeing in the Paru is natural, then great! We should probably mix phenotypes. And if the variation we're seeing in the Paru is unnatural, well that sucks... but the only thing we're getting in the hobby is unnatural mixes (if that's the case) and so it doesn't matter if we mix like to like or have a mixed bag anyway, because the damage has been done....

We shouldn't treat these frogs like we do most other hybrids. When Troy and Richard Lynch (for example) were working on their cross-breeding projects, there were big concerns. A concern that they wouldn't be able to sell their hybrids and so they would relabel them as something in the hobby and contaminate pure lines (for instance). But we don't have those issues here. Just like we don't have that issue with the White Banded fantasticus. They're labeled as they are. They are "Paru," they're not going to be interbred with "pure" morphs of sylvaticus.

Now, if you want to turn this thread into a moral one of "Should I work with Paru, I am against working with unnatural hybrids" then yes, the "why" questions are important. And it's very good that you're patient, because it seems like WIKIRI is working on an answer to your "why" questions. But telling hobbyists how to work with a frog that is either natural or unnatural, but either way there's no way to fix it, is simply elitist. I don't use that word often in the frog hobby, but in this case it applies.

You declared yourself a pragmatist in this thread. Use your logic. Mine is the logical conclusion.

This is not often my stance, but in this case, yes, Rich, whatever makes people happy.

[SmackoftheGods]

By the way, I just reread the last line of my first post in this thread. I meant to say "I DON'T usually subscribe to this mentality, but I think in this case it applies." It makes a big difference....

[RichFrye]

That's fine, Rich. Allow me to elaborate on a point apparently missed by you in my last post without referring to the reputation of anyone.

I doubt that I have , in reading every single paru post over the last 'x' amount of months that I somehow "missed" any point being made by the 'what's done is done, enjoy' brigade.
I have not missed any of the points , nor have I missed the jabs , be they direct as with Chris calling me a dick or somewhat more indirect as with your opening jab here.
I'm perfectly capable of digesting what's been written here during the whole process Jake.

You're "picking nits" as you so eloquently put it in this thread. They gave you ample information in their responses to you, it seems to me that they expected you to figure out what to do with your frogs.... With as much information as they gave you, I probably wouldn't have bothered to respond to your second e-mail either. Not with as much on their plate as I'm sure they have. You want to be spoon-fed the answers, and until you get it you won't be satisfied with the logical conclusions the rest of us have already been willing to make.

Simply put, the opinion that we all have ample information about how to breed these frogs is in no way a feeling held by everyone working with or considering working with these frogs. And I will elaborate, once again, later in this post.
I'm a potential customer asking questions of a business attempting to sell expensive frogs. I have a right (and was actually told to email WIRIKI by Mark Pepper) to ask simple , relevant questions and get pointed factual answers to those questions.

The "why" no longer matters. It's a very interesting question, but it holds no place in the determination of which frogs to breed with which. Not anymore. Why these frogs appear this way just doesn't matter. The founders of the project didn't export any of their founding stock. They bred their founding stock amongst each other and shipped the offspring out. So, whether there is a natural phonetypic gradient in a smallish space, or whether WIKIRI agents intentionally put one Lita and one San Lorenzo together intentionally (no, I don't believe that's what happened), it does not matter. You said it yourself, what's been mixed cannot be unmixed. When I got my box, I got a few intermediaries, and then I got a frog that looked very much like a Lita, but it obviously wasn't a Lita, and I got one that looked very much like a San Lorenzo, but it obviously wasn't a San Lorenzo. If the variation we're seeing in the Paru is natural, then great! We should probably mix phenotypes. And if the variation we're seeing in the Paru is unnatural, well that sucks... but the only thing we're getting in the hobby is unnatural mixes (if that's the case) and so it doesn't matter if we mix like to like or have a mixed bag anyway, because the damage has been done....

How exactly did the founding breeding groups get collected and divided? (reasoning behind what was collected from where and how they were divided up in separate breeding pens)
Separate breeding pens could mean (please, please) there was some thought that on the far side of the reserve there were frogs which looked like 'x' while on the side of the preserve farthest away from 'x' frogs tend to look a bit more like 'y' and therefore are in a pen for breeding based on a 'y' phenotype.
If the above reasoning ( or any reasoning aside from total lumping) was used as opposed to a 'let's build separate pens but mix all of them together' approach then I see a great need to at least attempt to manage these frogs based on the assumption there was a plan as opposed to 'do what you want as long as it's enjoyable to you.'
But, without any real hard data on this veritable wonderland of dart uniqueness, we are once again left to speculate.
If there was a verifiable plan on the divisions ahead of time , we have a hope for management. If there was no plan at all then I fail to see how a plan could be anything more than 'enjoy and do as you like'. Not exactly a scientific approach to husbandry management.

We shouldn't treat these frogs like we do most other hybrids. When Troy and Richard Lynch (for example) were working on their cross-breeding projects, there were big concerns. A concern that they wouldn't be able to sell their hybrids and so they would relabel them as something in the hobby and contaminate pure lines (for instance). But we don't have those issues here. Just like we don't have that issue with the White Banded fantasticus. They're labeled as they are. They are "Paru," they're not going to be interbred with "pure" morphs of sylvaticus.

Ah, but you see, there are issues with the fantasticus . There have been issues with breeding , aside from the other issues hybrids bring to the table.
I'm glad that you can read the future and that you know for a fact that guys like Taron won't take advantage of the paru which look like 'x' locale.

Now, if you want to turn this thread into a moral one of "Should I work with Paru, I am against working with unnatural hybrids" then yes, the "why" questions are important. And it's very good that you're patient, because it seems like WIKIRI is working on an answer to your "why" questions. But telling hobbyists how to work with a frog that is either natural or unnatural, but either way there's no way to fix it, is simply elitist. I don't use that word often in the frog hobby, but in this case it applies.

You declared yourself a pragmatist in this thread. Use your logic. Mine is the logical conclusion.

This is not often my stance, but in this case, yes, Rich, whatever makes people happy.

I have yet to read a paper saying that these paru are hybrids. But , if they turn out to be a huge mix of locales I do not plan to work with any that have come in in the past, in the past.
If, the studies show that there is a need for division for optimal husbandry and that we have absolute phenotypes that can be divided amongst the different phenotypes hopping around the preserve, and WIRIKI decides to start placing like phenotype together for future, future breeding projects...I'm all over that. Time will tell.

To say what's done is done and what is mixed can not be unmixed, no way to fix 'it' , so "enjoy", just sounds like a sales pitch.
Studies come first. Then answers. Then a management plan.

My logic is very easy to digest. It may be impossible to manage the paru that have come in in the past to my personal standards. It may be possible to manage future paru to my personal standards. I wait for future scientific information to help me make up my mind about my future participation with paru frogs.

I have yet to read a text book with the term "whatever makes you happy" as an actual husbandry management plan.

[Tuckinrim8]

I have not missed any of the points , nor have I missed the jabs , be they direct as with Chris calling me a dick or somewhat more indirect as with your opening jab here.

Reread what I said Richard, I did not call you a dick I said you can be a dick.. Judging by the emails, pms, and messages I'm not the only one who feels that way.

[RichFrye]

I have not missed any of the points , nor have I missed the jabs , be they direct as with Chris calling me a dick or somewhat more indirect as with your opening jab here.

Reread what I said Richard, I did not call you a dick I said you can be a dick.. Judging by the emails, pms, and messages I'm not the only one who feels that way.

And your personal thoughts on my "acting" are relevant as to how these frogs should be managed how exactly?
It is still a personal attack and uncalled for. Get it?

So, if you'd like to beat the hell out of this some more before either of us can actually prove our thoughts out, fine, address my last post.
If you are so frustrated that you feel the need to go on with the personal attacks then I fail to see how you are adding anything of value to this thread.

[Philsuma]

I love how this forum provides for all sorts of different opinions on complex issues such as the 'Paru' frogs.

Like the old adage goes ' The truth is often located somewhere in the middle' applies here as well (IMHO).


On one FAR end : Do what you want with your frogs - on the other end: I'm not satisfied at all, with anything.

I'm in the middle and here's some of my thoughts in numbered format for easy digestion.

1. Did Wikiri help the hobby and 'do better' in terms of sustainable import and $$ going to 'better' people than before - oh my yes. Rather than pay smugglers or get crap from the E.U - they def helped here. Did they knock it outa the park ? Meaning did they shatter the bar? Nope. There are a LOT of questions that I have and things I'm not clear / satisfied with.

2. Would I buy any of their frogs ? Maybe (in the middle here, remember). I would absolutely NOT be happy with sight-unseen animals arriving in a box on my porch. I want pics in advance and I want to pair up my projects EXACTLY by my wishes with regards to everything that I desire - shape, colour, pattern ect.

This 'purposefully' mixed - sent to use 'as is' in terms of phenotype is not something I am comfortable with at this time. Unless I personally have boots on the ground in country and/or have maps, guidebooks and an ass-load of colour pics, I am not satisfied. That's how we continue to push the hobby forward, by demanding more.

For those who would now scream' unnatural selection' and 'line breeding' - you are breeding for traits when you say all that.....they are wrong. Hard selection and line breeding is IMPOSSIBLE with such a small import /sampling of animals. Line breeding takes YEARS of hand selection and breeding.

Bottom line...are they to be applauded? Sure. Would I ever buy (obtain) some of those particular imports ? Sure, under my above conditions. Would I be real keen on F1 froglets coming from some of the selections that I've seen pics of, from some hobbyists. No.

[SmackoftheGods]

It's easier to respond to Phil than to Rich right now so my first comment is for Phil. I understand the desire to hand-select frogs. And you're right, a single generation of hand-picked frogs does not constitute line-breeding. But it DOES constitute the beginnings of unnatural selection. Advocating that stance is advocating perpetuating unnatural selection. Ed has pointed out on Dendroboard many a time that unnatural selection is unlikely to work for a sustainable population of any captive animal.

Rich, I did not intend to insinuate that you are incapable of digesting a point. I said that you missed it. Which you did. I know that you did because you didn't respond to it, and you're always very thorough in responding to everything that anyone says when you have a differing opinion. So I wrote a post detailing the point that you missed. If you would like to assume that it was a personal attack on your intelligence then that is your right. But instead of acting all butthurt over personal attacks you should go back over this thread. You have been belligerent, completely dismissive about any opinion that does not conform to your own, and you've bashed those who have offered those opinions, if not directly then certainly thinly veiled. And what's most upsetting to me is that I don't think that you're an idiot that has to resort to such measures. I've seen you display your capability of holding civil conversations on controversial topics. Why you've resorted to these tactics on this thread baffles me. Also, don't be too hard on Chris. If you burned the bridge with every person who ever said you were acting like a dick you wouldn't have any friends left. You should commend him for saying it to your proverbial face instead of behind your back. You're probably going to say that you don't need me to do this, and that's fine you don't need to say it, but when I've heard people calling you a dick behind your back I've been one who's frequently stood up on your behalf. It's times like this that I wonder if I'm really right to do that.

Your reputation, and my reputation, and Phil's reputation, and Chris's reputation are irrelevant to this discussion, as you so clearly pointed out earlier in this thread. However, the reputations of Mark Pepper and WIKIRI DO have relevance to this discussion.

First of all, Mark Pepper has been pretty adamant about keeping separate populations of frogs separate. He's given me no indication that he would be willing to participate in a project that would result in unmanageable populations of frogs. Also, let's keep in mind that it makes ZERO business sense for a project like this to include a bunch of mixed locality frogs. If there are different localities in the area then it makes sense to sell them as different localities. It even makes sense to take the same locality and give different looking specimens different names so you can sell them as different frogs to unknowing customers as is suspected to have happened with several tinctorius morphs. But to sell such a wide variety of frogs as all the same frog makes little business sense. When Mark released benedicta he released the "standard" version, and then waited for some time to release the next morph (the one without the blue stripes and instead the faded blue morphs, I forget the name). That makes business sense, and the variation is WAY mellower than what we're seeing in the Paru frogs. Instead of throwing them all together, if there were different locales within the harvest range it would make sense to do as you suggest and separate them. They could call the ones on the north side "Paru," and the ones on the south side "Otokiki" morphs, or whatever and release each morph slowly into the hobby. Conducting this project the way you seem to suspect makes no sense.

Furthermore, it seems to me fallacious to assume that the staff at WIKIRI is too stupid to see that mixing morphs makes no sense. They have degrees, and they're concerned about the region they're working with. They're ecologists, and conservationists, and biologists, and probably know a hell of a lot more than you or I do about what they're doing, or even about frogs in general.

I'd also like to call to your attention a couple of quotes you posted of the response you received from WIKIRI.

"The frogs farmed (as metamorphs) by Wikiri represent the natural variation (at the metamorph stage) occurring at the exact same site and not artificial selection processes were carried out."

It seems to me that this would indicate that the frogs we're receiving in the hobby are representative of those showing up in the wild, and that they're not (at least intentionally) cross-bred individuals. Worst case scenario, through human activity (my bet would be deforestation), a natural barrier was destroyed reintroducing two previously isolated locales of frogs. Best case scenario, this cross section of locales is naturally occurring. Either way, neither of these scenarios is going to prevent me from working with these species.

"Backup populations under care of hobbyists are also important as an ex situ tool helping integrative conservation strategies."

As ecologists and conservationists, those working on the WIKIRI project are very likely FAR more in tune with the fragility of the ecosystem with which they work than you or I. They have bigger concerns than your or my tiny little collection. Their concern is doing what they can to preserve natural resources. It is foolish to think that these educated, respected individuals don't know about things like "outbreeding depression." You and I know about outbreeding depression, and we've received little formal education in that field. They have that education. Considering this information, it seems ridiculous to me that intelligent ecologists would be interested in backup populations from hobbyists as an ex situ tool to help conservation strategies if the frogs we were receiving were in any way tainted or suspect.

Whether or not you choose to work with these frogs is entirely up to you. I won't judge you either way. But unless you have evidence to suggest that the frog we are receiving are in some way suspect (other than the fact that you have never seen a type of dart frog with as much variability as we're seeing in this one - Hume showed that just because something hasn't ever happened doesn't mean it WILL NEVER happen) then all you're doing by foundationlessly calling in to question these frogs is shitting all over the hard work of conservationists, and undermining their efforts for both the funding of their work and their attempts to provide new frogs to the hobby.

[RichFrye]

It's easier to respond to Phil than to Rich right now so my first comment is for Phil. I understand the desire to hand-select frogs. And you're right, a single generation of hand-picked frogs does not constitute line-breeding. But it DOES constitute the beginnings of unnatural selection. Advocating that stance is advocating perpetuating unnatural selection. Ed has pointed out on Dendroboard many a time that unnatural selection is unlikely to work for a sustainable population of any captive animal.

And, separate pens (plural) with displaced frogs is also human manipulation and is also the beginnings of unnatural selection. The frogs did not decide on their own to be placed in pens. Pens which I have asked about pertaining to a thought process behind the decision on what frogs get placed in what pens and why.
We are guessing about the human selection relating to the breeding pens.

Rich, I did not intend to insinuate that you are incapable of digesting a point. I said that you missed it. Which you did. I know that you did because you didn't respond to it, and you're always very thorough in responding to everything that anyone says when you have a differing opinion.

What exactly was "it" that I have not commented on in our 100 Paru posts here in over a year?
Please, tell me your new points or new information (as opposed to something we've hit on before, thus drumming over and over and over...) and I will make sure that each and every NEW point is address. Please make it factual , as opposed to personal. Please.

So I wrote a post detailing the point that you missed. If you would like to assume that it was a personal attack on your intelligence then that is your right. But instead of acting all butthurt over personal attacks you should go back over this thread.

Nothing new in that post that I could find.
Not butthurt, just wondering if we need to degrade this thread even more with dick-talk and other personal insults.
I don't think we do need to.
Frustration at not being able to prove anything can manifest itself in a few ways.
One way is uncontrolled , non-relevant personal attacks , ala Ferrell-esk stupidity.
Another is to sit tight knowing that all the possible speculation on both sides of the debate has exhausted itself and therefore re-stating the same old same old time and again, month after month is a waste of time ...so sit tight and wait for information promised by the for profit business selling these frogs.
I opt for option latter.

You have been belligerent, completely dismissive about any opinion that does not conform to your own, and you've bashed those who have offered those opinions, if not directly then certainly thinly veiled.

Says you. Yes, I'm Mr. "Thin veiled". Subtle I am.
Belligerent? Bashed? Bullshit.
Dismissive of those unquestioning? YUP!

And what's most upsetting to me is that I don't think that you're an idiot that has to resort to such measures. I've seen you display your capability of holding civil conversations on controversial topics. Why you've resorted to these tactics on this thread baffles me.

Cite the bashing tactics and the belligerent posts, please.
Me thinks I am not the butthurt here.

Also, don't be too hard on Chris. If you burned the bridge with every person who ever said you were acting like a dick you wouldn't have any friends left. You should commend him for saying it to your proverbial face instead of behind your back. You're probably going to say that you don't need me to do this, and that's fine you don't need to say it, but when I've heard people calling you a dick behind your back I've been one who's frequently stood up on your behalf. It's times like this that I wonder if I'm really right to do that.

I really don't mind if people have their own personal thoughts about me. I hope and know they do If they can't make a civil post and need to resort to name calling , please make it in the appropriate areas of the forum. Start a 'Rich Frye' is a dick thread somewhere else.
A bridge is a two way avenue, quite literally.
I have personally never contacted Chris in any way , be it email, pm, textypoo or any other form of personal contact. Never crossed my mind, as I'm not often looking for new frogs and i have a good idea of which of my friends to contact when I am looking for something.
I will say this, after Chris' venting here,
and after him contacting me asking for specifics on a frog I breed that he is looking for (only a couple weeks ago),
giving a price and situation with said frog and having waited for a simple reply to my timely answer to his question,
I wonder a couple things.
Why , if he feels I can be a dick and feeling the need to openly print that and more , would he inquire as to purchasing frogs from me and why no reply to my answer?
Chris crossed the bridge, who's burning what now again?
I have never found the need to say 'I have tons of private correspondence saying such and such'. Does anybody really think that in the time frame of when these frogs were announced to the present that I have somehow not had UMPteen emails, PMs , phone conversations, phone conversations, phone conversations , face to face out of state conversations, and the like time and again? I just don't feel the need to point out if I feel someone is being less than objective (or a dick, subjective) and drive it home as a personal attack.
Justify the slams if you feel the need and I'll just keep pointing out when it happens. I'm am sure the frustration is at play, again.

Your reputation, and my reputation, and Phil's reputation, and Chris's reputation are irrelevant to this discussion, as you so clearly pointed out earlier in this thread. However, the reputations of Mark Pepper and WIKIRI DO have relevance to this discussion.

First of all, Mark Pepper has been pretty adamant about keeping separate populations of frogs separate. He's given me no indication that he would be willing to participate in a project that would result in unmanageable populations of frogs. Also, let's keep in mind that it makes ZERO business sense for a project like this to include a bunch of mixed locality frogs. If there are different localities in the area then it makes sense to sell them as different localities. It even makes sense to take the same locality and give different looking specimens different names so you can sell them as different frogs to unknowing customers as is suspected to have happened with several tinctorius morphs. But to sell such a wide variety of frogs as all the same frog makes little business sense. When Mark released benedicta he released the "standard" version, and then waited for some time to release the next morph (the one without the blue stripes and instead the faded blue morphs, I forget the name). That makes business sense, and the variation is WAY mellower than what we're seeing in the Paru frogs. Instead of throwing them all together, if there were different locales within the harvest range it would make sense to do as you suggest and separate them. They could call the ones on the north side "Paru," and the ones on the south side "Otokiki" morphs, or whatever and release each morph slowly into the hobby. Conducting this project the way you seem to suspect makes no sense.

Furthermore, it seems to me fallacious to assume that the staff at WIKIRI is too stupid to see that mixing morphs makes no sense. They have degrees, and they're concerned about the region they're working with. They're ecologists, and conservationists, and biologists, and probably know a hell of a lot more than you or I do about what they're doing, or even about frogs in general.

I'd also like to call to your attention a couple of quotes you posted of the response you received from WIKIRI.

"The frogs farmed (as metamorphs) by Wikiri represent the natural variation (at the metamorph stage) occurring at the exact same site and not artificial selection processes were carried out."

It seems to me that this would indicate that the frogs we're receiving in the hobby are representative of those showing up in the wild, and that they're not (at least intentionally) cross-bred individuals. Worst case scenario, through human activity (my bet would be deforestation), a natural barrier was destroyed reintroducing two previously isolated locales of frogs. Best case scenario, this cross section of locales is naturally occurring. Either way, neither of these scenarios is going to prevent me from working with these species.

"Backup populations under care of hobbyists are also important as an ex situ tool helping integrative conservation strategies."

As ecologists and conservationists, those working on the WIKIRI project are very likely FAR more in tune with the fragility of the ecosystem with which they work than you or I. They have bigger concerns than your or my tiny little collection. Their concern is doing what they can to preserve natural resources. It is foolish to think that these educated, respected individuals don't know about things like "outbreeding depression." You and I know about outbreeding depression, and we've received little formal education in that field. They have that education. Considering this information, it seems ridiculous to me that intelligent ecologists would be interested in backup populations from hobbyists as an ex situ tool to help conservation strategies if the frogs we were receiving were in any way tainted or suspect.

Whether or not you choose to work with these frogs is entirely up to you. I won't judge you either way. But unless you have evidence to suggest that the frog we are receiving are in some way suspect (other than the fact that you have never seen a type of dart frog with as much variability as we're seeing in this one - Hume showed that just because something hasn't ever happened doesn't mean it WILL NEVER happen) then all you're doing by foundationlessly calling in to question these frogs is shitting all over the hard work of conservationists, and undermining their efforts for both the funding of their work and their attempts to provide new frogs to the hobby.

Everything in the above quote has been gone over and it addressed again and again.
I can keep quoting where WIRIKI does not know why the unique situation is occurring and does not rule of hybridization.
I can quote where they say they need to study and it will take time.
I can defy you to show me one single line that gives us guidance about how we should breed these.
I can waste more time...but please, once again, for the love of god, give me something new or move along, nothing to see until I see scientific peer reviewed ANSWERS for customers.

I am either so full of shit and "shitting on" the project, in which case I should be easy to see through and dis-proven , thus "shitting" not accomplished...OR I have valid points and unanswered questions and have riled and frustrated those already working with these question marks to the point of name calling and justifying it here.
At least voting 42 % would most likely vote the latter.

If I were secure in my choices and stance I'd feel good just waiting until things have been proven out. I'm waiting until things have been proven out.
If that's "shitting all over hard work", I suggest working harder at answering my simple questions.

[goods]

From Wikiri...At Otokiki, similar large variation in colors and patterns is seen in 3 enriched closed quadrats as well as in one enriched open quadrat, and in the control (not enriched) quadrat.

It seems to me that the choice of breeders for each pen represents the natural variation based on the above sentence.

Even if these are an intergrade between San Lorenzo and Lita, who's to say that the concept of ring species can't be applied here, just on a lower taxonomic level. The "ends" of a contiguous population have been separate for long enough to diverge phenotypically, but there is interbreeding within the subpopulations of the ring, keeping them phenotypically diverse.

Perhaps human intervention did play a role in this morph. It could have been deforestation or some other event that linked these populations and allowed for gene flow to occur, or it could have been human's introducing different frogs in the pastRegardless, I believe what is coming in is representative of the current natural variation on the reserve and should be treated as such. Wikiri, herpetologists, conservationists, etc., etc. would not create hybrids for the purpose of selling them. As has been stated above, they could have made much more money if they nitpicked and sold morphs like 'Paru yellow', 'Paru red', 'Paru Lita', etc., etc.

Unless there is information not presented in these threads or from the Wikiri site explaining the current research into why they are the way they are, no one to my knowledge is claiming these are recently developed crosses. They are researching why this is so phenotypically diverse, not if one, contiguous population is so diverse

[Philsuma]

Zach,

That's an excellent argument and totally believable.

What would help swing me, personally, is a book /map type document(s) ,quite similar to the work CvDL did in the Bocas.

I would feel much more at ease with some studies and pics of ranges. Compared to sylvatica...I feel we are much more well-off with pumilio pics and approx locations, and that ain't sayin' a whole lot...lol.

[goods]

Phil, the other thing to keep in mind here is that comparing pumilio to sylvatica is like comparing apples to oranges, in my opinion. Many of the pumilio morphs seem to me much more clean cut because many are divided by major geographic barriers. I mean no Basti is making it to Isla Colon to spread those genes. Mainland morphs are a little less cut and dry. I tend to look at sylvatica morphs in a sense similar to looking at all the pumilio morphs on a given island, if that makes sense.

The following is only an assumption, and I'd love to see data proving or disproving this point...I feel ok assuming sylvatica diverged from histrionica (or vice versa) relatively recently in geological time, and we are seeing something similar to this with CR vs. Panamanian vs. Escudo pumilio. In the past, the lumped "histo/sylvatica complex" may have been what we currently see in pumilio. In 200 or so years, taxonomists may be calling CR pums and Escudo a different species than pumilio just as histos and sylvaticas have now been split. Just an idea and food for thought...

[Philsuma]

Correct. I'm just using the 'pumilio example' to illustrate the fine work CvDL did on documenting a species of dart frog.

We need a Colombian CvDL.

[goods]

I totally agree. The only thing I've seen come anywhere close to it is the poster that was circulating around a year or so ago.

Correct. I'm just using the 'pumilio example' to illustrate the fine work CvDL did on documenting a species of dart frog.

We need a Colombian CvDL.

[Philsuma]

Apparently a decent percentage of people feel like a lot of this import batch look 'muddy', and I'm assuming that connotation = unattractive.

Beauty has, and always will, be in the eye of the beholder...