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

[Philsuma]

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

[thedude]

Can you add a 4th option? I would say the last should be all of the above. If we constantly mix them, or constantly breed like with like, that isn't very natural breeding. Kind of like bastis. Colors should be mixed sometimes, and sometimes they shouldn't. But it shouldn't be one or the other ALWAYS.

[RichFrye]

Can you add a 4th option? I would say the last should be all of the above. If we constantly mix them, or constantly breed like with like, that isn't very natural breeding. Kind of like bastis. Colors should be mixed sometimes, and sometimes they shouldn't. But it shouldn't be one or the other ALWAYS.

Your understanding of Cemetary Bastis is lacking. The mean is the orange color. About 80%+ are orange, so to properly breed those you would not want to mix yellow to yellow, rather orange to orange to yellow . But as explained already , bastis are not a polymorphic locale. Take a black and white pic and you'll still be able to ID them as basti. No mud involved in that population.

[thedude]

Your understanding of Cemetary Bastis is lacking. The mean is the orange color. About 80%+ are orange, so to properly breed those you would not want to mix yellow to yellow, rather orange to orange to yellow . But as explained already , bastis are not a polymorphic locale. Take a black and white pic and you'll still be able to ID them as basti. No mud involved in that population.

Not exactly. Breeding yellow to yellow is fine (orange will come up with this as well), so long as you don't ALWAYS breed them together. Sometimes yellow should be bred with orange, and sometimes with red. Plus the random greens and blues that are pretty rare. Your understanding of polymorphism is "lacking." But we already went over this in another thread. Mud doesn't mean polymorphism. You have know idea what the alleles being displayed in these animals are doing. Get a genetics degree and then I'll listen to you.

The poll needs a 4th option, either way.

[Philsuma]

Can you add a 4th option? I would say the last should be all of the above. If we constantly mix them, or constantly breed like with like, that isn't very natural breeding. Kind of like bastis. Colors should be mixed sometimes, and sometimes they shouldn't. But it shouldn't be one or the other ALWAYS.

Sometimes yes and sometimes no ? That's beyond confusing and I can't see a 4th poll choice out of that statement...

To even make a comparison to an Insular frog population such as the Island of Bastimentos, to an inland, contiguous or possibly broken-divided population, is pure 'apples and oranges'. No comparison, IMO.

[RichFrye]

Your understanding of Cemetary Bastis is lacking. The mean is the orange color. About 80%+ are orange, so to properly breed those you would not want to mix yellow to yellow, rather orange to orange to yellow . But as explained already , bastis are not a polymorphic locale. Take a black and white pic and you'll still be able to ID them as basti. No mud involved in that population.

Not exactly. Breeding yellow to yellow is fine (orange will come up with this as well), so long as you don't ALWAYS breed them together. Sometimes yellow should be bred with orange, and sometimes with red. Plus the random greens and blues that are pretty rare. Your understanding of polymorphism is "lacking." But we already went over this in another thread. Mud doesn't mean polymorphism. You have know idea what the alleles being displayed in these animals are doing. Get a genetics degree and then I'll listen to you.

The poll needs a 4th option, either way.

You are correct that you can at times breed yellow to yellow, and that we do not want to ALWAYS breed them as such. rarely would you want to given choices. IF , if you want to breed them as close to natural as possible that would most likely be orange to orange, orange to orange, orange to gold, orange to yellow, orange to orange and such. Rarely red to red or yellow to yellow. Optimally.
Bastis are absolutely not polymorphic, as explained in the other thread. Let me explain examples of other non-polymorphic locales.
My popes produce an occasional reddish or orange offspring. I don't sell all oranges to someone who wants to breed in an unnatural ratio of minority to minority. Just because the popes will throw green, orange and red does not mean they are polymorphic.
BJ at times have full blue legs, at other times almost zero blue at all...not polymorphic.
Blackjeans may sometimes have all very dark almost black legs, while in the same breeding population have blue legs and some with almost no blue or black on the legs at all. Not a polymorphic population. A bit variable , but not polymorphic.

Mud absolutely doesn't mean polymorphism, according to the researchers it means mixed breeding populations/hybrids. As sited numerous times.

[edwardsatc]

Bastis are absolutely not polymorphic, as explained in the other thread. Let me explain examples of other non-polymorphic locales.

Actually, the Rudh etal. article you cited in the Paru input thread actually states quite the opposite. See pg. 4289, last paragraph.

"The only populations polymorphic for dorsal background coloration were BBT and West Point (BWP)."

BBT=Bastimentos Town locale

[RichFrye]

Bastis are absolutely not polymorphic, as explained in the other thread. Let me explain examples of other non-polymorphic locales.

Actually, the Rudh etal. article you cited in the Paru input thread actually states quite the opposite. See pg. 4289, last paragraph.

"The only populations polymorphic for dorsal background coloration were BBT and West Point (BWP)."

BBT=Bastimentos Town locale

Polymorphic for dorsal background color only.
Not for size, not for calling, not for patterns, not their spots, not for ventral patterns and colors, so , my point being they are not a truly polymorphic population.
If you show a black and white photo, if you record their sizes, if you record their calls and all that is lacking is the background color of each frog, the size, patterns, spots , calls and vents will all be similar.

[edwardsatc]

Bastis are absolutely not polymorphic, as explained in the other thread. Let me explain examples of other non-polymorphic locales.

Actually, the Rudh etal. article you cited in the Paru input thread actually states quite the opposite. See pg. 4289, last paragraph.

"The only populations polymorphic for dorsal background coloration were BBT and West Point (BWP)."

BBT=Bastimentos Town locale

Polymorphic for dorsal background color only.
Not for size, not for calling, not for patterns, not their spots, not for ventral patterns and colors, so , my point being they are not a truly polymorphic population.
If you show a black and white photo, if you record their sizes, if you record their calls and all that is lacking is the background color of each frog, the size, patterns, spots , calls and vents will all be similar.

As has been stated before by myself and others, you don't appear to have a very good understanding of the term polymorphic. Not going waste my time debating it here.

[RichFrye]

As has been stated before by myself and others, you don't appear to have a very good understanding of the term polymorphic. Not going waste my time debating it here.

I'm not debating the fact that the dorsal colors of bastis are polymorphic. We all know that background colors vary. Yes.
Polymorphic when pertaining to the relevance of same species such as pums and sylvats should be understood a bit beyond simple background colors though.
Pums as a whole species are greatly polymorphic, pertaining to size, pattern, colors, etc. not simply background color. But I can tell a picture of a bastis, most generally, when in color or black and white. So, if we want to pick nits, yes bastis are polymorphic to a certain extent, but they all fall within certain constraints most all other pums do not.
The vastly , greatly polymorphic message I am trying to convey pertaining to the Parus is they come in an extreme amount of colors, patterns, striking patterns, muddied patterns, etc, etc...it is not simply a matter of one has lita netting and is red while another had lita netting and is orange...with the vast majority being one OR another.

If my use of vastly polymorphic is incorrect, I would still hope my general message and line of logic is still understood.

[thedude]

Sometimes yes and sometimes no ? That's beyond confusing and I can't see a 4th poll choice out of that statement...

To even make a comparison to an Insular frog population such as the Island of Bastimentos, to an inland, contiguous or possibly broken-divided population, is pure 'apples and oranges'. No comparison, IMO.

How is that confusing? And this is an actual question. I want to know, exactly how breeding them together in 2 different ways is confusing to you.

It's not apples and oranges considering the Paru come from a small reserve that is surrounded by farmland on all sides. All gene flow happens within this small area just as it does on the islands.

And Rich, even wikipedia has polymorphism right. "Polymorphism in biology occurs when two or more clearly different phenotypes exist in the same population of a species — in other words, the occurrence of more than one form or morph."

[RichFrye]

And Rich, even wikipedia has polymorphism right. "Polymorphism in biology occurs when two or more clearly different phenotypes exist in the same population of a species — in other words, the occurrence of more than one form or morph."

Do you now, still not understand my points about VASTLY, GREATLY polymorphic as opposed to a simple dorsal background color being polymorphic?
I can attempt to break it down in even simpler terms if needed.

When you have a green frog with blue legs , solid white vent and no spots, and you have a solid red frog, and you have a black and white frog with black and blue vent, and you have a green frog with a solid yellow vent, and you have a solid brown frog with tiny purple spots only on it's hind legs, and you have a blue frog with stripes on it's back and a solid red vent, and you have a solid white frog and you have a solid purple frog with black reticulation on all legs...that is greatly, vastly polymorphic.


Pumilio as a species (not lone breeding group) are greatly , vastly polymorphic. Histos and Sylvats as species (not lone breeding population) are greatly polymorphic. And the Parus , in pictures presented and offspring being produced and pictured are greatly vastly polymorphic. As one lone breeding population this would be a first ever if true.

[RichFrye]

...I still don't get why people are arguing about this. It is completely obvious to me and others that they should all be bred together...

If you took the poll Adam, then you are the only one out of the 13 polled who feels this way. Twelve others feel completely obviously different.

[RichFrye]

This is Mark Pepper's explanation of the cross:

...

WIKIRI is working on a much more detailed informational release, which will in much more detail summarize their work, the conservation, research, and educational work that will benefit from the export of these frogs. As soon as that is ready, we will publish it online.

This was post in April of this year. I'm not sure what month MP told Craig more info /research.

Email sent today to WIKIRI , for those who also would like to send an email for info, their email is

info@wikiri.com.ec

the auto function is not installed properly on their site to 'click to email'.

[Philsuma]

First off, I would like to thank Mark P and his operation for all the good work they have done and continued to do. They have SET the bar in many aspects of our hobby and I am grateful.

That said, I still think we have an option to comment and discuss the 'Paru" animals, and our opinions in relation to our growing hobby.

My quick 'cliff notes' thoughts - as I'm sure some of you are tired of the longer stuff...

1. $500.00 is a lot of $$$ for an animal and my money is tight - so that means a LOT of examination and inspection into the whole process.

2. "I want what I want' ...in a animal, a car, a house, a pair of boxer briefs. Even if it's a 'mere' $250.00 blue jeans pumilio, I still want a pic and for my purchased animal to look exactly the way I want.

3. I think some buyers are getting 'buyers remorse' with their purchase and are trying hard to justify putting together what they have gotten in the mail to recoup their investment. I seriously doubt more than 10% of the entire purchasers are NOT considering selling or trading offspring to further their own hobby involvement - therefore these animals MUST begin to breed for them. Very few people are saying 'eh, it's just a frog that I'm going to quietly enjoy by myself in my house", IMO.

That's why we have the disparity in the voting. I think we have 50/ 50 - pleased with the physical colouration and patterning and....not so pleased. Very typical amongst fellow American hobbyists that I have known for years now.

I don't have a frog in this jumping contest....yet.....but I will have a few different Sylvies, someday.

[thedude]

If you took the poll Adam, then you are the only one out of the 13 polled who feels this way. Twelve others feel completely obviously different.

I say mix, and one other, plus the 7 that say how they come to us (meaning mixed)....that's more than the 6 that say keep separate :? Glad to see you're good at math too :wink:

[RichFrye]

If you took the poll Adam, then you are the only one out of the 13 polled who feels this way. Twelve others feel completely obviously different.

I say mix, and one other, plus the 7 that say how they come to us (meaning mixed)....that's more than the 6 that say keep separate :? Glad to see you're good at math too :wink:

they should all be bred together...

If you took the poll Adam, then you are the [b]only one out of the 13 polled who feels this way. Twelve others feel completely obviously different.

When I get a reply from WIKIRI (no reply yet, but it's only been one day) then we will have even more info.

If you are not going to attempt to understand my statements on vastly , greatly polymorphic lone breeding populations there is no way possible you are going to make me understand how "they should all be bred together" can possible be interpreted other than ' they ( the entire population) should all be bred together.

I truly hope that the way they are shipping them out is they way they should be bred . That would be good for the hobby. But , I'm pragmatic.

BTW, at the time I wrote the statement there were the exact amount of vote that I wrote :wink: hock: :wink: . People have voted since then, just so you know I actually can add. hock: hock: hock:
For example, right now, right now as I write this there are a total of 15 votes. Yet another small dig to attempt to make me look bad. But what it does is shows you don't practice what you preach...

[RichFrye]

As written , there's speculation on all ends of this. Also as pointed out below , human intervention could have played a role in the variation we see.
I would also point out that even if the wild population of the 'paru' were not manipulated by WIKIRI employees (but as pointed out, possibly manipulated by others...) , once they are penned without full understanding (speculation) human manipulation is happening in breeding pens without full scientific understanding nor study results...
What most scientists (and many others) understand is that if this were a natural ancient population of darts (or pretty much any animal) genetic drift would have mixed and settled the vast array of phenotypes we are seeing now.
While Dr. Coloma is reluctant to interpret the variation as hybridization, you will note he does not rule it out. Genetic testing is needed.
The above has been my stance for months now. The muddy frogs pictured just add to my stance.



By Luis A. Coloma.
...


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).

[thedude]

BTW, at the time I wrote the statement there were the exact amount of vote that I wrote :wink: hock: :wink: . People have voted since then, just so you know I actually can add. hock: hock: hock:
For example, right now, right now as I write this there are a total of 15 votes. Yet another small dig to attempt to make me look bad. But what it does is shows you don't practice what you preach...

That doesn't make any sense. Out of 13 votes as you say only one voted as I feel. And you say that's how it was till others voted? Then how exactly would the numbers change? It says now and did then that 6 people voted like with like. If it was 12 that were voting that before they would have had to retract their vote and re-vote for breeding as they were sent to us. But nice try, again :roll:

As it was: 1 for mixing, 7 for how they were sent, 6 for like like, with 13 votes total.
How you say it was: 1 for mixing, 0 for how they were sent, 12 for like like, with 13 votes total.

"Exact number of vote that I wrote" huh? Don't think so.

[dynekevin]

Ive been reading all this stuff and honestly dont know nearly as much as the rest of you but IMO i dont even think they should be bred until there is hard evidence. Right now its clearly a guessing game IMO. My 2cents but if i had to choose.. i would go like to like.

-Kevin