Is it really a....

[Enigmatic_Reptiles]

Let me preface this by saying this is in no way shape or form directed at anyone, and if you take offense then you may have a guilty conscious .

I just want to address something that I see becoming more prevalent throughout the hobby (and other species as well). The use of genetic mutations being used liberally based on the "look" of an animal and not its genetics. Yes, there is a lot genetic mutations that can be determined/narrowed down by looking at an animal...but the key word to that statement is GENETIC. This is predominantly for line bred or polygenetic animals. Just because you hatch a gecko with green in it does not mean its an Emerine, or a gecko with a lavender hue thats striped doesnt mean its a Lavender stripe. Yes the gecko may express some similar traits to a real Lavender Stripe but the biggest difference is one is a GENETIC Lavender Stripe/Emerine and the other is a random gecko which expresses some traits/characteristics. To me if someone is going to call a gecko...lets say Hyper Xanthic then I expect that gecko to have a lineage which can be proven to come from JMG Hyper Xanthic. Without having the lineage from an animal from those genetics then it is (to me) impossible for it to EVER be called such.

I see two main reasons for people doing this. First, the most obvious, is marketing and inflated price on their animals. Second I think its people trying to add importance or exclusivity to their collection. In other words they are trying to pad their genetic ability. This may work for a year or two and people will gobble up these "high end" morphs for unbeatable prices. However, when these people are incapable of producing animals of quality from these animals then they themselves are now in a sticky situation with too many babies and not enough people interested in their animals. This hurts the community in 3 ways.

1. breeders will invest in these animals and soon be out of business (or unable to sell babies if your a hobbyist) because of lack of true quality and genetics.

2. kills the market value (exclusivity) for people who are really working with these genetics.

3. muddies up and/or tarnishes the look or expectation of a certain trait/genetic over time.

Lets use a realistic example of what I see being done. Lets say I breed a Blood Hypo to a Super Hypo. Every single baby can (doesn't mean they should) be labeled as a blood cross. Now lets say you take your absolute best baby from this pairing and you breed him back to that same female...making it a Blood cross to a Super Hypo. NOTHING from this pairing should even have the name Blood in it in any way shape or form. At that point your animals posses no more than 25% blood genetics. It could look better than any Blood you have seen it...but its is NOT a blood anymore. If any animals has less than 50% of a genetic in it than it should not have that name attached to it.

This is an example of how crazy it can get with calling things like you see it

You can call her a; Red Stripe Emerine Lavender Dorsal Stripe CT etc etc. When in reality this is simply an Electric cross. Parents were Electric x Emerine/Blood. There is no need for the long list of genetics which are expressed...because those are not the genetics she posses. Lets just keep our morph names to what we KNOW and keep our line bred genetics clear of misrepresentation and market inflation. If the breeder can not provide lineage on an animal then don't believe what they are calling it.

Don't have a cow about this thread (or a HUGE bladder stone and retained eggs in this case)...

breeding is fun and hatching crazy animals is only part of the excitement of keeping these amazing animals. Enjoy the rest of the season and good luck to everyone.

 

[acpart]

You make an interesting point. I would like to think that most people don't do what you're talking about to intentionally fool anyone, but because they sincerely believe they're calling it correctly (and I'm not so sure they're wrong in the case of polygenetic traits). Morph naming can be a lot like folklore and language development --things evolve the way they're going to based on what happens with the users and there's not much that can be done about it.
Here are 2 examples, a little different maybe than what you're talking about, where what I would consider a "misnomer" has become mainstream:
--hybinos: my original understanding is that this was limited to superhypo Tremper albinos from the Hines line, but it seems now to refer to any superhypo albino

--RAPTOR: based on the "P" in the name, they should all be patternless, but many people (including Ron Tremper in his new app) talk about banded and striped Raptors

Aliza

 

[Halley]

Quick question. At what point would you say somebody has created their own line. If they mix a random SHTCTB with a Blood and then the best blood cross back to the SHTCTB, do they now have their own line?

I personally wouldn’t feel as if I was being tricked into anything, if I bought a “Blood Cross” that was 25% blood, and represented the blood traits well.

 

[Enigmatic_Reptiles]

I certainly see and agree with some of your points. Starting with Raptors...thats is a different can of worms because thats an acronym for genes in a gecko. If there is no P than there should be no Raptor.

As far as the lines evolving...I get that to an extent. But evolving still will include what...GENETICS from the founding animals. If the genes are never there than the evolution would not be from said name morph. Also evolution will take place in multiple generations (which yet again would HAVE to contain the genetic being evolved) and not just over one breeding season.

As far as it not being intentional...that I agree with on most cases. However, I have spoken with many people at shows...who do not know me by face and have had them bold face lie to me about a LOT of things. Even claiming they have MY line of a project and they got them directly from me.

This thread was a combination of a rant and just an eye opener for people who do this. The whole moral to my story is for people to check genetics before they buy and lineage of animals they are investing in.

 

[Enigmatic_Reptiles]

To me there is no set timeline for how long it takes to create your own line. If you can produce something that looks completely different than another existing line AND be able to reproduce it then you can say you have your own line.

As far as your purchasing scenario I think the biggest thing you would have to consider is the ability for a gecko to which only has25% of a gene to be able to pass that onto their offspring. Lets say you have a nice looking Blood cross that is only 25% Blood. you breed that back to your SHT female that produced him. Are you willing to pay the price for a Blood Hypo when you are only going to have 12.5% chance of it being passed. Or would you rather have a Blood Hypo from true lineage and having 50% chance of Blood traits being passed on. This goes along greatly with my point I am trying to make. When we list a gecko as being a specific GENETIC trait...shouldn't it actually be that trait and not a slight percentage of being that trait? If its only 25% Blood then why not call it whatever the remaining 75% is...probably because then it would be a SHT instead of carrying the prestige affiliated with a Blood.

I am not trying to turn this into a debate or anything...just my opinion on how the market does not reflect the genetics being sold and the importance of record keeping.

 

[eric]

Great points Travis! My two cents for what it's worth is, the term "my line or a new line" is a touchy subject unless new wild type subjects displaying unique pattern/color or a random mutation pops out and is proven genetic my opinion is you can't call it a "new line". With that said I do believe a line can be refined and combinations of other proven genetic morphs is all we have until the other is seen and proven. Proven genetic, a process to prove one way or another, something I believe has been taken a little too "Willy nilly" with some. Again just my thoughts, my Afghan Halloween bolds/ boldstripes, Afghan eclipses and Afghan RAPTORs are just the latter, a combination of proven morphs that enhances there combined genetic traits, not a "line"! Thanks again Travis for bring up this topic.

 

[garner63080]

Just my opinion but since most Leos out there today have been bred in captivity, wouldn't the only true way to develope a new morph is to breed front actual wild caught geckos? Genetics that haven't been influenced by humans?

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I747 using Tapatalk 2

 

[acpart]

I would imagine that mutations can happen just as well with captive bred animals as with wild caught, so new morphs can be (and have been) developed from captive bred leos.

Aliza

 

[CNest]

As a buyer I would be a tad miffed if I bought something, I'll just use the bloods as an example, only to find out it was a smaller percentage than I thought. If I see a blood cross, to me that would imply, to me, 50% blood. With that percentage I would expect to pay an appropriate price for those specific genetics. I sure as heck wouldn't want to pay a good penny for something that only has a smidge of what I'm looking for. If I was breeding that would double my time and work to get the results I was looking for. Wasted money and time.

Now as someone who will be in the market soon. I now have a better idea of the questions to be asking before shelling out a pretty penny for a gecko.

 

[eyelids]

I think most are just ignorant to the facts. I see so many peeps calling geckos 'lavender' this or that because their geckos retained a lot of white areas without coloring up.

 

[Kristi23]

This is a great post! I know for me, my blood crosses are all from a blood eclipse crossed with an eclipse. Now if I bred siblings (that are both 50%), would I still call it a blood cross? I guess this can be confusing to some. When I breed an afghan bold to an afghan bold, I still call it an afghan bold cross. Is that correct or wrong? I think most know that I only buy from the best breeders, so I trust that the geckos I'm starting with are represented correctly.

 

[Thorgecko707]

I agree with the blood cross not being blood at 25%. I bought my blood eclipse cross the. Found out it is 25%, and mostly redstripe. My question is, if jmg crossed a blood to a dark shtctb and then the best offspring to another shtctb and labeled the babies as their blood line would that be different? I think in any "line" people add in the best geckos that represent their line to strengthen the genetics. Otherwise, a line would take more than four or five years to accomplish. I just use jmg as an example and don't accuse them of doing that process.

 

[GodzillaGecko]

Reading all this a person can learn a hell of a lot. So thank you! I did learn a lot from reading all this. Its I guess almost the same for any animal. You just want the correct bloodline and the right genetics. But yeah I learn a lot here so thanks.

 

[stager]

Excellent info. Its funny how people try to see something in an animal even though it's not in the breeding