Giants

[Enigmatic_Reptiles]

As we all know, the majority of people believe that Giants are a genetic Co-Dom mutation. There are a few who believe they are not genetic and a few who just don't really care. I personally do not feel that they are a Co-Dom morph at all. Do I believe they are genetic...YES! However, my standpoint on a Giant is that they are a polygenetic mutation. Before you get your pitchforks hear me out and use your own G2 instead of hanging on every word spoken by someone else.

Lets say giants are Co-Dom...in theory I should be able to produce 100% Giants if I breed a Super Giant to a small female. By small female I am referring to a 2-3 year old animals that stays in the 40-50g range. If ANYONE can prove this to be true with records and image documentation on EVERY baby...please post it here. I am willing to bet you will not get 100% Giants.

Bu what about their head and length and .... My answer to that is it is simple frame structure that is inherited through lineage. Some sub species are smaller...does that mean they are a dwarf mutation. NO it is simply their genetic transfer of a naturally smaller framed animal. The same goes for giants. A larger framed gecko is going to pass on its genetic make-up which includes structure.

Weight and length...We all know you can get NON Giant geckos to get 120+g relatively easily. Feeding regiments and selective breeding can easily encourage overgrowth of a gecko. Are they "genetic giants"..NO, but they will also yield larger offspring and can be line bred for even larger one just like a "genetic giant" would.

Why then would we call them a Co-Dom....MARKETING. Anyone who knows how to read a market knows that anything Co-Dom holds more value than a polygenetic trait simply due to the "super" form you can create (especially in earlier stages of its release and supply is lower than demand). Having a Super to the morph allows for a prolonged development of projects, two varieties of a morph (both in single and double gene expression), and allows for the added value of being a Super.

Giants to me are nothing more than a polygentic trait with a marketing bonus of being genetically mislabeled. They say buy from someone who has known Giant lines...who is to determine who has true giants or not. Is it the people who are marketing them the most..yup. How long have they been selling them? None of their customers are producing them even though they are direct decedents from X breeders line. Yet again a way to help drive customers to them through the implication that the market has no true giants and if you want one you have to get it through them.

I like Giant geckos...but not Genetic Giants (co-dom). I simply enjoy my geckos which have (through years of line breeding) been held back for size and quality. I am not the only one who has "bigger" geckos though...look at any of the reputable breeders who has years in on projects and you can see that with selective breeding and years (and no 1-2 years doesnt count) of work in on projects they have bigger healthier geckos.

This is not directed at anyone and is simply MY view on them. If you disagree GREAT...explain why and keep the conversation factual and with proof YOU have obtained and not information you have read or heard. Maybe I am just over examining the market...but it seems as though a majority of people are too afraid to confront "big breeders" on their claims to genetics and think outside the realm of what they have been told or the "community" has come to except.

 

[Wild West Reptile]

Even though i dont work with "Giants" I always thought they were line bred. Makes much more sense to me than being its own co-Dom morph. Big geckos bred to big geckos should produce big geckos. Classic line breeding if you ask me. Bigger structured animals will pass that trait to the offspring producing bigger animals. Seems pretty basic to me.

 

[stager]

Even though i dont work with "Giants" I always thought they were line bred. Makes much more sense to me than being its own co-Dom morph. Big geckos bred to big geckos should produce big geckos. Classic line breeding if you ask me. Bigger structured animals will pass that trait to the offspring producing bigger animals. Seems pretty basic to me.

Exactly!

 

[CNest]

So, are you saying a more appropriate term would be "Line bred Giant"? Vs just calling it a Giant or Super giant? Would "Super Giant" be null and void if it is a line bred trait? Or again along the lines of "Line bred Super Giant"?

Still very much a noob with this genetic stuff. So sorry if this was plainly said in your reply's.

 

[Enigmatic_Reptiles]

They still could be called Giants. Their mode of inheritance only comes into play when you call it a Super which is meaning it is Co-Dom.

 

[Enigmatic_Reptiles]

No one else has an opinion.? Don't be afraid to voice what you think or say you disagree with me or anyone else. Lets just discuss genetics behind Giants.

 

[GodzillaGecko]

Well I have no idea since I never bred leo's. I dealt with Tokay's but mostly because I enjoyed it not for the money. But the giant morph is a odd morph cause its not color its size. Which I can see it being harder to make. Leo's tend not to get all that large.

But if I'm reading this correctly your saying the Giant morph is line bred so no matter what there will be giants? But if you mate a giant to a small female you expect all giants? That wouldn't happen. It would be like any genetic code. It can skip a few and work for a few. So with lets say 24 eggs. 18 giants and 6 normal size. But between two giants you take the chance of even getting a few smaller ones anyway. So yeah its not a true dominant morph but due to the volume of babies popping out it might seem that way. And your right about saying co-dom. It does sell a lot more. Its the same with any animal they breed for colors and size and such. They do it with pidgeons...Seriously look it up those things sell for THOUSANDS UPON THOUSANDS of dollars. So anything with the word Dominant sounds better and will sell.

Thats just my thoughts on this. Giants are nice though. Then again Leo's in general are beautiful so does it really matter? I'm just eh..about all these prices..yeah its a great morph but thats all it is. What does this 900 dollar lizard do that the 30 dollar lizard doesn't? Can it sing and dance? does it shit gold. No your selling a morph. Nothing wrong with that but I rather have something calm and sweet and good natured, healthy and intelligent then have it cause it was a pretty color. but thats just me.

 

[Kristi23]

I've always been a bit torn on what I thought about giants. Many of my normal geckos are larger than the giants I see. I would still possibly buy some just to add more size, but I would have to be super picky.

 

[eyelids]

My first clutch ever got over 60 grams in four months. They passed 100 grams by a year old and were also 10+ inches in length. No giant lineage, mom was a 55 gram Blizzard and dad was a 60 gram Mack Snow het Bell. The father did eventually grow to the size of his kids. With that I saw for myself how you get big geckos from big geckos. After that I had no intention on buying into 'Giants' let alone the idea that they were a co-dom morph.

 

[Wild West Reptile]

I guess Giants aren't much of a talking point in the gecko world bro. Lol! Nobody out there has anything to add to this discussion?

 

[kkigs]

All I will say is, call Sean at VMS Herp and ask him if they're co-dominant... he certainly won't post on here, but if HE says it's co-dom, I have ZERO doubt that it is. This is a guy that does ZERO marketing. And I will also ask, how did Moose suddenly appear on the scene, when at that point in time, very few leopard geckos even reached 100 grams, let alone 150+.

 

[stager]

Well I'm no expert but fell inro the giant thing actually the one in my avatar. For almost to years I thought it to be just a tremper but he is quite large now about 10 inches long not sure his wejght but dwarfs a 60 gram male I purchased

 

[CNest]

I'd love to hear more discussion on this subject. I'm rather fond of the giants personally. But I'm not all that well versed in genetics. So I have nothing to add to the conversation. I would love to be, so I hope more people will chime in on this subject as well as similar subjects.

 

[geckoboa]

The ol' giant debate...yay!
I am one of those that doesn't really care whether they are co dom or polygenic because it's next to impossible to prove either way. All I know and all I really care about is that it can to be reproduced and without heavy feeding regimens. That being said I am one that feels that a lot of geckos in the US are obese and overfed. If you think about how these animals survive in the wild it is completely different than what we provide them. I have never seen a wild caught look anything more than "skinny". Not saying that is optimal for captive reproduction but fatty livers don't help much either.

As far as giants go I personally believe there is something more than line bred genes going on here. Just come over and take a look at my SG Tremper who is fed the same as all my other geckos and reaches a healthy 145 in the off season. Of course I could pump him with dubias and worms til he explodes and maybe get him in the record books but at what cost? No marketing here and for most that know me know I don't market anymore than letting pictures of my animals speak for themselves.

I still feel that it is co dom and the reason is that I personally get similar results, but not perfect, to what a co dom gene should produce. The problem is there are so many factors that can vary size that it makes it hard to ever prove. Anybody that has ever bred geckos knows that there are runts and some geckos that just don't feed as well whether they are giant or not. Maybe some of these varied results could be from combining all or some of these factors. Another problem is the "weight rule" that was originally established as the set rule to identify genetics. This guideline only makes sense to be applied if the genetics were polygenic. Another by-product of marketing.

In conclusion everybody needs to make a decision for themselves on this. If you work with a true giant line you can produce larger geckos. This is proven. How it is passed on genetically is still up for interpretation. I respect everyone's opinion and still keep an open mind about it.

 

[pastelball]

I do have giants and a super giant. The super is straight from Ron Tremper. the giants I have are from the super giant. I do think that there is something. I don't over feed the geckos. Now in comparison of the giant to normal there is a difference in size.

 

[kkigs]

I guess I will take advantage of what John wrote, and chime in with regard to my biggest pet peeve in all of this, and that's weight. Quite possibly the WORST indicator of genetics there is. None of my super giant males are over 100 grams, and yet, there's just no way you would think that they're normal, non-giant geckos. They're simply longer and built differently. I wrote an article on my website with my explanation of what the giant gene is, based upon what I can offer from observation and of course utilizing the only two real written sources of information out there, Ron's stuff and more reliably, VMS's assessment. In the end, I don't have enough of a sample size to declare that I "know" more than someone else, but I won't hesitate to admit it if I find that my results prove to the contrary of what I've written. It's more important to accurately represent the animals than to try to market them.

As for line bred, that one doesn't add up. After 10 years, shouldn't we be seeing a 200 gram, 13 inch gecko? Especially since Moose was over 150 grams and almost 12 inches in 2002, implying that a line bred approach would continue to increase weights and lengths in a fairly short period of time.

Those are my thoughts on the subject. I'll know much more in a year or two as I continue to flesh out these genes I'm working with.

 

[Enigmatic_Reptiles]

Good to see we are getting some opinions and input on this topic. I have never owned a SG so I can't speak on their behalf, but I do know that my Giants I worked with were only more distinguishable by their heads. Length was about average and weight was like any of my other bigger geckos. All of mine came from known lines so there was no guessing game. However, I have had (and still have one) a few Mack Bold Stripe animals with heads of G/SG, but are far from being either. Maybe if I saw a SG (not inviting myself over John...) I would possibly be more inclined to believe the co--dom aspect of it. I do agree (John) that either way it will be impossible for us to know its true genetic inheritance. I just don't see it as being co-dom (IMO).

Keith - I get your point on if it were poly...why are we not seeing bigger. My simple response is that their bodies will have a natural livable cap on these things. If a Super Gecko were to ever come to be it would certainly require more than a hand full of years.

Best statement I have seen so far though was John pointing out that MANY breeders (not pointing any fingers...you know who you are) feel the need to overfeed their geckos simply for the impression of BIG animals. A truly big animal will also be proportionate. I can have a 7in gecko be 130g...but it will most likely die within a year or two.

I know the answer to this question is probably out there...but, how old is the longest living giant (and super)? Are their recent pictures of the founding stock and has anyone ever done a necropsy on one (I have heard of multiple random deaths from Giants..probably fatty liver from over zealous breeders).

Last question...Has anyone ever bred a SG to a "normal" (in size) gecko? If so I would love to see results from the pairing (hatch,1mo,3mo,6mo,1year). This would be something that would convince me it was co-dom if I saw that pairing act as one.

Like seeing a discussion going on...anyone else have something to add?

 

[pastelball]

For me breeding a super giant to a normal female has resulted in a baby that has only been about a gram or 2 bigger than a normal baby. Now as for growing size, it seem that when mine were growing it was at different size some of them would grow fast but some slower than the non-giants.

 

[kkigs]

All of my Diablo project geckos are SG to non-giant, and so far I've not had any indication that it's not acting the way it should. There is one runt in the group that just simply doesn't seem to grow at all, but otherwise they are all coming along nicely. My male snow diablo/blazing blizzard is over 40 grams, and is 5 months old today. He's on the same conservative feeding regimen as all the others. I have two females from that group that are also in the 5 month range, and not as heavy, but just as long. So far, I would agree with the assessment that the giants actually grow slower than non-giants, meaning they take longer to reach their full length.
The problem is, I don't breed normal to normal, so I have no basis for true comparison.

As for weights... it's not hard to tell who the power/overfeeders are. These guys are getting 60 grams at 4 months, which is ridiculous and VERY bad for the geckos. That's way too heavy. Let's think about this, in order to create a heavy gecko, it has to have food. I'll use the human analogy again. Two men each weigh 300 pounds. One is 6', the other is 6'6". What are our perceptions of these two? I bet we call the shorter fella FAT, don't we? Same thing goes for these geckos. Stuffing an animal full of food is not going to make it truly grow the way it should. In the end, a super giant is going to be much, much longer and bigger than a non-giant at one year of age on the same feeding regimen. Overfeeding just makes unhealthy geckos, not bigger geckos.
And you're right, Travis, longevity is in question. VMS just sold their oldest SG male this year; he was part of their founding stock in 2003, so nine years old. Anyone that knows VMS knows they only feed crickets, and I'd venture to say that I doubt any of their super giants have even reached 100 grams, let alone 110 or 120. I just sold a SG I bought from VMS in 2006 as a hatchling, so she was 6 years old and should easily live a long, happy life.

 

[Kristi23]

I definitely do not overfeed my geckos and most of my babies gain 10+ grams a month while they are growing. They never look obese, but I think that geckos under 6 months old should eat however much they need. I only feed my adults every 4 days and they are still pretty large (75+ grams).