Muddying the waters with E. afghanicus?

[Wowoklol]

Muddying the waters with subspecies?

Isn't mixing the subspecies into these lines equivalent to mixing any of the albinos? What is the difference?

 

[fuzzylogix]

The difference is the three albino strains cancel each other out, but leave the offspring het for both strains. That's an issue when breeders are trying to work with specific albino morphs. Crossing subspecies such as fasciolatus x afghanicus is creating intergrades and in my opinion is experimental in nature. I keep very detailed records about my pairings and the offspring produced. I of course also breed pure subspecies as well because I think it's important to keep those bloodlines pure.

 

[Golden Gate Geckos]

Just my opinion, but literally ALL of the leopard geckos we have are 'mutts' originally created by crossing various wild subspecies and localities. We cannot import wild-caught leopard geckos, and it has only been recently that we were able to get F1's and F2's imported from Europe. I work with E. afghanicus and E. fasciolatus and while I think it's important to keep pure lines of these jewels, crossing these wild genes into existing morphs will only make them more robust by deepening the shallow gene pools. Not only that, but some of the combinations that have been created by these crosses are simply beautiful!

 

[robin]

personally i think that most of even what we have here that are labeled as pure F1s and F2s are very likely not the correct animals. it's not like the collectors do a scale count when they are collecting them. i am sure by the time some of these got to europe and other countries (before us) the geckos had been through many different hands. who really knows what we have. only way we could know for sure is to collect them ourselves. another thing is so much crossing of the subspecies into other morphs, while strengthening the bloodlines, also leaves room for people to pass off crosses as pure. i suspect some of the subspecies we have been breeding as pure have been crossed. it's funny how these animals have orange on the tail and bright colors. just my opinion.

 

[Golden Gate Geckos]

only way we could know for sure is to collect them ourselves.

Unfortunately, this isn't possible at this time, but it would be soooo cool to be able to do some field herping the the Middle East without getting shot at!

 

[rickmoss95]

Unfortunately, this isn't possible at this time, but it would be soooo cool to be able to do some field herping the the Middle East without getting shot at!

yeah, no doubt! my cousin is in the Army, and is in Afg. right now...too bad its not legal, because i would pay some pretty good money to him for bringing or shipping me some!!!

 

[Wowoklol]

Just my opinion, but literally ALL of the leopard geckos we have are 'mutts' originally created by crossing various wild subspecies and localities. We cannot import wild-caught leopard geckos, and it has only been recently that we were able to get F1's and F2's imported from Europe. I work with E. afghanicus and E. fasciolatus and while I think it's important to keep pure lines of these jewels, crossing these wild genes into existing morphs will only make them more robust by deepening the shallow gene pools. Not only that, but some of the combinations that have been created by these crosses are simply beautiful!

http://geckoforums.net/showthread.php?t=16395

Ofcourse they can breed into other morphs, the benefit of crossing them into your bloodlines would be the fact that it will strengthen your bloodline, and will produce more robust offspring! Great choice if you do choose to buy them.

or one would like to assume. It could also bring about deleterious alleles, or lethal combinations of genes too. Not always safe to assume that just through outcrossing you magically "strengthen" a bloodline.

http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evosite/evo101/IIIE6bBadgenes.shtml - deleterious genes

http://www.ndsu.edu/instruct/mcclean/plsc431/mendel/mendel5.htm - lethal gene (see towards bottom of page)

exactly, I just mention it as so many people view "new blood" as the catch all fix to everything, when issues can arise as well. Something to always think about.

Interesting. Maybe I should have just bumped that thread. Necro'ing tends to be frowned upon though. Even though the information can be totally relevant.

 

[ElapidSVT]

anything can be rationalized if you try hard enough.

 

[eric]

With the naked eye you can clearly see, Afghan Fat Tailed Geckos (E.m. afghanicus) are not built the same way as a Leopard Gecko (Eublepharis macularius). It's really that simple, their overall body is much, much smaller. They're sexually mature as early as 25 grams, they cannot be temperature sex determined, like almost all Eublepharius macularius can be. My simple opinion, Afghans should be classified as a species all their own, not a local/sub. Just my thoughts, but with Eublepharis macularius living in Northern Pakistan and with Afghanicus inhabiting Afghanistan it's easy to see why they classified them as a sub/local, due to their close proximity to each other.

As far as the question, "are what we're importing truly pures?" Who knows? I'd like to believe that most people are honest and trustworthy. That what we're investing our hard earned money in is legit. My standpoint is simple, until it's proven otherwise, I believe that they are who they say they are. I have no room in my life for speculations.

Getting back to the original question, are we "Muddying the waters with subspecies?" We're doing just the opposite. We're strengthening the diluted gene pool. Just think about what we have right now, without out-crossings, line-breeding a specific trait for years, without an ill-effect? I believe this to be a naive way of thinking that nothing bad can happen. Don't get me wrong, line-breeding has given us some exceptional morphs, but adding a new blood line can only make them genetically stronger. It doesn't take a degree in biology to figure this one out. For the preservation of the classic morphs, we need out-crossings to bring in new blood. This is essential for their survival! We as Leopard Gecko enthusiasts are very limited to what comes into the US. We don't have the luxury of buying boxes of wild caughts each season to strengthen our very, very limited genetic stock. We're stuck until we're aloud back into the Middle East, but we have options, trusting the limited imports from from over seas. What other options do we have? Out-crossing with subs is a good thing. Yes, it takes longer when done right, but the overall outcome is worth it for all of us.

 

[TokayKeeper]

I would love to add to this given a very recent experience and how the assumption of adding "wild" blood is good, but for now I'm just going to remain vague on the matter.

 

[Tony C]

I would love to add to this given a very recent experience and how the assumption of adding "wild" blood is good, but for now I'm just going to remain vague on the matter.

I would suggest that anyone who is interested do a google scholar search for "outbreeding depression" and do some reading. Blindly outcrossing can be just as damaging as inbreeding, if not worse.

 

[eric]

I would suggest that anyone who is interested do a google scholar search for "outbreeding depression" and do some reading. Blindly outcrossing can be just as damaging as inbreeding, if not worse.

I understand Tony, but this isn't what we're doing.

 

[fuzzylogix]

from what i have produced so far in just a little amount of time crossing the subs, i'll just keep "muddying" the waters and enjoying the crap out of my amazing hatchlings.

 

[Wowoklol]

I would suggest that anyone who is interested do a google scholar search for "outbreeding depression" and do some reading. Blindly outcrossing can be just as damaging as inbreeding, if not worse.

Seems common sense, hence my confusion. You really have no idea of the complete genetics of any given animal until many generations later. Actually in this case we do. There are obvious differences. I want bigger geckos not smaller! Bah! I'd be careful about using the assertion that you are strengthening or refreshing or (insert clever marketing here) any bloodlines when you are using strains that have hardly been proven. First info I can find from breeding of any of the sub species is from 2008. That's not very many generations to base those assumptions on.

 

[Tony C]

I understand Tony, but this isn't what we're doing.

It is impossible to say that at this point. Outbreeding depression can take multiple generations to show effects, so we have no idea if outcrossing with subs will lead to issues or not.

Here is a good primer on inbreeding and outbreeding depression.

 

[fuzzylogix]

we keep going back to "we can't be sure" or "we have no idea". but without breeding and testing, we will never know. so who is assuming now? you may be right in the fact that we don't have much data to go on from the last 4 years, so should we just stop? you can read all you want on theoreticals, but the only way we will ever know the pros and cons of crossing subspecies is..... wait for it....... to do it! oh and Ben, some people like the smaller geckos. i personally am not a fan of Giants to be honest. to each their own, but i don't breed because of what other people like or dislike. i breed to produce what makes me happy, and if other people like them, it's a bonus.

 

[Golden Gate Geckos]

Blindly outcrossing can be just as damaging as inbreeding, if not worse.

Tony, could you please expound on what you mean by "blindly"? I understand 'outbreeding depression'... I bred AKC dogs for many years and have seen the outcome of irresponsible breeding and shallow gene pools. For example, purebred Golden Retrievers have inherent issues with hip dysplasia, Pugs and Pekinese have eye problems, and Basset Hounds and Dachshunds are inclined to have spinal vertebrae disc ruptures due to their aspect ratio being longer than tall. All of these are a result of these animals being inbred over thousands of years to serve a specific purpose, which comes along with the problems. Why is it that mutt dogs have the least inherent issues?

Outbreeding depression refers more to crossing dissimilar genes such as hybridization, and I really don't see it applying to the crossing of leopard gecko subspecies. Mother Nature has an incredible way of dealing with these hybrids, and the first one that comes to mind is the inability of the offspring to reproduce... like mules or ligers.

It's true that we may not have 100% confidence in the purity of the leopard gecko sub-species we import, but I can tell you without any hesitation that the E. afghanicus and the E. fasciolatus have a very distinct physical appearance that is easily identifiable as unique unto itself and unlike our beloved "mutts". Since the numbers of these sub-species are so limited here in the USA, I would suspect they are quite inbred in attempt to keep them 'pure'. I don't see these outcrosses as 'blindly' performed at all! If anything, the common practice of morph-making by throwing different genetic mutations together to see what we get, usually in hopes of producing the next 'new' random genetic mutation, is much less calculated than combining the purest form of leopard gecko genetics we have available.

I would love to add to this given a very recent experience and how the assumption of adding "wild" blood is good, but for now I'm just going to remain vague on the matter.

Chris, you are such a tease! Don't just leave us hanging... inquiring minds want to know!

 

[Tony C]

we keep going back to "we can't be sure" or "we have no idea". but without breeding and testing, we will never know. so who is assuming now? you may be right in the fact that we don't have much data to go on from the last 4 years, so should we just stop? you can read all you want on theoreticals, but the only way we will ever know the pros and cons of crossing subspecies is..... wait for it....... to do it! oh and Ben, some people like the smaller geckos. i personally am not a fan of Giants to be honest. to each their own, but i don't breed because of what other people like or dislike. i breed to produce what makes me happy, and if other people like them, it's a bonus.

I have no personal stake nor any particular concern since I am no longer breeding geckos, just thought I would pass on some info. Genetics are of particular interest to me and I hate to see oversimplified ideas like "inbreeding is bad" or "outcrossing is good" parroted without critical thought. A breeder who takes the time to educate themselves is in a position to make better choices. I haven't taken a position on outcrossing to subs because there is not enough info available to do so yet.

 

[eric]

It is impossible to say that at this point. Outbreeding depression can take multiple generations to show effects, so we have no idea if outcrossing with subs will lead to issues or not.

Why is it impossible? How many years would be needed? I know Afghans were out-crossed in 2008. That's just when I found out. Four generations from my groups with no ill-effects. None.

 

[Golden Gate Geckos]

Four generations from my groups with no effects. None.

Wait until you too can claim 30 years of inbreeding with no effects! (just kidding, Eric...)