Outcrossing with sub-species

[SaSobek]

Matt, I am doing no different than what you have done to others in this thread.

Is it not the truth about you guys proving them out? Why do you feel that it's a personal shot as opposed to truth? Why only make excuses for the second time, about taking those geckos off the site, it takes less than 2 minutes to delete them off with any website using a wysiwyg or any html editor. If this is not confusing, I don't know what is.

To answer back, first, we are at the mercy of our fellow breeder.
Second, you may be guessing wrong (assuming) Matt as I have posted in a few of the threads myself, with proof pics. Thirdly, I'm sure the threads took a turn for worse, when you get defensive, i have seen it a few times. Fourth, if you are test breeding them, PLEASE, stop confusing people and have them on the website for sale. Fifth, just update the site bro, kyle updated wiki. Sixth, if you are 3rd partying geckos YOU are at the mercy of the breeder you got them from, you may be telling us what you know but may be mislead by who you got them from. My experience with am was perfect except for the fact that I got sent geckos with regen tails and wasnt told. And yes, Alberto did contact me back to make it right. (respect)As far genetics, 100%.


As far you admitting, okay fine, follow up by taking them off the site and confusing people.

Yuri, it can impy what it wants, but as far as them being generalized as domesticus, let it alone, if people wanna do it, dont bash em for it. If you're a science fighter, do something bigger for the science community than bicker about a "fancy name" and a seemingly moot point.

Paulie, I did try, I know youre a wild guy, any intergrades?

If it did take two seconds we would have updated the site our selves but we do use a 3rd party that dose are website. true our fault for not having it taken down yet.

As far as the third party gecko selling yes the Tremper blazzing enigmas (that is right more then one) were bought. from lets just say the original “creator” of the enigmas. So we thought we could take his word for what they were. It was a bad investment and yes it was an investment. We didn’t have enigmas to sell yet and we got a few at a good price and our goal was to resell them and keep a male blazing enigma to use to breed. And well it didn’t work out that way at all. And all of this stuff hasn’t been proven and might not be proven because the whole project the male “blazing enigma” and the 2 females the “bliz enigma” and “blazing enigma” haven’t hatched one baby from them yet. And to be honist the blazing enigma project after seeing them, I don’t really want to breed for it. It would have been much cooler if the bliz enigma did have some spots on it to make it look different but as we all know now it doesn’t . So yes we were wrong. Yes we should have that off of the site. Yes we use a 3rd party to do our website. Yes we did buy geckos from a 3rd party and try to resell them. Yes we bought something that we thought was something and so far looks like it is totally not what we bought. Yes it sucks. Yes we lost money on it. Yes we did look like fools thinking we had something when we did. Yes we tried to explain it. Yes I get defensive. ………………………………......................

I just had a great talk with DawnoftheLeo it was a great talk and we got to talk about this whole thing and resolve it.

Now back to the Outcrossing sorry for getting off topic:main_thumbsup:

 

[SaSobek]

Some awesome angramainyu shots,(angra mainyu= god of darkness in persian)
the pics coincide (appearance wise) with other pics I've seen. The hatchlings do seem a little bigger but look way different!

http://www.geckosunlimited.com/comm...-eublepharis/31896-whoohoo-angramainyu-2.html

http://www.geckosunlimited.com/comm...eublepharis/33411-angramainyu-hatchlings.html

Thats what i need to get :main_thumbsup:

 

[DAWNoftheLEO]

Thats what i need to get :main_thumbsup:

The heads on those hatchlings are crazy, almost like a mandalorian or devil horn design! Dude, please find a way to get some and share, lol:main_thumbsup:

 

[SaSobek]

I might just know some one that could get them :main_thumbsup:

 

[DAWNoftheLEO]

If it did take two seconds we would have updated the site our selves but we do use a 3rd party that dose are website. true our fault for not having it taken down yet.

As far as the third party gecko selling yes the Tremper blazzing enigmas (that is right more then one) were bought. from lets just say the original “creator” of the enigmas. So we thought we could take his word for what they were. It was a bad investment and yes it was an investment. We didn’t have enigmas to sell yet and we got a few at a good price and our goal was to resell them and keep a male blazing enigma to use to breed. And well it didn’t work out that way at all. And all of this stuff hasn’t been proven and might not be proven because the whole project the male “blazing enigma” and the 2 females the “bliz enigma” and “blazing enigma” haven’t hatched one baby from them yet. And to be honist the blazing enigma project after seeing them, I don’t really want to breed for it. It would have been much cooler if the bliz enigma did have some spots on it to make it look different but as we all know now it doesn’t . So yes we were wrong. Yes we should have that off of the site. Yes we use a 3rd party to do our website. Yes we did buy geckos from a 3rd party and try to resell them. Yes we bought something that we thought was something and so far looks like it is totally not what we bought. Yes it sucks. Yes we lost money on it. Yes we did look like fools thinking we had something when we did. Yes we tried to explain it. Yes I get defensive. ………………………………......................

I just had a great talk with DawnoftheLeo it was a great talk and we got to talk about this whole thing and resolve it.

Now back to the Outcrossing sorry for getting off topic:main_thumbsup:

I really didn't mean for it to seem as a jab to amgecko or you, I have been nothing but happy with the genetics you guys go through to produce some of these things we have today in the hobby.

I am very glad we got to talk and discuss some things related to and not related to this subject . I was unaware of a few things and now have a better understanding on a few situations. .

Nothing but respect guys:main_thumbsup:

 

[DAWNoftheLEO]

I might just know some one that could get them :main_thumbsup:

:main_laugh:

 

[Golden Gate Geckos]

Good idea! Let's stay on the topic of the physical differences in E. macularius sub-species/localities, and make a good effort to have a stimulating exchange of information and ideas... and leave the pot-shots out of it.

With all due respect, most taxonomists don't even agree on exactly what makes a species-there are multiple definitions accepted by different individuals at this point. As far as subspecies go, the general trend is to do away with the subspecies concept completely these days (though I'm personally against it, I think subspecies are quite useful in some cases). So although this gentleman quoted has good, viable definitions for races, localities, subspecies, etc., they aren't the only ones and it's not as if he has the final word on the subject. I think there's still a lot of room for debate in this case, though I'm personally not familiar enough with the complex to draw any conclusions of my own about the various "subspecies."

I totally agree with you that taxonomists can't seem to agree on what is a 'sub-specie' and a 'locality'. Basically, what Dr. Westhoff is saying is that if there is any geographical opportunity for natural intergrade between specie localities, then they are not a true sub-specie.

A good example of this is with Western Banded Geckos (Coleonyx variegatus ssp.), which I enjoy keeping. The C. v. abbotti, or San Diego Banded Gecko, has a fairly specific range map, but it borders A larger range with the Desert Banded Gecko (C. v. variegatus). Specimens collected closer to the borders of each range are natural intergrades, so their status as a 'sub-specie' is ambiguous. http://www.californiaherps.com/lizards/pages/c.v.abbotti.html

Now, if you notice how vast the border is against Arizona for the C. v. variegatus, there is a H-U-G-E overlap of locality to the Tuscon Banded Gecko (C. v. bogerti). This can often confuse even the most astute biologists. Sub-labial scale counts, digit bone structure, and pre-anal pore counts are necessary to discern the differences in the so called sub-species.

Until in depth field studies can be conducted in the Middle East, which include detailed range maps and solid statistical data on specimen numbers, we are going to have to live with the information we currently have.

I asked Alberto awhile back, "How do we know that the sub-species we are bringing in from Europe are what they are supposed to be?" His answer was, "We just have to trust who we get them from." (paraphrased)
http://www.geckoforums.net/showpost.php?p=128262&postcount=11

Personally, I am not certain we can trust the merchants in Pakistan selling W/C Leopard Geckos to accurately represent where these geckos were collected, much less what sub-specie/locality they are.

 

[SaSobek]

I will be more then happy to count some scales if that helps at all :main_thumbsup:

 

[tangerineman]

yeah,

need help counting? lofl, i'm close...


maybe they gotta be .......sedated...?
just kidding, it's a line from a movie...
sorry , just reading so much, i had to say something eventually...
and i have nothing costructive to add, so i resort to humor...

-Duane

 

[SaSobek]

need help counting? lofl, i'm close...


maybe they gotta be .......sedated...?
just kidding, it's a line from a movie...
sorry , just reading so much, i had to say something eventually...
and i have nothing costructive to add, so i resort to humor...

-Duane

hahaha speaking of duane when are you stopping in queens. come see the sights and help me count.

what are we counting again? no realy what is the scale count and how is it done not trying to be a smart a$$.would pictures help? if some one gives me some standards i would be more then happy to try and to take pics so we can all see what is being done. I thinks its time that start doing some real work on the geckos that we love and try to figure this one out as much as we can. maybe our friends across the pond that have them can help us in out little study. :main_thumbsup:

 

[DAWNoftheLEO]

eyelash gecko book has the counts.

 

[SaSobek]

and i just so happen to have that book. :main_thumbsup:

 

[DAWNoftheLEO]

It might be missing a few, I haven't viewed the eublepharis section in awhile..if it has afghan or fasciolatus, I'd liek to count too

 

[Golden Gate Geckos]

what are we counting again? no realy what is the scale count and how is it done not trying to be a smart a$$.would pictures help? if some one gives me some standards i would be more then happy to try and to take pics so we can all see what is being done. I thinks its time that start doing some real work on the geckos that we love and try to figure this one out as much as we can. maybe our friends across the pond that have them can help us in out little study. :main_thumbsup:

Most of the sub-labial scale counts were done by Dr. Steven Anderson, but like you said, that was back in 1966. I don't have the "Eyelash Gecko" book yet, so I am curious myself about the information on scale counts and where those studies originated.

I had the opportunity to see Dr. Steven's wet collection of Middle east Eublepharids many years ago when they were on loan to the Steinbeck Natural History Museum. The only one that really stood out was the Eublepharis hardwickii (GRAY 1827).

 

[KelliH]

two we came out and said we were wrong multiple times but i guess you just didnt read that because half of thoughs treads got deleted because they got to name calling and stuff was said that the geckos gods didnt want to let out.

Hmmm, well since I am the owner and Admin of this site I am supposing that you are referring to me. Are you referring to the thread started by Paco about the Blizzard Enigmas "The True Story" or whatever it was titled? You must be because there have been no other threads or posts that have been deleted that were about that subject. Zero. I know this because every thread that has been deleted on GF is still viewable by myself and the mods. Now, first of all, the reason it was deleted has nothing to do with me not wanting to let any information out. That's an incorrect statement, and the thread was left up for several hours before it was deleted NOT because I didn't want any "stuff let out". It was deleted when the other person the thread was about (not you Matt) said in a pm that it was a mistake to allow Paco to post it, that it was regretted and that I should probably delete it. This person was correct when he said that it was a mistake that it was posted but let's be clear, I had no intentions of removing the thread until that point which is why the reason it was removed is listed as "mutual decision between myself and the subject of the thread.".

Now as far as Justyn's E. m. montanus goes, it was purchased in Daytona in 2004, along with an an E. m. afghanicus . Both were purchased at the same time by Justyn and myself, from the same seller, Rick from GeckoLand USA. They were both really old females that had come in as imports years before. So the animal being a montanus or not has nothing to do with Justyn or how much I trust his word.

Let's just cut to the chase here, Matt. I don't particularly care for the attitude in your post referring to myself and (I guess?) the mods here as "Gecko Gods" that remove posts because they contain information we don't want people to read. That is utter crap; not true. I own GeckoForums, Matt, so I should know, right? I allow you to post your pictures and advertise your animals here free of charge. I welcome it, that is why I started the site. But if you truly feel the way some of your recent posts indicate you do, it might be wise for you to take a hike. Passive aggressive behavior is one of my pet peeves, and this is really just an irritation I don't want or need on this website. It's your choice.

 

[Gregg M]

Personally, I am not certain we can trust the merchants in Pakistan selling W/C Leopard Geckos to accurately represent where these geckos were collected, much less what sub-specie/locality they are.

Marcia, this seems to be the issue with many reptile species. This is especially true with the middle east and Africa as well because of the close proximity of countries. Collection data is almost never available unless you know someone and you ask for it spacifically. Also, scale counts are not very reliable in most cases because there are variations within animals from the exact same locality...

As far as this sub-species craze that seems to be going on, I feel it is mostly hype... Honestly, I see very little (if any at all) difference in these so called subspecies compared to normalish looking CBB leos here in the States and Europe. Although getting any bloodlines from outside the US sub-species or not, cant be a bad thing... I just would not put too much stock in this sub-species thing... I believe that sub-species names are being abandoned more and more... If there is that much difference between sub-species, they are usually given full species status. Taxonomy has now turned to molecular and DNA testing to separate species or group subspecies into one full species.

And as far as the "domesticus" thing goes, it is rediculous and misleading. Sorry Gazz but you cant just go adding to scientific names. Taxonomy is confusing enough. No need to add anymore confusion... There is nothing fancy about it. Latin names are used for a reason spacific reason, not to make a specie name look exotic or "fancy"...

 

[sauroid]

i love all the domestic leo morphs, but i hope there are breeders who are keeping the bloodlines of all the subspecies still very pure.

 

[crotaphytidae]

I think that if we are to distiguish between the subspecies and our captive stock that comes from mixed bloodlines that were started in the seventy's on a scientific level, i.e. if someone asks what species you have, then the term Eublepharis sp. "domesticated" is as valid as Eublepharis macularius montanus. This conveys that this animal is a mix a various subspecies and species currently recognized as seperate and is so much easier than saying it is (Eublepharis macularius macularius X E. m. montanus X E. m. afghanicus X E. m. smithi X E. m. fasciolatus X E. angramainyu X E. turcmenicus), which would be the politically correct way to write the scientific name of any of the current morphs that we all work with. This is just my opinion. Thanks everyone for your input.

 

[Gregg M]

I think that if we are to distiguish between the subspecies and our captive stock that comes from mixed bloodlines that were started in the seventy's on a scientific level, i.e. if someone asks what species you have, then the term Eublepharis sp. "domesticated" is as valid as Eublepharis macularius montanus. This conveys that this animal is a mix a various subspecies and species currently recognized as seperate and is so much easier than saying it is (Eublepharis macularius macularius X E. m. montanus X E. m. afghanicus X E. m. smithi X E. m. fasciolatus X E. angramainyu X E. turcmenicus)

Eublepharis macularius "domesticus" would not be valid or recognized by science... The correct thing to do would be to do molecular testing to find out if the subspecies are infact valid or if there is enough variation to give some or all of the sub-species full species status... It is being done as wee type with members of the varanid family, particularly V. salvator. It was also just done with the Bitis family to give B. rhinoseros its own species status. It used to be a subspecies of Bitis gabonica.

 

[Golden Gate Geckos]

What's wrong with referring our 'mixed' sub-specie geckos simply as Eublepharis macularius?