The genetics of Rhacodactylus ciliatus...

[Haroldo]

While I am certainly no geneticist [or even biologist] by training, I have been breeding Rhacodactylus for a few years now and have noticed some things about my animals, and how that compares to the hobby overall. There are a few assumptions I'm working on that I feel are noncontroversial:

1) Overall pool of genetics (of R. ciliatus) is limited at best. New 'blood' comes to the market--both legally and illegally--but rarely. Those that get the new blood are often serious hobbyists (i.e. not the general public).
2) Keeping track of breeder info is almost unheard of, much less keeping track of "bloodlines". This has lead to a "muddying up" of the lines we do have to work with.
3) Going along with 2, most keepers don't have any clue as to the origins of their animals. Many don't have a clue as to the phenotype even of the parents of their offspring, leaving the plausibility of knowing further ancestry, near-enough null.


In a recent thread, a comment was made concerning the origins/existence of morphs in R. ciliatus.

 

[Select Gex]

So do you feel that leopard geckos were kept better, or have just been easier to establish what traits were what and how they were passed on?

Have you noticed an attitude difference in wild caught ciliatus? I know it is very unlikely, but I had one out of 50 or so I kept and it was so off the wall crazy and I would describe it as generally unhappy.

Nice thread!

 

[bleeding_sarcasm]

I made this really long post, but then I decided to delete it, in favor of asking what the point of this thread is, and posing a few questions.

#1. sure
#2. I think thats an exaggeration. I hear of it all the time.
In a perfect world, how would everyone [breeders, consumers, etc] conduct themselves to maintain records on a level that you would find satisfactory? How should breeders... breed their animals as to avoid "muddying up the lines"? and.... what are the benefits of having pure lines?
In a species where there are not cut and dry recessive/dominant genetics, what constitutes a line?
#3. Most keepers buy their animals from PetCo, or some other place where the animal has gone through a wholesaler where records are null. Not something that they can be faulted for.

Alot of ciliatus morphs are naturally occuring and have just been line bred and refined by many individuals.

 

[Haroldo]

To answer your first question, the point of this thread is to continue a dialogue that began in another thread...concerning the "line-bredness" of morphs in R. ciliatus...

#2. I tend to disagree with your assessment. Granted, there is a certain degree of relatedness almost assured in the gene pool we have to work with; but why be reckless with record keeping altogether? It's really not that difficult, no need for a perfect world. By simply keeping note (written down or maintained in a collection software like Degei) of where animals were obtained, that would help straighten out things for starters. I keep Phelsuma, and it is pretty much frowned upon for a keeper not to be serious with record-keeping. In our niche hobby, we have realized bloodlines are limited--and thus the gene pool--so we are a bit more careful about documention of animals. Let's take a simple, but very common example: say a genetic disorder comes out of your group, but you didn't know which animals were recessive for the trait, because you didn't keep track of animal info. (This can very well happen in a 1.2 situation.) Not only will it take you time, if ever, to figure out what animals are both carriers, but this will also have additional penalties. Namely, because no one knows the lineage of their animals, the recessive animals will keep propagating until the gene pool is basically shit.

What constitutes a line depends on the breeder and what viewpoint they have on "stock". Some think lines should be started off animals with unrelated parents. Then animals out of that single line should only be bred back to each other to keep that line "pure". This is a way that ensures, that if that "line" every proves problematic, that it can be honestly outcrossed with an entirely unrelated line. On the other hand, most people believe lines should constantly be created from unrelated animals. Animal A bred to B, C bred to D, AxB=E, CxD=F, E and F bred together to produce another line, and so on.

The problem with the gene pool of ciliatus, is that unless you obtain fresh blood and start anew, there's really nothing we can say about their genetics. When I first gathered my breeder stock, I bought no gecko that I didn't at least know the phenotype and origins of their grandparents! People say crested genetics are "not cut and dry", but I have witnessed otherwise with at least one of my pairs. For the last few years, I have paired up the same pair: A red-bicolor female and a "gold" harlequin male. To the best of my knowledge, these animals share no relatives going back generations. The phenotype of their ancestors are decisively dissimilar. Yet, every year for the past several years, the pair has produced offspring that have all developed a darker shade of red as a base color. I'm not sure what this means quite yet (as far as genetics go), but it certainly doesn't suggest that ciliatus genetics are random!

#3 I've bought two animals (leopard gecko) from a petstore, out of 160+ animals. In fact, those were my first two geckos. I'm certainly not faulting anyone for doing so, but there is a certain degree of record-keeping I have now gotten accustomed to being able to do now. I am certainly not alone though!

You're right, alot of ciliatus morphs are naturally occurring, but it doesn't mean that can't be reproduced in a predictable way...

 

[Haroldo]

So do you feel that leopard geckos were kept better, or have just been easier to establish what traits were what and how they were passed on?

Have you noticed an attitude difference in wild caught ciliatus? I know it is very unlikely, but I had one out of 50 or so I kept and it was so off the wall crazy and I would describe it as generally unhappy.

Nice thread!

I don't think leopard geckos were kept better, they've just been established for longer and had more time to be refined in terms of genetic traits. Hence, "Tremper, Las vegas, Bell" genetic "lines"....

I've never kept WC R. ciliatus...I can't say I have to motivation and/or see the real possibility of starting anew and 'straightening out' the gene pool for the masses. I've plenty of ciliatus that behave like they're wild caught:main_yes: ...mainly because I don't treat them like "lap-dogs" and take them out of their cage everyday like I hear many people do now...

With Phelsuma, I'm aiming to do just that...keeping animals well documented form the ground-up. Honestly, keeping good records have been the European way for decades. We're just the lax one's here in the U.S....