The Giant Debate???

[supperl]

Two words Nev....
Eublepharis angramainyu....
Dude, look at the patterns of pure E. angramainyu... If those are not the patterns of the original giant line, I dont know what is...:main_thumbsup:

Now what are the true genetics behind the Eublepharis angramainyu size is still what needs to be worked out...

Any chance someone could show up a picture of an angramainyu and an original Giant line gecko?

I had no Geckos 10 years ago, but 7 years ago my adults were around 50 grams.

I have a question which might not directly link up with the threads content.
So when years back adults were 50 gramms how many eggs a season did they lay? And what were the feeders? Have you been feeding mealworms 7 years back or crickets? HAve mealis always been feed or was their a time crickets were feed mainly?
And for the big geckos, I know from some big breeder he is choosing his holdbacks from they size as hatchlings, how good they are eating and how fast they are weighten up. He isn´t looking for colour, he is looking for fast weight gining geckos with realy big end-weight.

 

[eric]

Great question Thorsten! I am curious what the breeders back then fed. I know my Leos, since I stopped feeding Meal worms aren't as big as they were when on meal worms.And I know that doesn't have anything to do with the geckos length but more weight. Good question.

 

[liljenn]

I would like to add to the discusion. i havent had the experience most on this thread have, but i do love me some..."big geckos" I have a gem snow that I trace the genetics back on and it should have NO tremper blood. It only weights 82 grams, not a HUGE gecko but as far as body proportions go it fits the description to a "T" long, lankey gecko. Now I didnt think anything about this untill I started getting babies last year..I would say 90% where as big or bigger than my "giant" hatchlings, almost all of them had thelong lankey body shape staight out of the egg and held that until they where at least 20 grams or so.. i sold a few of these geckos, but held back quite a few also just to see what would become of this line...I dont have any idea if there is anything to it, or maybe its just a few big geckos..Guess we will see what this year brings.

I am a newbie at this but I have a snow (gem or mack? A long story but I will be proving that this season!) He is now 106G and 10" long (maybe 10.25"...how do you get accurate length?) -- just turned 1 yr old in December 08. He is a beauty, and not "fat". As hatchling, when I aquired him, he was approx. 1 month & 19G. At 11 months, he turned 100G. Here's the pic:
http://geckoforums.net/photopost/data/500/medium/Tanz100.jpg

Please continue this thread. Dispite a few poor off topic comments, I have enjoyed learning from it. I would like to know more from others experience with "Extra Large" geckos. Thank you to everyone contributing...I've learned a lot.

 

[eric]

Jenn, place him on or near a standard size ruler. That's how I measure mine.

 

[Baoh]

Any chance someone could show up a picture of an angramainyu and an original Giant line gecko?

This is something like the third time such a comment or request has been made in this thread, so I am hoping those making the claim will provide photographic evidence soon. I hope they are just busy.

 

[Next Level Geckos]

This thread some how reminds me of a whale doing back flips and pigs rolling in mud and penguins hatching out of eggs while labrador retreivers are retreiving ducks, and a baby taking his/her first steps. But...I agree with nevin on his previous posts.

 

[nevinm]

thorsten, eric, they were using mealies even 10 years ago. to my knowladge ron had been using mealies for a very long time. when i got into about 9 years ago i started with crickets then switched to use mealies shortly after. mealies

jenn you may very well something decended from the giant gene.

as for the agrumainyas and giants thorsten, IMO i dont think they are the same. ive compaired them and i dont think they look the same.

baoh, i havent seen it asked one time what it was. and theyre are 2 links on the first page. look at the last post by sasobek on page one. he has 2 links, they are to pics of the agrumainya.

 

[Sunrise Reptile]

as for the agrumainyas and giants thorsten, IMO i dont think they are the same. ive compaired them and i dont think they look the same.

You can't be serious! Outward appearance is very seldom a determining factor as to if a certain animal belongs to a particular species or not. The fact that E. agrumainyas "looks like" or "doesn't look like" E. macularius can hardly be used as some sort of determining factor. And if Giants are some sort of intergrade, then even less so!

 

[nevinm]

woh woh woh maurice. calm down. all i said was i dont think they look alike. there are more reasons why i dont think they are the same. again all i stated in that one post was that IMO they dont look alike.

 

[Sunrise Reptile]

woh woh woh maurice. calm down. all i said was i dont think they look alike. there are more reasons why i dont think they are the same. again all i stated in that one post was that IMO they dont look alike.

What can I say? I'm a passionate guy!

Anyway, I know what was said, because it's right up there in the post. And if you have more reasons, then perhaps you should have put them in that post as well.

My point being, there's a WHOLE lot more to taxonomy than looks. You shouldn't have read more into my reply than that simple fact.

 

[Baoh]

baoh, i havent seen it asked one time what it was. and theyre are 2 links on the first page. look at the last post by sasobek on page one. he has 2 links, they are to pics of the agrumainya.

I'm not talking about pics of angramainyu. I'm talking about pics of Giants that display the angramainyu head markings, as I have seen similarity claimed, although I have not personally observed this and my experience with this is limited, so I hoped those saying so would provide pics of this similarity. This is pretty much what Thorsten and maybe others want to see, too. Not just pics of angramainyu. I'm sure many of us have seen pics of angramainyu (cool animals and I love their head pattern).

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Maurice, I am not rulling it out based on appearance/markings/pattern, but I'm not ruling it in, either. I have seen people say that they had similar markings and I would like to see pics of the similarity before I just accept it as truth. It could be opinion and I'd like to be given the evidence to form my own if anyone has such evidence. I'm not saying what is or is not. I would just like the opportunity to see for myself.

 

[nevinm]

maurice, i understand the passion. and i did post it befor on why i dont think it is, i didnt think i would have to again, thats all. not a big deal i will. but it takes a full 2 years for the angramainya to miture, and they only lay up to 6 eggs a year. IMO i dont think or believe that MR T spent 2 years on growing them up, and several more years on several generations it would take to make the angramainya act as a normal leopard gecko, in the respect that the "giants/super giants" are miture in less 7 months, and will produce 6 -8 eggs the first year and up to 12 eggs a year after that.

baoh, im sorry i didnt know thats what you were asking, you have my appologies. as for the my self ive only compaired pics from his page and from other pics or the agrumainya. the head patterns are whicked on them tho i will admitt that.

 

[Sunrise Reptile]

but it takes a full 2 years for the angramainya to miture, and they only lay up to 6 eggs a year. IMO i dont think or believe that MR T spent 2 years on growing them up, and several more years on several generations it would take to make the angramainya act as a normal leopard gecko, in the respect that the "giants/super giants" are miture in less 7 months, and will produce 6 -8 eggs the first year and up to 12 eggs a year after that.

Based on some of the other feedback in this thread, I do see that as a valid point. And now that you mention it, I believe Gregg posted info about time to maturity and reproduction as well. Thanks for the clarification, Nevin.

 

[nevinm]

no problem bud.

 

[3d-gecko]

if its a subspecies i think about e.fuscus, they can have a length of 40cm

 

[nevinm]

fuscus is like an 8th of an inch bigger than the angramainya. they are the biggest, but not by much

 

[Mel&Keith]

Sorry, this is going back a few posts! LOL

So when years back adults were 50 gramms how many eggs a season did they lay? And what were the feeders? Have you been feeding mealworms 7 years back or crickets? HAve mealis always been feed or was their a time crickets were feed mainly?

When Keith was breeding Leos back in the very early 90's he fed mostly crickets (occasionally mealworms) and offered Calcium in dishes. His groups were all 40-50g, 50 being the really big ones! Most of his females laid 5+ clutches per season with an almost perfect hatch rate. We still start our babies and juvies on crickets until they are big enough to eat superworms. After the mealworm issues we didn't want to go back to them. He had a similar mealworm problem that resulted in lots of deaths back in the 90's.

I think food items may have affect on size. We've gotten a Leo from a breeder with lots of big geckos who was HUGE as a Juvie but maxed out at 45g after switching to crickets and Supers. Our Normal Geckos aren't all that big but our Giants hatch twice as big as Normals. Our "Giant" sized non-Giant geckos produce basically normal sized hatchlings.

 

[liljenn]

After reading all this, it sounds to me like the key to knowing if the "giant gene" exists in a specific gecko is: the large hatch size/weight + the lanky juvie appearance + the continued growth speed + the final adult size (whatever that standard is determined). Then proving it out through breeding. And from what a few breeders state it is a co-dom or dom gene???:main_huh:

Sorry, just trying to make some simple synopsis of what I am reading here....:dizzy:

 

[spykerherps]

Also it was said ealier that the E.Angramainyu wasn't a prolific breeder and isn't sexually mature until about two to three years of age. In theory wouldn't out crossing change this?

I believe it would.

I know many are not going through this thread and reading every post so I will state again even though the thread really is not about origins is that perhaps in theory because they were WC imports the sub species were already of breeding age and because they were crossed in theory to the macs they took on more of the mac's reproductivity/look/attitude.

 

[spykerherps]

Lets test my theory will someone lown nevinm or myself some angramainya or fuscus and we can breed them to or supposed macularius and see what happens