I still fall back on digital pics eliminating the "locality" mandate.



Why? How does that matter? A digital photo of an animal in a tub doesn't provide any information regarding the localized conditions that the animal (or its parents, grandparents, etc.) adapted to.



Here's an example:

Let's say you were in the market for some gentilis. You contact a breeder who sends you photos of some of his available stock. You pick out a nice female and don't ask any lineage or locality related questions. You decide you're going to search out a male from another breeder that catches your eye better than the males the first breeder had. You find a male, and again don't ask for locality or lineage information. As the snakes reach adulthood, you decide to brumate them in preparation for their first breeding. What would be the outcome if your female was from a line of gentilis originating in Central Kansas at an elevation of 1,500 feet asl, while your male was from a line originating in the intermountain valleys of north-central Colorado at an elevation of 7,000 feet asl? Would you not expect the animal from Colorado to have a different reproductive strategy than the plains animal?



The reason I bring this up is that this phenomenon is widely known in other herps. Why should we not expect it to be the case with milks?



-Cole

[ Show Entire Thread ]