Reptile & Amphibian Forums

What's with advertisers emphazing the fact that their jungles for sale are "swedish" or "swedish as well".

Thats like saying, our BCI salmons are "columbian", or our central american motleys are..."central american".

The jungle morph is a morph that was discovered in sweden. The true jungle line comes from that one snake discovered over there. There is no other type of jungle morph. or am i missing out on something??

I just believe that this is throwing some people off.

What ya'll think?

It is a single gene mutation... not some phenotype (Or look) that anyone can tack on their boa.

The single gene mutation originated from Sweeden. Therefore there is nothing wrong in advertising true jungles as sweedish jungles. The reason we do that is because so many people out there dont seem to get that jungles are a single gene mutation and not a look know (which gets even more confusing because most people dont even exactly what to look for in IDing a jungle... which leads to them saying their normal aberrant boa looks "just like a jungle" or "could be a jungle" etc). So, for those of us with the true original line, to avoid confusion, we often state they are from sweeden.
-----
Take Care,

-Ryan Homsey

www.topnotchboas.com

I haven't...but,I have seen nothing in the last 12 years that would lead me to believe that the "single gene mutation" theory could be substantiated.(I'd love to hear some actual evidence to the contrary?)the fact that a "super" form has been produced from the true bloodline is NOT proof of that theory...we don't see "possible albinos","possible Motleys",possible Arabesques",or "possible Salmons" the fact that gene carrying individuals can be produced from the bloodline with almost no outwardly visible distinguishing,conclusively identifying,monotypic criteria,suggests that there is almost certainly more than one set of genes responsible for the anomolous behavior of the Jungle bloodline.(IMHO anyway. ) I would also be interested in seeing pictoral evidence that substantiated the "super" as producing 100% visually distinct hets. to this day I don't think I've ever seen anyone come forward to provide any documented results from a breeding trial involving a "super" to non-gene carrier,maybe I missed that??? Don't get me wrong,I've loved & respected the Jungles (and,many times come to the defense in discussions.)since I first saw them back in 94...I've just been amazed at how little proof has been required by such a skeptical faction of the hobby prior to being willing to invest exorbitant amounts of investment capitol.
-----
EMAIL quit editing my signature!

Is it not possible for a single gene mutation to produce a varying range of phenotypes, some of which fall close enough to the wild type phenotype that they are difficult to call?

The fact that breeding a jungle to a jungle produces a phenotype taken to the next level, that (to my understanding) seems to come out around the 25% mark (where it would be expected within a single gene mutation).

I also believe the original jungle was a super. It is my understanding that it threw all jungles and those jungles proved to be jungles.

To me, thats proof enough.

I understand where you are coming from though and certainly respect your opinion.

And yes, I have bred them... but never produced them .

I haven't...but,I have seen nothing in the last 12 years that would lead me to believe that the "single gene mutation" theory could be substantiated.(I'd love to hear some actual evidence to the contrary?)the fact that a "super" form has been produced from the true bloodline is NOT proof of that theory...we don't see "possible albinos","possible Motleys",possible Arabesques",or "possible Salmons" the fact that gene carrying individuals can be produced from the bloodline with almost no outwardly visible distinguishing,conclusively identifying,monotypic criteria,suggests that there is almost certainly more than one set of genes responsible for the anomolous behavior of the Jungle bloodline.(IMHO anyway. ) I would also be interested in seeing pictoral evidence that substantiated the "super" as producing 100% visually distinct hets. to this day I don't think I've ever seen anyone come forward to provide any documented results from a breeding trial involving a "super" to non-gene carrier,maybe I missed that??? Don't get me wrong,I've loved & respected the Jungles (and,many times come to the defense in discussions.)since I first saw them back in 94...I've just been amazed at how little proof has been required by such a skeptical faction of the hobby prior to being willing to invest exorbitant amounts of investment capitol.
-----
Take Care,

-Ryan Homsey

www.topnotchboas.com

No,(to answer your first question.) In my opinion,the variability precludes any broad unsubstantiated assumptions about "single gene" responsibility...lack of evidence is NEVER "proof enough",is really all I'm saying,just a little food for thought.
-----
EMAIL quit editing my signature!

Probably the best post put on this forum in years. I would also like to see some proof to substantiate these claims.

Bob

Hey Ryan, While I agree that the best and most sure way to get true Jungles is to buy a sweedish line Jungle....I believe that for years they have been produced and because of no certain trait... look... or factual markers....the POSSIBLES...have been sold and very many of them exhist in collections and even pet shops...BUT...who is taking the time to breed them all to discover the possiblity of the hidden gene? The truth is and will always be with Jungles...if what you have produces a SUPER Jungle form...then you can be assured you have a Jungle. Up until that time the term Possible Jungle is fitting...just like the ones produced in Jungle litters that are sold cheap like normals but are possible Jungles!!!..... that is my honest opinion...Take care. Andy Federico
www.ajfreptiles.com

-----

Jungles typically do have a distinct look. Are there some that will get the short end of the stick? Sure. Rare but yes, can/does happen.

There are normal boas that can emulate, to some degree, what jungles have. Aberrancies ... high color ... etc. But jungles have distinct phenotypes within its mutation: criper saddles, black bordering saddles, increased white border outline in the tail splotches, increased color, pattern aberrancies. These traits are not typical, the color seems to be consistant to jungles ... and its a unique color... "the crisp" saddles .. the consistant think-line black bordering in the saddles .. the fat white bordering on the tail splotches .. all these traits are fairly unique and pop up in varying degrees within the jungle mutation. Some of the traits are something i have NEVER seen in other bloodlines.

IMO the confusion comes from those who are not experienced with jungles. They have not developed an eye for the unique phenotypes it throws and therefor think their boa(s) are the same phenotype.

Is it possible for jungles to "slip through the cracks" and be labeled/sold as a normal? Sure. Like I said, with all the unique jungles traits... they come up in varying degrees. Its possible for a jungle to get the short end of the stick on all these traits... and slip through. That is why it is certainly possible for any boa in a jungle litter to be a jungle. Probable without an identifying phenotype? NO.

I do agree that if you indeed believe you have a jungle .. and when bred it produces supers .. and the phenotypes thrown resemble that of the sweedish line jungles.. at that point you can safely say they are indeed jungles.

IMHO
-----
Take Care,

-Ryan Homsey

www.topnotchboas.com

But, disagree with how you are conveying it...all of the criteria you have described are "markers" for expressive identification,NOT "phenotypes" (within a single litter you could theoreticlly have several "phenotypes" )...they are general characteristics to look for in a given litter of Jungles.(I'm not saying many of our assumptions aren't valid,simply that there are some key pieces of evidence still left to be provided,that's all.)
-----
EMAIL quit editing my signature!

All genes have a degree of variablity. The salmon gene produces variable differences in boas. I agree that you can always tell for sure whether it is a salmon or not. That is becuase of what the gene does, a reduction in the black melanin...you can't mistake that with any normals.

With the jungle trait, it is not so easy to distinguish (for the untrained eye) becuase it is a gene that enhances color and aberrancies. This gene also produces variability, but is only harder to distinguish becuase of the variety of normals out there that some times tend to have enhanced color/ and/or abberancies.

However, in my opinion, most of the time there is no difficulty in pointing out a jungle if you know what to look for like Ryan Homsey described. I myself own 4 jungles, and each look completely different but are jungles none the less.

As to whether the so-called supers are actually superjungles that will produce 100% jungle offspring, there is no doubt in my mind.

Guess i'm just rambling now, hope i got my point across.

Great topic of conversatioin though!!

Kevin Ivens

"phenotype" to be is simply the observable characteristics of an individual. IE, aberrant jungles could be grouped into one "phenotype" while non-aberrant jungles could be grouped into another.

dictionary.com defines it as: "The observable physical or biochemical characteristics of an organism, as determined by both genetic makeup and environmental influences."

To me that translates to "the certain look of an organism - regardless of whether its genetic, environmental, or a combination of both"

It's secondary defenition being "The expression of a specific trait, such as stature or blood type, based on genetic and environmental influences."

Which kind of mirrors what I was saying with the various jungle traits.

But we basicly agree, no reason to quibble over semantics I dont think.
-----
Take Care,

-Ryan Homsey

www.topnotchboas.com

This is called a discussion,and it hinges on your assumption that because a "super" has been produced,it automaticlly also means "it" must be a single gene mutation...and my contention to that as "undeniable fact",if it were not for the fact that the variability of trait inheritance & expression in this case is not reliably consistant in "phenotypical appearance"(despite what you may find in your dictionary,when we talk about phenotypes in regards to "morphs" we're talking about a consistantly reliable appearance that allows us to readily identify a given individual as an expressive gene carrier,we appearantly don't have that luxury 100% of the time with this "set of traits".) You don't look at a litter of albinos,for example,and say "well,this one might not be an albino...I'm not sure,I'll sell it as a "possible albino"....or,"this might not be a Motley,I can't tell,I'll sell it as a "possible Motley". we don't see this with solid phenotypes,we see this with variable expression,in which there are more than one,or NO singularly consistant phenotypical expression at all.which is often indicating more than one set of genes working in somewhat different ways...we may never know how many genes are responsible for trait expression this variable,despite what the dictionary may tell you.(this has nothing to do with me doubting the Jungle bloodline,I've seen what it can do,and I personally LOVE it!) I also don't doubt a "super" would produce 100% jungles when bred, I'm saying In twelve years doesn't it seem strange that it hasn't been questioned before??? (if you look at 12 years of hypo production,the results from breeding homozygous examples was documented by numerous people.)
-----
EMAIL quit editing my signature!

that (from what I understand, your belief) a single gene mutation cannot produce a phenotype that is so close to the wild phenotype that the human eye has difficulty distinguishing it.

I disagree.

While it is certainly atypical for a mutation to behave in such a manner, when considering other boa mutations (albino, hypo, motley, etc)... I do not believe it to be impossible.

Why? Consistancy in numbers. The trials show consistantly clear results that point to single gene mutation.
-----
Take Care,

-Ryan Homsey

www.topnotchboas.com

"Opinions"...the fact that at least one of the breeders with the most experience with them,(actually breeding AND producing.) is honestly marketing them as "possibles" speaks for itself,and I salute him for it...the snakes will classify themselves,all we have to do is breed them,and be honest in interpreting the results.
-----
EMAIL quit editing my signature!

There are alot of people out there selling boas with stripes and abberant patterns as Jungle Like. If not a Jungle DON'T CALL it one. Thats why people like me had its swedish too.
So people know its a real Jungle.

ALSO> ALL JUNGLES DON'T HAVE CRAZY PATTERNS (like this one)
look at that color.

Thanks
Michael T
Boas Etc

The discussion hinged on the insistance of "Jungles" being a "single gene mutation",I think we're all in agreement that,not every aberrant boa is a Jungle,so that wasn't really the point of contention...however, the tendancy within the hobby today is to try,and "glom" on,or lump every thing that might look similar into one big group for convenience,and money,(something I completely disagree with,btw.) Just like everyone has done with "pastels","coral albinos",and,of course,"jungles" too...anytime something difficult to identify becomes popular,suddenly everyone comes forward asking "permission" to call their mystery boa,a "pastel",or a "jungle",or their albino with better than average color,a "coral"....
-----
EMAIL quit editing my signature!