Reptile & Amphibian Forums

For those following the discussions below and how terminology can effect understanding this is what several of us came up with here on the forums some time ago.

Hybrid - prodigy from captive breedings that cross species or greater lines. Example: Jungle corns.

Natural Hybrid - rare but naturally accruing prodigy from breedings that cross species or generic lines. Examples: red X yellow rats in GA.

Crosses - Prodigy from captive breedings that cross sub specific lines. Example: Apalachicola king X eastern king.

Integrade - Prodigy from natural breedings that cross sub specific lines. Example: milks from the central KS flint hills.

Locality specific - Any animal captive-bred or wc that has a credible claim to the local of original collection.

Purity - Big question mark here as the term is thrown around willy nilly. An animal can be locality pure but not taxonomically pure as is the case with intergrades. The most defendable usage of the term that I've come across (in the context of captive breeding) is the "ability to pass a similar suite of characteristics along to the next generation." I think that most would agree that this is something that integrades, crosses and hybrids do not do.

"Locality" was not given a specific definition but it was widely accepted that the arbitrary usage of political borders undermines the concept and that habitat or geographical features that contribute to population distinctiveness might be better delineators.

Frank Reetes (spelling?) on the kingsnake forum is always saying that once a snake is collected and taken in to captivity that it is dead to nature and so whats the big deal about locality and wheather or not its crossed or what ever.they are all snakes if two snakes made them.

duckbutter

Frank has a point and I can't say I disagree however people do make distinction about their stock so it would be nice to know how people are using terms. If it doesn't matter to you, cool but if it does at least a minimual agreemment on terms provides a good starting poitn to ask questions.

Tony I am glad to see you are still making an attempt to keep those terms going. I think in the end clear terminology is the only thing that can mend the rift between hybrid breeders and purists.
Duckbatter it is true that the snakes are dead to nature but I think that with selective breeding and a good base knowledge of the natural wild appearance we can keep them to where they at least look like true representatives of the wild populations even if they are domesticated. The thing that often happens is poeple selectively breed localities for enhanced color and pattern and then some hybridizers claim that justifies hybridizing or say that that means no localities are valid. I say why even try to justify any of it. If you want to hybrid then hybrid. If you want to selective breed a locality then selective breed it. If you want to keep a locality breeding project looking like the locality then do it. They are all different and good just call it what it is.

Yes,
This is exactly what I think.Its all good.

L8r
Shannon

It's all good!

Let's start with this:

If it has no legs, let's call that a "snake".

Chris

Bt, what if it has ears????

If it has EARS,

then it's obviously a MONKEY.

A war-ravaged monkey with no arms or legs that stepped on a landmine and was patched up by a local M*A*S*H unit.

Chris