Reptile & Amphibian Forums

It seems that a lot of the criticism from the purists involves the crossing of different genera. My intention here is not to ignite the debate on the moral aspects of this issue, but rather to ask a simple objective question from a biological and genetic standpoint: Do, or would, snakes of different genera interbreed naturally? (E.g., Lampropeltis X Pantherophis) Or are hybrids like the Cornduran created totally through human intervention?
-----
MichaelB

The cornduran at least would never happen because the snake are so far seperated geographically. (Honduras is in central American). I don't think anyone's found a lamp x pantherophis in the wild, so if it does happen I guess it doesn't happen very often.

check out a thread that started aug 7th . Go to the second page and a long thread that dates 7th-12th and you will get your questions answered from the horses mouth (so to speak)I am interested on your take after reading it.

Thanks

Rainer

I went back and re-read the whole thing. Interesting discussions. Looks like it got a little warm in there at times!

You need to remember that I'm what you might call "breeder challenged." That is, I'm not well versed in herpetoculture or the related terminology (but reading these forums helps a lot). So it might come down to what exactly we mean by "hybrid." Most of the crosses I've seen referenced, and virtually all of the ones that occur in nature, are intergrades between related subspecies. E.g., Lampropeltis g. getula x L. g. floridana = Peninsula Intergrade king. There are a few cases of crossings between related species, e.g. Pantherophis guttata x P. obsoleta, or Corn x Yellow Rat. Is this technically a hybrid?

The ones I'm wondering about, which prompted my original question, are crosses between snakes of different genus. The Cornduran, an example of Lampropeltis x Pantherophis, would not occur naturally since their natural ranges don't overlap. But what about, say, Corns and Scarlet Kings, which do overlap? Is it conceivable (excuse the pun) that they could interbreed in the wild?

As far as the ethics of hybridization (my take on the Kingsnake Forum thread - I hope I don't fan any flames here!) is that I'm apprehensive of it, but not necessarily a purist. IOW, I can live with it but I'm not necessarily too thrilled about it - especially if it involves interbreeding that can't or wouldn't take place naturally. I concede that hybrids are here to stay, tho. Aside from the notion that, IMHO, it's generally not a good idea to mess with Mother Nature, I'm concerned that the whole hybridization thing, if unchecked, will lead to a great herp "melting pot" of mixed breeds, Heinz 57s, or as some have described them, "mutts." Most, if not all, of the large-scale breeders (including yourself) certainly keep detailed data on what they're breeding and what they're "creating." But I can see the day coming when individual herps will need to be pedigreed and papered to certify their lineage, much like AKC purebreed dogs. That's where a national breeders' organization would have merit.
-----
MichaelB

The definition of a hybrid is problematic on several levels.

IMO A purist is anyone who "keeps" pure locality specific animals an raises them as such. I am a purist because I keep rosy boas which are locality specific and not just under taxonomic distictions.. Most self proclained purists are not purists at all . They are just misinformed.

Most all the top reputable breeders breed and sell hybrids, locality specic and spp. There has always been those distictions

The typical brow beating comments made by people new to the hobby and or someone who has chosen to breed a small group of animals and are upset because they "think" hybrids will affect their pocket book.

The thread you read was about a crossed eastern king and a hypo brooski king. The "purists" who called foul on this animal called it a hybrid . So by their own definition a unatural intergrade bred in captivity is a hybrid. I tend to agree with them on that because i am a true purist and a little more strict that others. If you want to take the defintion of a few people then that is what a hybrid is. Anything that is selectevly bred for color, reccessive gene, natural intergrade or unatural intergrade.

Is taking an aninal out of nature and selectively choosing colors and patterns natural?

The arguement on KS centered around the fact if someone was lucky enough to produce a pure hypo Apalachicola (aka goini) or hypo Outer Banks. Then the animal would be severely questioned and it would be worthless since someone created a fake one. My animals I produced from the origianl breeding look like Outer Banks and goini.
However if a hypo was to pop up the allel of the hypo would be differnt. This was my point I was trying to make but it went over most people heads.
Example:
I produced a new morph of hypo brooski. It is called a Peanut Butter brooksi. The hypo gene is different from the original hypo so another name was chosen to diferentiate from the already taken name, hypo. I crossed a hypo brooksi x PB brooski and got all hets. SO that proves it a differnt allele. But they also LOOK differnet so a hypo is not a hypo. It is just a term made up by man to name the animals.If a natuaral intergrade hypo was found and the allele was the same then no foul since these animals probaly crosses in nature sometime back. If it is a different hypo Aplachicola or Outerbanks that pops up you will be able to tell and the unatural intergrade made in captivity will be completly seperate..

AKC purebred dogs are not found in the wild and are a creation of man.
The affect on the snakes in nature by hybrids produced in captivity will have no effect on wild animals. That is an arguement done into the ground here and its to bad all the archived threads were erased by Kingsnake.com.
Sorry run out of time. Will pick this up later.
Rainer

Animls speciate because some natural barrier to their breeding arises which allows even further differentiation. Though "current" ecological conditions do not favor hybridization in the wild dramatic change might! Deforestation, sudden climate change, loss of cornerstone organisims within the ecosystem "might" initiate hybridization by breaking down barriers to breeding. Not saying it would just a thought. In any case its an interesting way to put an old question.

Point well taken! But if the usual evolutionary trend is toward diversification, would not hybridization go "against the grain" (even in the eventuality of significant change to the environment)?
-----
MichaelB

I'm not sure. You've kind of led me down a different path of thinking on this. Lets say there is some major cataclysmic event that drastically alters the worldwide environment. For giggles, just say it was a meteor strike. Diversification of animal life prior to this event would mean very little to the newly evolving matrix. Perhaps when pressed together hybridization would occur leading to vigorous offspring that could exploit the environment. It would be like melting down scrap metal to make something new.

Lets take this one step further and apply it to the recent trend to "preserve" populations through locality breeding. If it ever got to the point that we needed to reintroduce a population of snakes most likely we will also be rebuilding the entire ecosystem. I've got to go on the assumption that a rebuilt system is going to be entirely different no matter how hard we try to replicate the original. Soils have eroded and their micro fauna has changed, climate has changed and I see no way that we'd be able to recreate the complex interdependencies that exist in nature. At best all we can do is set the stage for it to happen over time. Given this, if we were rebuilding say, the Jersey pine barrens and looking to release say a coastal plains milk snake wouldn't it be best to introduce a line that is out bred over a strain line bred from the "original locality"? Wouldn't an out-bred type, possessing genes from ALL known populations of coastals, have the greatest chance to adapt and survive?

By the way I realize 'm a bit off in left field here but I've got a little time to kill so….. Anyway, I enjoy this particular forum. Other than the trolls it’s a pretty easygoing place. Though, there are exceptions, I "generally" don't like the outcome of captive hybrids I find them all interesting from a taxonomic perspective. Genuses to genus hybrids aren't supposed to be fertile which makes me wonder if our entire classification of these animals isn't more than a little off.