Reptile & Amphibian Forums

hi i was wondering,,
some where i read said,that tiger Retics are more,,what you would say "Docile" than other retics,,,

i was wondering if this was true

no. any retic is capable of being very docile or very aggressive. two main factors determine this, how the snake is naturally (including genetics) and how often the snake is handled/socialized. some other factors are enclosure set-ups, and size and frequency of feeding
-----
retic is king of kings

1.0 Tiger Retic
1.0 Albino Tiger Retic
0.1 Striped Tiger Retic (het albino)
0.1 Salmon Boa
1.0 Albino Boa
0.1 False Water Cobra

ive heard the rumor about the tiger retics being more docile. After reading an old reptiles magazine with bob clarke in it i think the rumor may have come about due to the tigers all being captive bred vs all the imports many years ago. idk

The calm temperament you see displayed by the vast majority of tiger retics is most definitely because they are tigers, and is genetic and inherent in this morph. It is not due to captive breeding over many years. The original wild caught tiger was an extremely docile python, and its offspring proved to inherit this same trait. The genetics of temperament in pythons and boas is well documented, and has been shown to be somewhat geographical and very inherent within specific populations of boids. Blood pythons from Malaysia show on average a more aggressive behavior than those originating from Sumatra, the boas on St. Lucia more aggressive than most other B.c. ssp. Retics originating from Southeast Asia seem to show on average, a more aggressive behavior than many populations from Indonesia. I believe there has been speculation that the original tiger was thought to possibly originate from eastern Indonesia.

While captive breeding can perpetuate the genetics of docility, it cannot create it. Jud McClanahan and I have three bloodlines of green anacondas that are inherently calm and most definitely have genetically passed this trait onto the offspring they have produced in first, second, and third generation breedings. This calm and even temperament displayed by their young is genetic and is passed on to future offspring, but it was not created by captive breeding, or by frequent handling. I have seen this same situation with certain bloodlines of retics as well. It is a cause and effect process when looking at captive born retics being calmer specimens. Most of the retics raised to adults and subsequently bred, are going to be the more docile specimens by sheer choice. Very few highly aggressive large boid specimens are going to be raised to large breeder size, as most keepers aren’t going to want to deal with them. This has a definite culling effect on the specimens that are inherently aggressive. The temperament of these calmer offspring is based on genetics, and not just because they are captive born. However, I strongly agree that interaction is very important and will most definitely help accustom a snake to being handled, but the genetics need to be there as well.

Kelly

two of my holdback retics i have, which i am still waiting to see what im gonna do with them, whether im just going to keep them or sell/trade them, both came from the same parents of mine. extremely docile tiger female, and supertiger male (which i now regret that i sold, was very docile as well. my male tiger i still have from them is the devil himself, and i try to handle him more. the female super, is calm as calm can be. so while i agree and believe that genetics play a big role in temperament, there are many other factors of significance involved
-----
retic is king of kings

1.0 Tiger Retic
1.0 Albino Tiger Retic
0.1 Striped Tiger Retic (het albino)
0.1 Salmon Boa
1.0 Albino Boa
0.1 False Water Cobra

Genetics probably plays the largest role in the temperament of a given boid. Either in the actual type of species involved, as some species are obviously more prone to defensiveness than others; or with the individual involved, as some individual specimens of the same species are more defensive than others. Either way, these two scenarios are genetically based. But given genetic traits manifest themselves in the odds that they will be expressed in any particular individual. However, it is never a given, and only relates the odds of a certain individual, in this case, being defensive or calm in temperament.

Kelly

Let's not forget that genetics can skip generations too. Maybe the grandparents or great grandparents had a nasty attitude problem.

And in addition to that you can have what I refer to as outliers. This means an exception to the rule. Outliers should not mean that the general rule is off. In most species, not only reptiles, genetics play the biggest part, but there are always bad eggs so to say!!!

Exactly, that is what I meant by odds. The odds may be genetically in favor of certain traits, ie: docility, but there is never a 100% guarantee with that type of trait. Only that it is more likely to occur.

Kelly

Hey Kelly,

I have to admit, I've read a lot of your posts over the years and feel like you have a wealth of knowledge and experience. I am completely confused by your post though.

At the beginning you state that genetics are the basis for the disposition (which is not backed by an sort of factual information, study, or explanation), then later chalk it up to the variability of genetic probability. Maybe you can explain further. I have held the belief for a very long time that although a particular bloodline may pass on a genetic propensity towards defensiveness or tractability, that there has been no significant proof that the disposition is so acutely linked to the tiger mutation that it would have any trace relevance to the disposition of tiger reticulated pythons being bred in captivity today. In fact I would say from our experience their disposition is just as variable as another other mutation which is established in captivity.

I am not saying that there are not animals from isolated gene pools which carry more shared genetic material which can be more accurately assesed to a character type can't be type casted by their propensity towards a genetically linked attribute, but rather than this is so outcrossed in the tiger trait that it has lost all validity in my mind.

Take care and deep respect,
Jordan

my thought and opinion, is that there are many factors that play a role in the attitude and temperament of any animal.
-----
retic is king of kings

1.0 Tiger Retic
1.0 Albino Tiger Retic
0.1 Striped Tiger Retic (het albino)
0.1 Salmon Boa
1.0 Albino Boa
0.1 False Water Cobra

NOBODY can prove that the agressive gene is absent in tigers. For all we care, tigers are just python reticulatus with a pattern variation. Period! Even if the original wc tiger had good natural disposition, that could never mean the agressive gene was erradicated, because the species evolved with it (as a crucial survival tool). So, the best we can say is that tigers have the usual captive-born calmness of any animal.
Remember, even if there was a law saying that only good people could breed, that wouldn't create a race of sweet angels by any means. Think about that!

I as well highly respect your opinion when it comes to discussion and knowledge of large constrictors, especially retics. I probably wasn't overly clear earlier with some statements, but I will attempt to clarify some of my comments.

The problems of the genetic basis for temperament come from the fact that it is not a simple dominant – recessive trait like amelanism, or other similar color trait. It would appear more complex than that, and is probably the combination of numerous inherited attributes. This is why I stated that by breeding two calm tempered adult boids together, that you simply increase the odds of getting even tempered young. You could easily see a spectrum of temperament from aggressive to docile within the young from one litter, but I would assert that the odds of getting docile young from two docile parents has a much greater probability with each offspring, than getting docile young from two aggressive tempered adults. I have seen this occur personally dozens of times and in both directions. An example in the other direction would be when I maintained a large colony of E. conicus in the 80’s that all had great dispositions, both adults and offspring, except for one male. No matter which female I paired him with, 90% of the offspring on average displayed highly aggressive temperaments, and they never grew out of it. On the other side would be a yearling female retic purchased as an import by a friend in the early 70’s. This female was completely docile when purchased and grew into the most docile retic I have ever seen in the last 35 years. It produced 5 clutches in it’s lifetime, mated with a young imported male that was aggressive from the start and never calmed as he grew to an adult, even with frequent handling. I personally sexed every hatchling, by probing, from all 5 clutches when they were about a week old, and was never struck at or bitten once. These babies made no acknowledgement that they were being handled and were by far the calmest retics I have ever seen to this day. They were exactly like the female. I gave other examples in my earlier post with other species that showed a similar inheritance of docility. As I stated earlier, the more complex genetics of temperament would indicate that you simply increase your chances of a certain temperament with the young by breeding docile parents, you do not necessarily guarantee it. You see this in dog breeds, some are genetically more docile than others, but it doesn’t mean you won’t see aggressive individuals occasionally in these docile breeds.

On the tiger issue I have posted below a quote by Bob Clark:

“In 1992, a strangely patterned retic was bred by Karl Hermann, then of St. Paul, Minnesota. Half of the offspring from this snake showed the mother's unusual pattern. Karl named these snakes "tiger" retics, and they exhibited varying degrees of striping and, in some cases, lateral duplication of the pattern. Most of the black line on the top of the head was missing and the white spots on the sides were enlarged and elongated. These were some of the first retics to be produced regularly in captivity and were surprisingly good natured, not at all like the retics many of us had kept in the past. Their attractive color and patterns and docile disposition made them immediately popular with python enthusiasts.”

Not only has Bob made this comment, but I have heard the same comments from others who first started working with tigers in the mid to late 90’s. To answer another respondent, I would never ascertain that the “aggression gene” is missing from tigers, as a few are aggressive. It’s just that tigers were at one time on average, more docile than other retics. As you seemed to state, it is possible that the outbreeding of tigers over the years may have possibly diluted the genetics of the original tiger temperament, but I do not have enough knowledge on that subject to make any type of assertion on it.

On the inheritance issue, I have just put the data together the way I have seen it and is only my opinion. It's a complicated topic I am in no way saying that I have all the answers. You and others as well, have brought up some excellent points and if I have mis-interpreted your original question about this inheritance issue, please let me know. Thanks and very respectfully,

Kelly

you know its funny. im in veterinary medicine (emergency/critical care) and i trust pit bulls, rotties, german shepard, dobies (the breeds that generally get a horrible reputation and are always the breeds you see on the news negatively) way more than labs, golden retrievers or any of the other "docile, family oriented breeds. ive been in veterinary medicine going on 13 years now, and ive been bitten many many times. i have never been bitten, however, by a pit bull, rottie or dobie. i have been bitten 4 times (2 severely) by golden retrievers and 3 times (1 severely) by labs. so, my thought and opinion is that every animal is an individual first and foremost and go one of three ways, either extremely docile, calm and laidback. 2-fairly docile, calm and laidback, but counters that with fair amounts of hostility, aggression and defensive mechanisms. 3-very little to no calmness, docilness and/or calmness. genetics influence these, as well as surroundings, upbringings, socialization, etc
-----
retic is king of kings

1.0 Tiger Retic
1.0 Albino Tiger Retic
0.1 Striped Tiger Retic (het albino)
0.1 Salmon Boa
1.0 Albino Boa
0.1 False Water Cobra

I would totally expect to see the data as you described. When taken out of familiar surroundings and placed in a foreign environment, ie: clinical vet hospital, many animals will behave differently. This would definitely skew the data for any type of comparative purposes. I too have seen many dogs behave in extremely unpredictable ways under stress conditions of unfamiliar surroundings. I have also had snakes that have been docile their entire lives react highly aggressively at the vet clinic, and this was no real surprise. And I totally agree with you that how an animal is raised can skew almost any genetically based predisposition, as in an animal that is abused or poorly treated. Even the most docile python has the potential to be aggressive under stress or threat conditions. I was working from the standpoint of temperament under fairly well maintained or standard conditions in captivity. Additionally, I don't think anyone would argue the fact that under relatively standard conditions and all being relatively equal, the chances of being bitten by a pit bull or doberman are probably at least a little higher than being bitten by a golden or a lab. I have been around all these dogs on many occasions and this would be my take on it. This is just as with some species of boids, on average, being slightly more prone to bite than other species under equal conditions. It's a very complex topic, and there are multitudes of angles from which to look at it. Thanks,

Kelly

yeah, i think ultimately, its up to personal interpretation and experience. i would easily take a fighter bred pit bull over a golden retriever any day. wouldnt even think twice about it. howeve, that is my personal take and experience on that. i used to think that about the tiger gene. but ive had more that were the devil himself than were docile and chill. all brought up in the same environment, same feeding schedule and prey size, and same amount of handling time. ive been around retics quite awhile now, and ive seen at least 25 - 30% more nicer normal retics than tigers. but the tigers that are nice that ive dealt with, have been extremely tame and docile, more so than the nicer of the normals, ive dealt with.
-----
retic is king of kings

1.0 Tiger Retic
1.0 Albino Tiger Retic
0.1 Striped Tiger Retic (het albino)
0.1 Salmon Boa
1.0 Albino Boa
0.1 False Water Cobra

That's a good point and good information. Jordan also brought up a good point along those lines on the possibility of genetic dilution through outbreeding of the original tiger strain. This could easily account for what you are seeing in the more recent tiger strains. However, I do agree with you and know of some current tiger bloodlines where all of the young of multiple clutches over the years have all had great temperaments and been non-biters. Genes from aggressive bloodlines can be carried over to other bloodlines as with the examples I gave earlier, and also Dr. Richard Ross comment, which in his book on captive reproduction of pythons and boas gave a classic example -

"The irritable nature of P. m. pimbura is so distinctive that some herpetologists consider this temperament a marker for pimbura genes among intergrades of the molurus group."

Kelly

Hi Kelly,

From reading your response, it seems as though we may actually be batting for the same team. We are in agreement that disposition has proven--through breeding-- to be heritable. The mode of transmission, well that is another can of worms all together. It is likely a combination of various genes like you mentioned. I think the only point I was etching towards was that the "genetically calm" adage to the tiger trait has essentially lost its validity. If the trait had been line bred, or if it had been selectively bred to complimentary out crossings then it would be possible to have a "more often than not" suffix to the calm disposition we like to attach to the trait.

I also want to be clear that my motive for this is that; I don’t want to paint a picture for new keepers who want a large constrictor as a pet, then all they need to do is go and buy a tiger retic and they'll have a 13' puppy dog... because it's just not that cut and dry. The predictability of disposition has become as variable as any other morph.

I will mention that most breeders naturally (knowingly or not) have a hand in reducing the amount of animals with aggressive dispositions being produced. The average person who breeds: retics, boa constrictors, or blood pythons are going to naturally have better hands on, more enjoyable long term commitment to the project and have more breeding success when working with a tractable animal. The genuinely nervous animals, with a strongly defensive disposition will rarely get the same time, or the same persistence from the keeper. I have seen this first hand by looking at the sheer volume of retics we work with here, and if the percentage of genuinely defensive (or even more rarely aggressive) animals reached anywhere near 5% I would be shocked. That is just simply a direct result of the natural selection of captive breeding. The animals with ornery attitudes are not biased by locality type or mutation type.

This is an interesting topic that I hope will benefit at least a few keepers, or would-be keepers.

Take care,
Jordan
Prehistoric Pets

There's no such thing as a tiger RETIC, there's a tiger pattern! the rest of the package: disposition, size potencial, intelligence, and everything else, have proper genes for the job. The moment the original tiger was breed (to a normal, i believe) the genetic material mixed. No one can tell what's under a tiger appearance.

I think we are both saying the same thing although maybe in a different way. You make a good point, I hope I didn't give the impression that tigers, or other python lineages for that matter, would all be of a calm disposition. I was definitely referring to general trends, as obviously there are always going to be exceptions based on individuality within even the most even tempered genetic lines of any species. I definitely agree that the tigers would have more likely retained their original temperament more precisely if they had been more carefully bred for that trait. This would have given them your "more often than not" adage with regards to inherited temperament. The unpredictability of python behavior is present with any individual, of any bloodline, of any morph. While captive born gives you a definite edge on managability, the culling, or exclusion effect of potential breeder pythons based on the aggression or defensiveness of the individual is probably a major contributor to the larger numbers of more even tempered pythons in captivity today. Thanks again Jordan for the great discussion,

Kelly

My male tiger has always been testy. I think he would like to kill me. He may do that someday. My female normal is very docile. They all shed their belly & side scales ok; but I have to help them with their backs. She seems to appreciate the help. He doesn't. I think he was underfed before I got him. He ate everything dead, alive, & even rotten. Will still grab a cold smelly rat from the tongs. He has never been underfed sin ce I got him.