Reptile & Amphibian Forums

This is from a (WC Monlezun X Vandeventer) Male X (WC Monlezun X [WC Monlezun X (WC Red Phase X Memphis Zoo)] Female.
The parents are from Tom Agosta. This is a PURE LA Pine.
I do believe it is reproducible. I do not think it is simple recessive. Only time and breeding will tell.
Tell me what you think.
Karl

-----
Boneyardreptiles.com

I think there is a corn snake in the woodpile!!! Just joking...but it is interesting.

Dan

Just amazing!! That's what I think man.

Glad you posted that one.

byron.d

Awesome animal, just got a pair of LA pines this weekend at the Charlotte show, but nothing like that one!
-----
0.1 Bull- Northern
1.0 Bull- TX Red
0.1 Bull- KS Yellow
1.1 Bulls- Red X Yellow
1.0 Bull- Medicine Hat, Alberta, Canada
1.1 Fox Snakes- Western
1.1 Pines- Carolina Northerns (M from NC, F from SC)
1.1 Pines- Louisiana
1.1 Ratsnakes- Black, Henderson Co. NC
1.1 Kings- Black Easterns (L.g.nigra) Todd Co. KY
1.2 Kings- Coastal CA
1.1 Kings- NC Eastern Chains (M from Union Co. & F from Mecklenburg Co.)
1.1 Kings- Gray Banded 'Blair's'
1.1 Kings- Speckled, Harris Co. TX
1.0 Boa- Hogg Island
1.2 Pythons- Ball

Wow, many people adding on La pines lately. Would you have pics of your new pair?

Karl,
I think it's hot as hell. Nice animal. Interesting to see the uniqueness of it. Nice work.
--Brian
-----
--Brian Scott

Surely that was a nice surprise! Deserves better pics don't you think?...not that that one isn't National Geo quality

Not all can be so lucky. This girl was so homely I had to get rid of her She's now in a special home for abandoned LA Pines...ain't that right Piney?

Congrats on an impressive animal. I cannot wait to see what it brings ya. Wooooohoooooooooo!

>>This is from a (WC Monlezun X Vandeventer) Male X (WC Monlezun X [WC Monlezun X (WC Red Phase X Memphis Zoo)] Female.
>>The parents are from Tom Agosta. This is a PURE LA Pine.
>>I do believe it is reproducible. I do not think it is simple recessive. Only time and breeding will tell.
>>Tell me what you think.
>>Karl
>>
>>
>>-----
>>Boneyardreptiles.com
-----
AMAZON REPTILE CENTER

I would not think the "trait" would be in the Monlezaun WC animal that is becoming a prevelant trait out there since Tommy has been bred to several females each year. I would think it would have popped up sooner than this if it was related to teh WC line.

However, IF the trait is inheritable I would think it came from the Vandeventer animal Tommy has. If my memory serves correctly, he has a really "speckled" Vandeventer female. This animal is in the line that produced this female. They look VERY similar.

So, I agree it may be reproduceable but I doubt it is simple recessive, mor like line bred as the originator suggests. Breed it back to the dad and let's see what happens.

I have seen the female that naysayer speaks of first hand. The anterior third of the body is highly speckled and very distinct...very wildish and what many would call "typical" of wild ruthveni. The color is also very unique and quite distinguishable. I have reserved two females from the same animals that produced this gem, and they are highly salmon in color as well. Gotta love that wild blood....nothing beats it IMHO.
Again....nice snake, and it'll be very cool to see it grow and progress in color/pattern.
Cheers,
--Brian
-----
--Brian Scott

I like it. Beautiful snake!

Still, I do have my doubts concerning it's purity (as I do with many of the LA Pines displayed on this forum) though, especially with this morph popping up. On the other hand, with all these generations of LA Pines being produced, anomalities like this one will happen sooner or later, regardless of purity.

It would be interesting to see how it's appearance develops as it matures, so please keep us posted. It is a keeper, right?

Posted by Herman:
"Still, I do have my doubts concerning it's purity (as I do with many of the LA Pines displayed on this forum) though, especially with this morph popping up. On the other hand, with all these generations of LA Pines being produced, anomalities like this one will happen sooner or later, regardless of purity."

It's sad that so many people feel this way about ruthveni, especially when some of us go to great lengths to investigate the lineage of not only lines of animals but actual specimens in particular.

As many of the heavy hitters have stated, and what I do believe to be reality, "there are likely many more pure animals out there compared to hybrids." And "people are overwhelmingly paranoid." (two quotes from a recent e-mail exchange)

It goes to show that regardless of just how deep you dig, and how hard you investigate some people will never be convinced. As with many things, trust and believing in people's ability to be righteous plays a big part---particularly in this hobby. I am glad it's still fun for me, anyway.

Cheers,
--Brian
-----
--Brian Scott

Well, the thing is, back in the good old days Louisiana Pines used to be rather drab colored snakes, "ugly" to some, "unremarkable" to many. Also, they were unavailable for most of us.

But then commercialism moved in, and suddenly there were all these unpublished colorful variants from undisclosed localities showing up, decreasing the correlation between herpetological literature and herpetocultural progression as it all became bigger and bigger. In recent years, it has become clear that there are many hybrids out there. Not only the commercial breeders did it, zoos did it too.

Obviously, Boneyard has put a lot of effort in digging up the genetic background of his animals, and I appreciate that. Unfortunately, effort doesn't equal assurance, so excuse me for such a paranoid dick.

YYAAWWNN!!!

" As many of the heavy hitters have stated, and what I do believe to be reality, "there are likely many more pure animals out there compared to hybrids." And "people are overwhelmingly paranoid." (two quotes from a recent e-mail exchange)"

I really believe you hit the nail on the head with this one!!

The facts are that, in both instances, simply put, there have been pure ones bred, and hybrids, bred. Like you stated, it seems like some people are never happy with any answer. Anyone can get on the internet and say anything. Assumption without knowledge, first hand information, proper data, etc., is just that...an assumption. We are all guilty of it, as it is human nature, but we need to be able to come to a point to decide to act upon what we actually DO know. Then, we take steps in making an informed decision. Information and trust then steps in.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with doubting an animal's purity. We all have that right, amidst others, and in doing so, it has led to the knowledge of some lines being polluted. Like you said though, due to the fact that hybrids were created, it has brought upon a state of paranoia, so to say, which is completely understandable. It is the end result of selfishness, brought upon by hybridizing this awesome animal. However, it is quite funny how many times someone has posted a pic of a ruthveni on here, and then people start screaming " HYBRID!! " without really knowing anything about that snake, it's history, etc..

The point is this: When the paranoia seems to overtake the fun of this hobby, and assumptions reign supreme without actual knowledge of the particular breeding or situation to begin with, then, simply put, it just gets tiresome.

Good post Piney!!
-----
Genesis 1:1

from both of you.

I just want to see pics, so show me the pics.

Funny though, almost everyone who posts to this forum keeps adult pituophis. Earlier, I posted a question asking what type enclosures, racks and such people are using to house their adults. I think one response.

Yet this stuff still gets all the hits. Pityful.

Just show me the pics

I didn't scream "hybrid". I said I have my doubts, as I doubt all Louisiana Pines that, well, don't look like a Louisiana Pine. But don't get me wrong. I would be happy to see any actual unbiased proof regarding the origin or natural history of all of these fantastically colored Louisiana Pine Snake morphs that are swarming all over the scene nowadays.

And really, what some guy has mailed to another guy means nothing to me. Call me old fashioned.

I would be happy to see any actual unbiased proof regarding the origin or natural history of all of these fantastically colored Louisiana Pine Snake morphs that are swarming all over the scene nowadays.

What morphs? I was not aware of any LA Pine morphs. Do you have any pics?
-----
Boneyardreptiles.com

With morphs I mean the extremely yellow and reddish ones, or that speckled one posted by you. I call them morphs because LA Pines in the wild don't look like those at all. That is, I never heard of them. Did I miss any publications on this? Please elaborate, so I can put them on my wishlist.

How many LA Pines have you seen in the wild?
I have never seen one in the wild. I have never been to Louisiana.
I have seen a handful of wild caught LA Pines and they all were highly variable in color and pattern. All of the breeders I know hold back the best looking, most colorful, weird patterned, babies for future breeders. After generations of selective breeding the animals start to look different than the original wild types. This does not mean they are morphs just simply above average colored or patterned individuals. This has been happening for many many years with many different species. Its a product of selective breeding. The same thing is happening with LA Pines. Every year I hold back the best looking animals I produce for future breeders. So why would it be hard to believe that more colorful or weird patterned animals would start popping up?

Karl
-----
Boneyardreptiles.com

"How many LA Pines have you seen in the wild? I have never seen one in the wild. I have never been to Louisiana."

Neither have I. How I picture Louisiana Pine Snakes is based entirely on literature, and how I remember them before they started to "change".

"I have seen a handful of wild caught LA Pines and they all were highly variable in color and pattern. All of the breeders I know hold back the best looking, most colorful, weird patterned, babies for future breeders. After generations of selective breeding the animals start to look different than the original wild types. This does not mean they are morphs just simply above average colored or patterned individuals. This has been happening for many many years with many different species. Its a product of selective breeding. The same thing is happening with LA Pines."

Sure that would be a reasonable enough possibility, if it didn't seem like it all happened overnight. How many generations would it take to turn a rather drab, brownish colored unremarkable looking snake into a bright yellow or reddish colored one? Especially considering the relatively slow reproductive rate that is typical for this species? In my mind it would take decades to accomplish this.

"Every year I hold back the best looking animals I produce for future breeders. So why would it be hard to believe that more colorful or weird patterned animals would start popping up?"

Actually, it isn't that hard to believe at all. Really, I want to believe this, I want them to be Louisiana Pine Snakes, so I can put the species back on my wishlist. I want to believe in God and Santa Claus too. But I can't. It's just that the alternative scenario is by far more plausible.

>>Neither have I. How I picture Louisiana Pine Snakes is based entirely on literature, and how I remember them before they started to "change".

Most of the scientific literature I have seen through 2007 does not have photographs or illustrations only descriptions. The only pictures I have seen are in popular magazines or field guides. If you have peer reviewed literature that has pictures of specimens I would love to see it!

>>Actually, it isn't that hard to believe at all. Really, I want to believe this, I want them to be Louisiana Pine Snakes, so I can put the species back on my wishlist. I want to believe in God and Santa Claus too. But I can't. It's just that the alternative scenario is by far more plausible.

I kept ruthveni for 10 years, bred them successfully for six. Over the course of six years I produced a little over 50 hatchlings. In 2006 I produced 12 hatchlings. Tom Agosta produced 15 or 16 hatchlings. If my memory serves me right, Terry Vandeventer produced 3 or 4 clutches that year. John Ginter produced a clutch. Eric Richter produced hatchlings. That is estimated close to 50 animals from a small handful of breeders. Never mind all of the people I don't know that have bought animals from TV/JG/ER in previous years that were also successful. The numbers of offspring are there. You have to know where to look. As far as I'm concerned, there is no reason to hybridize these animals. Feed them well and pay attention, and they will breed. And continued breeding will show variations, such as Karl's male.
Again, I will have to look back through the literature, but I do seem to remember that Steve Reichling (Memphis Zoo, head of P ruthveni studbook) made mention of variance in captive bred animals and was a potential focus for future study. When I find it I will post it. If I am wrong I will correect my statement.

cheers,
daveb

-----
odelay odelay odelay hee hoooo...
heeeeya huhhhh!
~Back in the saddle (Aerosmith)

>>With morphs I mean the extremely yellow and reddish ones, or that speckled one posted by you. I call them morphs because LA Pines in the wild don't look like those at all. That is, I never heard of them. Did I miss any publications on this? Please elaborate, so I can put them on my wishlist.

...what do you want for your wishlist- the animals or the literature?

You should contact Terry Vandeventer and ask to see pictures of his w/c male he calls "chocolate chip". That is a very light yellow animal.
Occasionally offspring do hatch out reddish. I have seen it described in the literature and with my own eyes! As soon as I can find the article I will post it here. The reddish offspring gradually fade to yellow or brown.
One thing I think about the "literature", especially about these animals- the sample sizes in some studies, especially early ones consist of one or two animals. As science does, it always goes back to primary literature and quotes the datum or data over and over until there is a very rigid definition. I don't think it works well here as you can't really do statistics or define variation on a sample size of one or two. There is more variation present than what has been peer reviewed (btw some of the best info was published by TV/RY in popular herp magazines...) and at this point will be noted, maybe talked about but isn't going to be published. This is not politically correct but some of this "lack of variation" is what makes this species a "species" and is the drive behind its conservation efforts. People aren't going to research/publish something that jeopardizes their job or funding ( that also goes for much bigger fish than this, lol)no matter how interesting.

Cheers,
Dave

Pictured below is a male '06 offspring from Terry's chocolate chip male.

-----
odelay odelay odelay hee hoooo...
heeeeya huhhhh!
~Back in the saddle (Aerosmith)

"...what do you want for your wishlist- the animals or the literature?"

Well, both actually.

"You should contact Terry Vandeventer and ask to see pictures of his w/c male he calls "chocolate chip". That is a very light yellow animal. Occasionally offspring do hatch out reddish. I have seen it described in the literature and with my own eyes! As soon as I can find the article I will post it here. The reddish offspring gradually fade to yellow or brown."

Hmmm... Reddish hatchlings gradually fading to yellow or brown. Never heard of this before, but admittedly I suppose it could happen. Florida Kingsnakes can be quite reddish as hatchlings too. Please do post these articles if you can find them, sounds very interesting to me.

"One thing I think about the "literature", especially about these animals- the sample sizes in some studies, especially early ones consist of one or two animals. As science does, it always goes back to primary literature and quotes the datum or data over and over until there is a very rigid definition. I don't think it works well here as you can't really do statistics or define variation on a sample size of one or two. There is more variation present than what has been peer reviewed (btw some of the best info was published by TV/RY in popular herp magazines...) and at this point will be noted, maybe talked about but isn't going to be published."

Maybe so, but how does this help? I need unbiased and verifiable data to go on.

"This is not politically correct but some of this "lack of variation" is what makes this species a "species" and is the drive behind its conservation efforts. People aren't going to research/publish something that jeopardizes their job or funding ( that also goes for much bigger fish than this, lol)no matter how interesting."

I'm a zoologist myself (by education that is, not professionally), so you can take it from me. The payments aren't that good, LOL.

>>"...what do you want for your wishlist- the animals or the literature?"
>>
>>Well, both actually.

if you go online to the USFWS web site and search for JOHN HIMES and CRAIG RUDOLPH, you should be able to access their published field work. These two have done most of the published work that I am aware of over the past ten years.

>>Maybe so, but how does this help? I need unbiased and verifiable data to go on.

Search these people out and talk to them.
Steve Reichling
Terry Vandeventer
Tom Agosta
Bob Fengya
KJ Lodrigue Jr.
Eric Richter
John Ginter

If you can't trust what these guys have to say ( and if you don't believe in God or Santa, lol) then you are not going to be satisfied.

>>I'm a zoologist myself (by education that is, not professionally), so you can take it from me. The payments aren't that good, LOL.

I am sure they are not good for the individual. But there is often alot of money and political clout at stake overall and pesky details might get in the way of demonstrable achievement, lol.

Cheers,
Dave

-----
odelay odelay odelay hee hoooo...
heeeeya huhhhh!
~Back in the saddle (Aerosmith)

I produced six in 2008, from two different mothers but the same father and it is amazing the color differences in them. I really never noticed that difference until I photographed them all. After having over 50 years of expirence in breeding different species, I have noticed though, that many times captive bred animal are often far more atttractive and color intense then wild caught animlas. This is not from line breeding...but these qualities appearing in the first clutches of wild caught animals.

Dan

And while most of the LA pines on the market have come from those guys you listed...there are still others who have there own stock of wild caught LA pines who just didn't want the "publicity". Because of the "profit motive" behind this, many of the established breeders brought questions or doubt on any other stock then there own, when in fact they had no idea nor clue concerning that other stock. I believe (IMHO) they brought a lot of this "negativity" concerning LA pines upon themselves. J. Ginter believes that there are more LA Pines then hybrids and Terry V. just the opposite. I respect both mens opinions. Simply fact is...this is a hobby forum, not a science forum. I can't scientifically prove that my LA pines are "pure"...I'll take Ginters word that they are, who takes Terry's words that they are...and if I sell them...they are going to be sold as LA pines at LA pine prices. So, don't ask me if I can prove it...no I can't....but I like them anyway!!!

"if you go online to the USFWS web site and search for JOHN HIMES and CRAIG RUDOLPH, you should be able to access their published field work. These two have done most of the published work that I am aware of over the past ten years."

Unfortunately, the USFWS has moved their literature to the USFWS intranet, which I don't have access to. Do you have any copies? Sounds like this could be exactly the kind of information that I'm looking for.

try this-

http://www.srs.fs.usda.gov/search/

-----
odelay odelay odelay hee hoooo...
heeeeya huhhhh!
~Back in the saddle (Aerosmith)

Yes, thanx.