Reptile & Amphibian Forums

Someone had brough my attention to this subject bellow....... It is very interesting to say the least...... Ok to start with I have seen the wet collections of a couple of museums and have never seen a wild caught patternless....... I have seen some very reduced patterns and even something that may be called a hypo...... Never saw super hypos or tangs or carrot tails...... But the link posted was an eye opener or just interesting..... Now it is aggreed that patternless and blizzards are recessive genes....... Yet a link bellow is saying or making it sound like it is a dominant gene...... Now if you breed a mormal or wild gene to a patternless you get all normal babies...... This is common knowledge and just about everyone knows this...... My thought is this...... The site is saying that these other morphs are subspecies......... I don think this is the case at all....... I think if what I was reading is true, the patternless morph can be a locality spacific recessive gene...... This is ofcourse my own conclusion but as far as I feel, coloration is not enough to give an animal its own subspecies status..... Any thought because this is new news to me........ And I thank GoldenGate geckos for bringing this to my attention......
Gregg

I have seen that link before, and it was discussed here a bit and I thought at that time the consensus was it was a hoax. I'd like to hear what others think.
-----
Sarah Stettler aka Starling
Sarah@stargecko.com
StarGecko.Com COMING SOON! Star Quality Leopard Geckos
Specializing in Hypotangerine Tremper Albinos

n/p
-----
Marcia McGuiness
Golden Gate Geckos
www.goldengategeckos.com

Well then, it sounds like you and Christine need to quit arguing and join forces in a research study on this! LOL! I know these species do exist, but do not know if they can be interbred. I have second-hand information from a friend of mine who is a professor at UC Davis Vet School that these various leopard gecko species and sub-species were used by some very big name breeders to develop some of the "new" morphs that are being sold today at outrageously high prices.

A good place for you to start might be here:
www.calacademy.org/research/herpetology/catalog/BrwsHerpRecDisp.asp?Atr=Genus&Val=Eublepharis
-----
Marcia McGuiness
Golden Gate Geckos
www.goldengategeckos.com

It would be very interesting, I wish they had pictures in that other link you sent. They do look like out patternless and hypotangerine morphs in that one link.
-----
Sarah Stettler aka Starling
Sarah@stargecko.com
StarGecko.Com COMING SOON! Star Quality Leopard Geckos
Specializing in Hypotangerine Tremper Albinos

just curious because i'm interested in any herp specializing professors/vets at UCD (especially one that is knowledge about geckos). email me personally if u need to, thanks in advance

sfgeckos@aol.com
-SFgeckos

n/p
-----
Marcia McGuiness
Golden Gate Geckos
www.goldengategeckos.com

"I think if what I was reading is true, the patternless morph can be a locality spacific recessive gene...... This is
ofcourse my own conclusion but as far as I feel, coloration is not enough to give an animal its own
subspecies status.."

Well you basically just defined what a subspecies is without even knowing it...

By definition a subspecies is a natural population within a species that differ genetically (you said locality specific recessive GENE) and are partially isolated from each other due to different ranges. They can and will interbreed where ranges over lap. It amazes me that you were not aware of this considering your background.

-----
Bill DiFabio
Garden State Herpetoculture...website to follow...
Email Me
"The poetry that comes from the squaring off between,
And the circling is worth it.
Finding beauty in the dissonance." - Maynard James Keenan

n/p
-----
Marcia McGuiness
Golden Gate Geckos
www.goldengategeckos.com

Hey Bill,
I know where you are coming from with that train of thought...... I thought the same thing at first...... But it takes a little more than pattern to get subspecies status..... And I dont think a recessive gene qualifies in this...... It is still a recessive gene and can never become a true dominant..... Also true intergrades will take on the color and pattern of both parents not just one...... Take gaboon/rhino crosses for instance...... Would you say an albino is a subspecies???? In this case, if proven true, the name should be E. macularius afghanicus....... Thats the way I see it....... Take black or white throat monitors for example..... All are separated somehow from eachother...... All are different in pattern and coloraton...... And they too can intergrade...... You have V. albigularis. albigularis, V.a. microstictus, V.a. ionides, and V.a. yemenensis...... When crossed the noes look like both parents not just one..... See where I am going???? So I really did not just discribe a subspecies....

They are in the same genus but that site has them listed as different species...... Thanks for the correction bill...... I do not feel the should have full species status...... I got myself alittle confused because I think faster than I type and it all get jumbled up inside....

"it takes a little more than pattern to get subspecies status"

Yes, you are right, it takes geographic isolation. Pattern can very well identify a subspecies, it is controlled by genes, isn't it?... think back to the definition I posted.

"Would you say an albino is a subspecies????"

I would not call a cb albino a subspecies, but what about a wild population of albinos. However unlikely this would be...what if there was hard evidence of a geographically isolated population of albino leopards out in Afghanistan somewhere. Would they not by definition be a subspecies. Would a taxonomist be able to deny that they are? So what if there is a wild population of patternless leos that have an isolated range, how could they not be considered a subspecies?

"All are separated somehow from eachother...... All are different in pattern
and coloraton...... And they too can intergrade...... You have V. albigularis. albigularis, V.a.
microstictus, V.a. ionides, and V.a. yemenensis...... When crossed the noes look like both parents not
just one..... See where I am going????"

Could you explain this one a little better? I don't see the point...sorry, I'm not being sarcastic either. I mean you just named a bunch of subspecies... by definition, subspecies can breed with subspecies, otherwise they would be a seperate species.

-----
Bill DiFabio
Garden State Herpetoculture...website to follow...
Email Me
"The poetry that comes from the squaring off between,
And the circling is worth it.
Finding beauty in the dissonance." - Maynard James Keenan

"In this case, if proven true, the
name should be E. macularius afghanicus."

actually exists...check out the info bellow...I would imagine there are even more subspecies than that, just not much interest in identifying them. I tried to just copy the link, but would not work.

"Species:
Eublepharis macularius
Synonyms:
Cyrtodactylus macularius BLYTH 1854: 738
Eublepharis fasciolatus GÜNTHER 1864: 429 (fide SMITH 1935)
Eublepharis macularius - BOULENGER 1885: 232
Eublepharis macularius - BOULENGER 1890
Eublepharis macularius - SMITH 1935: 127
Eublepharis macularius - WERMUTH 1965: 29
Cyrtodactylus madarensis SHARMA 1980
Eublepharis gracilis BÖRNER 1974
Eublepharis macularius - KLUGE 1993
Eublepharis macularius - RÖSLER 2000: 78
Subspecies:
Eublepharis macularius fasciolatus GÜNTHER 1864
Eublepharis macularius afghanicus BÖRNER 1976
Eublepharis macularius macularius BLYTH 1854
Eublepharis macularius montanus BÖRNER 1976
Eublepharis macularius smithi BÖRNER 1981
Family:
Gekkonidae, Sauria (lizards)
Distribution:
Afghanistan, Pakistan, W-India (Rajasthan, Ajmer, Madar foot hills), Iraq, Iran (fide CARRIÓN et al. 2003).

Terra typica: Salt Range, Punjab.
Comment:
Cyrtodactylus madarensis Sharma, 1980 is a subjective synonym of Eublepharis
macularius (Blyth, 1854), according to Das (1990). Grismer (in ESTES & PREGILL 1988) synonymized E. gracilis and E.
afghanicus with E. macularius. Eublepharis macularius fuscus BÖRNER 1981 has been elevated to full species status by
DAS 1997. E. macularius shows temperature-dependent sex determination (Shine 1999).

photo: http://itgmv1.fzk.de/www/itg/uetz/herp/photos/Eublepharus_macularius.jpg
photo: http://www.uroplatus.com/photopage/images/Eublepharis macularius 01.jpg
photo: http://www.uroplatus.com/photopage/images/Eublepharis macularius 02.jpg
photo: http://www.uroplatus.com/photopage/images/Eublepharis macularius 05.jpg
photo: http://perso.wanadoo.fr/batraciens/page_reptiles_1.htm
photo: http://www.gekkota.com/Photos/photos.html
photo: http://www.geckoranch.com/photos2.html
photo: http://www.geocities.com/Heartland/Prairie/3470/EUBLEPHARIS.html
photo: http://www.crislis2.f9.co.uk/herpcapbreed/leopard.htm
References:
Blyth (1854) J. Asiat. Soc. Bengal 23 [1854]: 737-740
Bonetti (2002) 100 Sauri. Mondadori (Milano), 192 pp.
Börner (1974) Miscellaneous Articles in Saurology, (4):7-14.
Borner (1976) SAUROLOGICA (No. 2) 1976: 1-15
Börner (1981) Saurologica, (3):1-7
Boulenger (1885) Catalogue of the Lizards Vol. I.
--> Boulenger (1890) Ann. Mag. nat. Hist. (6) 6: 352
Das (1992) Asiatic Herpetological Research 4: 55-56
Estes etc. (1988) Stanford University Press, xvi 632 pp.
--> Günther (1864) Ann. Mag. nat. Hist. (3) 14:429-430
--> Martínez etc. (2003) Reptilia (GB) (26): 39-42
Rösler (2000) Gekkota 2: 28-153
Sharma (1980) BULLETIN OF THE ZOOLOGICAL SURVEY OF INDIA 3(1-2) 1980: 111-112 and Asiatic Herpetol.
Res. 4: 55-56
Shine (1999) Trends Ecol. Evol. 14 (5): 186-189
Smith (1935) Fauna of British India,Vol. II., Rept. Amph."

-----
Bill DiFabio
Garden State Herpetoculture...website to follow...
Email Me
"The poetry that comes from the squaring off between,
And the circling is worth it.
Finding beauty in the dissonance." - Maynard James Keenan

Here are some publications that go waaaay back, too!

Anderson, Steven C. and Alan E. Leviton
A new species of Eublepharis from southwestern Iran (Reptilia: Gekkonidae).
January 20, 1966

Clark, Richard J., Erica Clark and Steven C. Anderson
Report on two small collections of reptiles from Iran.
June 30, 1966

Leviton, Alan E.
Report on a collection of reptiles from Afghanistan.
February 27, 1959

Leviton, Alan E.and Steven C. Anderson
Third contribution to the herpetology of Afghanistan.
February 28, 1963

Anderson, Steven C.
Amphibians and reptiles from Iran.
September 10, 1963

Clark, Richard J., Erica D. Clark, Steven C. Anderson and Alan E. Leviton
Report on a collection of amphibians and reptiles from Afghanistan.
April 10, 1969

Anderson, Steven C. and Alan E. Leviton
Amphibians and reptiles collected by the Street Expedition to Afghanistan, 1965.
October 22, 1969

Leviton, Alan E. and Steven C. Anderson
The amphibians and reptiles of Afghanistan, a checklist and key to the herpetofauna.
December 31, 1970
-----
Marcia McGuiness
Golden Gate Geckos
www.goldengategeckos.com

I messed up when I said subspecies...... I got too far ahead of my self and your post made me look twice at what I wrote..... That site was making it look like they were their own species not subspecies...... And when I was rambling off those species names I actuall was trying to say the same thing you were but like I said I got ahead of myself and thanked you for the correction......

I'M POSTING THIS INFORMATION AS MY OPINION ON THE SUBJECT. So please don't start any arguments. This is how I perceive the situation. I'm only giving my input.

The commercially avilable morph's aren't technically subspecies. There are some leos in the wild who exibit traits that corispond with some of the available morphs. This comes from being geographically isolated. It's basically like a contained breeding colony. The genes get passed around and the reccesvie traits begin to show. As Aztec said subspecies is defined as:
subspecies

n : (biology) a taxonomic group that is a division of a species; usually arises as a consequence of geographical isolation within a species. Quote from www.dictionary.com

Basically subspecies is a synonym for race. Slightly different physical traits that define one from being slightly different from the next. It's like trying to compare someone of asian heritage with someone of european heritage. Were all humans but we show different physical traits. But were all classified scietifically as homo sapiens.

Would you consider an albino leo to be a different species than a high yellow? I don't think so. So why would you consider a patternless leo as a different species than wild caught leo. It's the same animal except for it's coloration. This also manifests itsself in the human world.

Basically what I'm trying to say is do you consider a white poodle to be a different species than a black poodle for example. Why would gecko's of different genetic stock be a different species.

Compare leo's to knob tailed geckos for example. There are several physical differences between rough and smooth knob taileds. This is why they are classified differently. Now if someone bred a line of leo that had a knob tail for example this would be a subspecies for sure.

Once again my thought's my opinions. You don't have to agree or disagree I'm just trying to give people some insight into the situation.

This makes sense, especially when you consider that many of the geographic locations of these sub-species are pretty much land-locked.
-----
Marcia McGuiness
Golden Gate Geckos
www.goldengategeckos.com

True. The more I look at this the more it starts to make sense. Humans have been breeding dogs for thousands of years and we've created hundreds of sub species no one can debate that. Hell we've done it with chickens, pidgeons, cows, pigs, sheep, even goats. So by breeding geckos were doing the same thing. The big question would be how would you distinguish sub species, for example who's to say a hypo tang is a different subspecies than a tangerine. How would you classify morph's with recessive traits such as blizzards and leucustic?

You have a point, but I think are losing what the meaning of a subspecies is...when talking about domestic pets and livestock, the term that is used is breeds. These are inventions of man and not nature.
-----
Bill DiFabio
Garden State Herpetoculture...website to follow...
Email Me
"The poetry that comes from the squaring off between,
And the circling is worth it.
Finding beauty in the dissonance." - Maynard James Keenan

Which is the whole point were making is it not. Were trying to distinguish wether current leo morphs are sub species am I correct?

ah...but look at dogs...compare a great dane to a chihuahua or a greyhound to a mastiff...ENTIRELY different in appearance...but still considered the same species. I don't think they currently are...but many geneticists want to list dogs as a subspecies of canis lupus...or grey wolf. The way species and subspecies are split up is EXTREMELY varied, and many times is completely nonsensical. It is a matter of major debate between geneticists and biologists (or smt like that...I don't remember who's arguing with who...lol) how to designate different species...and even among people of the same scientific "schools of thought." There are even arguments going on over how to designate the domains of living things(used to be the kingdoms!!). It's really all a huge mess...lol Anyway, don't yell at me if I mixed up people or used strange words...lol The point is that many species/subspecies are named incorrectly or strangely according to many people, and many animals don't have species/subspecies status that should! Basically the jury is still out on how to classify living things...lol
-----
Christina

0.3.1 leos (soon to be 1.3.1!)
-0.1 tangerine het rainwater albino w/jungle background (Blinkers)
-0.2 jungles (Vahz & Skissor)
-0.0.1 albino (supposed Tremper)(Spitfire)
-soon to be 1.0 tangerine rainwater albino
1.0 australian shepherd/cattle dog (Foster...although he was being fostered before I got him...that has nothing to do with his name...It's after the beer!...lol since he's australian and I'm a college student!)

Yes but look at the signifigant skeletal differences between a great dane and a terrier. Anyone in there right mind can see that they are different animals. If you look at a norm, a blizz, a tang, and a patternless other than the color they all look the same physically. Other than the scaling and possible toe differences which could be caused be select breeding, as well all know it does cause minor defects to appear and be propogated look at any gecko morph.

As well I know there's a huge debate going on which disturbs me. If we can't even classify the animals we know about then what's gonna happen when we start finding ones we didn't know about...

One of the biggest debates is whether or not to classify animals by appearance...or by genetic variance...which makes GIGANTIC differences! For example with dogs, those who want to consider them a subspecies of canis lupus (myself included) argue that they are almost genetically identical in terms of the entire genome (I'm not sure of the exact percentage of difference...but its not more than a percent I don't think...). They are so closely related that they can interbreed freely and have perfectly healthy reproductively intact offspring...and yet are considered entirely different species. On the other hand there are animals classified as being "closely related" that differ greatly in thier genomes. It makes it very hard to understand what the hell is going on! lol Basically it's a matter of listening to whatever the "books" say since no one can agree on a single way to decide what's what...Basically our current system of classification needs to be tossed and everything reclassified (in my opinion the best way would be by genetics).
-----
Christina

0.3.1 leos (soon to be 1.3.1!)
-0.1 tangerine het rainwater albino w/jungle background (Blinkers)
-0.2 jungles (Vahz & Skissor)
-0.0.1 albino (supposed Tremper)(Spitfire)
-soon to be 1.0 tangerine rainwater albino
1.0 australian shepherd/cattle dog (Foster...although he was being fostered before I got him...that has nothing to do with his name...It's after the beer!...lol since he's australian and I'm a college student!)

i remember seeing that link about 3 or 4 years ago, so it's been on the net for a while. i can't really say whether its true or not (when i saw it a few yrs ago my initial thought was it a hoax), but i can say i have examined some of my leopard geckos closely- especially those from "pure ray hine" (dominant hypo line from his wc hypos) compared to say my tangerines which have no "hine line blood". and if u count or examine their posterior scales along their neck/throat it APPEARS (to me) that they have a different scale count and size...however i know scale count can vary greatly, but in MY collection, i've noticed a difference. could the "hine domainant hypos" be a different subspecies? could "tremper giants" actually be a subspecies instead of a simple recessive trait? who knows..just random thoughts

-SFgeckos

Jon, you are really on to something...
-----
Marcia McGuiness
Golden Gate Geckos
www.goldengategeckos.com

Hey Jon, is there a significant difference in scale count???? Or is it just a couple???? Like you said scale count can differ...... It can even differ between males and females..... I now gaboons found in the same area can have a difference in scale count...... Not huge, but enough to notice.....

I have noticed the same thing, also the toe structure is different.
-----
Peace-
Kelli Hammack
H.I.S.S.
email me

however i just thought the toes were more variable than say scalation? when i have some free time i'll look for more literature info on the different subspecies (scale count, any structural differences etc), and maybe compare them to what i've see in my collection? be kinda interesting i think

-SFgeckos

-SFgeckos

This is going to sound grim but the only sure fire way to check the toe situation would be to take a look at some skeletal models. There has to be somewhere you can look at leo skeletons to see if wild caught ones have toe variations.