Reptile & Amphibian Forums

I have a female Texas Indigo that is five years old. I got her from a breeder of Texas Indigos and she was born to normal Texas parents. I bought her from a group of babies that were and are all normal. I treated her like all Indigos feeding and the full treatment. She is now perfectly normal in all ways, except she is only about 36". A perfect minature Texas Indigo. I have heard occasionally of dwarf Indigos and I have one, I guess. I would like to find a male Texas that is similar and see if it is genetic. No way she could be bred to my big male who is approaching eight feet. I think he would think she is a snack. I know this is a long shot, but if you have a male like this and want to give this a try, let me know. Thanks.

That breeding attempt might not be the best idea you ever had. Since your dwarf was a normal sized baby, she obviously must have hatched from a normal sized egg, which is pretty big. If your little female has a successful mating, how will she ever be able to pass viable eggs? She'd probably wind up egg bound and you could lose her.
It sounds like even though she's a dwarf, you like her, so why risk it? I guess she has all the characteristics of an indigo without the large size, so as a pet, she must be pretty fun.

VinnyButch

Hmmmmm......makes me think this snake may be a result of brother/sister some type of inbreeding possibly.I'd never breed her,just keep her as a pet IMHO.

Hi Virgil,
Carl Gossett had one like that a while back. I believe it was a female also, but I can't remember for sure now. He said it was a great pet snake....I came close to buying her for that. He was asking that whoever bought it didn't breed it...probably the right thing. I, too would be concerned about egg-binding in a dwarf female. And, I'm really not so sure about the prospects of a dwarf line of Indigos.....but, then again, I'm a "purist". The thought of breeding for morphs of any kind or crossing lines at all drives me crazy...just a "thing" I have. I love Indigos in their pure, normal, natural form. I'm not trying to say it would be wrong to try to breed out a dwarf line...who am I to judge that? It's just not something I would be interested in doing. I do agree, though, that it would be interesting to know if it's a hereditary trait or a one-off.

Hi old herper,

I have a question for you. I too am against breeding for morphs and understand how you feel. However, if you hypothetically hatched a litter that produced 1.1 albino easterns or texans would you breed them together to produce an albino line?
If I were to be totally honest, I would have to say that in that situation, I would probably do it, even though I would be against otherwise trying to produce an albino indigo.
What does everyone else think about this? Go easy on me though!

Eric

That is a good question! I think I would breed them, just like any others. The difference is that would be a naturally occurring morph, not something that was produced "artificially". Who knows? The dwarfism that we're talking about in this thread may well be a genetic trait also, a defective gene if you will. Albinism is the same thing. It's just that a dwarf Indigo just doesn't hold any appeal for me. The size of them is part of the charm for me. That doesn't mean that I would euthanize a dwarf if I came up with one out af a clutch, I would just keep it as a pet and probably not breed it unless it was for the purpose of trying to isolate the origin of the condition.

I am confused...Didnt we hammer this all out in the hybrid debacle? Didn't you guys all jump on the band wagon against this sort of thing? What happened to the purists who chastised the crap out of me for suggesting that a hybrid might have some use? Isn't this the same kind of thing? I think it is. If there is any validity to the arguments against hybrids, then those same arguments should also apply to the subject of propagating genetic anomalees like dwarfs and albinos. I think.
Tony.

Tony,
I have to disagree with you here. These defects, albinism and dwarfism, are naturally occuring conditions in nearly every population of animals. The dwarf Indigos are not something I would particularly like to see on the market, but that's more a matter of personal taste than anything else. For me, the jury is still out on albinos. I've never seen an albino Indigo, though I'm sure they have existed. However, a dwarf or albino Texas Indigo is still a pure Texas Indigo and as far as that goes is still genetically pure. A hybrid between a Texas Indigo and some other Drymarchon isn't. Big difference to my way of thinking.

I haven't posted here in a while, so let me start off by saying I'm not a troll, and don't mean to start any type of argument with anyone here, I just want to know how the group feels about these things. I respect the work you guys do, and fully realize that when dealing with animals that are becoming rarer in nature, there is a lot more sensitivity about keeping things pure or original.

That said I was a bit surprised by the response to this thread, and the open suggestion that dwarf style animals are enough of a "defect" that a breeder should consider simply putting them down. It's not that I'm against culling animals...in fact, I've seen many an albino boa and the like which were missing eyes, kinked, or deformed in some other way that should never have made it out of the breeder's hands, yet again be purchased for breeding themselves. (that's the kind of practice that even turns a hybrid-lover's stomach )

I remember DougT telling me about the "hotdog" indigos a long time ago, and I remember thinking that they would be really cool snakes. I personally like them as big as possible...but some other people might love a small one. (in fact, I wouldn't mind having a small one to show people the difference)

Is there any posibility that there is some kind of natural adaption going on here? Drys tend to be big, and are serious movers and shakers compared to the other snakes I keep...my indigos travel all over the place, and my limited understanding of the group is that all the subs tend to have pretty huge ranges. I know a few hundred years of habitat desruction and contamination is a little different than a million years of adaptation, but it seems odd to me that this is cropping up in at least easterns and texans, if not other subs as well.

It would be really sad to see one of these little females die from egg-binding, but I wonder what the response would be from you guys if she passed the eggs just fine? Since all of the current dwarves came from normal sized parents, it could be that a dwarf/dwarf breeding would exagerate the trait and produce smaller eggs/hatchlings. Would it be a clutch of freak snakes that people should scorn, or another natural phase of the gorgeous snakes that we love...?

I don't know why someone would want to stamp out a naturally occuring varietly of indigo... The anti-hybrid thing I understand, but the "I like my 'pure' indigos the way I first saw them--big; so no one should be allowed to enjoy naturally small ones. Please kill them if you produce any."

If I'm losing the context of the conversation or overemphisizing the wrong points, I oppoligize, just trying to get a better feel for the reasoning behind not wanting different varieties of these snakes in the hobby.

One way or the other, I think it's cool that the breeders here are at least interested in isolating the trait and learning about what's happening whether they'd like to see smaller ones on the market or not. Neat project...

-c-

You are correct, OldHerper,

Dr. Gossett once had a 0.1 dwarf D. c erebennus within his collection. However, she was sold, then traded, then sold again to an individual in Florida at a local reptile show.
I found her for sale, yet again, here on KS about 2 months ago.
I contacted the individual selling her and purchased her for my academic collection, here at the university, as I did not wish to see her passed around the country any longer.
I have no intentions of breeding her, but will be conducting cDNA, genome mapping and a hybridization probe with her, in the near future.
I will take SVL, OVL, VTL and cranial measurements to post later this week.
It may be of interest to note, she demonstrates diminished eyesight, even by Dry standards, and has the appearance of cataracts within her eyes, giving the appearance she is constantly in the blue.
I am attaching a photo, which I hope can be viewed.

I think this is worth trying.

We know that “dwarf” indigos have occurred frequently in captivity and have even been collected in the wild.

So…is this due to inbreeding (which can happen in the wild as well as captivity) or could it be that a period of forced-fasting during a critical growth period could be the cause?

This could also happen in captivity as well as the wild. Maybe people feeding them like boids during the first couple years could cause it in captivity?

Or maybe it’s strictly a genetic abnormality. This is a test that could have real scientific merit.
I hope this doesn’t make me cold and unfeeling, but I think it’s worth it to risk egg binding in one dwarf female for such a test.

It would be great if you could get the babies from such a pairing in the hands of people you trusted to raise and compare notes. But…of course be careful they don’t leak out into the general public to contaminate the “good” genes.

I’d say if the babies do end up being “dwarf”, get them in the hands of people you 100% trust to keep them and not breed them, or euthanise them.

I could go along with that. It woul definitely be interesting to know, and maybe even uncover something important and as yet unkown with regards to husbandry and breeding...who knows? But, as you said care needs to be taken to insure that the babies don't get sold to the public. I'd hate to see a post on here one day that says something like " I had this dwarf Texan and I bred it to a Yellowtail to get some bigger babies and then bred it back to an Eastern to get some dark color back and I ended up with these babies that have gigantic eyeballs and red fingers that look like hotdogs growing out of their necks. I'm offering them for $15,000.00 a copy."

I agree, go for it.

Sure it's an indigo but, it's worthless for anything other than a pet so, I believe the potential benefits from such a breeding far outweigh the chances that this snake will become egg bound and die. Chances are it would've died in the wild anyway.

Eric

I would have to disagree on this one Drini.It seems to me that this would be propagating a genetic abnormality wich would not be much different than the "mutts" of previous discussions. I would have to refer to some of what you wrote about hybrids, and aply that to this subject. It seems to me that this would not serve any viable purpose for helping a species which is already in trouble. Would'nt we just be muddying the genetic waters so to speak as you so fervently pointed out in the hybrid discussion? I'm sorry buddy,... I just don't see it. Shoould'nt we be focusing on breeding projects which strenghten the blood line instead?

Not to mention what that poor little mama would have to endure to pop out those eggs. That would be like you or I crapping out a bowling ball!...Or six or eight bowling balls!! I don't know about you but I'd be through after the first one.

Oh well no hard feelings, thats just my opinion. Hope I didn't stir up another hornets nest!
Tony.

Tony,
I think the point is that if you can narrow down the cause of the dwarfism, you may actually be able to strengthen the captive populations by eliminating it. If it's some occasionally manifesting genetic defect, there's probably nothing that you can do about it. But, if it's some environmental issue or husbandry issue, you can. If it's from something like insufficient diet during the first two years (rapid growth stage), it could provide valuable insight on that relationship.

I disagree that it's the same thing as hybridizing these animals. This condition is something that is occasionally seen both in the wild and in captivity without human intervention. Hybrids aren't...at least hybrids such as Eastern/Blacktail crosses. I certainly do disagree with the idea of breeding them as another morph for the pet trade, though.

One other thing I do agree with you on though is the egg size issue...I just don't know if a dwarf female could handle full-sized pebble-grained Indigo eggs. But, would a true genetic dwarf lay full-sized eggs? If it is genetic, is it one of those traits that skips several generations? Would a true genetic dwarf necessarily have dwarf offspring?

I think I get what you are saying now, and I'm more inclined to agree. I was watching 60 minutes tonight, and there was a segment about embryonic gender selection, and genetic screening where an egg is fertilized and a cell is removed for D.N.A. analysis for humans. In plain english, they where checking to see what sex it was and wether or not there were any genetic problems, before the embryo was implanted. And all the undesirables were disgarded. Stoping genetic problems before they start. Amazing stuff!!!. We have mapped out the human genome, which is what gives us this tremendous control over our own species, but is anyone out there working on similar research with these animals?
Tony.

This condition is known to exist in the wild I know people who have collected them.

So...if it's because of a simple lack of food. ok...that happens during drought...etc.

But if it's GENETIC, then we know we could have a problem in populations where we see this. It may make sense to introduce new bloodlines into populations where we see the dwarfism if it turns out to be genetic.

Tony...I always respect your point of view, but I'm never going to be in favor of breeding for an abnormality unless I beleive there is a benefit in it for the animals. You should know me better than that!

Now I understand. I think. But I still wouldn't do it unless it would provide an opportunity for science to identify, isolate, and eliminate that particular gene. I don't know,... maybe I just feel sorry for that little gal trying to crap out those bowling balls.
Tony.