Reptile & Amphibian Forums

np
-----
0.0.37-blue lab chichlids
0.1.6-sandiego gopher snakes
0.0.1-cal. kingsnake
0.0.1-anole
0.0.2-f.b.t
2.3-coturnix quail
0.1-cockatiel
0.2-s. black widow
1.1(fixed) cats-eddie/buzz

I would have to say no. I'm not an expert on tegus so correct me if i'm wrong but the smallest species is I believe the blue tegu which still gets to be about 3-3.5 feet (sometimes larger) which in my opinion is too big for a 55 gallon.
-----
0.0.1 Green Water Dragon
1.0.0 Tokay Gecko
1.1.1 Bearded Dragons
0.1.0 Columbian Red-tailed Boa
1.0.0 Yellow Ratsnake
0.0.1 California Kingsnake
0.0.1 Black and White Tegu
0.0.1 Chilean Rose Hair Tarantula
1.0.0 Evil Budgie

Except for the fact that a "blue" tegu is T.merianae, which is in competetion with T.rufescens for being one of the LARGEST tegus, you're basically correct. Other teiids could do fine in a 55gallon, such as Ameiva. But members of the Tupinambis genus would definitely require more space.

Sorry I thought the blue was Tupinambis teguixin. T. merianae is what I have...argentina black and white so is the blue a sub-species??. Also is the dwarf tegu (Ameiva ameiva??) actually considered a true tegu or is it just a relative?? I had considered putting him as my answer but hesitated due to the scientific name.
-----
0.0.1 Green Water Dragon
1.0.0 Tokay Gecko
1.1.1 Bearded Dragons
0.1.0 Columbian Red-tailed Boa
1.0.0 Yellow Ratsnake
0.0.1 California Kingsnake
0.0.1 Black and White Tegu
0.0.1 Chilean Rose Hair Tarantula
1.0.0 Evil Budgie

You should look down to some of my earlier posts, beardiedragon started a thread 'what to do' I believe.
It's one of my problems with the pet industry - and I should know, aside from being a private herpetoculturalist and an actual herpetology researcher, I spent close to 10 years running pet shops. Common names are created left, right and center by people who don't know any better. The wholesaler gets them from some importer, neither often really knows what it is, they create a name for it, and that's that. The name gets passed on to the pet shop, and quite often the people in the pet shops don't know any better. I truly and seriously wish that hobbyists would do more to learn about their animals, starting with knowing the scientific names so that there is no confusion.
Unfortunately, there's more confusion than just the names. As to whether the "blue" classifies as a subspecies, I would say not. Just a morph. I think a relatively true-breeding morph, but a morph nonetheless.
The 'true' tegus are those of the Tupinambis genus. Even within that, there are considered to be two groups. The merianae group (which includes T.merianae, T.rufescens, and I think two others) and the other I think is referred to as the teguixin group (sorry, I was talking to someone the other day on this very subject here, a true expert, and I seem to have forgotten some of what he said).
Ameivas are commonly just referred to as Ameivas, but they are a Teiid. But they're all pretty recognizable by that pointy head of theirs.

The Blue tegu is Tupinambis teguixin ssp., a subspecies of the Black Columbian Tegu (Tupinambis teguixin). Tupinambis merianea is the Argentine Black & White Tegu. The Argentine Red Tegu is tupinambis rufescens. The Argentine Black & White Tegu is the largest tegu in the world.

The only tegu that can be kept in a 55 gallon tank it's entire life is a Dwarf Tegu, this is not a true tegu (Tupinambis), but as stated prior, it's an Ameiva. It's probably the closest thing you will get to a small tegu-looking lizard.

To see what a dwarf tegu looks like click HERE and HERE.

Rick

-----
theTegu.com Info
Tegu Size Survey
Care Sheets
Tegu Photos (Upload Yours?)

Sorry to disagree with you, Rick. But every 'blue' I've seen is T.merianae, not T.teguixin. dragonfruit_85 earlier posted a (correct, I believe) photo of T.teguixin, and I'm sure most will agree it does not look like your typical blue.
As for the largest tegu in the world, I can't verify that. The largest T.merianae I've ever encountered (one of my own) was 5kg, but I've been told of the odd 8-9kg male. I've read unofficial reports of people claiming to have 20 kg T.rufescens.

According to the scientific name, Tupinambis teguixin ssp., which means clearly that the scientific community conciders them subspecies of the Tupinambis teguixin. Otherwise they would be Tupinambis merianae ssp.

Based on this, and the fact that Ron St. Pierre, a leader in Blue tegu breeding, stated "At this time the Blue Tegu appears to be an undescribed subspecies of tegu. Their origin is from Norther South America and they have similar habits to the Colombian B&W Tegus(temps & diet) and mild personalities like the Argentines. (The original bloodline was found in a shipment of tegus originating from Colombia)" would lead us to believe they are indeed likely to have originated from the Tupinambis teguixin.

They could be a cross-breed or different breed completely for all we know, but for now, they are scientifically classified as Columbian Tegu subspecies.

As far as the largest tegu in the world, according to Bert Langerwerf, about the Argentine Black & White tegus; "The Argentine Black & White tegu is also called the giant tegu, as it is the largest tegu in the world."

And according to Ron St. Pierre, about the Argentine Black & Whites tegus; "Merianae tegus are capable of growing quite large but are generally very docile and usually grow to become tame adults when raised indoors."

If you do a google search for "Largest Tegu", you will see everyone agrees with Bert that the Giant Tegu, aka Argentine B&W Tegu is indeed the largest tegu in the world.

So, if you disagree with me, you are actually disagreeing with with the leaders in the tegu community, as I am just sharing agreed upon information.

Rick
-----
theTegu.com Info
Tegu Size Survey
Care Sheets
Tegu Photos (Upload Yours?)

Ahh good! A debate! I love to debate.

Sorry Rick, you are very much incorrect. I don't mean to step on your toes, but I'll try to address your post on a paragraph by paragraph basis. If you please:

First and foremost, as I've stated before in several posts, there is no officially recognized common names for reptiles in South America (or some other parts of the world for that matter) in english. There is no governing body for such a claim. Secondly, Tupinambis teguixin ssp. does NOT designate that the scientific community recognizes it as a subspecies. The additive "ssp." ONLY indicates vagueness or the fact that the author doesn't know what they are talking about. You need to read your trinomial nomenclature rules provided by the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature. You can find them at
http://www.iczn.org/
Read The Code. A guaranteed cure for insomnia.

Ron St.Pierre may indeed be a leader of breeding "blue" tegus, I don't dispute that (except for the fact that Augusto Shinya Abe has been breeding them for far longer than anyone in NorAm ever knew they existed). However, in his own words, which you have quoted you should see the fallicy to his claims - "At this time the Blue Tegu appears to be an undescribed subspecies of tegu. Their origin is from Norther South America and they have similar habits to the Colombian B&W Tegus(temps & diet) and mild personalities like the Argentines. (The original bloodline was found in a shipment of tegus originating from Colombia)". First, colour alone is NOT a good indicator for describing a species or subspecies. Why? As any zoological museum curator will tell you, alcohol bleaches out the colouring of zoological specimens. Greater criteria are required. Second, he only says Colombian B&W tegus, he has not identified a scientific name. Third, just because it came from a shipment of tegus originating from Colombia does not mean they are T.teguixin (there are several other Tumpinambis species occuring in that country as well) nor that that is where they were originally collected from. There is a lot of black market trade in animals in SouthAm, particularly with reptiles for the pet trade in NorAm. Lastly, he has not indicated any research into the fact of actually identifying the species due to scientifically recognized factors, NOR into whether the group he found actually classifies as a subspecies.

Again, there is NO SCIENTIFIC CLASSIFICATION body that recognizes the common names of these reptiles as used by the pet trade. Find me a peer reviewed, primary research published article that does indeed equivalate Tupinambis teguixin with "blue tegu" and I'll eat my foot. However, if you look on the EMBL Reptile data base (http://www.embl-heidelberg.de/~uetz/LivingReptiles.html) which is usually (although admittedly not always) accurrate, you'll find under Tupinambis teguixin they recognize as common names Black Tegu or Golden Tegu. Under Tupinambis merianae you will find they recognize no common names. Why? Because every pet hobbyist and their blind, three-legged dog keeps creating names for them left, right and center at whim. There just isn't a "common" name. Unfortunately, the internet shouldn't be a reference, read on.

A search on the Ovid Biosis data base for B.Langerwerf produces only 3 references, and only one of them with him as the primary author. It was in 1973 and about the construction and maintenance of a reptile garden. Hardly strikes me as a tegu expert. The other two articles are on nucleogenesis.

Yes, Mr.St.Pierre is quite correct, they can grow quite large, and in captivity often become docile. I'd like to see how "docile" he'd describe the wild ones around here (not our breeding colony, but actual wild, running loose ones) that typically will charge you, jump up at you, and try to tear parts of you off.

Ah yes, google. A great starting place for information. But not a place to finish. So called "resources" on the net are dubious at best. Anyone can put up anything on the net without any regulation whatsoever. Any scientist will tell you the internet is NOT a good reference source. Why? It is simply overbrimming with innuendo, hoaxes, opinions, unfounded 'facts' and outright lies. Try handing in a university paper with resources you got only from google (or anywhere else on the net) and I think you'll find yourself receiving a failing grade. Look further, find the original research articles. However, I really don't want to argue over which species is larger, it's a moot point and unimportant. I just said it was contendable as I've read claims of people having T.rufescens around 20kg, and I've only heard of T.merianae getting close to 10kg. I'd take that over "because someone says so" any day. However, I'll concede you this, let's claim T.merianae is the ubertegu, hooray for them.

So yes, I am disagreeing with you. Am I disagreeing with the tegu community? That depends. With ill-informed hobbyists (no, I'm not pointing at you or anyone else on this forum specifically) I'd have to say I am. With the actual scientific tegu community, I certainly hope not as it's from them I'm getting my data.

Now, please, do me, and others, several favours before you reply to this post. First, it'll make you and probably several others VERY happy if you can provide me with a peer reviewed, primary research article that definitively ties "Tupinambis teguixin" with "blue tegu". My only claim is that every "blue tegu" I have seen has been T.merianae. Secondly, if you fail to do that, please look up these references and read them:

Ávila-Pires, T.C.S., 1995. Lizards of Brazilian Amazonia (Reptilia: Squamata). Zoologische Verhandelingen 1995: 3-706.

Colli, G.R., A.K. Péres, Jr., and H.J. da Cunha, 1998. A new species of Tupinambis (Squamata: Teiidae) from central Brazil, with an analysis of morphological and genetic variation in the genus. Herpetologica 54: 477-492.

Goeldi, E.A, 1902. Lagartos do Brazil. Bollettino del Museo Paraense 3: 1-62.

Manzani, P.R., and A.S. Abe, 1997. A new species of Tupinambis Daudin, 1802 (Squamata, Teiidae) from central Brazil. Boletim do Museu Nacional, nova série,Zoologia, Rio de Janeiro 382: 1-10.

Milstead, W.W., 1961. Notes on the Teiid lizards in southern Brazil. Copeia 1961: 493-495.

Vanzolini, P.E., A.M.M. Ramos-Costa and L.J. Vitt, 1980. Répteis das Caatingas. Academia Brasileira de Ciências, Rio de Janeiro, Brasil.

After reading them thoroughly, get your hands on a bunch of "blue tegus" and use the scientifically accepted criteria to key out exactly what species the "blue tegus" should be considered and report back to us. I'm very curious to hear your findings, as I'm sure many others are as well.

You missed one vital detail, was it overlooked on purpose in your need for a 'good debate', I am stating "facts" based on the common excepted information we currently have from the people who are breeders/keepers of these creatures.

As I pointed out, you are disagreeing with the leaders (breeders/keepers) of the tegus we all buy. I don't need to 'prove' or show anything. I am not 'making' these truths, These current 'truths', true fact or fancy are the commonly excepted facts. If you have proof otherwise, please feel free to show us and I am sure you will be helping to inform a whole community, otherwise I think most of us with continue believing in what the Pierres and Langerwerfs have to say.

If you feel they are wrong, that's your opinion. We are all entitled to our own opinions, but they do have experience on their side. I am not trying to attack you, but to put this into perspective, what exactly is you experience? How long have you been studying tegus?

Rick
-----
theTegu.com Info
Tegu Size Survey
Care Sheets
Tegu Photos (Upload Yours?)

Ok, let’s do this one more time, hopefully it will be the end of it.

First, you claim “According to the scientific name, Tupinambis teguixin ssp., which means clearly that the scientific community conciders them subspecies of the Tupinambis teguixin. Otherwise they would be Tupinambis merianae ssp.” Then, you follow up in your next post with “I am stating "facts" based on the common excepted information we currently have from the people who are breeders/keepers of these creatures.”

So Rick, which is it? Who are you supporting? Are you presenting the “tested facts of scientists” or are you supporting the “opinions of breeders/keepers”? They aren’t one and the same. They can be, but they certainly aren’t in this case.

You further claim “If you have proof otherwise, please feel free to show us and I am sure you will be helping to inform a whole community, otherwise I think most of us with continue believing in what the Pierres and Langerwerfs have to say.”

I do have proof otherwise, I presented it to you to look up for yourself instead of just taking my word for it (which you obviously don’t). However, your response to this information was little more than “yeah, well, the sky is pink because Bob says the sky is pink! So there.”. Please, before you claim I’m wrong, do me the justice of at least checking out those references and putting the information within to application. Or are you the type that still believes Preznit Bush is going to find WMDs in Iraq? On the other hand, I have asked you repeatedly, and I do so again: Please, if you have the reference to a peer reviewed, primary research article that ties “blue tegu” to the species “Tupinambis teguixin”, I’ll gladly eat my foot. Heck, I’ll have someone lop off the other one and send it to you to feed to your tegus. Serious.

I submit, however, that the Lagerwerfs and St.Pierres are NOT the experts in this field. Not to say they are stupid. Far from it. If I wanted to know more about breeding tegus to supply to the pet trade, they are the ones I’d go ask. But they aren’t the ones that described and designated the species, they don’t do research in that field, scientists do. Therefore, when I wish to identify what species I’m talking about, it is those scientists’ material that I will refer to for the species classifications.

In order to have that material published, those scientists submit their papers to be reviewed by other experts in the field. Those experts then review it to deem whether the information presented within is accurate and truthful before the material actually gets published. The Lagerwerfs and St.Pierres probably have written a lot. They have possibly even had a lot published. But it hasn’t been peer reviewed by other experts in the field. Therefore, those published works amount to little more than “opinion”. If I published a book claiming everything they said was garbage, would it make it true? No, because it still only represents my opinion. This is not the route by which the Lagerwerfs and St.Pierres get their reputation. The only test to their claims is the product which they supply to the consumers. And that’s not a test. Coke can say their product is good for me, and I may really like and endorse their product, but it doesn’t prove their claim that it’s good for me.
Ahh, my opinion. Yes, it is my opinion. Although I present the scientific papers to back that opinion up. I have yet to see “their experience” backed up with peer reviewed documents. As for my experience, well, I have to humbly admit, I am quite limited in that respect. I don’t have that much experience, there are certainly others better qualified and more experienced to be called experts than I. I have only worked with tegus for about 20 years. I have only had experience with them through private herpetoculture, working in the pet trade for 10 years, and by being governmentally funded to scientifically research them. I have only dissected about 30 of them to study their anatomy. I’ve only performed surgery on about 100 of them, and admittedly not all turned out to be successful. I’ve only been intensively studying them scientifically for about 5 years, for more than just breeding them that is. I’ve only been responsible for the care of about 1200 of them now and then over time, and admittedly not all of them lived wonderful, disease&problem free lives. I’ve only produced about 500 hatchlings so far. In all honestly, I can only really discuss good, informed experience with T.rufescens, T.merianae, T.quadrilineatus and T.teguixin as I’ve only met a few of the others and most of them were pickled zoological museum specimens. I’ve only just co-authored a chapter on tegu hibernation in a peer reviewed publication for the 2004 scientific symposium of “Life In the Cold” (if you wish, provide me your email and I’ll send you a pdf). I only just gave up most of my life and a private collection of hundreds of animals so that I could escape the dogma of “excepted”(sic) authoritarians (as you claim) so as to come to the tegus natural environment to see how they tick, do research on them in THEIR environment, not mine, and find out first hand the facts. I am not one of the scientists who documented and described the original accounts of the scientifically approved species descriptions, I have only talked with some of them and worked with some. Am I being a smart ass here? No, I am not, because despite this background, I still don’t feel I’m an expert, and when I encounter something of which I’m unsure of, I either go talk to the people whom are more knowledgeable than I, or I go find original resource articles to help me figure things out. I try very hard not to make any claims that I cannot back up with documented proof.

I have never claimed “all blue tegus are T.merianae”, just that all “blues” that I have been shown, or whose pictures have been clear enough to identify the species’ accredited characteristics have turned out to be T.merianae by published accounts. The claims that the “blue” have been scientifically documented to be T.teguixin (you did claim this, Rick) are to my knowledge completely bogus. I have never seen a peer reviewed paper claim such, and I welcome you pointing me in the direction of one that does.

So I disagree with you, Rick. I have presented my argument, I have presented the facts, I submit them for you to review and then report whether I’m correct or not as based on the SCIENTIFIC basis, not on what is believed in the pet trade. Scientists define species, not hobbyists or industrialists. And yes, if what you claim is true, that “blue tegus are scientifically recognized as T.teguixin”, then you DO need to prove it, to provide evidence that documents your claim.

I have recorded your sources for review. In the mean time you stated "I do have proof otherwise".

Could you quote or even paraphrase some of the proof as to what the actual latin name is for the blue tegu? Are you claiming the blue tegu, like the black and white tegu, is available in both columbian and argentine strains or are you saying the blue tegus are merely a color morph found wild in both species? Is there a study on this that you have access to?

Also, since it's the field you work in, could you point me to a recent scientific taxonomy on each tegu.

I will attempt to remain openminded to your comments.

If you wish to contact me via email or to send information, such as the pdf you offered, you can contact me directly at 'tux(at)thetegu.com'

Rick
-----
theTegu.com Info
Tegu Size Survey
Care Sheets
Tegu Photos (Upload Yours?)

By Cthulhu, Rick, I don't want to be insulting, but are you thick or what? Have you read these posts at all?

I've stated, again and again, that to my knowledge (and I have had to research this fairly extensively for my dissertation) THERE IS NO SCIENTIFIC, PEER REVIEWED PRIMARY RESEARCH ARTICLE THAT MAKES ANY CLAIM AS TO "BLUES" BEING T.TEGUIXIN. I think I have perhaps skipped over a sentence that it seems clearly you need to read. Scientists do NOT acknowledge the "blue" tegu. They don't say it doesn't exist, they don't say it does exist. They don't refer to ANY SPECIES AT ALL as being a "blue". Is this clear enough for you? The "blue" tegu of which you are arguing over is an imaginative term as far as taxonomic scientists are concerned. I'm not saying you or anyone else doesn't have a "blue", I'm saying people have been misinformed as to it being a distinct species or subspecies. It's merely T.merianae with a black nose. Call T.merianae whatever common name you want to (everyone else does) the scientific name is still T.merianae.
To answer your questions - no, I am not claiming the "blue" tegu is "available" in both Argentinian and Colombian strains, nor am I claiming that it is just a morph found wild in both species (my friend, what is the difference?!?!?). This I will claim - scientists don't use these common names, there are NO scientifically accepted common names for these species, because the so-called "common" names are inconsistent. This I will also claim - these common names to which you adhere to are misguiding and make no sense. The Colombian black (&white) does not reside solely in Colombia, nor is it only "available" in black (please, drop the "available" as you make it sound like you consider these animals to be nothing more than product for consumption). The so-called Argentinian black&white occurs in greater numbers in other countries than Argentina, like the "Colombian" it doesn't solely exist in Argentina, and it has many more colours than black and white.
Admittedly, I cannot make the claim that T.teguixin doesn't have a morph with the distinctly patterned black nose that hobbyists refer to as "blue". I can make the claim that that particular distinctive marking is found in T.merianae. I am making the claim that every "blue" I have been shown is simply T.merianae with a black nose. Therefore, it is a morph of T.merianae (see other posts).
Again, for the nth time, there is no scientific study claiming anything at all about any "blues" that I am aware of, it's a figment of mass imagination that any scientist ever said "the blue tegu is T.teguixin". In fact, I'm willing to bet body parts that no peer reviewed article has ever referred to any tegu as "blue".
Rick, I HAVE pointed you towards recent scientific taxonomy that describes the tegu species, look at those references I provided. If you are looking for a single, concise, recently published volume that covers all the tegus in their entiretly, tell me where it is because I'd sure love to have a copy of it myself. South American reptiles and amphibians are VERY POORLY covered by any english books.

Sorry, Rick, I apologize for some of my language and tone in the previous post. I'm just getting frustrated with this, I've been showing "blues" to be T.merianae for years, and the best anyone has ever come up to refute me on it, despite all my evidence, is the "well, this breeder claims them to be so they must be".

Honestly, I implore anyone reading this string to direct me to ANY peer reviewed primary research article that refers to ANY tegu as "blue", and better yet identifies the "blue's" scientific name. If such an article can be presented, I will humbly admit I'm an ignorant idiot and refrain from further discussions on species. It seems it would be much easier to prove me wrong than for people to look at the evidence I've provided to defend my (and the scientists' I know) case.

I guess the fact is clear that you think that there is no 'blue' tegu, and that all 'blue tegus' owned as pets are T.merianae and that those who have bred blue tegus for many years are so ignorant or misinformed that they can't tell a columbian tegu from an argentine tegu? and all this based on your experiences?

Let's say that science doesn't recognize the blue tegu at all, which is indeed possible. Let's assume for a moment you have observed a T.merianae that had a powder blue coloration. Does this still mean there isn't a breed of teguixin that predictably breeds 'blue' colored tegus? Of course not.

The point that you overlooked in my posts is that "I" have no experience with blue tegus, I never claimed to be a blue tegu expert. I am posting over and over, as frustrated with you as you are with me, that I am stating the publicly agreed upon norm., which is that the Pierres have been spending years breeding and calling the 'blue tegu', "Blue Tegus (Tupinambis teguixin ssp.)". It's assumed that the leader in the blue tegu pet industry would have some inkly of an idea of the scientific name of their lizards, their life work. The point I was/am making is that the name "Tupinambis teguixin ssp." clearly indicates that the 'blue tegu' is a subspecies of the Tupinambis teguixin. The point you are trying to make is that the name Tupinambis teguixin ssp. doesn't even exist and that the Pierres made it up. You are stating that we are all the blind leading the blind, that the Pierres put out false information and we all blindly agree to this and repeat it until it becomes am agreed upon norm.

Ok, let's move this discussion forward. My mind is open. Let's assume you and the Pierres are both correct, because I can't lightly discard information from someone within their own field of work. Lets assume they have blue Tupinambis teguixin and you have seen or currently have access to a blue Tupinambis merianae. Lets stop the useless banter. Please post some pictures of your blue Tupinambis merianae with close ups. Please point out in your pictures what makes the tegu in your pictures T.merianae rather then T.teguixin. If Stella can do the same we can get to the details from both sources who actually do claim to know the facts.

As stated over and over in the past threads and once more now so you keep it in mind. I am NOT a blue tegu expert, I am not a biolocial scientist. I have never even personally seen a blue tegu other then in photos. I have seen the Argentine Black & White Tegu (tupinambis merianea), Argentine Red Tegu (tupinambis rufescens), Black Columbian Tegu (tupinambis teguixin). I have taken care of or owned both Argentine Black & White Tegu and Black Columbian Tegu. The common name is used herein because though there may not be a body governing the common names, there are indeed 'common' names, names used by 'regular' or common people to describe the lizards. I am arguing the facts with you that we (the consumers of the pet trade) are told by those who breed and supply these reptiles.

Listing reference material that I can't get right now, at this moment, does not help prove your point at this juncture. This is why I asked to you to quote some of the 'true facts' or even paraphrase, but you didn't. It's not "I" who is trying to change the commonly believed 'facts'. I do not know the 'facts' other than what we are told. If you want to tell us otherwise, please show us with some detailed photos. I would personally be interested in knowing the true facts if you have something to offer beyond "science doesn't recognize the blue tegu" or "there is no governing body to deal with common names" statements.. I will assume this is fact at this point. Please show us some blue colored T.merianae.

Thank you,

Rick
-----
theTegu.com Info
Tegu Size Survey
Care Sheets
Tegu Photos (Upload Yours?)

this is my big boy Fred, almost 25 lbs.

-----
Bennett

beardiedragon.com
Home of the Florida Orange

That's indeed a good size tegu. When they say 'largest' I think they mean weight and overall length potential. There are always variances in each type, but the Argentines are larger then the Columbians.. from what I understand it goes like this..

Larger to smaller (if you can call a 3 foot lizard "smaller"

Argentine Black & White
Argentine Red Tegu
Columbian Black Tegu
Blue Tegu & Blue Albinos

There are probably cases of some being larger then others, but this is what I believe is the general size orders. There are always exceptions to every rule.

Rick
-----
theTegu.com Info
Tegu Size Survey
Care Sheets
Tegu Photos (Upload Yours?)

Oops probably should have read the rest of the posts before replying...this answered all my questions thanks
-----
0.0.1 Green Water Dragon
1.0.0 Tokay Gecko
1.1.1 Bearded Dragons
0.1.0 Columbian Red-tailed Boa
1.0.0 Yellow Ratsnake
0.0.1 California Kingsnake
0.0.1 Black and White Tegu
0.0.1 Chilean Rose Hair Tarantula
1.0.0 Evil Budgie

just wanted to share a couple pics of the Ameiva we had for a while. Not a pet that you can handle, wild disposition. A funny story though, I was holding him in my left hand and cleaning out his cage with my right. I was focused on the cage and not the Ameiva in my hand. suddenly i felt a tugging from my left hand as if it were being pulled but I thought how? I turned around to find that one of my dogs had walked up to the Ameiva and it latched onto his nose. He was backing up to get away. no yelping or crying. It only took a few seconds and the Ameiva let go but it was so funny. At least to me, the dog did not seem amused.

-----
Bennett

beardiedragon.com
Home of the Florida Orange

Actually, what you link to is not an Ameva ameva, but what is commonly known as a Chilean Dwarf Tegu, scientific name Callopistes maculatus. (See BeardieDragon's post below for pictures of the Ameva)

These guys are the high speed/low drag versions. Very sleek, very fast, escape artists, and generally known for not living in captivity much more than one year. (There are still some things we clearly don't know about their captive needs) They remind me more of some of the monitors than tegus.

I don't recommend them as pets, as they are very nervous and flighty, and, as stated above, don't live long in captivity. I had one a few years ago, and, at the time, did not know their reputation for not doing well in captivity. Had mine over a year, which I was later told is a long time for one to live in captivity, then it died literally overnight, which I since learned is part of the frustration of keeping them. Necropsy showed absolutely nothing wrong; which I since learned is also common. Still, it was a really neat, active captive as a display lizard. No matter what you do with these guys, they do not get used to you.

Leslie

Yes, I did post a correct picture of a Columbian Black and White Tegu, Tupinambis teguixin. THIS IS ACCORDING TO PETCO. I do not fully trust them(because I was told a 20 gallon long would work for him for life, and he needed a heat rock only), but also according to many care sheets and scientific papers and things I have looked at, it is T.teguixin If I'm correct, 1 loreal scale = teguixin? Plus the smooth scales and all. Here is Tika, my Columbian Black and White/ Common Tegu/ Black Tegu/ Columbian Black Tegu/ LMNOP Tegu, you get what I mean. Now I am confused about taxonomy.
-Beth
PS. This is an old pic of him, he's much bigger now.

Looked right at me when I said his name, he usually ignores me. He was very attentive this day and posed for me.
-Beth
PS. FYI-Tika had MBD when I got him, thank you PETCO

It may not have entirely been MBD, though. It looks to me like it may have also suffered a congenital birth defect. One of our early hatchlings this year was born looking similarly funny, except also missing about half its snout on the left side. A little early for MBD.
However, I'm sure your guy has a wonderful caretaker now.

I dont think it was a congenital defect, because he formed an abcess on his mandible, right under the TMJ (temporal-mandibular joint) and my herp vet squeezed out a great deal of pus. This he didnt know the origin of however. I would like to say he has a wonderful caretaker, but it's just my opinion. So his jaw is crooked because of the abcess, the mandible didnt continue to grow on the one side, Im guessing. He still eats like a pig though.
-Beth