Reptile & Amphibian Forums

For you "wild-type" fans, here's a 2003 F1 male (from WC adult female) produced by Tim G. Pic taken today after a shed. Enjoy!

Bob

Very nice shot of a beautiful snake. However, I think my opinion of thayeri is somewhat suger coated now. I am starting to see much beauty in all of them. Of course, a nice picture does help. Good job on managing those shadows.

Got your email too.

Later,

Brad

Very nice Bob. He's got that "modernly antique" look. Its hard to describe but the best way to explain it is the way I described a woman I once knew. A friend once asked me what I thought of this woman and I said she was "beautifully ugly". She really was pretty but at certain angles she was kind of ugly. Then she would turn her face and she was stunningly beautiful.

I really like the background in that pic too. I need to bring home some of them lichen rocks to take pics on too.
-----
Vichris

Vichris Variables

Thanks. That's an interesting way to describe a woman! I am lucky having lots of those rocks all over here, as it makes photography on natural backgrounds a bit easier.

Bob

...and this is by far the best shot of him I've seen, thanks much for sharing it here. Tim told me he was an interesting F1, he obviously knows his animals well and can see their potential when young. Unfortunately for me I wasn't smart enough to see it back then.

I think you were very wise to add that male to your group. His offspring will be something special and I know you have the right females for him. I'll certainly be looking forward to seeing what you do with that one!

Mike

Hi Mike:

Glad you liked the pic, and you've certainly seen this male at various stages in his young life. I think it's especially interesting to photo-document our snakes (esp. thayeri) from hatchling-hood to adulthood. They often change in ways that are difficult to predict.

Bob

Nice. Some of the thayeri I had in the early 90's had that same type of nuchal and the lateral dot-alternates.

Bob,
I am not wanting to step on anyone's toes around here, but if a single wild caught parent is bred to a captive bred mate aren't the offspring considered "from wild blood" and not F1?

I too have a female from that bloodline, but I don't think I can refer to it as an F2, but rather "of w/c blood".....Just wondering if anyone else has noticed this......
If a wild male is bred to a wild female then the offspring are certainly F1's.......If a wild female was bred to a captive bred male the offspring cannot be considered F1's.....Am I wrong here or what?

John Lassiter

John:

Thanks...my toes are fine. The F1 simply refers to all first-generation descendents of that particular female, and of course F2's are the products of crossing any of her F1's. It does not make any reference to the percentage of "wild" genes. Though in this particular instance, assuming the wild-caught female is bred to a captive-produced male of uncertain origin, we can say that 50% of their genetic material came from a female wild-caught in the mountains of Nuevo Leon near the town of Aramberri.

Cheers,

Bob

I see, we are using 'F' as a generation marker within a group rather than generations from the wild. I do that with "morph project" snakes. I thought I was wrong, but it was easy for me to keep up with them. I believe hybridizers label their project generations with 'F' as well.
Thanks Bob,
John Lassiter