# OH NO A HYBRID ! MY LEPRACUTTAS



## N2TORTS

Oh No A Hybrid! 
Many of these comments border on near-hysteria, others simply state that hybridization is unethical. In one case, I remember a member gave the impression that the world would end if additional hybrids of any type are produced. Yet while writing such a post, that same person may have a domestic cat curled up in his or her lap. The writer is blissfully unaware that this cherished pet is most likely a descendant of an intra-specific hybrid, a cross between the African Wild Cat and the Asian Wild Cat . In any event, all of this would have taken place thousands of years ago and the world is still turning.
But one thing is pretty obvious in all these cases. Most people are completely ignorant of what a hybrid truly is, and even more ignorant of some of the benefits of hybridization. Sure, there can be a few 'downsides' to hybrids, but even these have little merit in an argument. Think about that while you go let the dog out. Did you know your canine friend is a hybrid? In his case, there appear to be so many ancestors which contributed to his genetic pool that scientists cannot even agree on which or how many there might be. Yet no dog-lover would ever consider abandoning Fido simply because he's not 100% pure Wolf!
SO â€¦..lets shed some light shall we? 
The WORD hybrid is a term applied by plant and animal breeders to the offspring of a cross between two different subspecies or species. Hybrids between different species within the same genus are sometimes known as interspecific hybrids. Hybrids between different sub-species within a species are known as intra-specific hybrids. Hybrids between different genera are sometimes known as intervener .
Hybridization between cultivars or varieties is often used in agriculture to obtain greater vigor or growth (heterosis). The first generation often shows greatly increased vigor and a better yield primarily because many genes for recessive, often deleterious, traits from one parent are masked by corresponding dominant genes in the other parent. Many of the hybrid reptiles produced in today's marketplace also show the positive effects of hybrid vigor. Larger babies, with stronger feeding responses, are often produced.
The offspring can display traits and characteristics of both parents. This is a common reason for hybridizing captive reptiles. Combining two forms with attractive appearances to create a third intermediate form which may be still more uniquely attractive is a common goal. Many breeders also use hybridization as a means to introduce desired mutations into species not currently exhibiting them. One of the first projects along these lines was the use of albino Ruthven's Kingsnakes to introduce the albino gene to the closely related Gray Banded Kingsnake . By carefully selecting the resulting offspring for appearance similar to the Gray Banded Kingsnake, breeders were able to produce albino specimens nearly identical to pure Gray Banded Kingsnakes.
The possibility of natural interbreeding and the production of fertile offspring is an indicator of the genetic closeness of the two species. An understanding of the true relationships between species can be enhanced through the process. DNA compatibility is certainly a more accurate indicator of close relationships than mere anatomy...
The offspring of an interspecific or intergeneric cross may be sterile. Sterility is often attributed to the different number of chromosomes the two species have, for example donkeys have 62 chromosomes, while horses have 64, mules and hinnies have 63. Mules, hinnies, and other normally sterile interspecific hybrids normally cannot produce viable gametes because the extra chromosome cannot make a homologous pair at meiosis, meiosis is disrupted, and viable sperm and eggs are not formed. However, fertility in both female mules and hinnies has been reported with a donkey as the father.
Now the other side of the coinâ€¦â€¦Loss of 'purity of race'. This is the most common argument presented against hybridization, and it has a bit of merit. However, such argument is often carried to extremes. It's generally broken into a few concepts, most of which are misleading:
"The genetic purity of the race will be lost and the resulting specimens will be unfit for repatriation into the wild population". 
"The genetic purity of the captive population will be destroyed forever". Often this argument is presented along with the idea that genetic information about hybrids sold will be lost or misunderstood by keepers acquiring future generations of these animals. 
First, let me state that anybody producing hybrids does indeed have an obligation to accurately label them as such to prevent accidental introduction of undesired or unwanted genes into the population. That's just professional etiquette. I think the same data should accompany sales of known pure races as well. We've got the same obligation to maintain details of purity as we do of impurity. 
Here's a secret for you: Unless your animals are pure descendants of known 'locality specific' specimens their purity is already highly questionable anyway. 
"Hybrids are trash". Yeah, whatever...... Sharing such a factually presented opinion carries zero weight with anybody. You should have joined the high school debate team, you might have learned a thing or two about presenting your point. Foreign car enthusiasts have been saying bad things about domestic vehicles for years now, and vice versa. Come to think of it, so have Ford vs. Chevy owners. Guess what: Nobody cares about your sticker showing some kid wearing a Ford shirt urinating on a Chevy when they are shopping for a new vehicle. There's millions of happy owners of all these brands of vehicles.
Moral of the story: If you don't like it don't buy it. This is America and that's your freedom of choice. So is expressing your opinion, just try not to sound like an idiot or waste other people's time when doing soâ€¦.
* No offense You Guys or hard feelingsâ€¦.* but I wonder sometimes why they even open up the threadâ€¦..just to *****?
One last note, I myself did not breed these but, took them on as an interesting project from start to finish and LEARN from the experiences with them . So far the experience has been awesome and the torts are just wonderful little creatures. 
Enjoy~


A few weeks old ( notcice the egg tooth)





Almost 1.5 years....current

















JD~
"JUST MY OPINION"
I honestly think they are Sweeeet!


----------



## dmarcus

I think they are as well!!


----------



## wellington

I would never abandon a hybrid/mutt just for that reason, or any reason. However I do not believe in mixing. It isn't natural and it is man made. I do not look down on someone that does it, however I don't like it either. Your torts are cutties and I wouldn't not by one, I just would never breed one. Yes I realize my dog started out somewhere long ago as a mutt. I would have been just as happy, with one that was never a hybrid, as I wouldn't know any better anyway. I still would never purposely breed for a mutt, or now as they are called designer dogs, ugh. My opinion and it always has been and always will be


----------



## JoesMum

wellington said:


> I would never abandon a hybrid/mutt just for that reason, or any reason. However I do not believe in mixing. It isn't natural and it is man made. I do not look down on someone that does it, however I don't like it either. Your torts are cutties and I wouldn't not by one, I just would never breed one. Yes I realize my dog started out somewhere long ago as a mutt. I would have been just as happy, with one that was never a hybrid, as I wouldn't know any better anyway. I still would never purposely breed for a mutt, or now as they are called designer dogs, ugh. My opinion and it always has been and always will be



I hold very similar views. I don't hold against the ones that exist, but don't believe in crossing species.

Dogs are slightly different. The breeds have come about by selective breeding to preserve certain traits. 

With torts you are mixing species that are more distantly related.


----------



## dmmj

I think you are mixing apples and oranges here comparing dog breeds to different tortoise species.
If you can't tell I am also against it, but no law is being broken, so I won't complain.


----------



## N2TORTS

dmmj said:


> I think you are mixing apples and oranges here comparing dog breeds to different tortoise species.
> If you can't tell I am also against it, but no law is being broken, so I won't complain.


I use the dog reference as most people in here... have 0 experience with any other exotics , rather it be fish , birds, mammals or other herps. For the most part I think itâ€™s a joke to keep a tortoise in an aquarium! ( Geee how many forum members do that? ) â€¦..Ya think thatâ€™s natural ? Not Man Made?â€¦.
You guys are funnyâ€¦â€¦.
"Dogs are slightly different. The breeds have come about by selective breeding to preserve certain traits." ......Joe's mum I think you missed that point in the post ...


----------



## Baoh

Do not sweat it, man. Your animals are healthy and you enjoy them. I certainly enjoy seeing your photographs of them and learning more about them by proxy.


----------



## EricIvins

I don't think the F1s from this group are going to retain much on the Leopard side..........I would like to see how some of the other unrelated F1s that favored the Leopard side are coming along........There have been at least 3-4 clutches produced to date, and I know one of those clutches did have 50% or more that did favor the Leopard side........

Personally, I think these will turn out to be a very popular "Pet" Tortoise if they tend to stay smaller..........


----------



## ALDABRAMAN




----------



## Jacob

Dont worry everyone has there opinion on it, hey its not illegal right


----------



## Glasswalker

I don't feel too strongly one way or the other about it. As long as the parents aren't forced into doing the deed and the offspring are healthy, that's all that matters. Your torts look great, how big do you think they'll get?


----------



## ALDABRAMAN

Jacob said:


> Dont worry everyone has there opinion on it, hey its not illegal right


----------



## Tom

JD, It saddens me that you feel the need to do this. It shows me that you feel that comments against the practice of hybridization are personal comments against you. They are not. You are a respected member here, and with the exception of these two animals, I thoroughly enjoy your posts, comments and pictures. I am not against you, I am against the practice of hybridization. I don't like it in snakes, fish, flowers, birds, tortoises, or any other species. I don't feel that it should be allowed to happen, and I don't feel that people should try to make it happen. I also feel that the people who do participate in it, by accident or by design, should not be rewarded financially for it, or in any other way. There is absolutely nothing hysterical about that.

Comparing tortoise species to mutt dogs is not even apples and oranges. Its apples and bacon cheeseburgers with grilled onions. Because we don't know the exact origin of the domestic dog from 10,000 or more years ago, is not a good reason to go ahead and start making hybrids all willy nilly in 2012. One thing has nothing to do with the other. Same with the domestic cat. This is not hypocrisy. It is two unrelated things. Dog breeds are all the same species, whatever the origin was. I am not against selectively breeding for color morphs within a species. Like what we see in leopard geckos, ball pythons, and corn snakes. Got no problem with that. Got no problem with the hypo red foots, the sunset hypo leopards, or the Ivory sulcatas. These are all members of the same species and being captive bred. Awsome! Have fun with that. Not the same thing as mixing and breeding two different species.

Granted most of the leopards and sulcatas in this country are mixed mutts made up of individuals from all over the range. I find this saddening, and it was a mistake every time this happened. It is a mistake when it happens today. Because it happens or has happened is not justification to go ahead and make a bad situation worse. There are a few people around the country who have leopards and sulcatas from known and distinct locations and they maintain these "pure" populations. I find this honorable, and worthy of great praise. What we have in this country is it. No more are coming in. There more we mess up what we have, the worse off the situation will become. It is my opinion that allowing hybrids and celebrating them messes things up even worse.

I don't know what your intention was with this thread. It seems to me you are defending your actions. I wish that was not the case as you have not been attacked and therefore need not defend yourself. I think we all know where the various parties stand on this issue. This thread will not change anyone's mind and neither will my reply to it. Its a free country and I respect your right to do as you wish. I do not ordinarily comment on your threads showing these tortoises because it would be pointless, impolite and inflammatory. You already know where I stand and there is no reason to beat a dead horse. I only comment here because you made some points and you wish to debate the issue. I don't think that this is a debate that anyone can "win" as this subject is a matter of opinion.


----------



## Neltharion

Tom said:


> JD, It saddens me that you feel the need to do this. It shows me that you feel that comments against the practice of hybridization are personal comments against you. They are not. You are a respected member here, and with the exception of these two animals, I thoroughly enjoy your posts, comments and pictures. I am not against you, I am against the practice of hybridization. I don't like it in snakes, fish, flowers, birds, tortoises, or any other species. I don't feel that it should be allowed to happen, and I don't feel that people should try to make it happen. I also feel that the people who do participate in it, by accident or by design, should not be rewarded financially for it, or in any other way. There is absolutely nothing hysterical about that.
> 
> Comparing tortoise species to mutt dogs is not even apples and oranges. Its apples and bacon cheeseburgers with grilled onions. Because we don't know the exact origin of the domestic dog from 10,000 or more years ago, is not a good reason to go ahead and start making hybrids all willy nilly in 2012. One thing has nothing to do with the other. Same with the domestic cat. This is not hypocrisy. It is two unrelated things. Dog breeds are all the same species, whatever the origin was. I am not against selectively breeding for color morphs within a species. Like what we see in leopard geckos, ball pythons, and corn snakes. Got no problem with that. Got no problem with the hypo red foots, the sunset hypo leopards, or the Ivory sulcatas. These are all members of the same species and being captive bred. Awsome! Have fun with that. Not the same thing as mixing and breeding two different species.
> 
> Granted most of the leopards and sulcatas in this country are mixed mutts made up of individuals from all over the range. I find this saddening, and it was a mistake every time this happened. It is a mistake when it happens today. Because it happens or has happened is not justification to go ahead and make a bad situation worse. There are a few people around the country who have leopards and sulcatas from known and distinct locations and they maintain these "pure" populations. I find this honorable, and worthy of great praise. What we have in this country is it. No more are coming in. There more we mess up what we have, the worse off the situation will become. It is my opinion that allowing hybrids and celebrating them messes things up even worse.
> 
> I don't know what your intention was with this thread. It seems to me you are defending your actions. I wish that was not the case as you have not been attacked and therefore need not defend yourself. I think we all know where the various parties stand on this issue. This thread will not change anyone's mind and neither will my reply to it. Its a free country and I respect your right to do as you wish. I do not ordinarily comment on your threads showing these tortoises because it would be pointless, impolite and inflammatory. You already know where I stand and there is no reason to beat a dead horse. I only comment here because you made some points and you wish to debate the issue. I don't think that this is a debate that anyone can "win" as this subject is a matter of opinion.



I second everything that Tom has stated.


----------



## N2TORTS

Tom donâ€™t be sad â€¦flowers are on the way~ ( not hybrids either) 
I didnâ€™t start this thread to debate but to educate!â€¦after reading another post I wanted to start a new thread to understand the hybrids from a scientific point of view not an *OPINION*. Yes, some of the comments made do come off as offensive, but I guess Iâ€™m just a sensitive sort of guy, but I DO know my tortoises and other exotics close to my 50th year. I personally do not promote Hybridization in tortoises but understand the true possibilitiesâ€™ of it (rather man made or in the wild ) and it fascinates me to see the outcome in genetic form. Iâ€™m not the popular guy in town that has a crowd who follows my every word. Iâ€™ve seen this for years in here with the redfoots and cherries. While knowingly I own some of the best in the country and all the silly arguments of where they came from , cherries vs. redfoots the 80â€™s shipment bla bla bla .. Funny thing any most of us have the same gene lines in all torts from the last 30 years with captive bred animals. I took these guys on trade only weeks old and thought â€œ heck why notâ€? â€¦and to date they are simply awesome with tons of personality and showing some very neat~o markings .
I wonder if they were never â€œ labeledâ€ and years down the line they were posted , how many folks would figure them out? 

( yes I know it's in the debate section , but I knew it would grab your attention ) ...


----------



## Tom

JD, Your carbonaria are all awesome, but I'm not sure I understand your point. I, like most people I think, am not sure of all the different types of redfoots and their origins. They are not one of the species I keep or study much, so I am admittedly a bit ignorant about them. As I understand it, they have all been mixed together and interbred since the 60's. Is this correct? Is this the point you were making? It is a similar situation with the leopards. I'm sad to see this with any species, and that is why I think it is so spectacular if someone has a breeding population of adults that are all from a know locality within that species range, but that is another topic...

Could you please clarify for me what you mean about the redfoots?


----------



## allegraf

Since it is in the debate section, I agree with Tom's assessment of the reason for your post. You can't just post something and then say I didn't mean it that way. You state that you do not promote hybridization, but if I recall you have no problem exposing your cherryhead females to your hypo northern male. Maybe I am a stringent purist, but that is mixing the bloodlines unnecessarily. No one doubts your experience, it is rather your approach to "pointing out the scientific view" and expecting no reply. 

Allegra


----------



## N2TORTS

Here ya go Tom. Read above perfect example....!
First the "exposing" comment is very lame and I do believe I know when my animals are in heat and mating or just in the group enclosure. So this person (yes I know who they are) breeds cherries right? Wonder if they actually know the " local" of their collection and honestly I have some of the same gene lines they do as well as Carl , Marty , Tom, Jerry ect ect ...?....Oh wait how many times have I read over and over Cherries are the same as red foots , just a group came in the 80's with exceptional head coloring so they named them Cherries...and the name stuck and demanded higher prices because honestly they are in some eyes a better looking tortoise. The only difference is locality so donâ€™t mix them ? WTF????? Make up your mind people! 



allegraf said:


> Since it is in the debate section, I agree with Tom's assessment of the reason for your post. You can't just post something and then say I didn't mean it that way. You state that you do not promote hybridization, but if I recall you have no problem exposing your cherryhead females to your hypo northern male. Maybe I am a stringent purist, but that is mixing the bloodlines unnecessarily. No one doubts your experience, it is rather your approach to "pointing out the scientific view" and expecting no reply.
> 
> Allegra



Yes Miss Graf' he has spent time with some of them ......17 females
( 1 Hypo )and 2 males to be exact!


----------



## Madkins007

Hybrids can be interesting. I think there are a couple things we need to remember in this discussion, though.

When we speak of dog, or rose, or most other kinds of hydrids, we are talking about crossing races of the target species. To put it in human terms, we are talking about breeding Caucasian and Hispanic for example.

When we speak of crossing between species, as with the Leopard and Sulcata, we are speaking more along the lines of crossing human and chimpanzee. 

We often cross dogs and roses with some sort of goal in mind. We track the generations and try to reinforce whatever characteristics we want. The upside of this is a better version of the species. The downside is 'culls'- individuals that are not desirable and may in fact have some real problems.

Crossing between species* rarely happens in either nature or captivity. Most species have some sorts of barriers, behaviors, or other defenses to protect against it. When it DOES happen, it very often means that either people have set it up artificially, or that something is stressing the animals to the point that the natural systems are failing. 

Crossing species bothers many people. Bioethicists debate the morality of this on several levels. To use the human x chimp idea again, you can more easily see some of the issues at the heart of the debate. If someone sets this up, are they acting ethically? Is it a 'right' thing to do to either species involved? If the cross works, the offspring is usually at least sterile and often deformed- is this ethical to do? Does the cross serve a purpose or is it more of a whim?

*- The term 'species' is getting kind of slippery as science and taxonomy progress. It is definitely a man-made concept, but its purpose is to help define the relationship between animals. It may turn out that things like Leopard and Sulcata are not as far apart as to be two different species, in which case discussing crosses for them turns to mixing races, not mixing species.

It is also interesting to note that tortoises store sperm for years and can mix old and new sperm. Therefore, the eggs can have a mix of fathers stretching back over about three years. I do not know of any research about whether this mixing makes hybrids more likely or not. It almost certainly makes it tougher to KNOW who the father of a given batch is without DNA testing.


----------



## N2TORTS

Very Well Said Mark.......and I was waiting for you to chime in. You and I might not always agree , but your very well versed on many issues and one sauve' writer~
I respect that~


----------



## allegraf

First the "exposing" comment is very lame 

Very mature comment, the level of which is typical from you. When someone disagrees, you resort to name calling. 

Miss Graf' -What?


----------



## dmmj

I want a half man half monkey


----------



## Jacqui

dmmj said:


> I want a half man half monkey



.. I think I dated him once....


----------



## N2TORTS

allegraf said:


> First the "exposing" comment is very lame
> 
> Very mature comment, the level of which is typical from you. When someone disagrees, you resort to name calling.
> 
> Miss Graf' -What?



No name calling here, Lets focus on the Rf's and Cherries are they the same species other than different locality?


----------



## dmmj

A tad OT but can non cherries produce cherry heads and vice versa?
Also lets refrain from name calling


----------



## Neltharion

dmmj said:


> I want a half man half monkey



I'm scared to think what you would do with it.


----------



## N2TORTS

dmmj said:


> A tad OT but can non cherries produce cherry heads and vice versa?
> Also lets refrain from name calling



Good question Dj , lets see what the experts have to say~


----------



## allegraf

Who are these experts you are challenging? This has been debated and debated as to whether the only differences between the cherryheads and the northern locale redfoots are in fact different species. There has been no in depth study as far as I know to make this determination. There are obvious differences between say a Colombian and a Brazilian, the plastron, the spurs and even the scale patterns on the head. We all know about the term "cherryhead" coming into use as a selling point to get more money for torts. That being said, you can breed a Brazilian and a Venezuelan and get a redfoot for sure, but is it a Brazilian or a Venezuelan? I choose not to intermingle the different locales and disagree with those that do. It is not necessary and generally is done only to make money. I prefer to keep breeding true to the locales that I have. Here in South Florida, the native green anoles can breed with the Cuban/Bahamian anole. It creates another anole but one that is no longer true to the native species.


----------



## ALDABRAMAN

dmmj said:


> I want a half man half monkey



 



Jacqui said:


> dmmj said:
> 
> 
> 
> I want a half man half monkey
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .. I think I dated him once....
Click to expand...


----------



## N2TORTS

allegraf said:


> Who are these experts you are challenging? This has been debated and debated as to whether the only differences between the cherryheads and the northern locale redfoots are in fact different species. There has been no in depth study as far as I know to make this determination. There are obvious differences between say a Colombian and a Brazilian, the plastron, the spurs and even the scale patterns on the head. We all know about the term "cherryhead" coming into use as a selling point to get more money for torts. That being said, you can breed a Brazilian and a Venezuelan and get a redfoot for sure, but is it a Brazilian or a Venezuelan? I choose not to intermingle the different locales and disagree with those that do. It is not necessary and generally is done only to make money. I prefer to keep breeding true to the locales that I have. Here in South Florida, the native green anoles can breed with the Cuban/Bahamian anole. It creates another anole but one that is no longer true to the native species.



Interesting ...and I agree on the differences ( the many years dealing with them at a high level and seeing quite a few of them wild caught and captive bred) , but whats entertaining is your own hatchlings for sell commend the cherry price and not a redfoot hatchling price ? So there must some incentitive in making money and charging a "market price" for the term â€œcherry headsâ€ ....correct? Plus the fact they usually are much more bold in appearance.
In the works are some folks at the San Diego Zoo and Scripps .. who are " in the works" of providing me with some interesting information about the DNA within my own animals used as "subjects". And if cost efficient may help others within the US to keep these so called pure strains ( much like the stud book for radiâ€˜ ) . I firmly believe unless you yourself grabbed the first wild tort at its known location it would be pretty darn accurate of its " locality" ...other than that its second hand info!

JD~


----------



## allegraf

I'm not sure how this became a discussion about me or why you feel the need for the innuendos that I am doing something illicit. I use the term "cherryhead" to market my hatchlings as it is the commonly known name. I am am a hobbyist that happens to breed Brazilian cherryhead redfoot tortoises. I do not do this for money, there is no way there is any profit in it, it is purely a hobby. I am not sure how it is entertaining either. It is apparent that you may have a problem with me personally. If that is so, just say it.


----------



## N2TORTS

allegraf said:


> I'm not sure how this became a discussion about me or why you feel the need for the innuendos that I am doing something illicit. I use the term "cherryhead" to market my hatchlings as it is the commonly known name. I am am a hobbyist that happens to breed Brazilian cherryhead redfoot tortoises. I do not do this for money, there is no way there is any profit in it, it is purely a hobby. I am not sure how it is entertaining either. It is apparent that you may have a problem with me personally. If that is so, just say it.



I guess the same way it went from the leppracuttas to the Hypo redfoot comment.....

I too breed Brazilian, as well as others. The hypos I owned 3 but sold one of the males couple years back. I have the pair now and the baby from last year. Of all my RF's and Cherries I know whoâ€™s breeding who and isnâ€™t mature enough . Currently in the adults Cherry I have 2 males and 7 females. The redrootsâ€™ there is they hypo pair , 1 Colombo female ( fife's) ( just about old enough to breed) and 2 other females almost old enough to breed ( Kilgores).... plus the numerous young's and hatchlings. 
I do though think a lot of myths and rumors go astray in forums such as this..... and its mostly second hand info.
I apologize for any misunderstanding you may have taken..it wasnt an attack on you or your tortoises.

J~


----------



## Tom

A couple of points for Mark. Just for fun and discussion.

Elsewhere in the thread the term apples and oranges was used. According to my diversity professor in college, chimps and humans can more closely be compared to green apples and red apples. According to him, if the same criteria were used to classify us and the apes as were used for all other species, all the apes and humans would be in the same genus. This made too many people of the day back then a little squeamish, so they categorized humans differently.

There is some evidence to suggest that sulcatas do not store sperm for more than a few months. Jerry Fife did a presentation on this at the TTPG last November. Leopards can apparently store it for at least five years.

Sorry for the off topic discussion, but thought it might be interesting to some.


----------



## Jacqui

N2TORTS said:


> ..it wasnt an attack on you or your tortoises.
> 
> J~



I am glad this is cleared up. Now let's get back to generalizations and debating the ethics of hybridization of tortoises (which I believe was suppose to be what this thread is about).


----------



## cdmay

N2TORTS said:


> Interesting ...and I agree on the differences ( the many years dealing with them at a high level and seeing quite a few of them wild caught and captive bred) , but whats entertaining is your own hatchlings for sell commend the cherry price and not a redfoot hatchling price ? So there must some incentitive in making money and charging a "market price" for the term â€œcherry headsâ€ ....correct? Plus the fact they usually are much more bold in appearance.
> In the works are some folks at the San Diego Zoo and Scripps .. who are " in the works" of providing me with some interesting information about the DNA within my own animals used as "subjects". And if cost efficient may help others within the US to keep these so called pure strains ( much like the stud book for radiâ€˜ ) . I firmly believe unless you yourself grabbed the first wild tort at its known location it would be pretty darn accurate of its " locality" ...other than that its second hand info!
> 
> JD~



Not wanting to step in the dog poop but....

_"...but whats entertaining is your own hatchlings for sell commend the cherry price and not a redfoot hatchling price ? So there must some incentitive in making money and charging a "market price" for the term â€œcherry headsâ€ ....correct?"_

I don't understand your obvious jab at Allegra selling her cherry heads for more than what the typical northern type red-foot goes for. Allegra didn't come up with the (stupid) name of cherry head but since she has that type of tortoise, why wouldn't she use the name that most people are familiar with?
JD you produce cherry heads now, correct? Are you implying that you will sell your cherry heads for the same price as a Surinam hatchling?
Some races are simply more in demand and command higher prices that their similar cousins. For example, the South African leopard tortoises go for way more than ones from elsewhere. Also, speaking of red-footed tortoises, the giant Bolivian and Paraguayan forms sell for a lot more than even cherry heads go for. Does that make the people who breed them and then sell their offspring for 'market value' bad? 

_I firmly believe unless you yourself grabbed the first wild tort at its known location it would be pretty darn accurate of its " locality" ...other than that its second hand info!_

Of course it's second hand info. But that doesn't make it wrong. Using your argument you could technically claim that the ancestors of your breeder leopard tortoises may not have come from Africa. I mean, you didn't actually see them captured right? So who knows, maybe they were really from Japan.
Some keepers intentionally play dumb when it comes to breeding responsibly by claiming that 'nobody really knows' what is what.
Don't be one of those guys.


----------



## N2TORTS

JD you produce cherry heads now, correct? 
( I did 10 years ago Carl.... matter of fact you and I have some of the same gene lines in a few of our adults).



Some races are simply more in demand and command higher prices that their similar cousins. 
(So is it species or cousinâ€™s? BIG DIFFERENCE!)

Does that make the people who breed them and then sell their offspring for 'market value' bad? 
( Not at all)



Using your argument you could technically claim that the ancestors of your breeder leopard tortoises may not have come from Africa. I mean, you didn't actually see them captured right? So who knows, maybe they were really from Japan.

(I never knew leopard tortoises were indigenous to Japan? )


----------



## JacksonR

I missed the good part of the debate....

Personally I don't think hybrids should be produced. If hybridization in tortoises becomes common it's going to be hard to know what's pure or not. Gonna get all muddy...


----------



## Madkins007

Tom said:


> A couple of points for Mark. Just for fun and discussion.
> 
> Elsewhere in the thread the term apples and oranges was used. According to my diversity professor in college, chimps and humans can more closely be compared to green apples and red apples. According to him, if the same criteria were used to classify us and the apes as were used for all other species, all the apes and humans would be in the same genus. This made too many people of the day back then a little squeamish, so they categorized humans differently.
> 
> There is some evidence to suggest that sulcatas do not store sperm for more than a few months. Jerry Fife did a presentation on this at the TTPG last November. Leopards can apparently store it for at least five years.
> 
> Sorry for the off topic discussion, but thought it might be interesting to some.



I have heard similar things about humans and chimps, which actually may make it an even better example of the leo/sully cross, since if they CAN cross, they may not be separate species. 

It also does not surprise me that sullys may not store sperm as long as some others. I would bet that we could chart viable sperm storage with regional temp/humidity/water access levels since to store sperm means to store water that may be desperately needed elsewhere in the system.

I kind of like when discussions like this can take on these side trips without really derailing the whole thing. Makes the thread more fun!


For those who may not be familiar with the whole 'red-footed tortoise/cherry-head/different species' bit...

The red-footed tortoise covers a range roughly the size of the US. Like the American box turtles, the range is broken by mountains, rivers (including a little stream named the Amazon), and so on. At the heart of this habitat is the Amazon rainforest. 

Within the rain forest, the yellow-footed tortoise inhabits the 'real' rainforest, while the red-foot tends to dwell in habitats along the edge. In general, the yellows are better suited to the flooding and heavy rain in the deep rainforest- for example they rarely use burrows for hides (flooding), and lay eggs in leaf debris piles instead of digging nests that can also flood. 

Over the last nine million or so years, the rainforest has swollen and shrunk many times. Sometimes, as it did so, it left viable breeding populations of red-footeds isolated from other populations.

Modern DNA research indicates that the red-footeds have at least 5 distinct DNA patterns- those from the Colombia area, those from the Andes north into Panama, those from the Andes east along the Gulf and Atlantic- Venezuela to Suriname (or whatever that last country is), those from eastern Brazil, and those from the Gran Chaco region southwest of Brazil.

There are coloration differences between all groups, distinct anatomic differences between several groups, and behavior differences between at least a couple of the groups (such as preferred temps, courtship and aggression behaviors, etc.)

Right now they are all considered one species by most authorities, but there are many who have been saying that they need more investigation for some time. However, since the wild animals are rather remote and not really endangered, and there are probably millions of other species that need attention as well, the investigation ain't happening quickly.

Depending on who you talk to, there are a few likely possible outcomes when they DO check it out...
- No change. The groups would be considered races if they even get that much official recognition.
- They all become subspecies, probably of the race from Venezuela to the east since that is the first group to be cataloged and is what all sources use when they describe a 'typical' red-footed.
- They all or most all become species on their own. This is probably the least likely scenario, but since there is also at least somewhat of a push to minimize subspecies, it is still possible.
- They make two species and the others become subspecies or races of the these two.

If I could make a prediction, I would say they become two species-
- _Chelonoidis carbonaria_, the Northern red-footed tortoise, with three subspecies-
---- _C. c. carbonaria_, the Guyanan red-foot, from Venezuelan Andes east
---- _C. c. morrocoi*_, the Panamanian red-foot, from Panama to the Andes
---- _C. c. carbonaria*_, the Colombian red-footed, in Colombia
- _C. tabulata**_, the Southern red-footed tortoise, with two subspecies
---- _C. t. tabulata*_, the Brazilian red-footed tortoise (Note- these seem to come in two color phases- yellow and red. The reds are commonly called 'cherryheads')
---- _C. t. moteloi*_, the Gran Chaco red-footed tortoise, from southwest of Brazil

(I freely admit I made up the *'ed names, mostly based on the common local name for the species. **- The name 'tabulata' comes from some early named species and was used for red- and yellow-footeds both. Since it is unused today, I think it is available and there is a general policy of using the oldest known name when possible.)


----------



## N2TORTS

Bingo!  ^5


----------



## EricIvins

allegraf said:


> Who are these experts you are challenging? This has been debated and debated as to whether the only differences between the cherryheads and the northern locale redfoots are in fact different species. There has been no in depth study as far as I know to make this determination. There are obvious differences between say a Colombian and a Brazilian, the plastron, the spurs and even the scale patterns on the head. We all know about the term "cherryhead" coming into use as a selling point to get more money for torts. That being said, you can breed a Brazilian and a Venezuelan and get a redfoot for sure, but is it a Brazilian or a Venezuelan? I choose not to intermingle the different locales and disagree with those that do. It is not necessary and generally is done only to make money. I prefer to keep breeding true to the locales that I have. Here in South Florida, the native green anoles can breed with the Cuban/Bahamian anole. It creates another anole but one that is no longer true to the native species.



Sorry for bringing this O/T again, but I do alot of work with native/invasive Anoles, and mis-information really bothers me.........

Green Anoles ( A. Carolinensis ) do not reproduce with Brown Anoles ( A. Sagrei ).........Browns will dominate and suppress a Green population to the point where population density is greatly reduced. Adult Browns will also predate on small Greens. They way they "communicate" and court is completely different, hence why they don't cross in situ........

I don't know where the confusion came from, but more than likely deals with the many invasive Anole species, of which some are very similiar in appearence to the native Green Anole.........Some of these invasive species are naturally found close together in their native range(s), and may or may not interbreed.......I would venture to say we have alteast 10 different established invasive Anole species in Florida, if not 15 or 20........ ( These animals are the result of the Plant/Fruit/Island trade, not the Pet trade - just an FYI )

It's mis-information like this that kills the argument over Taxonomy/Hybrids/what ever you want to call it. You can do this over and over with ( insert species here ), but what's the sense when the information isn't correct to begin with? Work is underway on the Taxonomy of African Tortoises, and what may come of it will make 90% of animals in the US "un-pure"............

What's everyone going to do then? The same thought goes for Redfoots and just about any type of Tortoise that we have available in captivity........


----------



## N2TORTS

Holly Anole ~ EEEE..... 
He is absolutly right!........ NOW WERE TALKING!


----------



## dmarcus

If anyone has a hybrid, half breed or what ever that they don't want, send it to me and I will love it.... Ops I went off topic...


----------



## HLogic

Just a couple of notes:

I am a Hispanic Caucasian.

C. tabulata could not be used as Testudo tabulata was used to describe the Yellow-footed tortoise - although quite haphazardly.

Canis familiaris is recognized as a species and Felis sylvestris catus as a subspecies, whether or not they originated as hybrids 5,000 to 40,000 years ago - IMO they are inbreds more so than hybrids or for that matter species (and yes, I like dogs and cats and goldfish and even some people).

Hybridization, historically, was used to produce plants and animals for consumption, as food or as draught [draft] animals with the goal of making them more suitable, more productive, stronger, etc. The current trend of doing so with 'pet' species is almost purely profit-driven.

Chimpanzees have 48 chromosomes (24 pairs), humans have 46 (23 pairs) which suggests they are very unlikely to be the same genus.

There may be another species of Chelonoidis (http://www.geneticsmr.com/year2011/vol10-2/pdf/ta034.pdf).

The ethics of hybridization are strictly limited to debate. It is an opinion, no more, no less and combatants in that debate are under no obligation to accept their opponents' view - accept it and move on!


----------



## dmmj

So then no half man half monkey?


----------



## allegraf

_It's mis-information like this that kills the argument over Taxonomy/Hybrids/what ever you want to call it. You can do this over and over with ( insert species here ), but what's the sense when the information isn't correct to begin with? Work is underway on the Taxonomy of African Tortoises, and what may come of it will make 90% of animals in the US "un-pure_

I stand corrected. Forgive me for the mis information spread by my high school biology teacher from Miami where the brown anoles are common. I have no problem admitting I was wrong for relying on what i mistook for common miami knowledge. But enough about my analogy with lizards. I still do not support the practice of "hybridization".


----------



## BrookeB

I don't feel the same as most of the people on this subject, I like hybrid torts. As long as they breed on there own (I don't mean in the wild) and the offspring do not have any health issues or deformities I don't see a issue.. Humans have been doing this kind of thing for 100s of years with all sorts of animals. I know that this is not how every one feels but personally I would buy a hybrid LEPRACUTTA and support the breeder. This is just my opinion please don't hate me for saying so


----------



## N2TORTS

At the gene level, chimps and people are over 98% the same. Chimps and humans have a different number of chromosomes, but because they are so similar they probably have about the same number of genes. In fact, a close look at chimp and human chromosomes shows that one of the human chromosomes is really made up of 2 of the chimp chromosomes (or vice versa). 

In terms of the Y chromosome, human Y chromosomes are a little bigger than chimp Y chromosomes. However, the Y chromosomes in both species are very small. Since the Y chromosome pretty much only carries instructions for making males, humans and chimps probably have about the same number of critical male genes as well.

All of this brings up an interesting point about chromosomes. There often isn't a relationship between number of chromosomes and number of genes. For example, we have 46 chromosomes while the simple goldfish has 94 and the toucan has 106!

Hummmm.............


----------



## lisa127

I don't have a strong opinion one way or the other.

I just wanted to say that the purebred dogs we have today are what is unnatural....not the mutts. So comparing it to mixed breed dogs does not even make sense. We created the purebreds. The natural wild dog, if we let nature take it's course, is in fact what we would call a mutt. Nondescript brown dog with erect ears and curly tail, about 30 to 40 lbs. So in reality these hybrid tortoises should be compared to the Purebred dogs man created and not the mutt dogs.


----------



## Madkins007

HLogic said:


> Just a couple of notes:
> 
> I am a Hispanic Caucasian.
> 
> C. tabulata could not be used as Testudo tabulata was used to describe the Yellow-footed tortoise - although quite haphazardly.
> 
> Canis familiaris is recognized as a species and Felis sylvestris catus as a subspecies, whether or not they originated as hybrids 5,000 to 40,000 years ago - IMO they are inbreds more so than hybrids or for that matter species (and yes, I like dogs and cats and goldfish and even some people).
> 
> Hybridization, historically, was used to produce plants and animals for consumption, as food or as draught [draft] animals with the goal of making them more suitable, more productive, stronger, etc. The current trend of doing so with 'pet' species is almost purely profit-driven.
> 
> Chimpanzees have 48 chromosomes (24 pairs), humans have 46 (23 pairs) which suggests they are very unlikely to be the same genus.
> 
> There may be another species of Chelonoidis (http://www.geneticsmr.com/year2011/vol10-2/pdf/ta034.pdf).
> 
> The ethics of hybridization are strictly limited to debate. It is an opinion, no more, no less and combatants in that debate are under no obligation to accept their opponents' view - accept it and move on!



As usual, great points but your link does not open. Does it refer to the two species that used to be clumped as Chacos? (I don't recall any details offhand but have seen something about this.)


----------



## tortadise

I am a strong strong believer of the redfoot statements. Until I came to this forum I had thought I was the only person that knew or kept different countries apart. I have quite a few different redfoots. All are kept separate from different breeders or imported batches. Most were imports during mid 90's. I have had a suriname male successfully breed a Guyana female (Mishap of course my huge male towered over the divider wall by climbing on the other females. They hatched successfully. Some had orange heads and legs which is predominant in the Guyana species and some had yellow heads and red legs which predominate in the Suriname species. On another interesting breeding speculation I've done on Venezuelans, I had what I thought to be worked out as a definite country identification chart. I was wrong on one particular animal. I thought for certain I had picked up another Venezuelan female, the male bred with her numerous years and she would drop unviable eggs every year. So I closely looked at her and my "identification chart" and found she was a Guyana. So putting her with the Guyana group she had been bred by the Guyana male and hatched 100% every year on out. It gets tough when it's so detailed like that but I believe they are all "breed able" but a hybrid. I do agree probably 90% of the redfoot market is somewhat crossed down the line. Look at the blondes and so called xanthic redfoots that people are hatching I'm sure those are just related bloodlines and really a genetic deformity but it gets a dollar from greedy breeders and maybe not even knowingly having same bloodlines. Its too hard to do it now but I believe a stud book or registry of some sort should be used to show bloodline origins at least when used in captive breeding. It might help. But then if your animals are imports they too could be related.


----------



## ALDABRAMAN

This stuff is way over my head! Intersting!


----------



## HLogic

N2TORTS said:


> *At the gene level* [emphasis added], chimps and people are over 98% the same....we have 46 chromosomes while the simple goldfish has 94 and the toucan has 106!



All of that is true and also essentially immaterial. Humans have ~20,000 genes and ~3,000 million base pairs. A fritillary butterfly has ~27,000 genes and 120,000 million base pairs whereas cress has ~27,000 genes but only 100 million base pairs. Do those numbers suggest humans are more closely related to cress than butterflies? (the answer is no). Chromosomes are simply a mechanism to allow the production of a complete genome in mitosis or a haploid genome in meiosis. The differing chromosomal counts were brought up as an easy way to understand the difference.

Greater than 50% of the human genome, with estimates as high as 70% is believed to be noncoding (i.e. it does not serve as the template for protein synthesis or expression/regulation). [NOTE: This value has dropped from 95+% recently so these figures may also change.] The genetic comparisons conducted between chimps and humans ignore this portion entirely. The sequencing of the chimp genome was not executed under the same scrutiny and stringent requirements as that of the human genome and includes fragments and random sequences that have not been resolved to contiguous sequences. The comparisons that have been conducted used the human genome as a template for ordering chimp genes and the fragments mentioned based on the idea of similarity between the two and were targeted to chimp sequences that are recognized and similar to human sequences thus biasing the values toward similarity. Other sequence comparisons have shown values of 85 - 90% - the same difference demonstrated between humans and cats. You should have cited the crux of the article: http://www.thetech.org/genetics/ask.php?id=69

In theory, two species' genomes could be identical and still be separate taxonomic entities. It is not so much the content in a genome as the expression of those genes that dictate what an organism is.



Madkins007 said:


> HLogic said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...your link does not open.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry, the ")" was included when the forum software parsed the URL. The correct link is: http://www.geneticsmr.com/year2011/vol10-2/pdf/ta034.pdf
> 
> 
> 
> tortadise said:
> 
> 
> 
> Until I came to this forum I had thought I was the only person that knew or kept different countries apart...
> ...
> I thought for certain I had picked up another Venezuelan female, the male bred with her numerous years and she would drop unviable eggs every year. So I closely looked at her and my "identification chart" and found she was a Guyana.
> 
> Look at the blondes and so called xanthic redfoots that people are hatching I'm sure those are just related bloodlines and really a genetic deformity but it gets a dollar from greedy breeders and maybe not even knowingly having same bloodlines.
> 
> Read more: http://www.tortoiseforum.org/newreply.php?tid=45502#ixzz1sn1Wo9K3
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You suffered the luck of the draw, a specimen of insufficient age or vigor or some other reason for infertility with respect to the cross between the Venezuelan and Guyanan. They are the same species and only vary slightly (except at opposing extremes of the range). The range of the 'Guyana Shield' (a.k.a. northern, northeastern) redfoot is contiguous across eastern Venezuela and western Guyana. There are definite color/patterning differences between the northern populations as the Orinoco river acts as a physical barrier between them. The differences in the southern part of the range are much less distinct. For the record, I know of viable Venezuelan x Guyanan crosses. I have several eggs of said cross in my incubator currently and have hatched several dozen in that same incubator.
> 
> Xanthic redfoots are real but are actually anerythristic (no red). All 'normal' redfoots produce xanthins as pigments. Aneryrithristics naturally occur as a phenotype in certain parts of their range. I have 10 from Colombia - additional detail is contained in other posts on this forum. They also occur in Panama and Barbados (probably introduced from Colombia). They are a normal color phase much like hair & eye color are part of normal color phases of humans - same species, different color/pattern.
> 
> They are, in a sense, "related bloodlines" as are all taxonomic and geographical groupings. They are also "a genetic deformity" or more accurately, a genetic mutation as they either do not have or express:
> 1. the carotenoid pigments contributing to red color
> 2. the transport mechanism of carotenoid pigments to chromatophores
> 
> This is not to say they are genetically inferior, inbred or otherwise artificially manipulated to produce the anerythristic individuals. Should they be sold at a premium? Only if the market will bear the burden and it does seem as though the market is willing to pay premium prices for less commonly available, more colorful or otherwise aberrant phenotypes. Does the market also support paying premiums for hybrids? Indeed it does. That which is unusual, rare or unique always does, it's called supply & demand.
Click to expand...


----------



## Tom

EricIvins said:


> What's everyone going to do then?



Well I can't speak for "everyone", but I can tell you what I will do. I am already doing it. I have sources for 3 different types of babcocki leopards, 1 type of South African leopard, and 1 type of sulcata that are all location specific. I am going to acquire, breed and sell babies from all of these. And I will make sure the buyers and everyone else knows what they are getting. Since many of the Testudo are still being imported, I'll bet I can do it with them too.

My current lot of sulcatas were all acquired before I had any knowledge of all this stuff or gave it much thought. Now that I know better, I will DO better...




dmmj said:


> So then no half man half monkey?



He only listed chromosome count for a chimp, which is an ape, not a monkey, so there is still hope for your man/monkey hybrid...


----------



## dmmj

I will settle this once and for all, with 2 words. Flying monkeys, need I say more?


----------



## tortadise

Art-

I do have to say I thought that was the case with my Venezuelan Guyana breeding failure. I realize that they are the "same" I do still keep ally countries kept separately. It seems that my male Venezuelan has no problems breeding with other females that are kept with him and knowingly Venezuelan. Same with my Guyana she produces without problem with the male kept with her as well as all the other female Guyana redfoots with that male. I'm not going to try and breed them again because I keep my countries differentiates. I do believe the statement of introduced species in the central or island variety. I see a lot of bolivian characteristics in my panananian male. A lot of characteristics of Suriname in my costa rican, and Trinidad and Tobago look just like a cherry head. When I acquired these country locals from a good friend of mine who is an importer. They were all around 4" and at that time I had some brazilians,Guyana, and columbians around the same size. The central and island breeds tend to show a much slower growth rate and smaller size. I really don't know how big they are going to get. Still a quandary of my observations. All in all they may be introduced species many years ago but I can say in my keeping and experience I have noticed a huge differential element in all of them. Same thing with Brazilian retail boas when I bred them. Soany different locales they could breed together but has very large differences in size and appearance.


----------



## ALDABRAMAN

dmmj said:


> I will settle this once and for all, with 2 words. Flying monkeys, need I say more?


----------



## EricIvins

Tom said:


> EricIvins said:
> 
> 
> 
> What's everyone going to do then?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well I can't speak for "everyone", but I can tell you what I will do. I am already doing it. I have sources for 3 different types of babcocki leopards, 1 type of South African leopard, and 1 type of sulcata that are all location specific. I am going to acquire, breed and sell babies from all of these. And I will make sure the buyers and everyone else knows what they are getting. Since many of the Testudo are still being imported, I'll bet I can do it with them too.
> 
> My current lot of sulcatas were all acquired before I had any knowledge of all this stuff or gave it much thought. Now that I know better, I will DO better...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dmmj said:
> 
> 
> 
> So then no half man half monkey?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> He only listed chromosome count for a chimp, which is an ape, not a monkey, so there is still hope for your man/monkey hybrid...
Click to expand...




Testudo? Unless you're only talking about European Testudo, you will get NO reliable locality information what so ever........Been there, done that......There are only "hubs" where Tortoises are shipped out.......Nothing more, nothing less......


----------



## Tom

Hmm.... I can't argue this one, because you might be right. I know a few importers here on the West coast, now you've inspired me to look into it a bit more...


----------



## Madkins007

(Off topic to hybrids, sorry!)

Art/HLogic- If I read the abstract correctly (and most of it is over my head), they found 2 DNA patterns in C. carbonaria, the red-footed tortoise, and feel that this means that there are two species represented. I could not see where they discussed where the true origins of the animals were, how many were tested, etc. but it does generally seem to support this paper:

VARGAS-RAMIREZ, Mario; Maran, Jerome; Fritz, Uwe. "Red- and yellow-footed tortoises, Chelonoidis carbonaria and C. denticulata (Reptilia: Testudines: Testudinidae), in South American savannahs and forests: do their phylogeographies reflect distinct habitats?" (http://www.fundacionbiodiversa.org/pdf/Mario/Vargas_2010_Chelonoidis.pdf )

Except that Vargas-Ramirez found 5 types. 

I gotta get you to write me up a 'workingman's briefing' on genetics in general and red-footed in specific.

Oh, and what do you mean I can't use _tabulata_? Since it was misapplied in the first place for both reds and yellows, and no one else seems to want it, I call dibs. I doubt old Leopold Fitzinger will argue.

Of course, I could suggest _C. territris_, Schwigger's name from 1812. It is an even older term! Of course, Fitzinger also used '_boiei_' back in 1835ish, too, didn't he? I don't like it as much for some reason, but it might work.

OK, getting back to the topic...


Bottom line- is it OK to cross-breed tortoises?
1. - Is it OK when they are of the same species but different races, color phases, regions, etc.?
1. a. ---- Does it make a difference WHY you do it? (desirable characteristics? Cool colors? Curiosity?)

2. - Is it still OK when they are different species and it takes more human intervention and possibly has a higher potential for defects- but you have lots of interesting potential as well?

Some of this will be based on your sense of ethics and morality, and we all differ in this, so let's be nice to those wrong-headed idiots that have the audacity to disagree with our stance.


----------



## JacksonR

Hybrids sure have ruined the Travancore tortoise in this country. Not related to whatever you guys are talking about...lol


----------



## GeoTerraTestudo

Some factual errors here.



N2TORTS said:


> The writer is blissfully unaware that this cherished pet is most likely a descendant of an intra-specific hybrid, a cross between the African Wild Cat and the Asian Wild Cat.



There is a world of difference between intraspecific hybridization, and interspecific hybridization. Hybridization between different populations of a given species may have either no impact on genetic fitness, or even enhance it due to hybrid vigor. Hybridization between different subspecies of a given species may reduce fitness if they are from very different environments (cold vs. warm, etc.), but again, fertility is usually unaffected, and may even be enhanced. In contrast, hybridization between species almost always reduces fertility, and can lead to sterility. Moreover, depending on the genetic distance, it can also lead to chronic or lethal health problems. All the different types of wildcat out there belong to a single species (_Felis sylvestris_), and so are able to form fully fertile offspring. Moreover, different populations and subspecies in many species are known to form zones of intergradation in the wild, where you find animals of intermediate phenotype because the two groups are naturally hybridizing on their own. Mixing them in captivity is not very different from this situation. In contrast, that is very different from the situation with lepracuttas, whose parent species (sulcata and leopard tortoise) have been isolated from each other for many millions of years.

NOTE: There are a few intergeneric hybrid cats out there in the pet trade. The Bengal cat, for example, is a hybrid of the house cat (_Felis sylvestris_) and the Asian leopard cat (_Prionailurus bengalensis_). As with many such hybrids, there are problems with fertility. Females may be fertile, but males are usually sterile (Haldane's Rule). Again, I disapprove of this cross, too.



> In any event, all of this would have taken place thousands of years ago and the world is still turning.



Nobody ever said the planet would stop turning if you breed interspecific hybrids. The point is interspecific hybridization in the pet trade is bad for the animals.



> Yet no dog-lover would ever consider abandoning Fido simply because he's not 100% pure Wolf!



Dogs are, with few exceptions, domesticated wolves (_Canis lupus_). Occasionally they have been known to hybridize with coyotes (_C. latrans_), and the more distantly related golden jackal (_C. aureus_). Northeastern wolves and coyotes have been found to have wild and domestic wolf (dog) ancestry mixed with coyote, and the southeastern red wolf has been found to be of wolf/coyote hybrid origin as well. One of the few types of captive dog known to be of interspecific origin is the Sulimov dog, which was methodically bred as an airport security sniffing dog. Other than that, the odds that "Fido," as you say, is anything but a domestic wolf, are extremely small.



> Hybridization between cultivars or varieties is often used in agriculture to obtain greater vigor or growth (heterosis). The first generation often shows greatly increased vigor and a better yield primarily because many genes for recessive, often deleterious, traits from one parent are masked by corresponding dominant genes in the other parent. Many of the hybrid reptiles produced in today's marketplace also show the positive effects of hybrid vigor. Larger babies, with stronger feeding responses, are often produced.



Yes, heterosis (hybrid vigor) can be the result of cross-breeding, and it can make valuable intraspecific crosses when the offspring are fertile. Mules are famously sterile intraspecific hybrids with heterosis, which I grant may be valuable since horses and donkeys are not endangered species, and the resulting mules are healthy and valuable as work animals. But why in the heck would anyone want to breed endangered reptiles in this way? For the aesthetics? For the money? Neither reason is sufficient justification for this practice.



> One of the first projects along these lines was the use of albino Ruthven's Kingsnakes to introduce the albino gene to the closely related Gray Banded Kingsnake . By carefully selecting the resulting offspring for appearance similar to the Gray Banded Kingsnake, breeders were able to produce albino specimens nearly identical to pure Gray Banded Kingsnakes.



I likewise disapprove of breeding albino animals, as well as highly altered animals with pushed-in noses, shortened limbs, etc. It's not good for the animals.



> "Hybrids are trash". Yeah, whatever...... Sharing such a factually presented opinion carries zero weight with anybody. You should have joined the high school debate team, you might have learned a thing or two about presenting your point. Foreign car enthusiasts have been saying bad things about domestic vehicles for years now, and vice versa. Come to think of it, so have Ford vs. Chevy owners. Guess what: Nobody cares about your sticker showing some kid wearing a Ford shirt urinating on a Chevy when they are shopping for a new vehicle. There's millions of happy owners of all these brands of vehicles.



While I certainly never call any living being "trash," and I don't think condemning hybridization is purely a matter of opinion. Fact: hybrids often have reduced fertility, and often lack the adaptations of their parent species. Therefore, they have reduced conservation value. This is not a matter of taste. This is a matter of priorities.



> Moral of the story: If you don't like it don't buy it. This is America and that's your freedom of choice. So is expressing your opinion, just try not to sound like an idiot or waste other people's time when doing soâ€¦.



I disagree. What if someone told you about an abused dog in a shelter? Would you tell him, "If you don't like it, don't buy it." No, you would say, "It is wrong to abuse animals, and if you cannot care for the abused dog, at least report it to the officials." I hasten to add that, I don't think breeding interspecific (and even intergeneric) hybrid animals is as bad as beating animals. However, I do think it is a form of cruelty to bring animals into this world, knowing ahead of time that they may have problems with fertility or health. Distant hybridization may be viewed as a form of genetic infirmity, right along with albinism and dwarfism. And while animals with genetic infirmity deserve ethical treatment as much as those without, we should nevertheless make efforts to avoid bringing about their infirmity, not willfully perpetuating it.

It amazes me how much people can sell their hybrids and other anomalous animals for, when really the customer is buying damaged goods. Albinos and leucistic animals cost a lot more than pigmented animals, and yet they are at greater likelihood of blindness, deafness, and other problems. When people put two-headed snakes and turtles up for sale, the animals are snapped up very quickly ... even though they will probably die before reaching adulthood. Similarly, short-faced dogs and cats tend to snore, and short-legged dogs (and now cats, too) are likely to develop back problems. And then there's the increased risk of aggression, disability, and cancer with inbreeding. Similarly, when you're buying a hybrid, you're basically agreeing to pay more for a sterile animal, and perhaps agreeing to pay more for an animal with malformed internal organs, too. Why? For the looks? For the novelty? I don't think this is a good choice.


----------



## N2TORTS

Madkins007 said:


> (Off topic to hybrids, sorry!)
> 
> Art/HLogic- If I read the abstract correctly (and most of it is over my head), they found 2 DNA patterns in C. carbonaria, the red-footed tortoise, and feel that this means that there are two species represented. I could not see where they discussed where the true origins of the animals were, how many were tested, etc. but it does generally seem to support this paper:
> 
> VARGAS-RAMIREZ, Mario; Maran, Jerome; Fritz, Uwe. "Red- and yellow-footed tortoises, Chelonoidis carbonaria and C. denticulata (Reptilia: Testudines: Testudinidae), in South American savannahs and forests: do their phylogeographies reflect distinct habitats?" (http://www.fundacionbiodiversa.org/pdf/Mario/Vargas_2010_Chelonoidis.pdf )
> 
> Except that Vargas-Ramirez found 5 types.
> 
> I gotta get you to write me up a 'workingman's briefing' on genetics in general and red-footed in specific.
> 
> Oh, and what do you mean I can't use _tabulata_? Since it was misapplied in the first place for both reds and yellows, and no one else seems to want it, I call dibs. I doubt old Leopold Fitzinger will argue.
> 
> Of course, I could suggest _C. territris_, Schwigger's name from 1812. It is an even older term! Of course, Fitzinger also used '_boiei_' back in 1835ish, too, didn't he? I don't like it as much for some reason, but it might work.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> OK, getting back to the topic...
> 
> 
> Bottom line- is it OK to cross-breed tortoises?
> 1. - Is it OK when they are of the same species but different races, color phases, regions, etc.?
> 1. a. ---- Does it make a difference WHY you do it? (desirable characteristics? Cool colors? Curiosity?)
> 
> 2. - Is it still OK when they are different species and it takes more human intervention and possibly has a higher potential for defects- but you have lots of interesting potential as well?
> 
> Some of this will be based on your sense of ethics and morality, and we all differ in this, so let's be nice to those wrong-headed idiots that have the audacity to disagree with our stance.





I'm Trying ......

*There ya go Art!.......................now thats some RF History ! ) 
Once again Brilliant Mark!
JD~


----------



## EricIvins

Tom said:


> Hmm.... I can't argue this one, because you might be right. I know a few importers here on the West coast, now you've inspired me to look into it a bit more...



The only locality you'll get is Jordan......Being that it is where all the middle eastern Tortoises are shipped from.......Of course, you'll get the people that will slap a label on a Tortoise based on looks, but that isn't paramount to anything........

This is how I make a living, so I know the whole supply chain.......There are some things you may be able to get reliable locality information on, but 95% of the Reptiles in the Trade you will not.......Very few people are stupid enough to do so.......Just because these may be under-developed/third world countries, doesn't mean the collectors themselves don't visit sites like this........They do, and some of them are educated in how these markets work.......They also don't want a crew of Gringos coming over to their Country, collecting their animals, and leaving them with no choice except to resort to other, more destructive practices to keep their families fed.......


----------



## HLogic

Madkins007 said:


> (Off topic to hybrids, sorry!)
> 
> Art/HLogic- If I read the abstract correctly (and most of it is over my head), they found 2 DNA patterns in C. carbonaria, the red-footed tortoise, and feel that this means that there are two species represented. I could not see where they discussed where the true origins of the animals were, how many were tested, etc. but it does generally seem to support this paper:<snip>
> 
> Oh, and what do you mean I can't use _tabulata_? Since it was misapplied in the first place for both reds and yellows, and no one else seems to want it, I call dibs. I doubt old Leopold Fitzinger will argue.
> 
> Of course, I could suggest _C. territris_, Schwigger's name from 1812. It is an even older term! Of course, Fitzinger also used '_boiei_' back in 1835ish, too, didn't he? I don't like it as much for some reason, but it might work.
> 
> OK, getting back to the topic...





The additional species/subspecies was a single specimen with morphology intermediate to that of red-footed & yellow-footed tortoises (i.e. it looked like a hybrid) found at the same farm. My assumption is that the animals were all collected in the general vicinity of the farm but I don't know. If that is the case, it would add a species/subspecies to the Vargas-Ramirez list.

The name "tabulata" was originally intended to describe or later applied to (I don't remember which) the red-footed tortoise. The type specimen, however, was a yellow-footed tortoise. This confusion and the redescription/renaming of the tortoise, in one of the many renaming cycles, resulted in the status of nomen illegitimum being applied to the name. The name gods won't let you use bad names... 

...and here's a real kicker!

No one should be so adamant in your stance on hybrids. There is a theory which in short reads like this: Ancient gods were aliens. They hybridized, cloned and/or genetically manipulated hominids to produce 'mules' for use as laborers. One (or more) of the manipulations produced fertile offspring which resulted in _Homo sapiens_.

If true, how would it effect your views?


----------



## GeoTerraTestudo

HLogic said:


> No one should be so adamant in your stance on hybrids. There is a theory which in short reads like this: Ancient gods were aliens. They hybridized, cloned and/or genetically manipulated hominids to produce 'mules' for use as laborers. One (or more) of the manipulations produced fertile offspring which resulted in _Homo sapiens_.
> 
> If true, how would it effect your views?



I am familiar with this "Ancient Aliens" hypothesis (it is a hypothesis, not a theory), and I find it extremely implausible. Ancient technology may have been surprisingly advanced, but there is no good evidence that it came from aliens, nor is there any compelling reason to think we are the products of extraterrestrial genetic experiments. No, we evolved here just like every other animal.


----------



## Neal

Tom said:


> Well I can't speak for "everyone", but I can tell you what I will do. I am already doing it. I have sources for 3 different types of babcocki leopards, 1 type of South African leopard, and 1 type of sulcata that are all location specific. I am going to acquire, breed and sell babies from all of these. And I will make sure the buyers and everyone else knows what they are getting. Since many of the Testudo are still being imported, I'll bet I can do it with them too.



I believe the same thing happened with leopards as Eric is describing with Testudo. As in, they could have been collected from anywhere, but they were imported from "hubs" in certain areas. Maybe we discussed this already? I can't remember. Still, if someone has their babcocki separated by "hub' than that's as good as it gets for us. And you'll be selling all of those to me correct? 

Sorry JD, I gotta say those leopracatas are ugly as sin.  I say it with a smile though. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.


----------



## StudentoftheReptile

Ah, the neverending hybrid debate...I've been loosely following this one over the past week, and here are my thoughts:

The long and short of it is that I can totally understand and agree with both sides of the argument. I do feel that more responsibility and care should be exercised when breeding specific localities/subspecies/whatever, ESPECIALLY if the locality(s) in question are obscure, rare and/or not well-represented in captivity. I have nothing against morphs or mutations, etc, but in general, my personal appeal is to the natural "phenotype" of that animal. I think hobbyists should devote a little more focus on preserving those isolated or unique bloodlines instead of non-chalantly throwing this and that into the pot just to try and make something "cool." I really have nothing against hybrids. There's some really cool ones out there, and there's some really butt-ugly ones as well!

All that said, like others have stated, a lot of the debate stems from one's own personal code of ethics and morals. This is the captive reptile market we're talking about here, in reality, an off-shoot of the pet industry. People aren't creating kingsnake/cornsnake crosses and lepracuttas and turning them back into the wild. I saw an ad a while back of some kingsnake hybrid that blew my mind; the thing was magenta pink with neon green stripes! It looked like it would have glowed in the dark, for crying out loud. Now, some hobbyists are disgusted by that, and that's fine, but here's my point. That's an animal that will get people's attention. That's a snake that is a conversation starter and could potentially draw new blood into the hobby. Pulling out a brown and tan snake doesn't widen peoples' eyes as much anymore but showing them a stark yellow one (albino), or a pure white one, etc. can. Then explaining all the wonderful possibilites of breeding these animals and what you can get. Obviously, that's not what appeals to every reptile hobbyists, but it is still is interesting. I mean, I'm not really a ball python enthusiast, but it still blows my mind that you can breed two brown and tan snakes (Mojave x Mojave) and get a pure white one with blue eyes (leucistic).

Most of us know that most reptile hybrids are not sterile. Apparently, those genetic barriers do not seem to work the same way as they do with mammals. Now, obviously, if there is a genetic defect with the cross, I am totally against it. But many are not, and ultimately, it is not fair for me to tell someone else what they can or cannot do with their animals, whether its hybridizing, or using a different substrate than I do, or whatever. I can say "Well, I wouldn't do it" but its THEIR animals and THEIR hobby, and if they enjoy it and are labeling their animals correctly, more power to them.

To those who create and/or sell hybrids and intergrades, of course, those animals should be advertised accurately. And again, I think before the person starts pairing things up, they need to seriously evaluate the consequences of the breeding. What are their motives for doing this cross (greed or genuine curiousity)? Is the locality/species/subspecies of either parent animal well enough represented in the market that creating a hybrid is not going to significantly damage that market further?

Example: if someone was going to try to breed plowshares to radiated tortoises, I wouldn't agree with that at all, for reasons I think many of us would agree on. Breeding a Okeetee cornsnake to a CA kingsnake...I don't get too upset about. Its not like Okeetee cornsnakes or CA kingsnakes are rare or hard to breed or anything. 



Neal said:


> Sorry JD, I gotta say those leopracatas are ugly as sin.  I say it with a smile though. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.



LOL...I somewhat agree! I don't think they're ugly persay, but honestly, I think they just look like interesting sulcatas. I don't see very much leopard in them, and I imagine as they get larger, the sulcata in them will be more dominate. I'm just curious to see exactly how large they get.

From a marketability standpoint, that would be the only main selling point: a tortoise that looks mostly like a sulcata but doesn't grow as large? Of course, other than appearance, one just argue that if size is an issue, just to buy a leopard!


----------



## EricIvins

Neal said:


> Tom said:
> 
> 
> 
> Well I can't speak for "everyone", but I can tell you what I will do. I am already doing it. I have sources for 3 different types of babcocki leopards, 1 type of South African leopard, and 1 type of sulcata that are all location specific. I am going to acquire, breed and sell babies from all of these. And I will make sure the buyers and everyone else knows what they are getting. Since many of the Testudo are still being imported, I'll bet I can do it with them too.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I believe the same thing happened with leopards as Eric is describing with Testudo. As in, they could have been collected from anywhere, but they were imported from "hubs" in certain areas. Maybe we discussed this already? I can't remember. Still, if someone has their babcocki separated by "hub' than that's as good as it gets for us. And you'll be selling all of those to me correct?
> 
> Sorry JD, I gotta say those leopracatas are ugly as sin.  I say it with a smile though. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.
Click to expand...


It's a shame - Right now I could get locality specific Leopards out of a few different countries if we didn't have the Heartwater BS......Some of these are different than the "Holotype" Babcocki........




StudentoftheReptile said:


> Ah, the neverending hybrid debate...I've been loosely following this one over the past week, and here are my thoughts:
> 
> The long and short of it is that I can totally understand and agree with both sides of the argument. I do feel that more responsibility and care should be exercised when breeding specific localities/subspecies/whatever, ESPECIALLY if the locality(s) in question are obscure, rare and/or not well-represented in captivity. I have nothing against morphs or mutations, etc, but in general, my personal appeal is to the natural "phenotype" of that animal. I think hobbyists should devote a little more focus on preserving those isolated or unique bloodlines instead of non-chalantly throwing this and that into the pot just to try and make something "cool." I really have nothing against hybrids. There's some really cool ones out there, and there's some really butt-ugly ones as well!
> 
> All that said, like others have stated, a lot of the debate stems from one's own personal code of ethics and morals. This is the captive reptile market we're talking about here, in reality, an off-shoot of the pet industry. People aren't creating kingsnake/cornsnake crosses and lepracuttas and turning them back into the wild. I saw an ad a while back of some kingsnake hybrid that blew my mind; the thing was magenta pink with neon green stripes! It looked like it would have glowed in the dark, for crying out loud. Now, some hobbyists are disgusted by that, and that's fine, but here's my point. That's an animal that will get people's attention. That's a snake that is a conversation starter and could potentially draw new blood into the hobby. Pulling out a brown and tan snake doesn't widen peoples' eyes as much anymore but showing them a stark yellow one (albino), or a pure white one, etc. can. Then explaining all the wonderful possibilites of breeding these animals and what you can get. Obviously, that's not what appeals to every reptile hobbyists, but it is still is interesting. I mean, I'm not really a ball python enthusiast, but it still blows my mind that you can breed two brown and tan snakes (Mojave x Mojave) and get a pure white one with blue eyes (leucistic).
> 
> Most of us know that most reptile hybrids are not sterile. Apparently, those genetic barriers do not seem to work the same way as they do with mammals. Now, obviously, if there is a genetic defect with the cross, I am totally against it. But many are not, and ultimately, it is not fair for me to tell someone else what they can or cannot do with their animals, whether its hybridizing, or using a different substrate than I do, or whatever. I can say "Well, I wouldn't do it" but its THEIR animals and THEIR hobby, and if they enjoy it and are labeling their animals correctly, more power to them.
> 
> To those who create and/or sell hybrids and intergrades, of course, those animals should be advertised accurately. And again, I think before the person starts pairing things up, they need to seriously evaluate the consequences of the breeding. What are their motives for doing this cross (greed or genuine curiousity)? Is the locality/species/subspecies of either parent animal well enough represented in the market that creating a hybrid is not going to significantly damage that market further?
> 
> Example: if someone was going to try to breed plowshares to radiated tortoises, I wouldn't agree with that at all, for reasons I think many of us would agree on. Breeding a Okeetee cornsnake to a CA kingsnake...I don't get too upset about. Its not like Okeetee cornsnakes or CA kingsnakes are rare or hard to breed or anything.
> 
> 
> 
> Neal said:
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry JD, I gotta say those leopracatas are ugly as sin.  I say it with a smile though. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> LOL...I somewhat agree! I don't think they're ugly persay, but honestly, I think they just look like interesting sulcatas. I don't see very much leopard in them, and I imagine as they get larger, the sulcata in them will be more dominate. I'm just curious to see exactly how large they get.
> 
> From a marketability standpoint, that would be the only main selling point: a tortoise that looks mostly like a sulcata but doesn't grow as large? Of course, other than appearance, one just argue that if size is an issue, just to buy a leopard!
Click to expand...




The way I see it - If I can have a Tortoise with a Sulcata personality, but not the size or destructive tendencies of a Sulcata, that would be a perfect "PET" Tortoise for alot of people........

I've had my fair share of Leopards that were very outgoing, and some that were very shy.......By comparison, the number of shy Sulcatas I've had is exponentially lower......Either way it would be a "win win" for the PET market ( NOT the Breeder or Professional Hobbiest market - 2 completely different market entities, with two completely different objectives )......


----------



## Madkins007

HLogic said:


> No one should be so adamant in your stance on hybrids. There is a theory which in short reads like this: Ancient gods were aliens. They hybridized, cloned and/or genetically manipulated hominids to produce 'mules' for use as laborers. One (or more) of the manipulations produced fertile offspring which resulted in _Homo sapiens_.
> 
> If true, how would it effect your views?



Actually- it would make me even more of a believer in the idea that crossing different species is not a great idea when done artificially. If this is true (and I really doubt it is just for the record), then some supposedly intelligent creatures made themselves some genetically manipulated pets/slaves, and goofed when some started to breed (man that sounds like the plot of Jurassic Park, doesn't it?)

Once we got to breeding successfully, we acted pretty much like an invasive species and just sort of took over. While we as a species have done some cool and amazing things, I don't think anyone would claim that we are 100% beneficial.


----------



## dmmj

People are awesome


----------



## bfmorris

N2TORTS said:


> I didnâ€™t start this thread to debate but to educate!â€¦




I think these animals are interesting, perhaps solely from the standpoint of watching to see if they exhibit a combination of each of the parent's behaviours. Hazarding a guess, I'm going to say they will be burrowers, at the least. 

What does one do with them in the long term, given there isn't anything to be gained from breeding them. Breed them to each other? meh. Breed them back to leopard or sulcata? meh. Never allow them to breed anything? meh. Seems they are a fun novelty, and a dead end, all in one.


----------



## bfmorris

I've read this thread very carefully instead of looking at the photos and commenting specifically about the animals as I did in my previous post.
I don't understand the point of this thread. to wit, The opening post purports to educate us on the hybrid subject, appatrently so as to bring us up to the level of knowledge the opening poster insinuates he possess. Oddly, however, the hybrid knowledge conferred on us in the opening post appears to be a plagiarism of Niland.

Attached is a photo of true locality redfoot tortoises. These guys in the photo are descended from animals directly imported from the Grenada Islands about sixteen plus years ago. *Pure* Grenada Island locality.


----------



## N2TORTS

bfmorris said:


> Attached is a photo of true locality redfoot tortoises. These guys in the photo are descended from animals directly imported from the Grenada Islands about sixteen plus years ago. *Pure* Grenada Island locality.



Dont you mean " Introduced" ?.....there is no such thing as "locality redfoots" in Grenada.


----------



## bfmorris

N2TORTS said:


> bfmorris said:
> 
> 
> 
> Attached is a photo of true locality redfoot tortoises. These guys in the photo are descended from animals directly imported from the Grenada Islands about sixteen plus years ago. *Pure* Grenada Island locality.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dont you mean " Introduced" ?.....there is no such thing as "locality redfoots" in Grenada.
Click to expand...


No, I don't mean that, and yes there is, until proven otherwise**. The original animals were collected from the wild on that island, as adults.


**An Annotated Checklist of the Amphibians and Reptiles of St. Vincent, West Indies Michael L. Treglia Department of Natural Resources, Cornell University, Ithaca, New York 14853, USA

**VINKE, Thomas and Sabine; Vetter, Holger and Susane. "South American Tortoises, Chelonian Library Vol. 3 2008


----------



## Neltharion

bfmorris said:


> I've read this thread very carefully instead of looking at the photos and commenting specifically about the animals as I did in my previous post.
> I don't understand the point of this thread.



This thread had inspired my curiosity. I took the time to read up on hybrids, not just in reptiles but other animals as well. You might find these articles interesting:

http://www.reptilechannel.com/lizards/breeding-lizards/gold-dust-day-geckos.aspx

http://feistyhome.phpwebhosting.com/hybrids.htm

http://www.sydneycichlid.com/cichlid-hybrids.htm

http://cichlidresearch.com/hybrids.html

http://jason-parent.suite101.com/ligers-and-tigons-hybrid-big-cats-a152649


----------



## EricIvins

Neltharion said:


> bfmorris said:
> 
> 
> 
> I've read this thread very carefully instead of looking at the photos and commenting specifically about the animals as I did in my previous post.
> I don't understand the point of this thread.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This thread had inspired my curiosity. I took the time to read up on hybrids, not just in reptiles but other animals as well. You might find these articles interesting:
> 
> http://www.reptilechannel.com/lizards/breeding-lizards/gold-dust-day-geckos.aspx
> 
> http://feistyhome.phpwebhosting.com/hybrids.htm
> 
> http://www.sydneycichlid.com/cichlid-hybrids.htm
> 
> http://cichlidresearch.com/hybrids.html
> 
> http://jason-parent.suite101.com/ligers-and-tigons-hybrid-big-cats-a152649
Click to expand...


I personally don't find them interestesting at all, because of the fact that its all opinionated, biased drivel that doesn't help or guide anyone.......

Someone who wants to do the reasearch should go to an academic database and go from there.......Being able to access peer reviewed literature that presents a valid argument or compare/contrast is the way to go..........


----------



## Baoh

I recommend performing personal research with a review of actual scientific research when possible.

Here is one option.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/


----------



## N2TORTS

When I started this thread it wasnâ€™t to start a debate ( guess I used the wrong section to post them under maybe should have used discussion header), nor my advocating Hybrid's. It was simply to share two torts that I had a chance to obtain during a trade. Being that I like something different than the norm , I was excited to see them in person at 3weeks of age . I simply thought, wow this would be neat to document their upbringing/stats and various changes that will occur as they grow
( since not too many of these are around â€¦that I know of) . I can remember 7 years back when at a major So. Cal. Herp expo, there was the " first set" to be viewed by the public in my area , which is pretty darn big. The line was a mile long to see them , and yes they were for sale ....of course a pretty penny. I had always wondered if the two would or could mate since I've both species for well over 25 years. As pointed out ( by others) I complied/used other opinions on the subject to help what might or could ( living proof) if they had a chance to mate. In the wild or captivity . I never meant this to get so darn ugly , but a lot has been learned by many I would imagine. With that said , I still think they are really cool and becoming very interesting as they mature. Plus the fact one of them has the most out going personality I have seen in young tortoises'. You can be sure I wonâ€™t post these guys again , and they will remain the 
" Enigma" or thorn in my back as viewed by others. 
Happy~tort~N
~peace~
JD~


----------



## Baoh

N2TORTS said:


> You can be sure I wonâ€™t post these guys again , and they will remain the
> " Enigma" or thorn in my back as viewed by others.
> Happy~tort~N
> ~peace~
> JD~



I am sorry you feel this way, but thank you for having shared what you already have.


----------



## Yvonne G

JD:

I think you hit the nail on the head...you posted in the wrong section. It really isn't a debate, but that's the section it is in.

I hope you continue to share pictures of your Lepracuttas. I'm very interested in watching them grow, as are many of our members. No one is thinking any less of YOU because you have the dreaded hybred tortoises. We have strong feelings about the subject one way or the other, but not against you personally or the fact that you own them.

In a couple months I hope to see more pictures of them, but posted in the Tortoise Photo section. Pretty please???


----------



## dmarcus

I for one do enjoy seeing the photo's as they grow and hope you will continue to share them with us!!!


----------



## Neltharion

EricIvins said:


> I personally don't find them interestesting at all, because of the fact that its all opinionated, biased drivel that doesn't help or guide anyone.......
> 
> Someone who wants to do the reasearch should go to an academic database and go from there.......Being able to access peer reviewed literature that presents a valid argument or compare/contrast is the way to go..........



While there are statements of opinions by the writers of those articles, there are many statements that are factual. 

You don't find them interesting, and in your own opinion think its 'drivel that doesn't help or guide anyone', you're entitled that opinion I couldn't care less. Others might find viewpoints from other areas of the pet hobby interesting. I don't agree with some of the opinions made by some of the writers, I still find it interesting to read what others have to say, despite some divergent opinions.

A simple google search, minus the wiki, yahoo answers, and ehow sites; and those are the type of articles that predominantly showed up. I specifically was looking for other areas of the pet industry, since these hybrid discussions have seemed to focus on the animal keeping industry.






Baoh said:


> I recommend performing personal research with a review of actual scientific research when possible.
> 
> Here is one option.
> 
> http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/



I had actually read that one too. Nice piece of scientific reading. But like I said in a prior response, I was specifically looking for articles related to hybrids within the context of the pet industry.


----------



## Baoh

Neltharion said:


> Baoh said:
> 
> 
> 
> I recommend performing personal research with a review of actual scientific research when possible.
> 
> Here is one option.
> 
> http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I had actually read that one too. Nice piece of scientific reading. But like I said in a prior response, I was specifically looking for articles related to hybrids within the context of the pet industry.
Click to expand...


That one what? I linked to a database, not an article. It is not a piece of scientific reading. It is an electronic library in which scientific articles, studies, and other literature may be found. 



> This thread had inspired my curiosity. I took the time to read up on hybrids, not just in reptiles but other animals as well. You might find these articles interesting:



That does not specifically request information as relating to hybrids in the pet industry and you did not say so in a prior response in this thread. Perhaps in another thread such a thing was mentioned, though. I am only speaking to this one.


----------



## bfmorris

Neltharion said:


> bfmorris said:
> 
> 
> 
> I've read this thread very carefully instead of looking at the photos and commenting specifically about the animals as I did in my previous post.
> I don't understand the point of this thread.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This thread had inspired my curiosity. I took the time to read up on hybrids, not just in reptiles but other animals as well. You might find these articles interesting:
> 
> http://www.reptilechannel.com/lizards/breeding-lizards/gold-dust-day-geckos.aspx
> 
> http://feistyhome.phpwebhosting.com/hybrids.htm
> 
> http://www.sydneycichlid.com/cichlid-hybrids.htm
> 
> http://cichlidresearch.com/hybrids.html
> 
> http://jason-parent.suite101.com/ligers-and-tigons-hybrid-big-cats-a152649
Click to expand...


Why would you think I'd find them interesting? My point above, was that the opening post is plagiarism.





emysemys said:


> JD:
> 
> I think you hit the nail on the head...you posted in the wrong section. It really isn't a debate, but that's the section it is in.
> 
> I hope you continue to share pictures of your Lepracuttas. I'm very interested in watching them grow, as are many of our members. No one is thinking any less of YOU because you have the dreaded hybred tortoises. We have strong feelings about the subject one way or the other, but not against you personally or the fact that you own them.
> 
> In a couple months I hope to see more pictures of them, but posted in the Tortoise Photo section. Pretty please???




I second this, and speaking for myself I don't have strong feelings one way or the other about hybrids; I see them as just a novelty. I'm am very curious, however, to see these develop and I'd like to know if they end up being diggers.


----------



## JacksonR

I don't find them very interesting...lol.


----------



## Neltharion

Baoh said:


> That one what? I linked to a database, not an article. It is not a piece of scientific reading. It is an electronic library in which scientific articles, studies, and other literature may be found.
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2453525/
> 
> 
> 
> That does not specifically request information as relating to hybrids in the pet industry and you did not say so in a prior response in this thread. Perhaps in another thread such a thing was mentioned, though. I am only speaking to this one.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The abstract is what popped up for me on search results. I browsed the rest of the database, but the abstract is what I was referring to.
> 
> 
> The thread didn't specifically call out hybrids in the pet industry, but one of the key points of the debate centers around the impacts of these hybrids in the pet industry.
> 
> 
> 
> bfmorris said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why would you think I'd find them interesting? My point above, was that the opening post is plagiarism.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You also made these series of statements: "What does one do with them in the long term, given there isn't anything to be gained from breeding them. Breed them to each other? meh. Breed them back to leopard or sulcata? meh. Never allow them to breed anything? meh. Seems they are a fun novelty, and a dead end, all in one."
> 
> For someone that had thought out what to do with these animals and drawn the conclusion that they were a novelty and a dead end, I thought you might find the viewpoints of others on the same subject something of interest.
Click to expand...


----------



## Baoh

Neltharion said:


> The abstract is what popped up for me on search results. I browsed the rest of the database, but the abstract is what I was referring to.
> 
> 
> The thread didn't specifically call out hybrids in the pet industry, but one of the key points of the debate centers around the impacts of these hybrids in the pet industry.



Surely, but my link was only to the database itself. The exchange seemed no different to me than if I told you about the Philadelphia Library and you told me "it" was an interesting book. No super-big deal, though, now that I know what you meant.

That may be the case, but you said, "But like I said in a prior response, I was specifically looking for articles related to hybrids within the context of the pet industry." If this, using "but", is meant as a counter to the high quality published data because it is not specific enough to what you were looking for, it is not justified by what you said in a prior response. You may have intended that, of course, but it was not communicated. Again, no worries now that I know what you meant.


----------



## StudentoftheReptile

N2TORTS said:


> With that said , I still think they are really cool and becoming very interesting as they mature. - - - - You can be sure I wonâ€™t post these guys again , and they will remain the " Enigma" or thorn in my back as viewed by others.
> Happy~tort~N
> ~peace~
> JD~



Despite my own opinions about them, they are here now, and like you, I do find them interesting and would like to see their progress as they mature. Please do not stop posting pics of them because of the pointless bickering. Debates and arguments aside, you still have two very unique tortoises there that have a lot of growing to do, and we all love pics!


----------



## bfmorris

Neltharion said:


> For someone that had thought out what to do with these animals and drawn the conclusion that they were a novelty and a dead end, I thought you might find the viewpoints of others on the same subject something of interest.



I see. Thanks for explaining, Neltharion, and thanks for those links.


----------



## Neltharion

Baoh said:


> Surely, but my link was only to the database itself. The exchange seemed no different to me than if I told you about the Philadelphia Library and you told me "it" was an interesting book. No super-big deal, though, now that I know what you meant.
> 
> That may be the case, but you said, "But like I said in a prior response, I was specifically looking for articles related to hybrids within the context of the pet industry." If this, using "but", is meant as a counter to the high quality published data because it is not specific enough to what you were looking for, it is not justified by what you said in a prior response. You may have intended that, of course, but it was not communicated. Again, no worries now that I know what you meant.



When I saw your link to the NCBI website, I assumed it was the same direct link to the abstract that came up for me on the search engine hit, and didn't realize that it was a link to the entire database. 

The prior response that I am referencing is in Post 82 to ericivens, which did come after you had posted that link. In no way am I attempting to counter or discredit research data, I am merely stating that I was looking for information within a specific context which was not stated in my original post.


----------



## Baoh

Neltharion said:


> Baoh said:
> 
> 
> 
> Surely, but my link was only to the database itself. The exchange seemed no different to me than if I told you about the Philadelphia Library and you told me "it" was an interesting book. No super-big deal, though, now that I know what you meant.
> 
> That may be the case, but you said, "But like I said in a prior response, I was specifically looking for articles related to hybrids within the context of the pet industry." If this, using "but", is meant as a counter to the high quality published data because it is not specific enough to what you were looking for, it is not justified by what you said in a prior response. You may have intended that, of course, but it was not communicated. Again, no worries now that I know what you meant.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> When I saw your link to the NCBI website, I assumed it was the same direct link to the abstract that came up for me on the search engine hit, and didn't realize that it was a link to the entire database.
> 
> The prior response that I am referencing is in Post 82 to ericivens, which did come after you had posted that link. In no way am I attempting to counter or discredit research data, I am merely stating that I was looking for information within a specific context which was not stated in my original post.
Click to expand...


I think we understand each other well regarding earlier points of confusion, so no worries.


----------



## vanillapooh1979

I would like to see the pictures. Are the photos on page one the hybrids? What do they look like now? How is interbreeding even possible? By that I mean is it naturally occuring because they are housed togther? Or did you have to manipulate this occurance? If So I am not sure I want to know the semantics. Ha. Seems odd to me that one would want to hybridize species.


----------



## Terry Allan Hall

dmmj said:


> I want a half man half monkey



Seems to me that a half WOMAN/half ape would prove more...useful. 



dmmj said:


> I will settle this once and for all, with 2 words. Flying monkeys, need I say more?


----------



## Moofahsa

He owns the tortoises and he can do as he pleases. I think it is very interesting, granted I am new to all of this but sheesh doesn't make sense to me that some people are pointing fingers like this is what is wrong with the world. This could potentially make a new niche market and attract more new people to the hobby!


----------



## Oogway

man shares 70% of the same DNA with slugs. I do not believe in cross-breeding, no matter how "closely" they are related.


----------



## Terry Allan Hall

The questions, as I see it, boils down to these:

(1) What are the odds that a Sulcata X Leopard tortoise is viable (can reproduce)? 

(2) How large can one get? 

(3) What health issues, if any, might result from this mating?

and, finally, 

(4) how much of a market might there be for such a beast?

The answers might be:

(1) I'm assuming that it'd be like a horse/donkey mule, in that males NEVER are viable and females VERY rarely are viable, so it's unlikely to ever be a real problem.

(2) Truly nobody knows, but a guess is approximately 1/2 way between the ultimate sizes of the two species providing ancestry (so, maybe 55-60# for a really big one?) The only way to know for certain is to measure/weigh a 30-yo one, though.

(3) Probably none, what w/ "hybrid vigor", but, again, that's simply a guess.

(4) Well, when you consider how populat sulcatas have become in captivity, there may well be quite a market for these, what with the uniqueness and the fact that they won't likely get as huge as a pure sulcata...I'll further guess that ones w/ more Leopard-like markings and (presumably) size will be more valued.

OTOH, because breeding them is so 'iffy", and because the Xs are extremely unlikely to ever go beyond the first generation (again, like horse/donkey mules), I'm inclined to think they'll never become particulatily common...

Just some thoughts.





A Pardalis/sulcata X hatchling


----------



## GeoTerraTestudo

Terry Allan Hall said:


> The questions, as I see it, boils down to these:
> 
> (1) What are the odds that a Sulcata X Leopard tortoise is viable (can reproduce)?



Note: viability of a hybrid refers to its ability to lead a long, healthy life as an individual. This is separate from fertility, which refers to the hybrid's ability to reproduce.



> (1) I'm assuming that it'd be like a horse/donkey mule, in that males NEVER are viable and females VERY rarely are viable, so it's unlikely to ever be a real problem.



This is known as Haldane's Rule, in which the heterogametic sex is more likely to be sterile as a hybrid. In mammals, females have two X chromosomes, and males have one X and one Y. Reptiles, however, have environmental sex determination, with higher temperatures leading to females in chelonians (and to males in all other reptiles). Thus, Haldane's Rule might not apply.

Overall, regardless of chromosome overlap, it's the amount of gene overlap that really matters. Thus, if two tortoises have enough different gene loci, then their offspring would probably be unviable or infertile.



> (3) Probably none, what w/ "hybrid vigor", but, again, that's simply a guess.



Again, depends on the genetic distance. A hybrid between two closely related tortoise species, even if infertile, would probably be healthy or even vigorous as an individual. The farther out you go, the more likely it is that the offspring will not be viable.


----------



## Terry Allan Hall

GeoTerraTestudo said:


> Terry Allan Hall said:
> 
> 
> 
> The questions, as I see it, boils down to these:
> 
> (1) What are the odds that a Sulcata X Leopard tortoise is viable (can reproduce)?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Note: viability of a hybrid refers to its ability to lead a long, healthy life as an individual. This is separate from fertility, which refers to the hybrid's ability to reproduce.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> (1) I'm assuming that it'd be like a horse/donkey mule, in that males NEVER are viable and females VERY rarely are viable, so it's unlikely to ever be a real problem.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> This is known as Haldane's Rule, in which the heterogametic sex is more likely to be sterile as a hybrid. In mammals, females have two X chromosomes, and males have one X and one Y. Reptiles, however, have environmental sex determination, with higher temperatures leading to females in chelonians (and higher temps leading to males in crocodilians and squamates). Thus, Haldane's Rule might not apply.
> 
> Overall, regardless of chromosome overlap, it's the amount of gene overlap that really matters. Thus, if two tortoises have enough different gene loci, then their offspring would probably be unviable or infertile.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> (3) Probably none, what w/ "hybrid vigor", but, again, that's simply a guess.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Again, depends on the genetic distance. A hybrid between two closely related tortoise species, even if infertile, would probably be healthy or even vigorous as an individual. The farther out you go, the more likely it is that the offspring will not be viable.
Click to expand...


You talk "science nerd" really good! 

And it seems we pretty much agree that we'll likely never see many "LEPRACUTTAS"...for those reasons.

Now, Xing a sulcatta w/ say, an American Desert or European species, resulting in a "sulcatoid" that never gets over 10#, but keeps the sulcata personality, could be kinda cool, but short of DNA splicing, is pretty unlikely!

Fortunately, there already is such a delightful species, and I've got 4 of 'em!


----------



## Ariele

This is my first time in this Hybrid form, & I honestly had no idea hybrids existed in the tortoise world! I am FASCINATED now! Thanks for sharing this information. Great details!


----------



## thea lester

I absolutely love your post about hybridization; I learned a lot. Anyhow, forgive my ignorance but what is a lepracutta? Sulcatta and Leopard Tortoise? I keep boxies. Thea


----------



## Eweezyfosheezy

Yes a lepracutta is a hybrid of a sulcata and leopard.


----------



## CactusVinnie

Moofahsa said:


> He owns the tortoises and he can do as he pleases. I think it is very interesting, granted I am new to all of this but sheesh doesn't make sense to me that some people are pointing fingers like this is what is wrong with the world. This could potentially make a new niche market and attract more new people to the hobby!



How many years above the age of 12 are you? 
You "own" your toys, or your mobile phone. Not a living creature!!! You *keep and care* about a living creature- it's a big difference. 
Even for objects you are responsable, because you just can't dump them anywhere, since they will became trash that is unpleasant and harmful for other people and environment! See, in fact a person can't just do things "as he pleases"- or he can, but "as he pleases" is a well thougt decision for a civilised, intelligent and responsable person. 
And, "sheesh", doesn't make sense to you that "market niches" and "attracting more people to the hobby" aren't by far a good reason for such a thing?? 

Since there are so many species almost lost in the wild, why not invest the available resources of a hobbyst (time, money, room) in breeding one of those, to reduce collecting pressure on the wild ones?? 
Waste of resources, irresponsability... poor critters did not ask for being born as genetic garbage. They (HOPEFULLY!!!) will live a solitary life, never mate and perpetuate their species- simply because they ARE NOT A SPECIES!

What's wrong with the world, indeed...


----------



## N2TORTS

CactusVinnie said:


> Moofahsa said:
> 
> 
> 
> He owns the tortoises and he can do as he pleases. I think it is very interesting, granted I am new to all of this but sheesh doesn't make sense to me that some people are pointing fingers like this is what is wrong with the world. This could potentially make a new niche market and attract more new people to the hobby!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How many years above the age of 12 are you?
> You "own" your toys, or your mobile phone. Not a living creature!!! You *keep and care* about a living creature- it's a big difference.
> Even for objects you are responsable, because you just can't dump them anywhere, since they will became trash that is unpleasant and harmful for other people and environment! See, in fact a person can't just do things "as he pleases"- or he can, but "as he pleases" is a well thougt decision for a civilised, intelligent and responsable person.
> And, "sheesh", doesn't make sense to you that "market niches" and "attracting more people to the hobby" aren't by far a good reason for such a thing??
> 
> Since there are so many species almost lost in the wild, why not invest the available resources of a hobbyst (time, money, room) in breeding one of those, to reduce collecting pressure on the wild ones??
> Waste of resources, irresponsability... poor critters did not ask for being born as genetic garbage. They (HOPEFULLY!!!) will live a solitary life, never mate and perpetuate their species- simply because they ARE NOT A SPECIES!
> 
> What's wrong with the world, indeed...
Click to expand...


He is probably much older than 12 , shows much more class in his opinions (one thing WRONG in this world , peope hiding behind a keyboard and mouthing off, with 0 exeprience ....oh yea ... they own a sullie for 3 years .. ha ha ha) and ...his comments were just as fair as everyone else. You all crack me up ... it's a tortoise!!! Maybe we should focus on the human race ......Now that is going to hell. Where do you think cancers and hiv...stem from?... Mixing human races, countries, imports , Illegals, hybrids,,,,what ever you want to call it. Is it wrong ..? of course not because its accepted ...Maybe birthcontrol should hold more importace.... we're running out of resources people .....


----------



## GeoTerraTestudo

N2TORTS said:


> Maybe we should focus on the human race ......Now that is going to hell. Where do you think cancers and hiv...stem from?... Mixing human races, countries, imports , Illegals, hybrids,,,,what ever you want to call it. Is it wrong ..? of course not because its accepted ...Maybe birthcontrol should hold more importace.... we're running out of resources people .....



Human ecology is certainly a very important subject ... however, if you're likening hybrid tortoises to mixed-race humans, well, you're way off base.


----------



## vanillapooh1979

I feel like I drug up an old isue and have caused issues now. The photo of the mixed tortoise is a beautiful tortoise.


----------



## Terry Allan Hall

Moofahsa said:


> He owns the tortoises and he can do as he pleases. I think it is very interesting, granted I am new to all of this but sheesh doesn't make sense to me that some people are pointing fingers like this is what is wrong with the world. This could potentially make a new niche market and attract more new people to the hobby!



Attracting more people to the hobby is a good thing, indeed...and your comments about a "niche market" is worth considering, but most folks prefer to keep more "natural" tortoises, at least these days, so this "niche market" will probably remain tiny.

Hard to say about the future, of course.



vanillapooh1979 said:


> I feel like I drug up an old isue and have caused issues now. The photo of the mixed tortoise is a beautiful tortoise.



No problem, V...folks are just sharing opinions and (mostly) in a polite, civilized manner. It's a good thing.


----------



## Kristina

N2TORTS said:


> Maybe we should focus on the human race ......Now that is going to hell. Where do you think cancers and hiv...stem from?... Mixing human races, countries, imports , Illegals, hybrids,,,,what ever you want to call it.



Are you seriously suggesting that HIV and cancer are the results of interracial relationships? 

Human beings are not HYBRIDS, because we are all the same SPECIES, no matter our skin color. I can't believe the bigotry of that statement.

I have had cancer and undergone chemotherapy. For you to suggest that it was the result of one of my parents being Caucasian, and the other Hispanic really, really ticks me off. 

As far as the hybrid tortoises, I think that they are a curiousity, nothing more. I personally agree with keeping the species pure. That is my personal opinion, which I am just as entitled to as anyone else


----------



## expo tort

CactusVinnie said:


> How many years above the age of 12 are you?
> You "own" your toys, or your mobile phone. Not a living creature!!! You keep and care about a living creature- it's a big difference.
> Even for objects you are responsable, because you just can't dump them anywhere, since they will became trash that is unpleasant and harmful for other people and environment! See, in fact a person can't just do things "as he pleases"- or he can, but "as he pleases" is a well thougt decision for a civilised, intelligent and responsable person.
> And, "sheesh", doesn't make sense to you that "market niches" and "attracting more people to the hobby" aren't by far a good reason for such a thing??
> 
> Since there are so many species almost lost in the wild, why not invest the available resources of a hobbyst (time, money, room) in breeding one of those, to reduce collecting pressure on the wild ones??
> Waste of resources, irresponsability... poor critters did not ask for being born as genetic garbage. They (HOPEFULLY!!!) will live a solitary life, never mate and perpetuate their species- simply because they ARE NOT A SPECIES!
> 
> What's wrong with the world, indeed...



To be clear there are people on this forum who ARE TWELVE! SO STEP OFF! Ok done. You do make a good point but think tort Z is a new species and it had to come from tort X and Y reproducing.


----------



## GeoTerraTestudo

Kristina said:


> Are you seriously suggesting that HIV and cancer are the results of interracial relationships?
> 
> Human beings are not HYBRIDS, because we are all the same SPECIES, no matter our skin color. I can't believe the bigotry of that statement.
> 
> I have had cancer and undergone chemotherapy. For you to suggest that it was the result of one of my parents being Caucasian, and the other Hispanic really, really ticks me off.
> 
> As far as the hybrid tortoises, I think that they are a curiousity, nothing more. I personally agree with keeping the species pure. That is my personal opinion, which I am just as entitled to as anyone else



Yea!! Kristina, you are right on, both biologically and socially. You tell 'em.


----------



## N2TORTS

Kristina said:


> N2TORTS said:
> 
> 
> 
> Maybe we should focus on the human race ......Now that is going to hell. Where do you think cancers and hiv...stem from?... Mixing human races, countries, imports , Illegals, hybrids,,,,what ever you want to call it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Are you seriously suggesting that HIV and cancer are the results of interracial relationships?
> 
> Human beings are not HYBRIDS, because we are all the same SPECIES, no matter our skin color. I can't believe the bigotry of that statement.
Click to expand...


No to your first insight ....you dont even know what race/gender medical situation I'am or have gone thru. 
Yes HIV came from Africa!
Yes....Different races carry different immunities and are carriers of different cancers and disease , thus offspring of these two could and most likely carry those introduced traits.
Of course melanin is only one aspect of what people call "race", there are a number of others as well. Skeletons are different and general races are easily identified with just a few bones. Also, what about the rest of the variation we see? Why are there differences in hair, for example?s this just an evolutionary accident (unlike skin color)? The dominant theory (called Out of Africa) holds that Homo sapiens (us) evolved in Africa about 150k yrs ago. There are fossils that are sometimes called "archaeic sapiens" that go back farther, but that's really a way of saying we don't quite know where they fit in. mtDNA agrees pretty much with the date of 150k yrs ago. Check out books by Ian Tattersall for a good description of this.
Some Out of Africa folks would argue that we evolved physically by about 150k yrs ago, but that our unique language and mental ability did not arise until as recently as 50-70k yrs ago (when you start seeing cave paintings and the like). This is a lot harder to prove than just looking at physical features.
If it is so easy to get differences in physical features, why not some differences in mental abilities as well? Should we not accept the differences we keep seeing on IQ tests between races and regions? The minority view, called the Multiregional Hypothesis, states that spaiens evolved all over the world at the same time from earlier forms of Homo. That we've basically been one species for the last ~2M yrs. Homo Erectus in Asia, Home Neanderthalenis in Europe, and Homo Ergastor in Africa all were really the same species that interbred and evolved into us. Check out books by Milford Wolpoff on this theory. 
Has there ever been a case of parallel evolution? If you isolate one group from another, give it a few hundred thousand years they won't be able to breed anymore, therefore they will be different species. I don't believe that we could have bred with neanderthals or erectii, correct me if I am wrong?
Site:http://www.sciforums.com


----------



## dmmj

(snicker) homo erectus.


----------



## Edna

"Race" in human beings is a concept that is used to justify discrimination. The differences are trends rather than absolutes. Intelligence as measurable on an IQ test is not an absolute, either. It is a set of mental abilities that happen to have become valued over other kinds of abilities in the last 100 years. And people don't "breed." We form relationships that result in offspring and the perpetuation of the species, in all its beautiful variety.


----------



## Terry Allan Hall

N2TORTS said:


> Kristina said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> N2TORTS said:
> 
> 
> 
> Maybe we should focus on the human race ......Now that is going to hell. Where do you think cancers and hiv...stem from?... Mixing human races, countries, imports , Illegals, hybrids,,,,what ever you want to call it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Are you seriously suggesting that HIV and cancer are the results of interracial relationships?
> 
> Human beings are not HYBRIDS, because we are all the same SPECIES, no matter our skin color. I can't believe the bigotry of that statement.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No to your first insight ....you dont even know what race/gender medical situation I'am or have gone thru.
> Yes HIV came from Africa!
> Yes....Different races carry different immunities and are carriers of different cancers and disease , thus offspring of these two could and most likely carry those introduced traits.
> Of course melanin is only one aspect of what people call "race", there are a number of others as well. Skeletons are different and general races are easily identified with just a few bones. Also, what about the rest of the variation we see? Why are there differences in hair, for example?s this just an evolutionary accident (unlike skin color)? The dominant theory (called Out of Africa) holds that Homo sapiens (us) evolved in Africa about 150k yrs ago. There are fossils that are sometimes called "archaeic sapiens" that go back farther, but that's really a way of saying we don't quite know where they fit in. mtDNA agrees pretty much with the date of 150k yrs ago. Check out books by Ian Tattersall for a good description of this.
> Some Out of Africa folks would argue that we evolved physically by about 150k yrs ago, but that our unique language and mental ability did not arise until as recently as 50-70k yrs ago (when you start seeing cave paintings and the like). This is a lot harder to prove than just looking at physical features.
> If it is so easy to get differences in physical features, why not some differences in mental abilities as well? Should we not accept the differences we keep seeing on IQ tests between races and regions? The minority view, called the Multiregional Hypothesis, states that spaiens evolved all over the world at the same time from earlier forms of Homo. That we've basically been one species for the last ~2M yrs. Homo Erectus in Asia, Home Neanderthalenis in Europe, and Homo Ergastor in Africa all were really the same species that interbred and evolved into us. Check out books by Milford Wolpoff on this theory.
> Has there ever been a case of parallel evolution? If you isolate one group from another, give it a few hundred thousand years they won't be able to breed anymore, therefore they will be different species. I don't believe that we could have bred with neanderthals or erectii, correct me if I am wrong?
> Site:http://www.sciforums.com
Click to expand...


Actually, there's a lot of strong evidence that Cro-magnons and Neanderthals did intermarry to some extent...no idea about homo erectus.

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/...neanderthals-humans-mated-interbred-dna-gene/

http://news.discovery.com/human/genetics-neanderthal-110718.html

http://humanorigins.si.edu/evidence/genetics/ancient-dna-and-neanderthals



dmmj said:


> (snicker) homo erectus.



Oh, behave, Captain Awesome!


----------



## GeoTerraTestudo

Terry Allan Hall said:


> N2TORTS said:
> 
> 
> 
> Has there ever been a case of parallel evolution? If you isolate one group from another, give it a few hundred thousand years they won't be able to breed anymore, therefore they will be different species. I don't believe that we could have bred with neanderthals or erectii, correct me if I am wrong?
> Site:http://www.sciforums.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Actually, there's a lot of strong evidence that Cro-magnons and Neanderthals did intermarry to some extent...no idea about homo erectus.
> 
> http://news.nationalgeographic.com/...neanderthals-humans-mated-interbred-dna-gene/
> 
> http://news.discovery.com/human/genetics-neanderthal-110718.html
> 
> http://humanorigins.si.edu/evidence/genetics/ancient-dna-and-neanderthals
Click to expand...


Yes, there is mounting evidence that _Homo sapiens_ and _Homo neanderthalensis_ did interbreed/intermarry. Actually, if you look at the genetics of modern humans all over the world, you find that Neanderthal genes appear to be absent from modern African people, but present in modern non-African people. This suggests that, as humans migrated Out of Africa via the Middle East, they encountered Neanderthals and interbred with them to a small degree.

But again, all of this is irrelevant to the issue of hybrid captive animals, and frankly a distortion of genetics and speciation. All modern humans today are very closely related, more closely related than two gorillas on opposite ends of the same forest. This is probably because our ancestors survived a genetic bottleneck event (like a volcanic eruption) some 70,000 years ago. The few surviving individuals went on to reproduce and found modern humanity. All people alive today come from the same population of early people from "only" a few tens of thousands of years ago. No wonder we can all understand one another's body language, learn each other's spoken languages, and freely interbreed.

Research has shown that there is an optimal genetic distance between individuals that humans and other animals are instinctively attracted to (via scent, for example) when it comes to finding a mate. Closer than that and you risk inbreeding. Farther than that and you risk genetic mismatch. At this "Goldilocks" genetic distance, you have the highest chance of having healthy offspring. Generally, this means marrying/mating with someone outside your extended family, but within your genetic meta-population.

Nevertheless, humans and other conspecific animals from opposite sides of the planet, when brought together by modern transportation, successfully have offspring all the time. A human from Congo and one from England are completely compatible. As are a wolf from Italy and one from Canada. As are grizzly and Syrian brown bears. As are moose from Montana and Sweden. As are lions from India and Kenya. And so on and so on.

Again, that's just because these are representatives of widespread (Holarctic or cosmopolitan) species. Some species just have very large distributions. Therefore, although they wouldn't meet if traveling on their own power, if brought together they can still interbreed and form healthy and fully fertile offspring.

And again, that's completely different from the situation with lepracuttas or other such hybrids not only from different populations, subspecies, or species, but from different genera all together.

How did we get from discussing hybrid tortoises to human genetics, anyway?


----------



## N2TORTS

Yes, there is mounting evidence that Homo sapiens and Homo neanderthalensis did interbreed/intermarry

..................so isnt that a hybrid? 

ummm dont know , guess it was the "race" thingy ....plus heck why not throw in some other nonesense... to debate about.


----------



## GeoTerraTestudo

N2TORTS said:


> Yes, there is mounting evidence that Homo sapiens and Homo neanderthalensis did interbreed/intermarry
> 
> ..................so isnt that a hybrid?



Yep, sure is ... but again, intraspecific hybridization produces mixture, not mules.


----------



## N2TORTS

GeoTerraTestudo said:


> N2TORTS said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, there is mounting evidence that Homo sapiens and Homo neanderthalensis did interbreed/intermarry
> 
> ..................so isnt that a hybrid?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yep, sure is ... but again, intraspecific hybridization produces mixture, not mules.
Click to expand...


Which brings me to this question....first why is everyone worried about "breeding" them? Who said anything about breeding them? . 2nd, if the " purists" want to stay "pure" ... no worries their " mules" .
Once again ....I DIDNT BREED THESE...but found it an interesting project that in the 35+ plus years I've owned torts and just about any other herp out there, I took these on a trade when they were very young, just so I could write an accurate document on these lil guys as they progress.


----------



## CactusVinnie

N2TORTS,

You not only missed my point- about not treating living creatures like objects that you may "own"- but liberally assumed things about "behind a keyboard, zero experience etc."... BTW, I am not the type owing a "sullie", not even for a day... in my climate. I would be the village lunatic. See the signature and that's what I keep... and breed. Not much fuss, but its fact, and it's enough for me- that's why I am on a tortoise forum.
And I wonder what class, experience and fair comments are you talking about, things that you "feel" emanating from our forum fellow... only 15 messages "old"? I don't have nothing against him!! Just I disagreed his immature and iresponsable view on treating living creatures. That's pretty all. 



N2TORTS said:


> Maybe we should focus on the human race



... I FULLY agree, but... again... remember... TORTOISE forum?? If we met here, it's because we both have tortoises and zero war/famine zone refugees in our homes... I am- just as many previous writers- against such useless practices, that have only a hue of sensational, and nothing else than downsides. 
Sure it's just a tortoise, but if we are talking tortoises, let's talk properly and not ignoring the fact that this event can be just a precedent for other weird crossings. I suppose you know well the animal hobbysts world, where ambitions are often more important than anything- and obtaining a mindblowing hybrid/morph etc. can be a pride for someone, and igniting the ambition and idea in other keepers. 

And, BTW, not all that's accepted is correct... unfortunately. Are we objective and smart enough to declare things we "accept" as benefic/correct?? I strongly doubt, in fact, I am quoting you to prove how smart we were until today: 

"Maybe we should focus on the human race ......Now that is going to hell...[...]we're running out of resources people ....."...
... and not only that!

Peace... and keep species pure, as Mother Nature left them!


EDIT: lots of interesting things appeared until I posted my reply!! 
No regret in digging up the thread, except for the offense resented by 12 years old members (what, feel discriminated LOL? chill, where I came from, people don't feel offended by such things- you 12 YO are not a "cathegory", you are a BEING, and no irony involved... still... to nervous for such a young (r)age )...

... and the "race thingy" direction. I must repeat, "where I came from" , there are no such quick jumps on feeling insulted when a simple word appears in discussion. 
Kristina, I am sure it was NO racist etc. shade in N2TORTS reply... as shown, some immunity weaknesses and maybe deeper effects when people living from millenia with their own diseases meet and mix, are real things, but, again, nothing to do with hate or stuff like that.


----------

