Naturally Occuring Panther Hybrids

My friend and I have a thought on naturally occuring hybrids...We believe that in the wild that panthers have to hybridize and if they do are they not collected or are they collected and named a locale that they resemble the most...for example the Ambato Panther is just between Ambanja and Nosy Faly would that be a hybrid of Oorana Mena/Ambanja or its own locality...I personally own an Ambato and he clearly looks like an Oorana Mena to an extent but was soldto me as an Ambanja...I label him as ambato...What are your thoughts on the hybidization issue.....

This is worth repeating there are several factors keeping locales separated.The most common one being geographical mt.ranges distance and not to mention small Islands such as N.be, N.faly, N.mitsio chameleons cant swim except one. All these things keep locales just that.

Thats an interesting opinion...I would like to here some others also

Besides the tsingy at Ankarana, what mountain ranges or large impassable rivers are there in the panther's range?

No one is saying its not possible...... but where is proof that it is happening?

Granted the only proof we have that its not happening is that we dont see them in the trade, and dont read about the new discoveries.... it most likely has happened... lets talk about why it would?

what reasons do these specialized lizards have to migrate?
IMO they wouldnt leave unless something was pressuring them.
Or something did move them ( a form of pressure )
I dont think a chameleon under enough pressure (stress) would feel up to mating as much as a cham with less stress.

There is no selective collection by exporters at a particular locale to only take animals that fit into our image of the locale's pure state. They take any they find at a given locale. Our distinction of a particular locale is usually driven by the fact that a major town is located there and there is something about the animals in an area that people want to select for. Ambato is an example where the blue coloration in the pardalis from that part of Madagascar has evolved to show particular attributes that are attractive enough to us to cause us to differentiate between them and other geographically close locales with some similar traits. There are gradual transitions between many of the major popularly delineated localities (the East coast is a good example) and then there are localities that are quite distinct due to barriers of various types. The different pardalis colors we see in different locales in Madagascar is just a small sampling of a gradual continuum where over their evolutionary history selection toward different coloring and patterns has occurred. The further two locales are from each other, the longer the individuals in that area have had to evolve different attributes and this is why you see such variation across their range. Now, in areas where increased isolation has occurred, you see more stark differences over a shorter geographic distance because there is no exchange in the other direction. Kent, one thing to keep in mind is that these geographic barriers don't have to be huge mountain ranges or rivers to reduce gene flow and increase genetic isolation. If memory serves me (I don't have any of my resources with me and don't have the time to go looking) the Ambanja area is a big valley. This is enough of a barrier to significantly limit gene flow.

Anyway, I really need to get back to work but thats something to think about hopefully.

Chris

I may be mistaken as to the location (If I am please correct me), I think it was you, Kent, that pointed it out in the video in the Panther Tour thread ... Wasn't there pics of them walking across a sand bar to Nosy Be from the main Isle. Whether a Cham could make that crossing is another story... But one thing is for sure...I never underestimate the ability of nature to suprise us. I mean... We could argue about where Arthur, King of the Britains, acquired his cocunuts... Or we could argue if the wing speed velocity of a Madagascar Swallow is adequate enough to carry a pardalis from island to island.

I am not a scientist... and am fairly new in digging into this topic, but I will make a vouple points based on what I find obvious.

Seriously though... Enough silly stuff... First we need to know that these names really have nothing to do with color, but instead where they were snagged from... A person could realease a clutch of Nosy Bes into the Ambanja area, and any of those Nosy's collected, or even there offspring, later on would carry the Ambanja label. I think it would be too presumtious of us to assume that these animals can't and don't cross boundries and come in contact with eachother in the wild. The colors we see in an ambilobe are just the charachteristics WE have noticed, and the label that WE put on it, there genepool does carry these specific color charachtereics, But we cannot prove that this Color charachteristic was not the product of natural crossing at some point (I don't like the term Hybrid for panthers as that means it CAN'T be found in the wild, when it is clearly possible). They do have a specific gene make up, but things like this will change and evolve in nature as time goes on. We are talking about F. Pardalis, no matter what color it is ...it is F. Paradalis, Nature doesn't differentiate between these colors, and I am yet to see a scientific taxonomy table that differentiates one locale panther from another, they are scientifically the same species. Locality is something that is constantly evolving, and never constant, there are too many factors that can cause locality to alter or change, even us humans. The "pure locale" is a great marketing gimmick as I see it. It is a differentiation in a species, that is recognized only by us, not mother nature, not wild panthers, just us humans, and used as a maketing label. Never will these locales be set in stone in the wild, But the taboo that we have attached to crossing makes it seem that we want it to be set in stone in captivity. If you ask me...we are suckers that have bought into this gimmick of the "pure locale" and now we have the unfortunate attitude of "I wouldn't touch a cross with a ten foot pole." In captivity we are striving to accomplish "pure locales" and calling crosses "hybrids", well if you ask me the "pure locale" that we like to brag about is non existant in terms of evolution and the chaos of nature.

Wow sorry for the long post, And sorry if my ideas got jummbled up...I am jotting small sections in the middle of getting actual work done. I am sure ther has been more posts to this thread since I started this at 8am... it is now 10:30...lol

~Joe

Joe,

The classification as a single species isn't necessarily the important point. There are many different definitions for what a species is and they all have their downfalls. The notion that a species is defined by a group of animals that can interbreed and can't breed with other species is simply not accurate much of the time. There are many species which can interbreed with clearly different species and even species where variation is so extreme across their range that functionally they cannot interbreed because of the reduced fitness effects on the offspring. Species concepts are heavily debated in scientific circles and classification as an individual species does not necessarily describe the diversity of the animals incorporated into that grouping. Our classification and naming system is just not sufficient to truly depict much of the true and very important diversity so just because they are the same named species does not mean that all individuals within that species should be treated the same. Genetically distinct populations and a number of other designations are very important classifications that aren't included in a named species. F. pardalis has diverged within itself and distinct variation can be seen. Such variation should be incorporated into management policy, scientific research and captive breeding efforts. While only snagging small pieces of the continuum might not account for the broader variation, you aren't going to see Ambanjas hybridizing with Maroantsetras in the wild. Now, genetics still flow between adjacent populations to a certain extent across the continuum but at a very different level then any of the locale hybridization that occurs in captivity. So by marketing pure locales, we may not be accounting for the fact that individuals within this species can interbreed when artificially allowed to do so but I think we are accounting for the species' natural diversity and maintaining a truer picture of what this species actually is.

Chris

"So by marketing pure locales, we may not be accounting for the fact that individuals within this species can interbreed when artificially allowed to do so but I think we are accounting for the species' natural diversity and maintaining a truer picture of what this species actually is."

well put..

Chris Anderson said:

Joe,

The classification as a single species isn't necessarily the important point. There are many different definitions for what a species is and they all have their downfalls. The notion that a species is defined by a group of animals that can interbreed and can't breed with other species is simply not accurate much of the time. There are many species which can interbreed with clearly different species and even species where variation is so extreme across their range that functionally they cannot interbreed because of the reduced fitness effects on the offspring. Species concepts are heavily debated in scientific circles and classification as an individual species does not necessarily describe the diversity of the animals incorporated into that grouping. Our classification and naming system is just not sufficient to truly depict much of the true and very important diversity so just because they are the same named species does not mean that all individuals within that species should be treated the same. Genetically distinct populations and a number of other designations are very important classifications that aren't included in a named species. F. pardalis has diverged within itself and distinct variation can be seen. Such variation should be incorporated into management policy, scientific research and captive breeding efforts. While only snagging small pieces of the continuum might not account for the broader variation, you aren't going to see Ambanjas hybridizing with Maroantsetras in the wild. Now, genetics still flow between adjacent populations to a certain extent across the continuum but at a very different level then any of the locale hybridization that occurs in captivity. So by marketing pure locales, we may not be accounting for the fact that individuals within this species can interbreed when artificially allowed to do so but I think we are accounting for the species' natural diversity and maintaining a truer picture of what this species actually is.

Chris

Click to expand...

Can't, and won't try to argue with that. Thanks Chris. Can I pose a couple questions though... And point out a couple things?

Can we look at the bloodwork of a panther, and determine what Locale it is?

Can we prove that these Localities we are farmiliar with in Maddy, and consider true, are acutaully natural, or is their locale a result of humans moving animals around islands?

There is no selective collection by exporters at a particular locale to only take animals that fit into our image of the locale's pure state. They take any they find at a given locale. Our distinction of a particular locale is usually driven by the fact that a major town is located there and there is something about the animals in an area that people want to select for.

Click to expand...

So by marketing pure locales, we may not be accounting for the fact that individuals within this species can interbreed when artificially allowed to do so but I think we are accounting for the species' natural diversity and maintaining a truer picture of what this species actually is.

Click to expand...

Going from this point, How do we know that we are breeding true locales??? With more and more exporting going on, there is a greater margin for "true" locales to become crossed unintentially, and then bred as true, and then their babies bred as true. If a breeder gets in a shipment of WC Ambiolobe, but the exporter throws in a Female Nosy Be, by mistake, or maybe becasue he was impartial. Even the most reputable breeder wuld market those as Ambilobe. For all we know... 50% or 90% of the CB Panthers that are sold as "pure" are actually crosses and we are mistakenly marketing them as pure. I mean, we can't even tell them dif between females!!! The babies may look a certain way, but if you ask me if you have no way of proving "X", then you should never advertise "X" especially when a $100 dollar price increase is involved. But the fact is none of us can guarntee it. This is where I find folley in putting so much weight in the "Pure Locale" market.

Thanks Again Chris... Just my two cents... I learned a while back... Put 2 cents in the Machine and you can get a lot of valuable information in return.

~Joe

i don't know why everyone thinks chameleons are poor swimmers, from what i've seen its just the opposite, and they are devilishly smart, and compared to most lizards have a large brain size. The smallest factors could cause migration in one season, if there is a seasonal drought they are going to follow the insects to water, or die.

Joe,

Genetic analysis should potentially be able to accurately identify a locale. The problem is, it takes a lot of research and data to put together the profile needed to do so. Gary Ferguson is in the process of trying to quantify the colors and patterns for different locales. Once enough data is collected, a profile of a locale can be created and identification can be done based on these profiles. Enough data has to be collected, however to account for the natural variation of the locale. The same goes for genetics. Yes, it can be done but we don't have the research base to do it at this point.

Yes, we can prove that locales are naturally occurring. Gary Ferguson's color and pattern research has used pattern and color evolution to trace the expansion history of the species. If memory serves me, it supports the gradual radiation of pardalis down the coasts from the northern tip of the country. Such a gradual radiation pattern wouldn't be due to translocation of populations. On the other hand, (again, I don't have my resources with me to double check) I believe the F. pardalis on Reunion are from an transplanted population.

A lot of the issues of locale purity go back to honesty and knowledge. People have to be knowledgeable about what males from these locales should look like and be discerning when selecting breeding stock. We've seen what a lot of hybrids between locales have a tendency to look like and if you see that, you should recognize that your female is probably misidentified. Verifying a female's locale identity by raising up a male offspring should be priority of breeders with imported females. There is a lot of room for people to screw up pure lines but if you are careful about your animal selection and only buy animals you are confident in and then practice honest, responsible breeding, you should not have a problem getting lines you are confident in. This is one of the reasons I wish the CCBTD took when we tried to set it up. It was designed so that you could look back along the bloodline's family tree (at least as far as was recorded in captivity) and look at other individuals in the line so you could decide if you were confident in the locale's purity.

Chris

Dank,

Chameleons are capable swimmers at short distances but they are not endurance swimmers. Random chance and luck could result in radiation across a water barrier but it would be very limited and wouldn't constitute regular gene flow between populations. Oceanic dispersal happens but it usually is related to rafting on storm debris. Tides and currents have to be just right for this to be successful which adds to the fact that it doesn't typically constitute regular gene flow. They also don't migrate any major distance that would get them away from a drought. These animals do not travel over extreme distances.

Chris

Hmmmmm.

If a breeder gets in a shipment of WC Ambiolobe, but the exporter throws in a Female Nosy Be, by mistake, or maybe becasue he was impartial. Even the most reputable breeder wuld market those as Ambilobe. For all we know... 50% or 90% of the CB Panthers that are sold as "pure" are actually crosses

Click to expand...

I highlighted the bold wording. The mixing up of imported females, either by accident, or more often deliberately, has been common since Locales became financially distinctive with quotas in the late 90's. Many importers would deliberately change the label on, for instance, an imported Tamatave female, which could have been sold for approximately $100, to being an Ambilobe, and triple their profit. The "most reputable breeders" are just that because they know this, and when breeding and selling the offspring from that female, would wait until the male offspring colored up to verify the dam's locale purity. When it is obvious they have been snookered, reputable breeders do not try to pass off they newly produced locale hybrids as pure because a label somewhere said the dam was "this" when she ended up being "that". That said, you can go onto Kingsnake classifieds on almost any given day and see folks selling obvious hybrids as "pure", solely because the breeding stock label said so, whether they bought the breeding stock as an import, or in many cases, from another breeder. You may have meant to imply that a "reputable importer", who may also be a "reputable breeder", would market imports as labeled. True, but all female imports are unproven, as they can't have been "proved". All breeders of any experience in the business of purchasing WC stock know the risks involved. Those new to the business may have to learn like the rest of us did, the hard way, or they may be fortunate enough to figure it out ahead of time, or read here.

As for being the "all we know ..... 50-90% crosses ....", that would be for those who do not deal with breeders with long proven track records of dependable bloodlines. An easy way to minimize this risk is to buy offspring that are large enough to show colors (males), so at least the breeder has demonstrated an opportunity to prove their bloodlines. That, combined with a multi-generational track record, will take the "50-90%" and reduce it to less than 10%, IMMHO. Over time, reliable exporters/importers/breeders have developed solid track records of being honest. Those less reliable have earned their reputations, and have the opposite track records. Ask around.

I was attracted to this thread by the title. As explained very well by Chris and others, I believe the original premise was flawed. My short answer is that the concept of "naturally occuring panther hybrids" is an oxymoron. As pointed out, the "labels" we assign and expectations of color are just that, expectations of man, often driven by marketing. Mother Nature could care less.

First of all I want to say, It shows a lot when somebody actually answer the question I ask directly... It is rare to see in a forum discussion where both sides of the coin are observed. Chris knows his s**t.

Yes, we can prove that locales are naturally occurring. Gary Ferguson's color and pattern research has used pattern and color evolution to trace the expansion history of the species. If memory serves me, it supports the gradual radiation of pardalis down the coasts from the northern tip of the country. Such a gradual radiation pattern wouldn't be due to translocation of populations. On the other hand, (again, I don't have my resources with me to double check) I believe the F. pardalis on Reunion are from an transplanted population.

Click to expand...

Unless I am mistaken you are saying that F. Pardalis started on the northern tip of Madagascar and slowly moved there way south through the island via the coast. Wouldn't this agree with idea that they can and do migrate between locales? However gradual or not. And if this slow "radiation" did happen, wouldn't that mean it is still happening?

Chris, everything you said makes a lot of sense...Thanks for taking the time to discuss it with me...and just in case I am taken out of context...My comments and questions are meant to dive my thinking deeper into the issue... I am not trying to lock horns with Chris, just trying to pick his brain, by exposing mine.

A lot of the issues of locale purity go back to honesty and knowledge.

Click to expand...

This is completely true... But if there is one thing I have learned in life is that you can rarely count on Humans to be honest or knowledgeable in the places they should be, ESPECIALLY when there is money involved. And even if a female is bred and a male offspring is raised to observe coloration, No matter how experienced, honest, or credible the breeder is, we are still talking about guesswork, and mistakes can and will be made. And not only that, but guesswork on the geneology of a species where we have very little solid info on how the how their geneology really works. Two completely experienced reputable breeders could completely disagree on the locale of a specific cham, what is it then?

Joe,

The important distinction is the time scale we're looking at. Over their evolutionary history of thousands of years, they are definitely radiating, their ranges are changing and genetic exchange is occurring resulting in changes to their appearance. They aren't picking up and deciding they want to move down the coast a few hundred miles and see what the girls down there look like though. By looking at similarities and differences between populations at one instant in their evolutionary history we can determine how closely related different populations are from one another and from that, get an idea about where population extensions originated, at least genetically and relatively how long ago.

As for how this plays into defining a locale or our management strategies as breeders, I don't think it matters on our time scale. Over a long time period, there is definitely going to be significant changes to what animals at these locales look like but there really isn't a way that we could accurately mimic such a trend in captivity and even if we tried, it would be along the lines of crossing an animal from one field to one in the next field over who's dad could have possibly been from the field just beyond that.

Going back to the issue of identifying and different opinions, thats where education and being a discerning buyer comes in. I know what I would expect if I were to go buy a particular locale and while another person might have a slightly different idea of what they'd expect, I'm going to be confident in my purchase because I bought from a line I was satisfied was pure and another breeder should have the same confidence when they buy. Ultimately you have to educate yourself and police your own involvement in breeding efforts by asking questions and being particular about what you want to see from lines you add to your own.

Chris

Chameleon Company said:

I highlighted the bold wording. The mixing up of imported females, either by accident, or more often deliberately, has been common since Locales became financially distinctive with quotas in the late 90's. Many importers would deliberately change the label on, for instance, an imported Tamatave female, which could have been sold for approximately $100, to being an Ambilobe, and triple their profit. The "most reputable breeders" are just that because they know this, and when breeding and selling the offspring from that female, would wait until the male offspring colored up to verify the dam's locale purity. When it is obvious they have been snookered, reputable breeders do not try to pass off they newly produced locale hybrids as pure because a label somewhere said the dam was "this" when she ended up being "that". That said, you can go onto Kingsnake classifieds on almost any given day and see folks selling obvious hybrids as "pure", solely because the breeding stock label said so, whether they bought the breeding stock as an import, or in many cases, from another breeder. You may have meant to imply that a "reputable importer", who may also be a "reputable breeder", would market imports as labeled. True, but all female imports are unproven, as they can't have been "proved". All breeders of any experience in the business of purchasing WC stock know the risks involved. Those new to the business may have to learn like the rest of us did, the hard way, or they may be fortunate enough to figure it out ahead of time, or read here.

As for being the "all we know ..... 50-90% crosses ....", that would be for those who do not deal with breeders with long proven track records of dependable bloodlines. An easy way to minimize this risk is to buy offspring that are large enough to show colors (males), so at least the breeder has demonstrated an opportunity to prove their bloodlines. That, combined with a multi-generational track record, will take the "50-90%" and reduce it to less than 10%, IMMHO. Over time, reliable exporters/importers/breeders have developed solid track records of being honest. Those less reliable have earned their reputations, and have the opposite track records. Ask around.

I was attracted to this thread by the title. As explained very well by Chris and others, I believe the original premise was flawed. My short answer is that the concept of "naturally occuring panther hybrids" is an oxymoron. As pointed out, the "labels" we assign and expectations of color are just that, expectations of man, often driven by marketing. Mother Nature could care less.

Click to expand...

Hey Thanks Jim... I always enjoy when you post, I worded it wrong but I was leaning more towards exporters. I realize that the good guys will raise up offspring to determine if the line appears pure. I think I cleared up the point you were speaking of in my above post. There is no doubt dealing with well established breeders with rep is the way to go, as you are sure to get a healthy, colorful animal, and up front service.

But what I am getting at is nobody can guarantee their cham is 100% anything, but yet the maket place focuses on 100% pure locales. Considering this, in my eyes it makes the whole "pure locale" thing seem like more of a tactic for marketing, than anything else.

Thanks Again guys, Nothing but respect intended...

~Joe

Ive talked to breeders where if they dont introduce a wild caught gene into the mix, they notice that the offspring get smaller and smaller...Just thought that was interesting.

LOL ... in a good way

But what I am getting at is nobody can guarantee their cham is 100% anything, but yet the maket place focuses on 100% pure locales

Click to expand...

True ! But by the same token, nobody can prove that a guaranteed cham is not the guaranteed Locale !

For those that were a part of it, the Ambilobe/Picasso debate that went on for years is a perfect example of how "Locales", as most people view them, are more a creation of man and marketing. Not to be confused with the naturally occurring variations one would find if walking across Madagascar, and as illustrated in the work of Dr. Ferguson and others, which certainly are legitimately fuzzy around the edges.

In discussion with others, to include many of my customers who have sent me pictures of their "X Locale" that grew up not to look like "X Locale", and they want my opinion, I try to use a different rule. I tell them that the reality of the marketplace is that if they want to sell that animal directly as "X Locale", or breed it and sell its offspring as "X Locale", do they want to be starting with an animal/bloodline where they have to constantly argue that it is as they say it is, which is not as it appears to others ? Locale color expectation is as a bell curve. From a marketing standpoint, it is always safe to try to stay in the middle of that curve, or what has been generally accepted in the marketplace. It is easier to meet the established expectation of the buyer than to have to reshape it first.

Andrew. Just saw your note. That is affected in part by the size of the gene pool a breeder is working with, as it is easy to paint oneself into a genetic corner, and wild blood is a quick ticket out. Regarding hybrids, a few of us are of the opinion that "Locale hybrid" bloodlines weaken more quickly than Locale pure bloodlines do, all other things being equal.

True ! But by the same token, nobody can prove that a guaranteed cham is not the guaranteed Locale !

Click to expand...

Either way you look at it, IMO both are great reasons not to focus our marketing around Locale. At least not until we have learned enough about the science of their genetics to actually gurantee the Locale of a Panther through blood work.

I am going to speculate a bit here. I have a feeling when/if we get to that point of genetically testing for locale, we may realize that the line is so small, or blurred, or non existant, that we will realize worrying about locale in CB chams is a lost cause. If such a testing ever exists we may come to learn that everything we had been selling as a "True Locale" has been off for generations, and you could have saved yourself a hundred bucks by finding a Cross that looks nice to you and buying that one, cause that's what you got anyway.

I think it is better when the marketing of a Chameleon revolves around the reputation of the dealer.

So by marketing pure locales, we may not be accounting for the fact that individuals within this species can interbreed when artificially allowed to do so but I think we are accounting for the species' natural diversity and maintaining a truer picture of what this species actually is.

Click to expand...

I have been thinking about this statement... I like it but I have an issue with it... I just bred a Ambi/Nosy cross to a Nosy Be, and the way in which it happened tells me that if these two were to have overlapping ranges in the wild (which these two locals don't, but others do), and encountered eachother, they would match and do this naturally. I did not have to force them... I did not have to artificially inciminate, there was no external splicing of DNA in a labrotory, They did Natures Naughty dance, and nature allowed them to do it, whether in a cage or in the wild, they can, do, and will mate outside their locale. I do not think there is anything "artificial" about it. If anything, Keeping only one locale, and breeding only that one locale to keep it "true", is taking out tons of factors, and possiblities that are present in nature to allow the futher evolution of there diversity. I think the fact that locales can and do interbreed is just another testament, and possibly an explantion, to their diversity. As far as locale breeding to keep a "truer" idea of the species, With the "nature of the beast"(importing, exporting, limited science, shady exporters/dealers,) we can't be sure if we are actually creating a truer picture of what the species actually is, the margin of error, and guesswork involved in captive breeding has lines that are way to fuzzy for science.

Thanks Again Guys, Respectfully,
~Joe