Viability of Captive Populations

[schendricks]

Hello everyone,

I'm curious if anyone here is aware of viable captive-bred generations past F4 or F5. Thanks for any help.

S

 

[schendricks]

Not a one?

 

[schendricks]

I read here that Ardith Abate wasn't so hopeful. Although this only constitutes a curiosity for me, I hope the silence on this thread doesn't mean she was right!

 

[laurie]

Could you narrow down what you are asking? Are you looking for a certain chameleon, just any chameleon or what? I am sure we can trace some Veiled & panthers that far, but it would help to know what you want to know.

 

[Trace]

The longer I keep the more I'm inclined to agree with her. Didn't used to. Take a look at Kingsnake Classifieds right now. There are Senegal Chameleons for sale for less than the cost of a proper UV light. What's the point in keeping that animal properly when it's simply cheaper to buy a new one? Just think too, 21500 specimens were allowed for export in 2009. How many of those were bred, let alone are still alive? And that's just one species that gets exported annually.

To answer your original question; beyond maybe a few Panthers and Veileds there are not many species that have been bred into multi generations. Kevin Stanford and his Furcifer lateralis lateralis are the only ones that come to mind in my pre-coffee state of mind. I know there are a few others but it's a very, very small handful.

Cheers,
T

 

[eisentrauti]

Bradypodion thamnobates and damaranum could be breed in multiple generations, Tr.jacksonii xantholophus and hoehnelii too

 

[DGray]

not to worry

Hello everyone,

I'm curious if anyone here is aware of viable captive-bred generations past F4 or F5. Thanks for any help.

S

I read here that Ardith Abate wasn't so hopeful. Although this only constitutes a curiosity for me, I hope the silence on this thread doesn't mean she was right!

For the most part, chameleons are short-lived animals with high fecundity and high losses to predators and circumstances. Heck, one of them is an annual with a lifespan above ground that is shorter than a marigold's. Don't worry about captive survival after gen 4, 5, 6, etc. Jackson's in Hawai`i show that they can be started and flourish from a small founder group.

Ardi, god bless her, was not a population biologist.

 

[fluxlizard]

This is a tough one for me.

I had veiled chameleons going for a number of generations in the 90s (more than 4 or 5, but I don't remember how many).

I had panthers going for 3- then my eggs started failing to hatch. My longest clutch previously took 13 months (yes pardalis- 1 time deal, but I had some take 10 months as well). So I kept holding out hope that eggs would hatch and they never did.

Not long after, I got out of chameleons almost altogether for several years- had a few here and there but nothing serious.

I attributed the problem at the time to my switch from reptivite (I think that's what it was called -the zoomed multivit) to herptivite which had no vit.A. I spoke with a few others who had the same problem and opinion at the time. I had no problem with the veileds- I figured that was because I fed the veileds lots of salad variety and occasionally (once after each breeding) a tiny mouse (fuzzy or hopper) so I figured they didn't have the problem with the switch because they got whatever herptivite was lacking from another source. I never fed the panthers anything but insects.

Important note- I am not saying I was correct about herptivite. That was my best guess at the time. I have no idea what happened with the panthers and why the eggs stopped hatching. I got out of chameleons almost altogether not long after and gave up veileds and panthers (and mellers, many of which I had raised up from my own breeding)(Moved and had to make choices about what I was going to keep).

I do think the problem is a nutritional problem.

I would be very interested to know if someone went a couple of generations with herptivite as their only multivitamin.

My situation is different today and I am hoping to go long term now with a few species and establish 2 or 3 species that are more or less self sustaining...

Of course- the multigeneration thing has another aspect too. 99% of people who set out to breed, end up quiting at some point. Most before, but some after a few times. Caring for babies and all the food they go through and selling and stuff gets old for many people and eats up their spare time and extra cash and they end up getting out of it.

So IMO a good deal of the lack of success could just be the high turnover of those who start out to breed...

Professional breeders can find many other herps to work with that are as profitable but much less work to deal with too. If you look at panthers and veileds they have something in common- they are very prolific. Panthers are relatively expensive too. I think those factors are a good part of why these have been so successful and focused on. If you have to choose from a dollars and cents predictable profit point of view, you probably aren't going to choose something that only produces a handful of offspring once or twice a year and sells for $50, if you can put the same effort, expense, and space into something that produces 100 or more offspring per year that sell for $200...

So that's another part of the lack of success in species other than panthers and veileds.

I don't think that's all of it, but that's a good part of it...

 

[Texas Panther Man]

No she wasn't but without her most of us would know far less about these magnificent creatures. I talked to her numerous times back in the '90s she helped me with my first two clutches of panthers. Her Cin journals were the first place cham keepers could go to find useful info on husbandry and breeding.

 

[DGray]

No she wasn't but without her most of us would know far less about these magnificent creatures. I talked to her numerous times back in the '90s she helped me with my first two clutches of panthers. Her Cin journals were the first place cham keepers could go to find useful info on husbandry and breeding.

Yes, agreed, we owe Ardi and CIN a huge debt.

 

[kinyonga]

fluxlizard said..."I had no problem with the veileds- I figured that was because I fed the veileds lots of salad variety and occasionally (once after each breeding) a tiny mouse (fuzzy or hopper) so I figured they didn't have the problem with the switch because they got whatever herptivite was lacking from another source. I never fed the panthers anything but insects."...if its true that some species of chameleons can not convert beta carotene then feeding them greens etc. wouldn't help their vitamin A levels. Feeding them a mouse would because it has prEformed vitamin A in it.

Insects do have retinol/retinyl in their eyes and some insects have even more vitamin A...so if you fed the panthers those insects even if they can't convert the beta carotene they should get some.

Drosophila have sources of vitamin A in other areas than the eyes, for example.

This site lists the amount of vitamin A in various insects...
http://www.bioline.org.br/pdf?jb06047

Locusts have vitamin A...
http://aedes.biosci.arizona.edu/PDFPapers/ref161.pdf

This site shows levels of vitamin A in insects too...scan way down...
http://www.eaza.net/activities/Documents/NutritionDocs/EAZA-Zoo Nutrition News 3 [03].pdf

Bombyx mori (silkworms)...if a lack of it causes problems then they must normally have vitamin A..
http://www.springerlink.com/content/h72570317553482u/

http://books.google.ca/books?id=l3v...epage&q="vitamin A" AND "bombyx mori"&f=false

 

[schendricks]

Could you narrow down what you are asking? Are you looking for a certain chameleon, just any chameleon or what? I am sure we can trace some Veiled & panthers that far, but it would help to know what you want to know.

Sorry if it wasn't clear. Yes, my question is general because A. Abate's reported opinion was that chameleons are not viable past the fourth or fifth captive generation--generally. I took her to mean that any captive population is unsustainable without diversifying its gene pool, e.g. through wild-caught specimens. While I've been aware of multiple captive generations--F3 or some unspecified number--I hadn't encountered evidence to contradict Abate's reported opinion. Naturally, I'd like to.

Fluxlizard seems to recall having bred calyptratus past the fifth generation. I'd like to know if at any point "fresh" genes were introduced through either wild-caught specimens or captive-bred ones of generation F<5. If so, Abate hasn't here been strictly proved wrong. For while Dave (very helpfully--how could I not have thought of that!) points to the Hawaiian T. j. xantholophus as evidence, is it really believed that no new introductions have been made to any of the (at least) four populations there? Can you elaborate on the population biology, Dave?

On the other hand, Trace and Fluxlizard offer strong alternative theories explaining the lack of captive generations past F5, viz., 1) that such extensive and continuous breeding hasn't been widely attempted and 2) that breeders' knowledge of and attention to nutrition has been insufficient. To the first, suppose I will contact the major breeders and see how far they've gotten. Regarding Fluxlizard's theory, who knows, but Kinyonga, you are the Linkmaster. Thank you for the information!

I will email breeders and if they'll permit it, report their testimony. However I'd like this discussion to continue as I think we're all interested in what will happen to captive populations once the imports are stopped or extinct. I wonder where Chris is--I know he's been very involved with that concern. If I've misunderstood anyone, please correct me. Thank each of you for your thoughtful, helpful contributions! Let's continue to explore this, if you'd like.

Sincerely,

-S

PS For anyone who's interested: Preliminary Study of the Behavior and Ecology of Jackson's Chameleons of Maui, Hawaii, Dr. George H. Waring, Department of Zoology, Southern Illinois University, 1996.

PPS Neither am I a population biologist or scientist of any kind, so please forgive but correct my terminological mistakes and factual misconceptions.

 

[fluxlizard]

sorry guys- somehow I did a double post and I don't know how to delete one. Disregard

 

[fluxlizard]

I did bring in a few male CB veileds here and there now that you ask and I'm more carefully thinking about it. Not many, but they would have been males.

If I remember rightly, I was not aware of fresh wild stock coming into the country most of the time I was breeding them and did not believe it existed.

I wonder how many generations Gary Ferguson went in his study in his lab? He indicated in his book that he went multiple generations, and recorded his thoughts about how to maintain a self sustaining but now that I think about it, I don't know that he was clear that he was not bringing in fresh genetics either...

I do think this probably has nutritional roots.

Vit A may be found in insects, and maybe if specifically gutloaded for it, they would provide enough. (Thank you for the excellent links by the way).

On the other hand, I just had an experience purchasing some lizards last spring that were adults raised by one of the biggest names in lizard propagation whose family is now selling off his breeding stock after he passed away, and this guy had been breeding this particular species for a looong time. Decades without fresh stock. These weren't chameleons but these animals were clearly vitamin A deficient at time of purchase and this came as no surprise at all to his son- I was pointed to the solution in an article the now deceased breeder wrote on them for reptiles magazine. I went back and looked in some of this guys (sorry "this guy" is used here because I am trying really hard not to name drop although by this point most people know who I am probably talking about anyway- "this guy" was my hero and very kind to me when he was alive and I have great respect for him and will forever hold him in the highest regard) articles, and sure enough- he indicated problems right there in black in white with vitamin a deficiency and how he dealt with it not only in this species (Lacerta lepida) but also in some of the other articles he wrote about other species he was maintaining self sustaining populations of. He bred his own insects (cockroaches and claimed to be the original superworm breeder before using cockroaches) so he had control over what went in to those insects. But to be fair- I suspect from his writings that was mostly somewhat random old surplus produce. I also don't think he normally used anything but calcium supplements on his insects...

I guess to me, that indicates that insects do not automatically have sufficient vitamin A for some species. Whether or not that means that is what happened to my panther chameleons, I obviously cannot say at this point.

Still, logic would say that the most likely culprit is a nutritional deficiency of some sort. Whether vit.a or something else.

We are seeing veiled morphs appear on the market now that are simply not possible without some amount of inbreeding. Seems like some of those people would be ones to talk to about multiple generational viability...

I wonder- did Ardi indicate if she felt that way because because eggs stopped hatching like my experience or did the eggs hatch/babies were born but the offspring were weak and sickly?

 

[DGray]

Sorry if it wasn't clear. Yes, my question is general because A. Abate's reported opinion was that chameleons are not viable past the fourth or fifth captive generation....
... I'd like to know if at any point "fresh" genes were introduced through either wild-caught specimens or captive-bred ones of generation F<5. If so, Abate hasn't here been strictly proved wrong.

For while Dave ... points to the Hawaiian T. j. xantholophus as evidence, is it really believed that no new introductions have been made to any of the (at least) four populations there?

Can you elaborate on the population biology, Dave?

On the other hand, Trace and Fluxlizard offer strong alternative theories explaining the lack of captive generations past F5, viz., 1) that such extensive and continuous breeding hasn't been widely attempted and 2) that breeders' knowledge of and attention to nutrition has been insufficient. To the first, suppose I will contact the major breeders and see how far they've gotten. Regarding Fluxlizard's theory, who knows, but Kinyonga, you are the Linkmaster. Thank you for the information!

However I'd like this discussion to continue as I think we're all interested in what will happen to captive populations once the imports are stopped or extinct. ...
Sincerely,

-S

To be clear, I'm not a population biologist either, and its been a long time since I had a semester of pop.bio., but it permeated my biological education and the principles endure.

I'm aware of the Makawao studies "... Jackson's Chameleons of Maui, Hawaii, Waring, G. H. 1996. " and they demonstrate that an even smaller founder group can result in a healthy population. There is no reason to think that those pop.s would need introductions of new wild stock to remain healthy. Indeed, it is very unlikely that new animals have been brought from Kenya to Hawai`i in the past three decades (which would be equivalent to at least 15 chameleon generations), but it would be impossible to provide proof that it has not happened. A genetic survey of a large number of sub-populations might be able to answer the question if it were important enough for that kind of effort.

Observe that there are natural selection factors in play there (predation, weather stress, natural mate selection, etc.) helping to keep the population healthy. In captivity the natural pressures are largely removed. This does not really lead to stronger stock, but is considered good "husbandry".

If any breeder started with a larger group of wild-caught animals and did not sell off 90+% of all the offspring, practiced careful selection, and proper nutrition, I'm sure there would be healthy generations past F6. I would posit that the reason we see so many examples of weak stock of captive reptiles, is that culling is not practiced very much.

.

 

[schendricks]

Alright, guys. I'm satisfied with 1) the case of the Hawaiian xantholophus, 2) the absence of natural selection in captive breeding, and 3) the potentially insufficient nutrition etc. in captive husbandry, as three very strong explanations for the dearth of generations past F5. Thank you all very much for your help.

Additionally, the posts in another thread about outbreeding/inbreeding depression and the complexities of genetic health have been enlightening. I really ought to get around to taking that biology class. I wouldn't be surprised if I fell in love, and that'd be a much safer beloved than philosophy.