Book mistakes

bradley

New Member
I got the 'The Chameleon handbook' for christmas and it goes on alot about hybrids. It has a picture in there of a supposed panther and and oustlets hybrid. It also has information saying that c. parsoni cristiferi could be a hybrid between c. parsonii and c. globifer. there is even a picture of this supposed panther oustlets hybrid and i have to say it does look rather true from the pictures. Is this right or is it a mistake?
 

bradley

New Member
author is francois le berre and page with panther oustlets hybrid is 19 and there ia another supposed hybrid page 20 and also a dead chameleon that is also a supposed hybrid page 108
 

Carlton

Chameleon Enthusiast
author is francois le berre and page with panther oustlets hybrid is 19 and there ia another supposed hybrid page 20 and also a dead chameleon that is also a supposed hybrid page 108
I don't know if there is a recent (since 2000) edition of this book, but if you have the 90s edition, the information is VERY outdated. Even when the book was considered new, some of the info was questionable at best. I doubt the hybrid was ever verified genetially.
 

ferretinmyshoes

Veterinarian
Staff member
Yeah I've noticed a lot of inaccurate information in this book also. I didn't see the hybrid claims but there were lots of other things said wrong (like that they don't need UVB) so I wouldn't put a whole credit behind any other claims in that book.
 

Oski

New Member
I got the 'The Chameleon handbook' for christmas and it goes on alot about hybrids. It has a picture in there of a supposed panther and and oustlets hybrid. It also has information saying that c. parsoni cristiferi could be a hybrid between c. parsonii and c. globifer. there is even a picture of this supposed panther oustlets hybrid and i have to say it does look rather true from the pictures. Is this right or is it a mistake?
Hi brad, I also got this book and noticed the cross very interesting.
 

Syn

Avid Member
A friend of mine has a postcard from the late 90s with pictures of a few different species. Once was a "Chamaeleo pardalis". Nomenclature changes over time as more information is learned and organization becomes better. It's interesting.
 

Kent67

Retired Moderator
I don't know if there is a recent (since 2000) edition of this book, but if you have the 90s edition, the information is VERY outdated. Even when the book was considered new, some of the info was questionable at best. I doubt the hybrid was ever verified genetially.
The book he's talking about is the 3rd edition of The Chameleon Handbook that was released last year. I purchased it for the photos, much like every other chameleon book out there. From what I remember of the 3 different supposed hybrid animals in the book, I didn't see anything that would refute the claim. The animals he proposed to be hybrids all have overlapping ranges and would appear to be related closely enough that I could see hybridization happening. The Furcifer oustaleti x pardalis is not the first time I've heard of someone finding a supposed hybrid of these species (Philippe de Vosjoli back in the 90's is another) and the photo, at least to me, looks like an Oustalet/Panther. I believe the photo of the preserved specimen was supposed to be F. antimena x verrucosus? Again, overlapping ranges and from what I remember, it didn't look like a classic example of either of those species. What was the last? That F. angeli is a naturally occuring hybrid of the overlapping F. rhinoceratus and "Ankaramy Pink" F. pardalis?
 
Top Bottom