Is this true?

GooglenVincient. I think it is very possible to line breed chameleons. Just remember to take into consideration what you are doing, what you are trying to accomplish, and what the possible poor outcomes may occur. Don't do it for too long, since studies say that the 10 to 12 mark are the worst for genetics (at least from my reading and study)... you may see recessive traits "rear their heads" sooner and cause problems. Be ready for anything.

Are you ready to line breed and keep several clutches of chameleons for their lifespans to see what happens? I don't know anyone who is or has the resources to devote to this... therefore, I have to revert back to other studies of other animals and compare chameleons to them. It isn't perfect, but it is all we have right now.

As for those that claim to know what they are talking about, I seriously doubt they have any data to support their claims.
 
I think no matter what you ask on this site, weather it be valid or not, will always attract some sort of critism from others who have differing opinions.
I have posted on this site before, asking for genuine help on a metter which i thought maybe some of the members here could help with as they seem to have so many years experience. I was rudely spoken to though and the advice offered, even though correct most probably, was in a distasteful way.
Line breeding is practiced. I do not know if it is acceptable or not, but i do know that it can happen and it does and no one should try and talk down any person who believes that this is a valid point of discusion.
we need to see evidence and proof that this is detremental to the lineage before people try and discredit any other persons point of view
 
Inbreeding of reptiles does not infer the same stigma, effects, or rapidy of effects/defects occuring as it does with mammals. People do, do it, for various reasons, often for many generations without apparent negatives. However, its logical to assume the a 'line' begun from unrelated specimans, will be '*naturally', more robust, less prone to eventual negative traits, than one begun from an inbred line.

* with the exception of exceptionally small/isolated populations of a given species, wild reptiles will have little odds of mating with clutchmates or related animals, since reptile young tend to disperse pretty widely (with the exception of atleast one species of lizard here , Cunningham's skinks (Egernia cunninghami) which retain family groups

http://www.cababstractsplus.org/abstracts/Abstract.aspx?AcNo=20043040205 )

Even these largely avoid mating with close relatives!

This is not to say inbred reptiles will be horrible freaks, or may produce freak offspring, or be any less able to produce viable young, but at some point diversification will be needed to strengthen the line (new blood).
 
Lol just got back on from my little 2 day vacation, didnt realize this topic would stur up so much, then again people are very out spoken on the forum (doesnt mean that is bad) we just all need to understand to be respectful of others, i thinkevery 1 did that so far. Good areguments and rebuttles, i would like to talk to some biologist that study chams and see if their DNA is the same as humans or dogs in the way people feel they are. I know less variety in dnaisnt a good thing because the animal isnt evolving, but it doesnt mean the animal is weaker, unless taken to the extreme and inbred various times. Good convos though.
 
GooglezNvincent said:
Lol just got back on from my little 2 day vacation, didnt realize this topic would stur up so much, then again people are very out spoken on the forum (doesnt mean that is bad) we just all need to understand to be respectful of others, i thinkevery 1 did that so far. Good areguments and rebuttles, i would like to talk to some biologist that study chams and see if their DNA is the same as humans or dogs in the way people feel they are. I know less variety in dnaisnt a good thing because the animal isnt evolving, but it doesnt mean the animal is weaker, unless taken to the extreme and inbred various times. Good convos though.
Click to expand...

I'm still waiting to see some data and it sounds like Clean Line would like to see some too. I don't think it is coming. . . Good thread Googlez!
 
In a natural situation, if such a pairing were to occur, nature would take care of things. A higher incedence of genetic problems would result in a higher percentage of deaths. In time, it is righted. If it's healthy, it has a shot, dueling banjos or not.

If it was done over and over, without any selective forces, you will see problems arise more quickly than in out-bred animals. IF you were to select for the healthiest animals in an in-bred line you should still get healthy animals - for a generation or two. However, it should not be a surprise to see higher mortality and more problems from the start.
 
OK well what about dogs then? I've been told that line breeding is put into use with the American Pit Bull... Are they not more complicated than a chameleon?

(it does seem like kind of a bad breed though :confused: )

I have pardalis and jacksoni and would never do it (morality, don't really need any other reason), just curious.
 
Mach said:
OK well what about dogs then? I've been told that line breeding is put into use with the American Pit Bull... Are they not more complicated than a chameleon?

(it does seem like kind of a bad breed though :confused: )

I have pardalis and jacksoni and would never do it (morality, don't really need any other reason), just curious.
Click to expand...

"Purebred" dogs are commonly line-bred... only takes a minute to do some research online. It is interesting to note there seems to be no stigma in the canine community about line-breeding (they have been doing it for a very, very long time). It is used as a tool, for a specific purpose.

Interesting:
http://www.geocities.com/learntobreed/linebreeding.html
http://www.rhiannon-cavaliers.com/linebreeding.htm
http://members.tripod.com/marge_s_2/nonframes/inbreeding.htm
http://www.yourdictionary.com/line-breeding
 
DJnSoCal said:
"Purebred" dogs are commonly line-bred... only [...]It is interesting to note there seems to be no stigma in the canine community about line-breeding
Click to expand...

That really depends who you ask. The practise has unfortunately resulted in a lot of very unhealthy animals.

Mach, Pit bull terriers and Staffordshire terriers are not bad dogs. They're strong loyal dogs - many of whom have BAD OWNERS.
Is anyone else old enough to have watched The Little Rascals?
 
Ya I actually have a pit/boxer mix, she is sweet as can be and very loyal. That's what makes me think line breeding is useful, or at least that there's a reason for it.
 
I hear a site sponsor of this forum line breeds... they are not posting in this thread.. in fact I have never seen them post. They do come to our local shows though...... The offspring from this breeder has been known to have no motivation to mate.... is this because of line breeding or just lame animals to start?

(I am going off what I have discussed in several round table discusions with locals and/or forum members who have dealt with these chams and breeder..... A member even told me they asked this breeder about it... and they even admitted to it.)

I do not agree with line breeding at all. Sure it might happen in the wild...... but if the animal reproduced lame offspring they would not carry on the genes... Thanks Darwin! :D
 
Oh, the reason I said bad breed is because of the horrible specimens I have seen, I attribute that to a mix of (like Sandra said) bad owners and the fact that they are prohibited within the areas where I live (seems they only get the good ones). I didn't really mean demeanor entirely, but I've seen a mix of meanness and health issues with pit bulls.

My example was directed to the point that chameleon genetics should be able to handle line breeding it if a complex mammal such as a dog can. I have to say that I don't know any type of "chromosome count" stuff but a chameleon seems relatively simple genetically compared to a dog/horse/etc., but not say... a fish or insect.
 
This happens in nature,Think of all the "nosy" pardalis forms,they have been inbreeding on there respective islands for thousands of years,the islands are very small,most can be walked round in a day or less,Its quite a clear assumption that they do Inbreed,
IMO i would have no problem in breeding one generation,i dont think you would have many problems,if any,inbreeding depression is a problem,but its commonsense that you work with the best you have
I would rather selectivly breed then crossbreed
In the wild the weak ones would die quickly.....Anyway haven't Nosy bes been bred like this in the past,i have always found in the past that the "true blue" Poly always tops out at a smaller size then wc Nosy be's
 
Last edited:
Where the hell where you guys when I tried to discuss this 2 weeks or so ago? :p lol

I agree with pretty much everything that has been said (pro line breeding) except the amount of generations you can go. A genetically simple fish can only go 6 generations, at the most before undesirable results occur. I would hate to see a 12th gen inbred cham.

It's honestly going to take someone to try this. See how far they can go, raise the offspring to breeding age, and see how their offspring come out to know for sure the total amount of the effects line breeding has had on your animals genetics. Any responsible breeder attempting to do this should do no less.

Then post on here after, to let everyone know and for it to be documented. Or wait about 2 yrs and see what I report.

As a person who has line bred in the past (not chams) I can say that the smart breeder always crosses his line back out to a non related similar trait animal prior to sale.

I will say this. If what turns out is a inferior animal, all should be destroyed. And definitely don't do it if you are not willing to cull your animals.
 
Pure said:
Where the hell where you guys when I tried to discuss this 2 weeks or so ago? :p lol

I agree with pretty much everything that has been said (pro line breeding) except the amount of generations you can go. A genetically simple fish can only go 6 generations, at the most before undesirable results occur. I would hate to see a 12th gen inbred cham.

It's honestly going to take someone to try this. See how far they can go, raise the offspring to breeding age, and see how their offspring come out to know for sure the total amount of the effects line breeding has had on your animals genetics. Any responsible breeder attempting to do this should do no less.

Then post on here after, to let everyone know and for it to be documented. Or wait about 2 yrs and see what I report.

As a person who has line bred in the past (not chams) I can say that the smart breeder always crosses his line back out to a non related similar trait animal prior to sale.

I will say this. If what turns out is a inferior animal, all should be destroyed. And definitely don't do it if you are not willing to cull your animals.
Click to expand...

+1... and the generational line-breeding I referred to was in relation to studies saying at that point there are serious problems most of the off-spring. That is to say, if you take it far enough, you're going to have problems if you don't bring in some new genes to the mix.
 
It really depends on what your idea of "undesirable" is.

Realistically it's a safe bet that after the second generation you will start to see some of the offspring have issues. Genetic and otherwise. IME with it and what is acceptable, after the 6th generation you start to have more losses than animals that turn out ok.

Again I'm speaking from experience with fish. This is apples to oranges, but seeing as fish are simpler in genetic makeup than chams I can only deduce that this would be the same effect if not worse with chams, dogs, birds, what ever.

To me, more than a 50% loss of a batch of offspring isn't acceptable. You have to remember these are living creatures. I do agree that you will have viable offspring much further down the line, but it has to comes down to ethics at some point. 1 out of 20 isn't something I would allow.
 
Pure said:
It really depends on what your idea of "undesirable" is.

Realistically it's a safe bet that after the second generation you will start to see some of the offspring have issues. Genetic and otherwise. IME with it and what is acceptable, after the 6th generation you start to have more losses than animals that turn out ok.

Again I'm speaking from experience with fish. This is apples to oranges, but seeing as fish are simpler in genetic makeup than chams I can only deduce that this would be the same effect if not worse with chams, dogs, birds, what ever.

To me, more than a 50% loss of a batch of offspring isn't acceptable. You have to remember these are living creatures. I do agree that you will have viable offspring much further down the line, but it has to comes down to ethics at some point. 1 out of 20 isn't something I would allow.
Click to expand...

I would hope it isn't something ANY of us would ever do. This debate occurred over Googleznvincent's question "is it possible." I think most people agree it is not only possible, it is being done. I, like you, wouldn't do it for very long or without careful consideration as to what I would be trying to accomplish. Can you imagine the resources you'd need to breed and keep just three generations of chameleons for their lives in order to select which ones to continue in the breeding project and then keep the others to see how they compare to non-line-bred chameleons!? I think chameleons are beautiful enough as-is, but that wasn't Google'z question. :D I hope your chams are doing well!
 
DJnSoCal said:
I would hope it isn't something ANY of us would ever do. This debate occurred over Googleznvincent's question "is it possible." I think most people agree it is not only possible, it is being done. I, like you, wouldn't do it for very long or without careful consideration as to what I would be trying to accomplish. Can you imagine the resources you'd need to breed and keep just three generations of chameleons for their lives in order to select which ones to continue in the breeding project and then keep the others to see how they compare to non-line-bred chameleons!? I think chameleons are beautiful enough as-is, but that wasn't Google'z question. :D I hope your chams are doing well!
Click to expand...

Pray for small clutches. lol

Well in all honesty, about the only way I can see to do this is to raise the clutch until you see the few that have the traits you're looking for, then cull the rest. Selling them would be irresponsible and keeping them all just isn't an option. Continue with this until you get what you are looking for. This is one of the reasons I said it shouldn't be attempted unless you are willing to do what has to be done. Even then it would take more than a couple of cages to do this from start to finish.

Not to contradict myself. When I was saying that 1 out of 20 isn't something I would do I was speaking from the stand point of the end result. To me culling is far more humane than genetic defects causing death or any other number of problems.

My chams are doing great! Thanks :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Francois5
Wild Chameleon eggs. We want to save them.
Replies
19
Views
442
kinyonga
K
king.louis
Some questions on Carpet chameleon husbandry
Replies
14
Views
786
javadi
javadi
NorahJan
Lost Cricket...
Replies
4
Views
175
kinyonga
K
Meliodas
Is this a burn?
Replies
1
Views
121
kinyonga
K
kib1
Chameleon’s end of tail is brown and injured
Replies
8
Views
232
Beman
Beman
Back
Top Bottom