What to call F. pardalis morphs

[Kent67]

This thread was supposed to be about realizing that unless you or someone you implicitly trust collected an animal or its direct relatives from the wild, you cannot EVER say that ANY animal is 100% pure locale. Documenting bloodlines is good, but it will never ensure locality crosses don't happen, since no one has 100% reliable collection data. There is so much variation that it just can't be done. Individual animals can be compared to generally agreed upon standards of what each locality phenotype is supposed to look like. For this reason, and to try to diminish the arguments over what is what, change the terminology to reflect that we don't know 100%. Let's realize that we have a problem and try to do something to change it.

I'd be more than happy to chime in on the right or wrongs of crossing locales in another thread, but can we try to keep this thread OT?

 

[Prism Chameleons]

Okay, let’s talk about the selling aspects of “locales” and how they are represented. I have kept quiet about this way too long and the reason I have is because I wasn’t about to get into a heated debate of whether a panther is this locale or that. It’s just not my nature to be argumentative or slash other’s opinions over the internet. And if this thread turns into a heated debate, I won’t participate in it either. If there is a question or a problem, I believe there are more respectable ways to handle a discrepancy.

Let’s talk about the now famous Uncle Sam owned by Jake of this forum. Yes, I am the breeder that sold Uncle Sam to Jake. Poor Uncle Sam was ripped to pieces on this forum the day that Jake took proud photos of his new panther chameleon. He posted up photos to share with all his beauty of his new “Ambilobe” and instead of hearing how beautiful he is, Uncle Sam was criticized about his locale. I received Uncle Sam as a mere baby of about 2 months old still brownish tan with his newborn colorations as an Ambilobe hatchling. I watched Uncle Sam gain his colorations, took care of him while he grew to a juvenile age, and yes, there was a part of me that wondered early on of his locale as he was gaining color. He had these beautiful red colorations developing in his background of green with blue barring on his torso and red barring on his legs. As the months went on, those red colorations in his background started spreading, filling in, and becoming more and more intense. Uncle Sam is only 7 months old and is still developing his colorations; he will continue to gain his full coloration until he is about 1.5 years old. He isn’t even finished gaining his full potential, yet he was already being debated as to what locale he is. I felt so bad for Jake and Uncle Sam that I gave Jake a full refund for his purchase. Jake didn't even ask or imply he wanted a refund - I just sent him a refund through paypal without him even knowing it. In turn, Jake has an absolutely STUNNING panther chameleon and I’m very happy that Uncle Sam has Jake as a proud owner.

Those who have seen the before and after photos of Uncle Sam can see that in a short amount of time Uncle Sam’s colorations have continued to fill out in the background of a more “solid” coloration rather than “spots” of red. Is he an Ambilobe? Is his phenotype found in the trees of Madagascar? Who can be sure? Is he possibly an Ambanja, Nosy Be, or other locale? Possibly. Did I misrepresent him? No. I sold Jake a young juvenile male who was still gaining colorations as the Ambilobe that was sold to me as a hatchling. Should I have said he was something else? How could I have done that? Uncle Sam was still and is still in the months of his coloration and physical development and if I had said he was another locale or a mixed locale then I would have been misrepresenting him.

It is the same with Vincent at Screameleons and the Ambanja/Ambilobe question. Vincent was told the female was a WC Ambanja – he sold the CH babies as such. Are they Ambanja? Can he be sure? No. Are they Ambilobe? Maybe… Maybe not. Was he misrepresenting the baby chameleons he was selling? No. Can even an importer or breeder who pulls the animals out of a bag when they arrive from Madagascar be sure of their origin? Nope. Not unless they were directly involved with the collection process in Madagascar themselves when the chameleons were collected and watched every minute of the way when they were housed and packed for shipping. We can only know what information is told to us by the seller’s we purchase from. Then we can take what we know from experience of locale colorations and try to apply that knowledge to individual panther chameleons to determine what locale is most likely to be true. We may find that when Uncle Sam is done gaining his full potential that yes, he may be a hybrid or another locale altogether. It is very possibly true that he isn’t the Ambilobe as sold to me; on the other hand, it is also possible he could be. All I know is that he is truly an amazingly beautiful panther chameleon and Jake is lucky to be able to see him every day with his own eyes and enjoy him.

I have always represented Prism Chameleons as keeping panther chameleons as nature intended. I have always thought there was something special about depending on where panther chameleons are located, they are different in their colorations and phenotypes. I still think there is something extraordinarily special about that. I will continue to try and breed my panthers to keep that specialness about them. Ankaramy panthers are a good example of locale differences. All Ankaramy are some various shades of pink/orange/red. If there weren’t any differences on geographical locations, why would all Ankaramy be some shade of pink in that area and that area only? However, having said that, Catherine and some of the others on this forum are right. Can we be sure of origin? Can we know for certain what locale a panther chameleon is? How about after many generations of a particular line of breeding? How can we be sure that all the mothers of those generations were Ambilobe, Ambanja, Nosy Be, Diego Suarez, or any other locale? We’d have to be sure of the first parent generation lineage, and be certain that through the years no females were mixed up or labeled something that was incorrect.

All I know is that Uncle Sam has turned into one absolutely gorgeous panther chameleon. After seeing his photos yesterday from Jake’s updated photo post, I actually had some seller’s remorse! All we can do as breeders, whether we are “purists” or not, is to try to sell offspring by representing them to the best of our abilities. When I haven’t bred something myself, I have ALWAYS disclosed that information to my customers and with my f1 generation offspring, I have kept them to try and “prove” the mother out until they have gained their colorations. All I can do as a breeder is provide healthy, quality, and beautiful panther chameleons to my customers with good customer service and represent them to the best of my ability of their background and locale. That is all any breeder of panther chameleons can do.

I am glad a panther is a panther is a panther. Because to me, all panther chameleons are beautiful, no matter what “morph” or “locale” they turn out to be.

 

[Dyesub Dave]

Well now I'm confused.

This thread was supposed to be about realizing that unless you or someone you implicitly trust collected an animal or its direct relatives from the wild, you cannot EVER say that ANY animal is 100% pure locale. Documenting bloodlines is good, but it will never ensure locality crosses don't happen, since no one has 100% reliable collection data. There is so much variation that it just can't be done. Individual animals can be compared to generally agreed upon standards of what each locality phenotype is supposed to look like. For this reason, and to try to diminish the arguments over what is what, change the terminology to reflect that we don't know 100%. Let's realize that we have a problem and try to do something to change it.

I'd be more than happy to chime in on the right or wrongs of crossing locales in another thread, but can we try to keep this thread OT?

I had thought that most posts in this thread were discussing this exact topic. With of course a few stray opinions here and there. Almost every post reflects an idea or opinion about 'Bloodlines' or 'Pure strains' and the documentation of such animals. It also seems that many here are agreeing with your perspective to varying degrees in the original post.

I guess the question is even if the animal is collected from the wild do you still have any guarantee that the bloodlines are pure? As ParadilisGirl stated how do we know that the collectors/breeders in these areas aren't letting animals loose in the wild or that due to human interaction on their habitat they aren't coming together naturally?

How about we just call them Panther Chameleons? And if somebody has what they think is a 'PURE' strain then then can call it a 'Pure Ambilobe' (or whatever locale it's from) if they like?

BTW - I really liked your post ParadilisGirl. Very unbiased and open-minded.

Dyesub Dave.

 

[Jeweledchameleons]

Jeweledchameleons said concerning calyptratus..."All the animals were believed to be one species, bred and crossed bred and completely muddled"...what species are you referring to?

Reference: Chameleons 2nd ed. by Petr Necas
page 113 section Chamaeleo Calyptratus
"from the Start classification of the veiled chameleon has been filled with errors. ~snip~ Two subspecies have been described- Chamaeleo ch. calyptratus ( yemen) and Chamaeleo calyptratus calcarifer Peters 1871 (Asir Saudi Arabia). Research has shown that the second subspecies was in fact a hybred between Chamaeleo Calyptratus X Chamaeleo arabicus [Necas pers. observ. Bøohme pers. comm.] Both forms are related and can be hybridized, as shown by Mrs Haikal's breeding experiments in LWIPZIG GERMANY. THE HYBREDS CLOSELY RESEMBLE THE VEILED CHAMELEON; THEY ARRE LARGE AND ROBUST, BUT HAVE A SMALLER CASQUE. They also demonstrate high fertility, even in subsequent generations. [underline and caps mine] From a taxonomic viewpoint, the subspecies Chamaeleo c. calcarifer does not exist, although animals from Saudi Arabia differ somewhat from those in Yemen as much as populations in Yemen differ from each other. "

It's this type of thing that I'm trying to prevent with the panthers.

 

[Kent67]

Well now I'm confused.

I had thought that most posts in this thread were discussing this exact topic. With of course a few stray opinions here and there.

True. I was trying to keep all the discussion over the ethical side out of it. If you can't verify that an animal's lineage is from "Ambanja," then respresent it as "looking like an Ambanja-type" or having come from Ambanja-type parents, period.

Since no other thread was started about the ethics of crossing locales, I'm going to have to ask questions here. A couple people have stated that they only breed panther chameleons as nature intended. I'm not trying to turn this into a "heated debate" but some things just don't make sense to me. In captivity we have very high hatch rates, which doesn't happen in the wild. In captivity we have no predation, which doesn't happen in the wild. In captivity we have clean conditions and less likelihood of acquiring disease or parasites, which doesn't happen in the wild. In captivity there is no competition for resources, which doesn't happen in the wild. In short, most of the captive born animals that make it to adulthood and are bred, in captivity, would never have made it to that age/size in the wild. This species has a very high mortality rate in the wild, which is why they have so many offspring at once, and only the strongest (most fit) are able to grow up and reproduce in most cases. In captivity, mates are decided by the keeper, not through natural mate selection processes. How is this as nature intended? It seems like it is the EXACT same thing that people who are breeding cross-locales are doing. It is artificial selection, often times involving animals that never would have bred in the wild (or even lived beyond a month or two for that matter,) for human-desired traits either way, is it not?

 

[Prism Chameleons]

Jewel - I really like your advocating trying to keep various species pure from blending species and/or sub-species of chameleons. It's too bad what has happened with the veileds through time. There is a difference where panther chameleons are concerned when comparing the veiled hybrids. Necas specifies two different sub-species of calyptratus, whereas with panther chameleons, they are all one species, Furcifer pardalis. In this sense, the word "hybrid" within the panther chameleon community is used incorrectly.

What we really have are various differing color phenotypes of "morphs" and we should as a community probably correctly use the word "morph" rather than "hybrid" when discussing crossing between geographical areas. The word "hybrid" suggests a cross of species/sub-species. All the color variations of geographical areas should most likely be referred to as "morphs" to properly identify the differences in panther chameleons. The problem with this, which why the word "hybrid" has been used, is to communicate that two different or more "morphs" have been bred into the bloodlines - hence, the improper use of the word "hybrid."

 

[Kent67]

The word "hybrid" suggests a cross of species/sub-species. All the color variations of geographical areas should most likely be referred to as "morphs" to properly identify the differences in panther chameleons. The problem with this, which why the word "hybrid" has been used, is to communicate that two different or more "morphs" have been bred into the bloodlines - hence, the improper use of the word "hybrid."

Actually, I believed that to be the case too. However, it is not. See Webster's: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/hybrid

 

[Prism Chameleons]

In captivity, mates are decided by the keeper, not through natural mate selection processes. How is this as nature intended? It seems like it is the EXACT same thing that people who are breeding cross-locales are doing. It is artificial selection, often times involving animals that never would have bred in the wild (or even lived beyond a month or two for that matter,) for human-desired traits either way, is it not?

Perhaps my phrase "as nature intended" is mis-leading. What the phrase is meant to say is that in nature, there are certain areas that have specific color phenotypes like my example of the Ankaramy. By breeding the pink Ankaramy to pink Ankaramy, we are keeping those colorations as close to the same as it currently is in Madagascar in that particular region. By having breeders select the mates of panther chameleons, you are right - it is totally out of nature's hands .

 

[Kent67]

It's this type of thing that I'm trying to prevent with the panthers.

Why? US bred F.pardalis will likely never be released into the wild. For the record, F. pardalis is not threatened by destruction of forests. It is a "forest-edge" animal that has adapted perfectly well to living in agriculture groves, people's yards, parks, and other modified habitats for years.

I've asked this several other times and never got any responses: Does anyone know of ANY species of reptile that became extinct in the wild, but was saved from total extinction and reintroduced to the wild through the efforts of captive breeding?

 

[Prism Chameleons]

Actually, I believed that to be the case too. However, it is not. See Webster's: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/hybrid

Wow - I stand corrected. I should have looked up the definition in the dictionary. I always believed since my Biology courses that hybrids were crossing specific species. I learned something today!

 

[Kent67]

Perhaps my phrase "as nature intended" is mis-leading. What the phrase is meant to say is that in nature, there are certain areas that have specific color phenotypes like my example of the Ankaramy. By breeding the pink Ankaramy to pink Ankaramy, we are keeping those colorations as close to the same as it currently is in Madagascar in that particular region. By having breeders select the mates of panther chameleons, you are right - it is totally out of nature's hands .

Jenna,

I commend you for what you do. It is good to know that there will always be reliable sources for locale-type animals. Although I love the look of Uncle Sam, I too prefer animals that are not mixed locale. This does not mean that I disapprove of mixed locales, it's just my preference for what I would want in my collection.

The point is that locale-type specific breedings and locale-type cross breedings are no more ethically right or wrong than each other. Many imply, and a lot flat out state, that cross breedings are ethically wrong, which I find to be downright silly. If F. pardalis is going to reproduce "as nature intended" then it means we must leave the animals in the wild. Once we've removed them from the wild, there is no right or wrong. All there is is what we decide to do with them.

 

[Kent67]

Wow - I stand corrected. I should have looked up the definition in the dictionary. I always believed since my Biology courses that hybrids were crossing specific species. I learned something today!

Don't feel bad, i thought my Bio courses would hold up too, until I checked Webster's just yesterday!

 

[Kent67]

It doesn't mean that selective crossings aren't going to take place.
it just means that mutts aren't going to be as highly regarded as equitable geo locals.

Ronaldo,

You know I love talking about this stuff so, I'm still wondering about your response to the question I posed regarding this statement.

Let's make my question fair though. Let's say Jake puts up Uncle Sam for sale at a price of $600. He also puts a same-age, 100% LOCALITY-DOCUMENTED, Maroantsetra (or any from a documented collection site for that matter) male up for $600. How fast do you think each would sell?

Sorry, another edit: If Jake was able to take him several generations and proved out clutches with very high percentages of males that look like Uncle Sam or better, what do you think the worth of those babies would be compared to the more rare(at the moment) locale-types? I'd be willing to bet that people who like "Designer" animals would be willing to pay more, a lot more, than locale-type animals. Why, you ask? Ball pythons, bearded dragons, green tree pythons, reticulated pythons, leopard geckos, corn snakes, burmese pythons, VEILED CHAMELEONS....

 

[westcoastchameleons]

This has nothing to do with the over all discussion at hand:

But my quesion is, should I be labeling uncle Sam as Ambilobe or not? I feel that as he maturs, his red and blue colortion is becoming more distingguished, which makes me second guess the morph cross theory all together.

Thanks,
Jake

 

[Kent67]

You know Jake, it's really up to you. I've spent the last 16 years addicted to panther chameleons buying every book and magazine I could find, going to out of my way pet stores to see them, going to other people's homes to view their collections, watching every tv show or documentary about Madagascar I could find, etc. I've never seen a wild pardalis that looked like Uncle Sam. For that reason I would feel uncomfortable ever calling him Ambilobe, if he was mine. Since he was sold as that locale, I think the term Ambilobe-type would still be appropriate. I also think, that since his colors are "beyond" what would normally be found in the wild and because they are obviously very popular with the viewers here, I don't see any reason why the term "designer" wouldn't apply to him as well.

 

[Sara270]

Why? US bred F.pardalis will likely never be released into the wild. For the record, F. pardalis is not threatened by destruction of forests. It is a "forest-edge" animal that has adapted perfectly well to living in agriculture groves, people's yards, parks, and other modified habitats for years.

I've asked this several other times and never got any responses: Does anyone know of ANY species of reptile that became extinct in the wild, but was saved from total extinction and reintroduced to the wild through the efforts of captive breeding?

I think this opinion essay is well put about the issue on captive breeding programs...

Melissa Kaplan's
Herp Care Collection
Last updated April 19, 2007

Captive Breeding As A Conservation Tool

Rob Nielsen, Pacific Northwest Herpetological Society, June 1994

"One of the most commonly held beliefs of amateur herpetoculturists is that their animals are a valuable source of brood stock for the reintroduction of species that have become extinct in the wild. Certainly there are many recent success stories of captive breeding programs for endangered species. Unfortunately, most animals bred in captivity by or for amateur herpetoculturists would prove to be poor seed stock for restoration of wild populations...

Domesticated strains of reptiles are also bred to display unique color patterns (such as the lack of various pigments, odd patterns of spots or stripes, etc.). Many of these traits are counter to the survival of wild populations. Captive-bred reptiles are often severely inbred. Although most of the breeders make a genuine effort to prevent inbreeding, most captive populations are based on a small number of ancestors. Inbreeding enables breeders to quickly select traits that are desirable in captive-bred individuals. Recessive traits are quickly expressed in inbred populations (an albino population developed spontaneously in rainbow trout during the study of inbreeding). Usually, the primary concern breeders have over the effects of inbreeding is the possibility of a reduction in fertility and viability (inbreeding depression)..."

http://www.anapsid.org/neilsen.html

 

[Jeweledchameleons]

whatcha talking about willis... ?

"Ronaldo"
Dude, Not even my mother calls me that.

Alright, I'm not trying to dodge the question kent...
just that see it as being way too "loaded".

Now, since you've asked (again) I've gotta tell ya
I haven't bothered to see the pic of uncle sam.. So I don't know.
BUT for the sake of argument... we'll say that the flashier animal
will be the most appealing and therefore command the higher price
which BTW, is a strong motivator for both breeders and the common
pedestrians to go ahead and continue to breed such mixed animals.

As perviously noted...
everyone realizes that people are breeding for color that appeal to our tastes as people.
Not as "nature intended" per sae but as we intend for our pleasure/uses.
Much the same way humans have selectively bred any other animal, plant or even fungus (yeast).

My point is one of process that'll yield the greatest advantage over time.
(Not as some seem to have taken it as to mean).

I'm asking that people preserve the geo locals and refine those first.
YES they can be pretty too.. and they can sell for just as much as any other color morph
IF WE DECIDE TO VALUE THEM AS SO.
as previously noted... the common person or petstore doesn't care one bit
nor can they tell the difference between young individuals from one local or another.

As an example dogs have been refined into different breeds that were developed via geo/region
each according to tastes, what traits were available and need.
We now have hundreds of distinct lines to choose from as breeds alone.
It's easier to wildly mix the animals that are currently available but the advantages
in the long run rest are with what I propose.

The disadvantage is (once again) that once you mix the natural geo locals up genetically
you can't unmix them.

what I'm advocating is a bit of discipline on behalf of the community
to keep the locals together and to continue their development
until they can be easily disquinshed from one another
(as a Alaskan Husky and a German Shepherd is to us today).

I'm saying that we should keep in mind that the preservation of the widest
range of DNA and distinct expressions is important.
that doesn't mean unattractive animals that won't sell.

But the suggestion of marketing "designer" chameleons (when they're all designer in actuality)
and distaste towards the accurate "hybrid" or region "mixed morph"
because it "devalues them" is incorrect.
Hybrids will produced and sold but they must be clearly named as such.

Kent, I've got some mixed morphs with the intent of breeding
but I also will be retaining the geographic lines intact.

sorry for such a long post ~

 

[Kent67]

"Ronaldo"
Dude, Not even my mother calls me that.

And yet that's the name you've used to identify yourself over the phone...yes, although I shouldn't have a very good memory, I do. Obviously no insult meant.

Alright, I'm not trying to dodge the question kent...
just that see it as being way too "loaded".

The question was not intended to be loaded, other than to show opposing points of view. You stated that pure locality types would be more valuable than mixed ones will be. I don't believe that is accurate, given equal age and sex animals. It appears as though you now agree.

what I'm advocating is a bit of discipline on behalf of the community
to keep the locals together and to continue their development
until they can be easily disquinshed from one another
(as a Alaskan Husky and a German Shepherd is to us today).

Why does this need to be advocated? I've been doing this for 16 years. There have always been, and always will be, people keeping the local-types pure. There have always been, and always will be, people mixing locale-types. Since they will not ever be introduced back into the wild, why is it important that all breeders in the US keep locale-types pure?

Hybrids will (be) produced and sold but they must be clearly named as such.

No one here ever said that wasn't the case. If it's vital that your locality-TYPE data is accurate, don't purchase animals from people you don't trust. It's as simple as that.

 

[Kent67]

Why does this need to be advocated? I've been doing this for 16 years. There have always been, and always will be people keeping the local-types pure. There have always been, and always will be people mixing locale-types. Since they will not ever be introduced back into the wild, why is it important that all breeders in the US keep locale-types pure?

Quoting myself! Gods, I'm out of hand on this LOL. I swear to Buddha I won't do this again...

Anyway, I feel further need to both restate and clarify the point I was trying to make in starting this thread. The point is, chill out and give up on locality names all together. Unless someone steps up and says, "Yes, my personal collector in Madagascar keeps animals seperately and documents them to the extent of "I found this animal x-direction, y-miles, from z-city" and I trust he has the facilities to do so" then locality names are pointless. I don't think any breeder can say that in the US. They come in marked with the names of the nearest major town, most likely with an airport, and that is the locality data. I say give the collectors GPS units! Seriously though, let's take the recent example of Ambilobe vs Ambanja. Obviously they are close enough in appearance to cause debate. What do you call a male that has a mixture of color traits that is captured halfway between these two towns, out in the countryside that comes in with no locality data at all?

Let's take the heat off the locality debate, by agreeing that there can be no agreement, and change the terms we, in the community, use to refer to the different color morphs to reflect such. There are plenty of breeders who have multi-gen lines that prove out to resemble accepted descriptions of what each locale-type should look like. There is not a risk to that aspect of the hobby.

Another point I wanted to add is about Nosy Be blue lines. There are a small number of breeders who have established lines that produce mostly, if not all, blue males. From everything I've ever read or been told by the people who've been to that island several times, the solid blue animals are somewhat of an anomaly. These US bloodlines, while being currently marketed as "Nosy Be," deserve a little extra attention. They have been refined and the solid blue animals being consistently produced in captivity are not the norm on the island they originated from. They are "designer" chameleons that have been selectively bred to refine the desired blue traits.

 

[kinyonga]

Jeweledchameleons...C. calcarifer is supposed to be a naturally occuring hybrid...calyptratus met/meet up with c. arabicus and reproduced....so can you explain what you are saying you want to prevent in pardalis?