 | mobile - desktop |
|
| mobile - desktop |
|
 |
 Available Now at RodentPro.com! |
News & Events:
|
Posted by glenn bartley on January 19, 2003 at 11:24:26:
In Reply to: Re: Opinions on crossing two different subspecies....Must Read! posted by zeteki on January 18, 2003 at 19:13:16:
Zeteki,
You brought up some good issues for discussion. I would like to reply, in depth, to some of the points you made on why someone would want to attemp interspecies breeding projects with snakes. Please, allow me to quote your reply post:
"The difference between snakes in captivity and snakes in the wild, if you'll forgive me for being obvious, is that they are captive."
I forgive you, but now I wonder: Did you say this because you believe I do not realize that difference, or was it because you felt someone else may not realize it after reading my post? Yes, what you pointed is quite obvious - so much so that I did not feel the need to express it. That, however, was not the point of my post at all. I never asked or expected anyone to explain such an obvious difference between nature and captivity, nor did I mean to imply my ignorance of such an obvious fact. My question was a bit deeper than that.
The question in my post about captive versus non-captive snakes was, in essence, why would one species interbreed with another species in captivity and not do the same in nature if the same two differing species encountered one another naturally? Let me quote that question here: “What is it, even in captivity, that attracts one species to breed with another, that would not be able to excite the same breeding response in a more natural setting?” I guess I figured the obvious would have been understood by anyone who read my post; but since you felt the need to point out the obvious, I will now assume that such was not the case. Sorry about not making myself clearer in that first post. Allow me to further explain what I meant:
I was wondering if there is any reason that snakes of different species, which normally coexist in the same general area and therefor could naturally encounter one another in the wild, would not attempt breed with one another as they often do when placed together in captivity. Or in other words, is there some reason (a certain something) that spurs on captive snakes of one species to be more likely to attemp to breed with another species, simply because they are captive and in close proximity to one another? Does something about captivity (other than the fact that they are placed together) stimulate them to breed interspecies? In a chance encounter in nature (whereby they are also ‘placed’ together) is the ‘certain something’, that spurs them to interbreed in captivity, then something that is non-existent or in someway diminished in the wild? What is it, if anything, that makes their being together in captivity so much different from their being together in the wild as to preclude them from interbreeding in the natural setting? I hope that makes it a little clearer.
I have observed, and collected snakes from the wild for over 35 years, and I have often encountered various species together under the same stone, board or other hiding place - yet I probably have never encountered what would outwardly appear to be an offspring from an interspecies cross (although I have caught obvious inter-grades between subspecies). I have found Black Racers under the same stones as Garter Snakes. I have seen Western Diamondback Rattlesnakes only a foot or so from Sidewinders and Mojave Rattlers. I have found up to six species of snake under the same flat stone at the same time. The six species were: Smooth Green Snake, Eastern Milksnake, Garter Snake, Red Bellied Snake, Ringneck Snake, Northern Banded Water Snake. A Dekay’s Snakes may have been a seventh but I was uncertain if it was a Dekay’s or a Red Bellied – then again maybe that one was a natural interbreed, it sure was hard to tell which it was (and now I will wonder about it now and again for the rest of my days). I have found Emory’s Rat Snakes (Corn Snake subspecies Elaphe guttata emoryi) and Gopher Snakes under the same piece of debris. I have also encountered the same two species only a couple or a few feet from one another in the field on more than one occasion. These two species will apparently interbreed in captivity – so why not in nature when together as I found them? Snakes of different genera and species do cross one another’s paths in nature – so if they would interbreed in captivity, why not interbreed in nature when in such close proximity to one another? (Or is it that they do interbreed in nature but as of yet we have not recognized the results?)
While you may believe it next to impossible for snakes of different species to cross one another’s paths in nature, such is not the case as I have shown above. Granted two snakes of different species from different niches in their ecosystem (even though living in the same general area) could be placed together in captivity, as could snakes from different continents, but that was not part of my point. Yet it is also an additional interesting point that you make about species that would normally not encounter one another in nature. I do not know if it would be so unlikely for the two you mentioned too meet in nature or not (I just do not know enough about the two), but the outcome of their having interbred is nonetheless quite interesting. It maybe says a lot about those two particular species interbreeding; but possibly does not say as much as you think. There may have been quite a different outcome for the offspring had the incubation procedures been changed from what they were. Temperament, fecundity and so forth may all have been affected negatively by improper incubation procedures for these interspecies eggs; or then again environment may not have had an effect and it could have been due to genetic incompatibilities. Until scientific research were to be done about why the offspring turned out the way they did, little can be said, short of assumption, as to why they now behave as they do.
You also asked: “If however, you breed reptiles because of a true fascination with the natural world and it's wonders, why would you want to try to "improve" on nature?” I don’t think I ever said or implied that nature, as you seem to be referring to it, would necessarily be improved by an interspecies breeding project. Nature, however, is constantly being improved (or at least changed) by itself; and that includes any changes to nature made by man. Mankind, after all, is only one small part of nature. As I said in my post, it would be rather interesting if such breeding were to take place, and the hobby would become more interesting, in my opinion. My goal in talking about the possible increased interest that would be generated was to point out that such would be more interesting because things that are new are usually considered interesting by inquiring minds. Out of the many minds that may be interested in such, at least a few of those, more given to inquiry, may be more prone to continue studies along the lines of interspecies breeding. As a result of the continued interest, knowledge that was before unavailable may become available to us. By the way, I fell must point out that people try to improve nature all of the time. We have created cows that give more milk, hens that lay more eggs, chicken, turkeys and beef cattle that are bigger with more meat, sheep with more wool, dog breeds to suit our fancy and to answer certain utile needs we have such as: dogs to herd sheep or hunt, dogs which seek human bodies or detect explosives (yes to some extent despite a naturally good nose, they are bred for this as some breeds are much preferred over others and virtually all domestic dog breeds have been selected by man), mice which are more adapted to living under the laboratory conditions of medical research (yes mice were actually bred to have attributes that would make them more suitable to laboratory and captive conditions), apples that are sweeter, corn with fuller ears, tomatoes that thrive in our gardens and grow fat and juicy, and the list goes on and on. I guess this should answer your question, although I could point out many other reasons why one would want to “improve on nature” as you put it.
You also point out that: “If you breed reptiles as a novelty item, then interbreeding for strange interspecies crosses and color morphs is the way to go.” By implication, I guess you are trying to say that interspecies mating projects would only qualify as a novelty. While such breeding attempts may be quite novel (as in new, offbeat, strange), I would not think them to be simply for novelty (as in fad, which is the way I believe most people use this word). In writing about such breeding projects, my goal was not to suggest that such be done for the sake of novelty (as in fad). Furthermore, while novelty may be a part of such a breeding outcome, it would quite possibly not be the only goal that someone who attempted to breed snakes interspecies would have. Interspecies snake mating attempts could be undertaken for a number of scientific reasons, as explained in the preceding paragraph, that would help us better understand the natural world. They could quite possibly lead to scientific or medical breakthroughs in the fields of genetics, medicine, agriculture and so on.
There are actually some quite valid reasons that one could attempt interspecies breeding projects. Then of course there is the old stand by reason: I did it to see if it could be done. Bear in mind that until not too long ago, scientists had said it was absolutely impossible for different species to interbreed and successfully produce offspring. Of course horses and donkeys did not know this, and they kept on producing mules. Then it was said that inter-genera mating could not be successful, but apparently this has been proven wrong by snakes that readily interbreed across not only species lines but those of genera also. Then it was said that interspecies offspring could never be fertile and breed true, but wouldn’t you know about it – I just heard that a mule has recently produced an offspring that is a true mule! (I only heard a brief blurb on the radio news the other day, I have to look into this one in more depth). Go Figure!
In my opinion, I find absolutely nothing wrong with someone trying to accomplish a successful interspecies breeding project in order to advance our knowledge. I also find nothing wrong with doing it as a novelty, this time as in fad. I truly believe that even when done for novel reasons such an attempt may ultimately result in a wealth of new knowledge being amassed. I am not afraid of the possibilities, but rather, I am afraid of living in ignorance.
Finally, as far as conservation goes, breeding interspecies may actually help conservation efforts. Look at it in a way that you may not have imagined and maybe you will agree. If a few new species were created, by interbreeding naturally occurring species, might not a prolonged interest in these species commence among those in the herp hobby? If such is the case, interest in naturally available species (as in wild caught) may become lessened as the interest in the ‘designer’ species increases. If you don’t think this is possible, look at how few wild caught corn snakes are now sold in the hobby as compared to only 10 years ago. Yes some are still sold, but what sells the most: color morphs of corns that have been produced in captive breeding programs. This has apparently helped reduce the demand for wild caught normal corns. Isn’t that great. I think so. Sure some of these snakes could escape, but chances are they may not fit into any ecological niche and would die off. Even if they did not die off, and they were successful and caused another species to decline, such whether affected by man or not, is the nature of nature: change is inevitable – we only screw up the timing. I am not advocating release of new species, nor of old ones where they do not naturally occur – don’t get me wrong. I am simply being pragmatic about it.
Best regards,
Glenn Bartley
