PDA

View Full Version : Are you as bothered about this as much as I am



Nitibus
04-05-2007, 02:58 PM
Check out ths post. Someone cross bred a pokie, and then sold the female. It could be gravid.


http://www.arachnoboards.com/ab/showthread.php?p=858508#post858508

P. Novak
04-05-2007, 03:20 PM
As long as the person he sold it to knows that it was cross bred, and knows what to do with it(like get rid of the sac once its laid, or keep the babies to himself, or if selling them MAKE sure he sells them as hybrids and doesnt sell them to anyone that doesnt understand the problem with hybrids.) I think it'll be fine. I mean I know it isn't right but tere isn't anything we could do now.

David Burns
04-05-2007, 03:26 PM
Thanks for posting this. Now I can try it. ;)

Actually, I have heard this kind of thing has happenned with Haplopelma, Poecilotheria, Brachypelma, Hysterocrates, Avicularia, Psalmopoeus and probably others.

SnakeManJohn
04-05-2007, 03:30 PM
Dang..that's crazy

Snipes
04-05-2007, 03:34 PM
Since this sort of thing happens naturally, i am not a hugely against cross breeding. I mean, look at avics! I do have a problem with selling a potentially gravid female with cross bred offspring. If one is to cross breed, they should do it themselves and if they sell it, the NEED to mention it in bold letters. I think it was an irresponsible thing to cohabitate and then sell the female IMO.

Cheshire
04-05-2007, 04:12 PM
I'm planning on doing a project with hybrid identification in the far future, but when I do it the spiderlings will remain in my care and will not be sold. They will be in thier own seperate cabinet to avoid confusion.

There are only a handfull of people I would send them to if they expressed interest (researchers and scientists) and I would not even charge them shipping.

Were I unable to care for them, I would freeze them instead of selling them.

This is the only ethical way to hybridize.

Giantsfan24
04-05-2007, 04:24 PM
I see zero problem with this. Reptiles have been hybridized for years and it makes for some cool crosses. As long as the person buying one know it is a hybrid, what is the problem? Now I say all this assuming making hybrids does not cause any sort of physical abnormality(like a persian cat having a hard time breathing because foolish people like that look).

P. Novak
04-05-2007, 04:27 PM
I see zero problem with this. Reptiles have been hybridized for years and it makes for some cool crosses. As long as the person buying one know it is a hybrid, what is the problem? Now I say all this assuming making hybrids does not cause any sort of physical abnormality(like a persian cat having a hard time breathing because foolish people like that look).

THe problem is that the tarantula world is already messed up as it is. Adding more species would make it harder to correctly ID which species is which. I am pretty sure reptiles are much easier to ID then arachnids.

David Burns
04-05-2007, 04:28 PM
If I go buy a Hysterocrates Hercules spiderling. Another person in another city buys a spider that is sold under the name Hercules baboon tarantula and he takes it home. He does some research and posts picures on the Boards, from the feedback and his research he determines that he has a female H.hercules. My spiderling matures, after some time, to a mature male. Is end it off to him and he breeds them. We split the sac of slings and sell them as H.hercules.

Now are they H.hercules?

Are you sure what you have in your collection is what you think it is? Was your specimen compared, under a microscope, with the holotype of that species?

ShadowBlade
04-05-2007, 04:32 PM
Are you sure what you have in your collection is what you think it is? Was your specimen compared, under a microscope, with the holotype of that species?

What is your point? The cleaner we keep species unhybridized, gives us that much more of a chance to keep breeding T's in captivity long after their habitats are destroyed. Which is happening at an alarming rate for Avicularia and Poecilotheria both of which whom's genus is already screwed up.

Just because we can't be 100% accurate all the time, doesn't mean we can't keep it as clean as possible.

Plus the fact hybrids totally throw a wrench into captive breedings due to the adult's sometimes un-willingness to mate. I'd sure hate to send a MM P. pederseni to someone who thought he had one, turns out it was a hybrid and eats the male.

-Sean

syndicate
04-05-2007, 04:36 PM
why do u think the Poecilotheria genus is screwed up?

ShadowBlade
04-05-2007, 04:38 PM
why do u think the Poecilotheria genus is screwed up?

Excuse me.. Being screwed up.
They're being hybrized quite often.

-Sean

David Burns
04-05-2007, 04:42 PM
I think this topic doesn't take into account that the classification of mygalomorphae is still in flux. The fact that the breeding is in the hands of hobbiests is only going to muddy the waters.

Also, Hybrids of Mygalomorphs are sterile. If they are viable then the original classifications were wrong.:wall:

Talkenlate04
04-05-2007, 05:25 PM
I am agreeing to disagree. An overwelming number of T keepers see the value of each individual species by itself, and dont feel the need to make new ones that would never occur in the wild
( I am not saying never, but some of the things people are trying to do would really never happen on their own)
I personally think its a waste of time and not needed. It can be done yes, but should it be?

There is proof arising from overseas with breeders that have interbred species, there can be sterile clutches, deformities, short life spans, ect.

Think of it this way. You fell in love with Ts for a reason, why go changing that reason.....

But much like Novak I am not going to lose any sleep over it if it happens, I just will make sure I steer clear of anyone selling something like that.

TheDarkFinder
04-05-2007, 05:25 PM
Also, Hybrids of Mygalomorphs are sterile. If they are viable then the original classifications were wrong.:wall:

Why is that?

Everyone that has answer this question so far needs to do a lot more research before they continue to prove how uneducated they are.

here is a little help.
1.) do a search, there are so many threads on this it is sicking.
2.) read a biology book, or at least read something about hybrids. Do not give the answer that you, deep down inside, want to be right, but make sure it is right.

So that I do not have to come back to this tread.

the answer to my question is, no; Two valid species can produce a offspring and still be two species. The question is between genus, can two genus cross and still be classified as two different genus. The answer is of course yes you can and you do not need to reclassify anything.

OK So big print so that it get through.

THERE ARE MORE FERTILE HYBRIDS THEN INFERTILE AND NOT BY JUST A LITTLE BUT BY SUCH OF AMOUNT THAT IT IS NOT EVEN CLOSE.

Give you two examples.

1.) About 3/4 of all birds produce fertile hybrids, specific combinations not random.

2.)There are only about 300,000 cataloged species of plants, but there are 100,000 different orchid hybrids, that are fertile, of orchids. With in orchids alone there are only 25,000 species, but as stated above, there are 100,000 hybrids.


With orchids, hybrids are a mess, and yes it did destroy some species.

I'm not arguing the genetics or ethics of this.

Talkenlate04
04-05-2007, 05:32 PM
I'm not arguing the genetics or ethics of this.

Oh man why not? I want to see you get good and riled up.:D

David Burns
04-05-2007, 05:36 PM
Why is that?

Everyone that has answer this question so far needs to do a lot more research before they continue to prove how uneducated they are.

here is a little help.
1.) do a search, there are so many threads on this it is sicking.
2.) read a biology book, or at least read something about hybrids. Do not give the answer that you, deep down inside, want to be right, but make sure it is right.

So that I do not have to come back to this tread.

the answer to my question is, no; Two valid species can produce a offspring and still be two species. The question is between genus, can two genus cross and still be classified as two different genus. The answer is of course yes you can and you do not need to reclassify anything.

OK So big print so that it get through.

THERE ARE MORE FERTILE HYBRIDS THEN INFERTILE AND NOT BY JUST A LITTLE BUT BY SUCH OF AMOUNT THAT IT IS NOT EVEN CLOSE.

Give you two examples.

1.) About 3/4 of all birds produce fertile hybrids, specific combinations not random.

2.)There are only about 300,000 cataloged species of plants, but there are 100,000 different orchid hybrids, that are fertile, of orchids. With in orchids alone there are only 25,000 species, but as stated above, there are 100,000 hybrids.


With orchids, hybrids are a mess, and yes it did destroy some species.

I'm not arguing the genetics or ethics of this.
What I said, still stands. What you say can be true, too. We are talking about different animal kingdoms.

David Burns
04-05-2007, 06:22 PM
http://mygale.arachnide.free.fr/photpsalmohybri.html

http://www.poecilotheria.com/galerie_poe_orn_fas.htm

http://www.e-spiderworld.com/gallery/pages/Brachypelma%20hybrid%20Albogans1.htm

All sterile.

ChrisNCT
04-05-2007, 06:46 PM
I think humans hybrize quite often.

Talkenlate04
04-05-2007, 06:47 PM
http://mygale.arachnide.free.fr/photpsalmohybri.html

http://www.poecilotheria.com/galerie_poe_orn_fas.htm

http://www.e-spiderworld.com/gallery/pages/Brachypelma%20hybrid%20Albogans1.htm

All sterile.

I am glad you found those cause I remember seeing them but was not going to dig them up...... At least one person agrees with me.

tarangela2
04-05-2007, 07:24 PM
Check out ths post. Someone cross bred a pokie, and then sold the female. It could be gravid.


http://www.arachnoboards.com/ab/showthread.php?p=858508#post858508

i believe if you read closely, takenlate was simply trying to see if the female would accept the male, which i think he proved. scroll to the top of the thread.

P. Novak
04-05-2007, 07:31 PM
i believe if you read closely, takenlate was simply trying to see if the female would accept the male, which i think he proved. scroll to the top of the thread.

Ya you're right but this whole thread discussion is on the breeding some else did with 2 different species of pokies.

ShadowBlade
04-05-2007, 07:44 PM
Also, Hybrids of Mygalomorphs are sterile. If they are viable then the original classifications were wrong.:wall:

How you are so confident in that, I'll never know.
We don't even have a clear definition of what a 'species' is.

Interspecific hybrids occur in all classes of animals. Mammals, Fish, Birds, Invertebrates.... can you provide one that doesn't?
What makes mygalamorphs so special?

Yes, I'll give you that hybridizing does often end up with infertile eggs/sterile offspring. It does not make it impossible.

Why don't you read this thread-
http://www.arachnoboards.com/ab/showthread.php?t=29843&highlight=fertile+hybrid And tell me you know more then these guys, to state what you've said as FACT?? haha..

-Sean

Merfolk
04-05-2007, 07:51 PM
I think that, whit Tarantulas becoming more popular and less feared, it will become like any other pet trade.

You'll have bastard breeds that anyone can get and experiment with; and then you'll have pedigree breeds, kept by careful and dedidaced enthusiasts who will
breed pure species (BTW, I doubt that people would cross anything rare/endangered/valuable) and keep those breeds pure for ecological purpose (we might be able to reintroduce some...)

As for Avics getting crossbred, I think that many species are so closely related that we shouldn't bother that much with classifiing them. Some of them have less difference between them than the differences we have between some human groups (like Finnish vs Australian aborigines-this not implies that one is better than the other) and think
of the many breeds of Canis familiaris- the Chihuahua and the Danish classified together as the same specie....:?

EricFavez
04-05-2007, 07:58 PM
Nitibus....seems like this has turned around to bite you in the butt didnt it. THE NEW OWNER WAS AWARE OF THE SITUATION! What if i had to sell it because i needed the cash?? Not everyone in this world are very wealthy. Get over it...and no one cares. And from what i can see most the people who replied see nothing wrong with it.

Beardo
04-05-2007, 08:10 PM
As long as the hybridization is honestly represented and documented, I have zero problem with it.

Some of you people need to open your mind and close you mouths at times. Just because someone does something different does not equate to evil.

Nitibus
04-05-2007, 08:29 PM
Get over it...and no one cares. And from what i can see most the people who replied see nothing wrong with it.

That's a problem within itself. We as hobbists should be preserving these remarkable creatures, in their natural form. With the taxonomy alway in much debate, this will further dive or hobby into obscurity.

I hope it doesn't get the point where we only have one species of tarantula left, some docile mogrel species that has been inbred for so long it can't sustain itself without captivity...

Nitibus
04-05-2007, 08:31 PM
As long as the hybridization is honestly represented and documented, I have zero problem with it.
l.

How do you document it, if you cross and sell off the T ?

P. Novak
04-05-2007, 08:33 PM
How do you document it, if you cross and sell off the T ?

My best bet is don't sell them to amatuers, sell them to professionals and scientists studying this kind of stuff!

David Burns
04-05-2007, 08:50 PM
How you are so confident in that, I'll never know.
We don't even have a clear definition of what a 'species' is.

Interspecific hybrids occur in all classes of animals. Mammals, Fish, Birds, Invertebrates.... can you provide one that doesn't?
What makes mygalamorphs so special?

Yes, I'll give you that hybridizing does often end up with infertile eggs/sterile offspring. It does not make it impossible.

Why don't you read this thread-
http://www.arachnoboards.com/ab/showthread.php?t=29843&highlight=fertile+hybrid And tell me you know more then these guys, to state what you've said as FACT?? haha..

-Sean
That is exactly what I was looking for. The Biological Species Concept by Mayr/Hennig. If you ask me the linked thread gives more credence to my argument. While other concepts are out there, The BSC is the one that was used to prove the separation of morphologically indeterminent species of Ts that are recognised right now.

ShadowBlade
04-05-2007, 09:02 PM
That is exactly what I was looking for. The Biological Species Concept by Mayr/Hennig. If you ask me the linked thread gives more credence to my argument. While other concepts are out there, The BSC is the one that was used to determine all 800+ species of Ts that are recognised right now.

To my knowledge, the Mayr/(Henning) concept of species is still unproven yet widely accepted.
It, and what you've stated, is not fact.

Mating seperate species of very closely 'related' species is very possible we know. However, it is unproven whether or not all offspring of such crossbreedings are or aren't sterile.


-Sean

David Burns
04-05-2007, 09:20 PM
To my knowledge, the Mayr/(Henning) concept of species is still unproven yet widely accepted.
It, and what you've stated, is not fact.

Mating seperate species of very closely 'related' species is very possible we know. However, it is unproven whether or not all offspring of such crossbreedings are or aren't sterile.


-Sean
what I said originally was wrong, sorry. I have corrected it.

If they are so closely related , such that they are subspecies, they can have viable young. The BSC is used still to determine the separation of species that cannot be determined by morphorogical identification. True Hybrids are sterile. I learned that from Volker von Wirth and Code Monkey.

This kind of thread comes up every so often and I forget not to try and put this excepted fact out there. I don't think I can convince you, for what ever reason. I'll stop.

ShadowBlade
04-05-2007, 09:26 PM
True Hybrids are sterile. I learned that from Volker von Wirth and Code Monkey.

Really? I hadn't quite read it was such a confirmed idea. If you read this thread Chip, can you elaborate a bit on this?
Apparently there is something I've missed David, if what you're saying is such a fact, I'll back down. But I don't believe so.

-Sean

Merfolk
04-05-2007, 09:38 PM
Sterile hybrids=nature don't want them. They'll die and that's it.

Spider-Man v2.0
04-06-2007, 12:09 AM
whould it be posible to breed a mexican red knee and a pink toe??
once my pink toe maturs i think im going to try it.
ill name it.. hmm the pink red knee turatula

P. Novak
04-06-2007, 12:21 AM
whould it be posible to breed a mexican red knee and a pink toe??
once my pink toe maturs i think im going to try it.
ill name it.. hmm the pink red knee turatula

I hope you were kidding lol, cause as stated earlier in this thread, its almost if not impossible to breed a T of a different genus.

KingBowser
04-06-2007, 01:44 AM
I couldn't tell you how many times I've seen this debate drag on animal hobby boards with two sides at the beginning and two sides at the end with neither side caving in. I have done studies on hybridization on several animal groups, and natural hybrids are common in nature. I personally enjoy a "pure" specimen, pure being completely a matter of perception. When I bred birds, I read a study that a breeder did on three conure species from S. America, all three very similar in shape and habits and the only real visual difference was the amount of green and yellow plumage. When these conures are paired in captivity, they will readily interbreed to the point that most captive lines are polluted. However, in the wild where all three ranges overlap, the species will NOT interbreed and always choose a mate of their own species. You can't tell me that the genus Brachypelma, mostly black spiders with varying degrees of red, were not at one time one or two very similar species. They just broke off into their own niches and became distinctive types. But how different are they genetically?

My point is the term "pure" is relative.

DrAce
04-06-2007, 02:47 PM
At the risk of making everyone moan because the topic has been re-dredged up from the pits of the Arachnoboards archives...

From what I can see, we have two factions who are warring over something which is hypothetical.

My understanding of a 'species' (and a brief text-book search kinda vindicated me) is that they shouldn't NATURALLY be able to breed, and produce viable offspring of either gender. We're not, obviously talking about a natural phenomenon, given the stacks of perspex boxes we keep these spiders in.

There are a large number of 'higher' animals which are interbred and are perfectly well catalogued. Dogs, cats, etc all come with pedigrees on them. Maybe it's time that this started to happen in the Tarantula world. That will all depend on the consumer. Supply and demand, right?

Personally, I don't have much problem with interbred spiders. I'm still not convinced that they're different species if they can interbreed successfully. Expecially in the Pokie case... don't their territories overlap heavily in the wild? That would imply to me that they can interbreed naturally.

And there is no point arguing this on a 'purity' level either. There isn't a good genetic definition of a 'species', and genetic variation in a group of animals or plants is normally a good thing, in the wild (again, we're not in the wild). This could well be one of the mechanisms which was used by evolution to make the spiders so successful. Diversification, while retaining the ability to interbreed.

I don't think there's a good ethical reason for not allowing interbreeding, although I'm keeping an open eye/ear for a good one, and I'm happy to be argued on the point. It seems, however, that this is really going in circles.

Talkenlate04
04-06-2007, 03:03 PM
At the risk of making everyone moan because the topic has been re-dredged up from the pits of the Arachnoboards archives...

Not much risk, this was started yesterday.

TTstinger
04-06-2007, 03:43 PM
Were I unable to care for them, I would freeze them instead of selling them.

This is the only ethical way to hybridize.Yes very ethical just kill something for no reason at all. how bout you just not do it. Each one of those slings in a living breathing creature you are not it's "gods" you should look up the word ethical.

Cheshire
04-06-2007, 04:37 PM
Yes very ethical just kill something for no reason at all. how bout you just not do it. Each one of those slings in a living breathing creature you are not it's "gods" you should look up the word ethical.

You need to think what I write in this post over long and hard before you post your reply. Included the first half of my post and not just what you quoted for a reason.


1.) These hybrids were created for a purpose...to double check taxonomical definitions and to allow people to identify hybrids in the hobby. Nothing more.

2.) There is no guarantee these spiders are hybrids that would naturally occurr, thus they cannot be allowed to be sold. I can not guarantee the person I sell them to will not re-sell them, nor can I guarantee the person he sells them to won't re-sell them under a different name. The only exception is to other well known scientists who already have published peer reviewed journal articles. Volker Von Wirth from these boards, for example. This project will be for the sole purpose of letting keepers be able to identify hybrids.

3.) There is a distinct difference between hybirdizing spiders to create new species, and hybridizing spiders for research. It's ironic that you use the term 'playing god' because that is exactly what I am attempting to prevent. I am attempting to prevent people creating new species for the sole reason of their profit.

I believe people creating new species that do not exist in nature (such as the liger (http://www.sierrasafarizoo.com/animals/liger.htm)) for the sole reason of making a profit off of them is highly unethical. The only way for the hobby to fight against this is for someone to create these hybrids (which will also help double check taxonomical research) and document ways to identify them so people will be better informed about what they are really buying.

These spiders will have many deformities and high mortality rates as a result. As I said before, I cannot guarantee the person I sell them to (with very few exceptions) will not sell them or breed them. I cannot let these spiders be released into the gene pool.

If I find myself unable to care for them, I can not allow them to be released into the gene pool, nor can I sell them for a profit. I even refuse to accept any money at all for these, instead covering all shipping costs to other accredited researchers myself. The first option would be disasterous, as these species would be eventually be mislabeled and interbred with actual species found in nature that are currently in the hobby. Whether this happens by mistake or on purpose does not matter. The second would be unethical by any definition for reasons I've already outlined and for reasons I've yet to explain.

The relevant definitions for ethical (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/Ethical), according to dictionary.com


1. pertaining to or dealing with morals or the principles of morality; pertaining to right and wrong in conduct.
2. being in accordance with the rules or standards for right conduct or practice, esp. the standards of a profession: It was not considered ethical for physicians to advertise.

Utilitarianism (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/Utilitarianism)


the ethical doctrine that virtue is based on utility, and that conduct should be directed toward promoting the greatest happiness of the greatest number of persons.

I have made my position on the pet hobby very clear here on the boards. I hope to eventually open the way for conservation groups and the exotic pet hobby to join hands and use the exotic pet hobby as a gene bank for potentially endangered species, as thousands of people working individually can produce more offspring of people than can individual zoos.

If hybridizing in the pet hobby becomes common, the genes for the wild type (or actual species) are lost forever and the re-establishment of natural populations of previously endangered species that were decimated by various means (over collecting, restored habitat after destruction) now becomes impossible. We lose a valuable conservation tool, and less importantly my life's goal is shot before it even begins.

Utilitarianism is the the theory that the lives of many outweigh the lives of few. I will attempt to care for any un-natural hybrids I create. However I may somehow unforseeably be put into a situation where I am forced to sell off my collection. I may also unforseeably somehow find myself unable to care for them in any manner. Should this happen, selling them is unethical because it pollutes the bloodline with something that would not naturally exist. This would be disasterous in the future if we wished to re-establish natural populations of tarantulas or any other animal that is currently in the exotic pet hobby. I cannot be responsible for what other people do with these spiders, so therefore the only ethical thing to do is to humanely euthanize them to prevent this from happening.

I don't need to do any further thinking on the ethics of this subject. I thought long and hard about this when I first thought up the experiment.

Tunedbeat
04-06-2007, 05:04 PM
Each one of those slings in a living breathing creature you are not it's "gods" you should look up the word ethical.

I would say, we are already playing "God".

Crotalus
04-06-2007, 05:11 PM
what I said originally was wrong, sorry. I have corrected it.

If they are so closely related , such that they are subspecies, they can have viable young. The BSC is used still to determine the separation of species that cannot be determined by morphorogical identification. True Hybrids are sterile. I learned that from Volker von Wirth and Code Monkey.

This kind of thread comes up every so often and I forget not to try and put this excepted fact out there. I don't think I can convince you, for what ever reason. I'll stop.

True hybrids are sterile? Not Bitis gabonica x Bitis nasicornis offspring.
Animals dont care about what label a taxonomist put on them and what genus they stick them into.
For all we know, some animal groups hybrids turns up sterile and some fertile.
Some mygalomorph genus hybrids turns up sterile and some probably not.
There is no given rule to this.

Also the european frogs Rana lessonae and Rana ridibunda sometimes breed in the wild and the offspring is the species Rana esculenta. Some populations can reproduce with either of the parent species, some with one and some with both. The result of such breeding is either more esculenta offspring and some results in one of the parent species.

http://www.sareptiles.co.za/forum/viewtopic.php?t=3001&start=0&sid=808044d4aee328125d237757a909f895
http://hellfirereptiles.com/rhino-gaboon.html

BinarySpider
04-06-2007, 05:53 PM
I would have to say this topic is continuous in every single forum on the net which includes hoofed, dog, cat, mink, rodent, bird, fish, invert, etc., and probably even the single celled species of plants and animals. It is never ending and it will never end.

I use to raise champion AKC ChowChows. I personally handled and showed my own champions at AKC sanctioned shows. There is NOT a single ChowChow in any show ring that does not have one or more serious health problems. This is directly do the massive inbreeding in which you have no choice of if you are raising pedigree dogs. In fact every single pure breed dog has some serious health issues directly from the inbreeding. I always hated mix breeds until I saw a BUG. That is pure Pug crossed to a pure Boston Terrier. It looked pretty darn neat to me.

The same goes from the tropical fish industry. Just last weekend I went to get some lemon tetras for my son's frog/fish aquarium. I turned them down. Every single one was deformed to some extent. While looking at several other species in the store many of those had suttle deformities. The employee said it was most likely from the inbreeding done generation after generation after generation by tropical fish breeders in an attempt to maintain purity by the breeders.

Personally I would believe that hybrids would produce a stronger genetic pool of much healthier animals. I also believe that if sold into the general population the hybrid should at least be noted with maybe a...

(species name / breeder name) X (species name / breeder name)

...where the breeder would be the origional source of the animal or line of animals. Many breeders can have the same species name on their website but comparing the animals from each breeder they just may look very different from one another. A very nice looking hybrid could be more valuable than the combined values of the parents.

In the end this planet is running short of genetic material simply because of the lost of wildlife and their habitat. We may have no choice but to consume that Gecho_x_Owl_x_Bass_x_Pig for dinner. It may be all that is left to us for food except for Soylent Green (1973).

Soylent Green Is Made Out Of People

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soylent_Green

BinarySpider

Cheshire
04-07-2007, 09:41 AM
I use to raise champion AKC ChowChows. I personally handled and showed my own champions at AKC sanctioned shows. There is NOT a single ChowChow in any show ring that does not have one or more serious health problems. This is directly do the massive inbreeding in which you have no choice of if you are raising pedigree dogs. In fact every single pure breed dog has some serious health issues directly from the inbreeding. I always hated mix breeds until I saw a BUG. That is pure Pug crossed to a pure Boston Terrier. It looked pretty darn neat to me.

You claim to be a dog breeder, yet you know nothing about them. You evidently don't know much about spiders or even biology, either.

Dogs are pretty much all one species, Canis familiaris. Purebred dogs are all dogs that are bred to have one trait or sets of traits. Any dog that does not fit these lines is culled out of the breeding program because it does not have these traits.

The true definition of inbreeding is as follows: the mating of individuals more closely related than the average of the population from which they come. Since most spider breeding is done over the internet, the average hobbiest may not be breeding spiders from the same bloodline theirs is. Carefully choosing who you do your 50/50 splits with can help.

The thing you are overlooking is every species we talk about is just that...a species. Not a certain spider selected for whatever traits it has, it is an actual biological species. As far as classification is concerned, we are talking about spiders that are a major subdivision of a genus or subgenus. The term species is regarded as the basic category of biological classification and is composed of related individuals that resemble one another, are able to breed among themselves, but are not able to breed with members of another species. Dogs are one species. A chowchow, great dane, pug, bug, and one of those rat-dogs Brittney Spears has are all the same species. Brachypelma klassi, Brachypelma smithi and Brachypelma emillia are different species.


Personally I would believe that hybrids would produce a stronger genetic pool of much healthier animals.

The genetic differences between species is why...as many people said earlier in this thread...and please read this next part very, very, very, very closely:

Most hybrids are sterile.

New bloodlines are created every so often. Any animal that is created through sexual reproduction recieves half it's genes from it's parents. It's half related to both of it's parents. Therefore, one fourth of it's DNA came from each grandparent. One eighth of it's DNA came from each of it's eight great grandparent, so on and so forth. New bloodlines are created at the point where the offspring are no more related to their ancestors genetically then they are to their parents.

According to Wade here on the boards, the original stock for the superworms you can buy at petsmart orriginally came from roughly 25 individuals. For arguement's sake, let's say the superworm's DNA had roughly the same number of genes as we (http://www.ornl.gov/sci/techresources/Human_Genome/home.shtml)do. I'll use the number 24,000. Bob and Cindy came from the same parent.

The first generation recieves 12,000 genes from the father (or Bob) and 12,000 from an unrelated mother...Samantha.
The second recieves 6,000 from that first father
The third, 3,000 from Bob
the fourth 1,500 from Bob
the fifth 750 from Bob
the sixth 375 from Bob
the seventh (we'll round up because you can't recieve half a gene) 188 genes from Bob
the eighth generation: 94
ninth: 47
tenth (again, rounding up) 24
eleventh: 12
generation number twelve: 6
generation number thirteen: 3
the fourteenth generation: 2
fifteenth generation: 1 gene
The sixteenth generation of Bob's progeny is no more related genetically to Cindy's progeny at the sixteenth generation as Bob and Samantha were when they had children. In other words as long as the numbers of whatever species we're talking about are increasing and specimens are bred with those individuals that are less closely related than the average of the population from which they come, it's relatively safe to say that inbreeding will not occurr.

The world is not running short on genetic material. The world is running short of species. Different species do not interbreed in the wild because there is a distinct disadvantage to interbreeding with different species. Often times, the offspring are sterile or deformed to the point where they could not live long enough to reproduce. A rarer occurance, the offspring of the two produce a third species that competes with the two parent species for resources. In one of the links posted earlier, Volker Von Wirth hybridized two species of spider (haplopelma spp.) and only had one sling survive past two years.


Hi,

Leon is right, I've bred Hapl. sp. "longipedum" with Haplopelma lividum. The result is, that at the moment, two Years after this crossbreeding experiment, I have only one alive Hybrid= very high mortality rate! This indicates to me that both Species are real Species in the sense of the biological Species concept after Mayr/Hennig! I'm preparing the description of the Haplopelma sp. "longipedum" but this will still take some time.

Cheers, Volker

So both your assertion that the world is running short on genetic material and your assertion that crossbreeds create stronger spiders are false. The only ethical reasons to create hybrids are to double check taxonomical research. Breeding different strains of Canis familiaris together may indeed strengthen the bloodlines of dogs. This does not apply in this conversation about hybridization because the spiders we are talking about are not merely different strains of the same species. They are different species, not different breeds. Two seconds of research, some common sense and a quick scan of this thread should have told you that.

This site will help you understand what species are:

http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evosite/evo101/VA1BioSpeciesConcept.shtml
http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evosite/evo101/VADefiningSpecies.shtml


The relevant definition of breed, in the sense you are using it:


Genetics. a relatively homogenous group of animals within a species, developed and maintained by humans.

The dogs you spoke of earlier are breeds. The animals we are discussing hybridizing are species.

DrAce
04-07-2007, 12:31 PM
Or may be species...

I'm still questioning weather all the pokies are actually properly divvied up into separate species.

hamfoto
04-07-2007, 01:12 PM
I don't think there is anything "inherently" wrong with trying a cross-breed. People have to realize that the chances of the mating being successful are highly, highly, highly unlikely...should I say highly again...
These spp. live in two different habitats...two different land masses (India and Sri Lanka). So, has speciation occurred? probably...it's been a long time since the two were connected.
They may be "able" to mate physically, but factors like different palps, sperm incompatability, hybrid viability, etc...are more than likely going to prevent fertilization or kill the zygotes if fertilization took place. And if they do grow, a lot of times they die early in life or could be sterile.
So, there's a lot of factors working against this actually being a possibility. But then again, if it did work...there are a lot of interesting questions to try and answer why...

Chris

BinarySpider
04-07-2007, 02:18 PM
You claim to be a dog breeder, yet you know nothing about them. You evidently don't know much about spiders or even

WOW, I did not want to take up a lot of server space with parroted statements such as yours but for you to post with huge letters and then make claims about what I do know and what I do not know about a subject without even the slightest little conception of what my education and or background is, well, your flames are extremely childish in my opinion. Should I have posted my full resume complete with documented proof of my genetic research over the past two decades to make you happy?

While I understand that most forums are somewhat controlled by those who have a larger number of posts I think that your claims that I know nothing and even less about spiders is a feable attempt to discredit my post.

I was actually having fun in this forum until today.

I guess a return flame is in order here. May I suggest that if you are flaming on somebodies post please only state the obvious and not the merely obvious for a biology lesson. Your flaming lesson most certainly does not come up to grade school level content IMHO.

Returning As Merely A Lurker,

BinarySpider

Cheshire
04-07-2007, 05:22 PM
WOW, I did not want to take up a lot of server space with parroted statements such as yours

Or you could post your research that disproves what I've said in my post. Everything that I've read on dogs tells me they're all the same species, although I'm starting to think that chichuauas (sp?) and several of the smaller breeds should be referred to subspecies at the very least because I've been told by professional dog breeders in my area that breeding these and any of the largest breeds together results in a deformed offspring or a stillborn litter.

If you've misread my intentions, I sincerely apologize. However, as I pointed out in my earlier post this is something I take to heart. Encouraging people to hybridize species by bringing up information that is relevant in one profession, but not in another is purposeful misinformation.

Especially when sources quoted are people who have described multiple species. Dogs are clearly one species, at least in the context you spoke of in your post. These spiders are different species. End of debate.

If you'd like my qualifications, I freely admit I have none at all. I am transferring from a community college to Iowa State University in the fall to study entomology and microbiology. My arrival is highly anticipated because of my conversations with professors up there.

However, any and all statements I make can be backed up with reliable sources or through further explanation. If you would like to know them, just ask.


Or may be species...

I'm still questioning weather all the pokies are actually properly divvied up into separate species.

I'm actually operating under the assumption that at least one species of Brachypelma is actually a naturally occurring hybrid. We should at least try to properly divvy up species properly before selling hybrids as natural species.

I would email Michael Jacobpi of this site and ask him about his research. I believe he is working on this genus, and he might know who is.

I know there is a way to properly document hybrids, but these would eventually be mislabeled and improperly sold and bred. There is a photo of a hybrid brachypelma on Rick West's website. This spider looks very close to B. emillia and it's easy to see how they could be mixed up.

DrAce
04-07-2007, 05:45 PM
Also, on the "species" definition, it's an old one, which was imposed by people like Linnaeus (spelling?). It may not actually be as relevant as we're lead to believe. There are plenty of groups of animals who are separated into different species by as little as their song (birds), which does separate them in a biological sense... but they can still have viable offspring.

The sterile hybrid result comes from genetic differences which are so great that they lead to difficulties during meiosis (eg different numbers of chromosomes, leading to aneuploidy, see the mule, and ligers). That definately makes them different species... but if two species CAN interbreed and give VIABLE offspring (of both genders) then surely that implies that there is some difficulty in the definition of the species.

As genetic fingerprinting progresses, I think many of these things will become less important. We'll be much better at describing different species.

phil jones
04-07-2007, 05:52 PM
do not interfere with nature as man is NOT GOD even if he thinks he is !!!

DrAce
04-07-2007, 05:59 PM
do not interfere with nature as man is NOT GOD even if he thinks he is !!!

Good! Something on topic!

But:

I assume you don't cook anything? Do you eat soy products? No soy sauce, soy milk or tofu? Most of that is heavily modified.

Then there's wheat products... also modified (not using GE techniques here... but still modified by man). And then there's that beef that is so popular in the UK. Those cows have been changed so much by selective breeding that they have problems breeding them further.

I also hope you intend to set your tarantulas free. That's against god's will too...

Look, almost everything we do, is un-natural (by the definition). It's not helpful to label these things as 'acting like god'... since all you have done is put the two spiders together. If they breed, surely that's an act of god, no?

Talkenlate04
04-07-2007, 06:04 PM
Very well said Drace........ Its just part of the game. There is no way around it. If we were going to be god oriented about all of this non of us would have caged pets..........
While I am against cross breeding I can concede and admit that there is something to be learned from just about everything we do including cross breeding.

spider_fan
04-07-2007, 06:16 PM
I have to second what pretty much everyone else has been saying already. I have nothing against it if the s'lings are not sold to an unkowing or irresponsible buyer.

However, with that said I would love to see a hybrid with the looks of P. metallica and the cost of G. rosea.

DrAce
04-07-2007, 06:31 PM
Well, it wasn't really an argument about hybridization. But I do object to people dismissing arguments by invoking any form of higher being against something thought out and rational.

Now, on the topic of hybrids, I haven't so far seen anything which doesn't boil down to:
"don't do it, cos god doesn't do it"
or
"don't do it, cos I don't want one, and I don't want to be confused about what I'll get in the future"

We don't even know if there are any real viable hybrids out there, do we (by viable I mean ones we know have been further bred on)?

Sheri
04-07-2007, 09:15 PM
I was actually having fun in this forum until today.

Me too.



I guess a return flame is in order here. May I suggest that if you are flaming on somebodies post please only state the obvious and not the merely obvious for a biology lesson. Your flaming lesson most certainly does not come up to grade school level content IMHO.

Returning As Merely A Lurker,

BinarySpider


As cocky as he came across, he's right on the dog part.

All dog breeds are the same species and therefore, not at all relevant to this conversation.

However, his comment as to your spider biology was over the top.

The last time I checked, this was a hobbyist's forum...
Those with more knowledge after years of studying the subject - are welcome to share it.

But chill out Ches - we weren't all born with an entomology book up our ass.

As for the assumption that all offspring of hybrids will be infertile - we really don't know that. One look at a few spiders long held in captivity (P. irminia being one of them) should tell us that if we decide to create hybrids, we cannot come to that decision by way of a false sense of security that they will absolutely not reproduce and pollute the hobby.

Sheri.

Nitibus
04-07-2007, 09:48 PM
I'm starting to feel like a thread troll...

May original intent was NOT to restart the hybridization debate, but to draw attention to one very unwise action. Fertile or not, if you're going to give/ sell a T. don't cross mate it before you do so.

Can we all agree to disagree on this hybridization ? Yet agree that crossing and passing on the outcome irresponsible ?

Cheshire
04-07-2007, 10:05 PM
But chill out Ches - we weren't all born with an entomology book up our ass.

As for the assumption that all offspring of hybrids will be infertile - we really don't know that. One look at a few spiders long held in captivity (P. irminia being one of them) should tell us that if we decide to create hybrids, we cannot come to that decision by way of a false sense of security that they will absolutely not reproduce and pollute the hobby.

Sheri.

Actually, Sheri...you kind of beat me to my own punch. I've not been myself lately for more than a few reasons. The combined stress of upcoming finals, my transfer away from my closest friends at the school I'm at now, as well as quitting smoking have all taken a toll on my mental state as of late. If you think I've been bad here on the boards, I've been far worse off the boards. It actually took a harshly worded PM from a friend here on the boards to make me realize what an ass I've been.

So in the effort of patching things up and coaxing people out of lurking, I offer my full apology to anyone I've offended. I've been far more acerbic than I realized, more blunt than I normally am, and far more over the top in this thread than I should have been. This is not a proper reason, however it is the true and honest reason. My behaivior was in no way justified.

So, I'll try to think what I'm writing through more than I have been. I usually try to focus more on the information in my threads than how it's delivered and this is something that should change.

So let me clarify my position again, in the way I should have to begin with:

1.) Creating new species for the sole reason of your own profit, and not the benefit of society is wrong.

2.) Hybridizing for the purpose of taxonomical research benefits society. Therefore this is acceptable, as long as the spiders are not released for general sale to the public.

3.) Allowing hybridized spiders into the hobby could weaken the gene pool and basically destroy the species in the hobby. This could be catastrophic if any of these spiders became endangered or extinct in the wild. Extinction is an hourly thing, so you can bet at least one tarantula species has gone extinct this month. It's bad enough that we have to have a sub-forum dedicated to misidentified spiders. Imagine the chaos if hybrids were common.

4.) Although the vast majority of tarantula species are not in trouble, the pet hobby is the driving interest to describe and import new species. Because of this, we do not need to be creating our own new species. This practice makes the pet hobby be taken less seriously to conservation groups, and this is a detriment to anyone and everyone involved.

So again, I offer my heartfelt apology to anyone and everyone who read this thread and was offended.

EricFavez
04-07-2007, 10:27 PM
I'm starting to feel like a thread troll...

Can we all agree to disagree on this hybridization ? Yet agree that crossing and passing on the outcome irresponsible ?

Man i just dont get it...How is it irresponsible if the purchaser was well aware and was very excited to receive the animal? What if i needed the money once again? And for the people who say "We are playing GOD" ....come on if thats the case everyone who keeps a caged animal is. We decide what..when..it eats. Its life is in our hands no matter what we breed it to. Think people. We control our Ts destiny am i right? So that playing GOD stuff is just stupid.

Cheshire
04-07-2007, 10:31 PM
Man i just dont get it...How is it irresponsible if the purchaser was well aware and was very excited to receive the animal? What if i needed the money once again? And for the people who say "We are playing GOD" ....come on if thats the case everyone who keeps a caged animal is. We decide what..when..it eats. Its life is in our hands no matter what we breed it to. Think people. We control our Ts destiny am i right? So that playing GOD stuff is just stupid.

These concerns have already been addressed several times:


1.) Creating new species for the sole reason of your own profit, and not the benefit of society is wrong.

3.) Allowing hybridized spiders into the hobby could weaken the gene pool and basically destroy the species in the hobby. This could be catastrophic if any of these spiders became endangered or extinct in the wild. Extinction is an hourly thing, so you can bet at least one tarantula species has gone extinct this month. It's bad enough that we have to have a sub-forum dedicated to misidentified spiders. Imagine the chaos if hybrids were common.

4.) Although the vast majority of tarantula species are not in trouble, the pet hobby is the driving interest to describe and import new species. Because of this, we do not need to be creating our own new species. This practice makes the pet hobby be taken less seriously to conservation groups, and this is a detriment to anyone and everyone involved.

Nitibus
04-07-2007, 11:39 PM
Man i just dont get it.


That's right ! You don't " get it ". That's my point !

So I'll post something more to your understanding : Dude, that's not cool ! Sure your buddy might be " excited ' about his cross bred T's, but I am sure neither you or he understands the future problems you may have caused.

Read these posts again. There is a reason this has become a debate.

Think about it, then think some more...

TheDarkFinder
04-08-2007, 12:09 PM
Most hybrids are sterile.




Oh please, oh please.

Prove this statement. Please do. Produce a peer reveiw document that says, most hybrids are sterile. Please do.

The vast majority of plants can produce non-sterile offspring. Most birds are. Most reptiles are. Most insects are. Look at cockroaches.

Be every careful. Do not post opinion or just scream louder, the common defense of personal opinion on this board.

I know you can not. I have spent years looking for a scientific articles on hybrids. you see I breed orchids, and know the power of the hybrid.

If there is a live offspring, hybrids, they may or may not be sterile.

So prove it.
I will get you started.
"Hybrid speciation". Nature (London) (0028-0836), 446, p. 279

Merfolk
04-08-2007, 12:54 PM
Species with overlaping territories that refuse to crosssbreed... to answer this argument, I'd say that humans also do, even though they are all the very same specie. The slightest difference (religion, political opinions) is enough; we are so prone to reject the others....

BinarySpider
04-08-2007, 01:42 PM
Yea, I think to many people consider the genus and species a set in stone argument and may rely on the mule idea.

In Lake Malawi Africa a fish called the cichlid which has many different genus and even more different species is a great example. Fertile hybrid species happen all of the time in the wild and in the home aquarium. I had also read that the fish of that lake can reproduce that are from two completely different genus. This is factual and has been proven by both intent and by accident in the average home fish aquarium.

The genus and species names seem to be merely a label based on a few individuals opinions of the animal's physical structure. Of course the individual who discovers a truly unique form of life gets the honor of choosing the species name. Someday I suspect that many animals could become re-catagorized by DNA structure.

Hybrids will occur in the hobby sooner or later. I would only ask that the animal be given the honest and true background if ever released into the public...

(species name / breeder name) X (species name / breeder name)

JMO

BinarySpider

TJPotter
04-08-2007, 02:30 PM
In Lake Malawi Africa a fish called the cichlid which has many different genus and even more different species is a great example. Fertile hybrid species happen all of the time in the wild and in the home aquarium. I had also read that the fish of that lake can reproduce that are from two completely different genus. This is factual and has been proven by both intent and by accident in the average home fish aquarium.

I am afraid I am going to have to ask you to stick to dog analogies, as this is not accurate at all. The Mbuna of Lake Malawi consist of several species, and tons of regional variants. The regional variants and species do not procreate in the wild. However, if in your home aquarium you cross two regional variants/species, and mention it on a forum, you will be accosted my every truly serious hobbyist on the board. African cichlid taxonomy is in no better shape than tarantulas. And we do not want things mucked up worse than they already are.

As far as fish from different genera reproducing in the wild- I would really like to see a source on that. Two species, in the aquarium, definitely, but not in the wild (Barring human interference). Two genera in the aquarium or wild? The offspring would undoubtedly being incredibly deformed and die very soon after birth in the wild due to predation, and being biologically unable to sustain themselves.

Unfortunately, the "mixed african cichlid" tanks in P*tsm*rt, are great places to buy regional variant mutts (though once in awhile you can spot some pure Lab. caer.), and mislabeled fish. Not to mention recommending keeping peacocks and Mbuna together, which can and will lead to Malawi Bloat eventually due to dietary differences.

If you really want to see a flame war start, I dare you to go onto an african cichlid forum, and write a post about crossing individuals from Lake Victoria! You would never, ever be treated with respect on that forum again.

Same goes for the cichlids of Lake Tanganyika (which I collect). N. cylindricus and N. leleupi are very closely related, and could potentially produce offspring--So us hobbyists do NOT keep the two species together in the same tank. Its just part of being a conscientious hobbyist.

The same goes for South American cichlids (Namely Trimacs, Citronellums, Red Devils, Midas, etc.) Serious hobbyist pay huge money in order to get pure ones that have not been mucked up by amateurs that do not know better.

As far as "Parrotfish", the horribly disfigured S. American cichlid hybrid that is so deformed it cannot even close its mouth, many "newer" hobbyist collect them, only to be shunned by many more experienced hobbyists for buying hybrids. The majority (but not all) of "Parrotfish" are sterile, btw.***

***These fish do have a very devoted following in some groups though***

-------------------------------------------------------------------

As far as I am concerned, with the taxonomy of our hobby in such a sad state, risking the possibility of hybrids being introduced into hobby is enough to make me sick. "maybe I sold her because I needed money" is a pathetic excuse, and irresponsible to say the least. So, what if she does produce an egg sac, and the new owner "Needs money"? I keep track of who posts things advocating hybrids and such-and people who deal with them, and have built up quite a large list of people that I will never buy from.

My two cents:o

T

BinarySpider
04-08-2007, 03:50 PM
I am afraid I am going to have to ask you to stick to dog analogies, as this is not accurate at all. The Mbuna of Lake Malawi consist of several species, and tons of regional variants. The regional variants and species do not procreate in the wild. However, if in your home aquarium you cross two regional variants/species, and mention it on a forum, you will be accosted my every truly serious hobbyist on the board. African cichlid taxonomy is in no better shape than tarantulas. And we do not want things mucked up worse than they already are.

First off, I would like to stick with whatever analogy that I choose to use please. I think that is my choice, thanks.

Actually I believe that you are absolutely wrong about those statements. They do in "fact" hybridize in the wild and in the aquarium. Your statement is based on your opinions only which you have a right, no dought at all. I believe IMO that the hybrids occur both in the wild and in captivity.


As far as fish from different genera reproducing in the wild- I would really like to see a source on that. Two species, in the aquarium, definitely, but not in the wild (Barring human interference). Two genera in the aquarium or wild? The offspring would undoubtedly being incredibly deformed and die very soon after birth in the wild due to predation, and being biologically unable to sustain themselves.

Actually NO, they were NOT incredibly deformed at all when I did it in an aquarium with two completely different genus from Malawi. It was accidental in that case but it happend since they were the only two fish in the tank. It was over 6 months after I bought them when it happened. The offspring contained characterisitcs of both parents. This happens all of the time. I wish that I still had the cichlids to show them off. This was about 8 years ago when I had my small African Cichlid hobby.


As far as I am concerned, with the taxonomy of our hobby in such a sad state, risking the possibility of hybrids being introduced into hobby is enough to make me sick. "maybe I sold her because I needed money" is a pathetic excuse, and irresponsible to say the least. So, what if she does produce an egg sac, and the new owner "Needs money"? I keep track of who posts things advocating hybrids and such-and people who deal with them, and have built up quite a large list of people that I will never buy from.

My two cents:o

T

You definitely have the right to your beliefs, absolutely. But so does everybody else.

I personally find it very amusing how so many people can be so paranoid about a small number of hybrid animals entering the market place. It absolutely will happen all of the time if it is possible. The worn out claim that different_species_name_x_different_species_name is a hybrid and that same_species_name_x_same_species_name is not a hybrid is getting pretty darn old. Species are grouped into a genus by a few individuals who examine the physical structure of the animal. These people are no different than anybody else.

When they are grouped by the chemical structure of the DNA molecules that are responsible for the animal I might consider that grouping valid but until then I do not. Of course yes, the obvious, it would be rediculus to group lets say a bear with a termite. Oddly imagine if those two animals were nearly identical at a molecular genetic level, that would rip.

JMHO

Here is another example of producing viable NON Sterile offspring. The new offspring are also reproducing and they are not mules.

Varanus panoptes "Argus monitor" x Varanus flavirufus

That cross/hybrid/whatever label produced a smaller version of the Argus that looks like an extremely colorfull Argus. The breeders have claimed they are less agressive than the origional Argus. Those "hybrids" are still to large of a monitor for my personal taste but defintiely headed in the direction that many and myself prefer.

In the end, this seems to be an argument that will never end. About 50/50 which sounds just like politics. I personally am not worried about the small handfull of crosses/hybrids/whatevername floating about in the general public. I made a choice of a breeder for my T purchases whom I believe will allways tell me exactly what he has with total truth. If I wanted a hybrid then I would have not bought any of my "pure_lines". Yes in time there will be those who will look at the hybrid and say, well, it looks like a "name" therefore I will sell it as "name". It will happen with a high percentage of probibility.

I would prefer them to be honest but like so many will sale out for a few bucks and those could care less. Even those who sale T's in some pet shops. I have seen several T's at different shops labeled Avicularia PinkToe. When I asked what species the store manager said Pink Toe, the species name is not pink toe but I cornered him on it and he said that is what it was sold to us as. I have seen the same with giant white knee common name that does not look like any giant white knee that I have ever seen. Now that so called honest line, "that is what it was sold to us as", which they think that makes it OK, is also getting pretty darn old as well IMHO.

BinarySpider

Cheshire
04-08-2007, 04:30 PM
Prove this statement. Please do. Produce a peer reveiw document that says, most hybrids are sterile. Please do.

This (http://waynesword.palomar.edu/hybrids1.htm) is the best I am able to offer for now. This goes through a handfull of common sterile hybrids and the basic genetic process and why these animals are sterile. Animal hybrids are a bit different than plants. With some very closely related species (such as ring species), some hybrids may be firtle. However, species that are not so closely related will be infirtle or have insanely high mortality. I'll be able to research this subject more later in the week, however my sources are pretty much confined to the internet so I doubt I'll be able to find the paper you listed.

Most animal hybrids that I'm familiar with either have incredibly high mortality.

TheDarkFinder
04-08-2007, 04:57 PM
This (http://waynesword.palomar.edu/hybrids1.htm)

So looking at your source you given. I counted 25 fertile hybrids and 27 sterile hybrids example given.

But that is mostly plants lets to animals, not insects, which have lower surivual of animals.

http://www.bird-hybrids.com/
http://www.uwyo.edu/dbmcd/molmark/lect2a.html
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2005/07/0727_050727_evolution.html
Sorry last one in insect

TJPotter
04-08-2007, 05:00 PM
First off, I would like to stick with whatever analogy that I choose to use please. I think that is my choice, thanks.

Actually I believe that you are absolutely wrong about those statements. They do in "fact" hybridize in the wild and in the aquarium. Your statement is based on your opinions only which you have a right, no dought at all. I believe IMO that the hybrids occur both in the wild and in captivity.



Actually NO, they were NOT incredibly deformed at all when I did it in an aquarium with two completely different genus from Malawi. It was accidental in that case but it happend since they were the only two fish in the tank. It was over 6 months after I bought them when it happened. The offspring contained characterisitcs of both parents. This happens all of the time. I wish that I still had the cichlids to show them off. This was about 8 years ago when I had my small African Cichlid hobby.



You definitely have the right to your beliefs, absolutely. But so does everybody else.

I personally find it very amusing how so many people can be so paranoid about a small number of hybrid animals entering the market place. It absolutely will happen all of the time if it is possible. The worn out claim that different_species_name_x_different_species_name is a hybrid and that same_species_name_x_same_species_name is not a hybrid is getting pretty darn old. Species are grouped into a genus by a few individuals who examine the physical structure of the animal. These people are no different than anybody else.

When they are grouped by the chemical structure of the DNA molecules that are responsible for the animal I might consider that grouping valid but until then I do not. Of course yes, the obvious, it would be rediculus to group lets say a bear with a termite. Oddly imagine if those two animals were nearly identical at a molecular genetic level, that would rip.

JMHO

Here is another example of producing viable NON Sterile offspring. The new offspring are also reproducing and they are not mules.

Varanus panoptes "Argus monitor" x Varanus flavirufus

That cross/hybrid/whatever label produced a smaller version of the Argus that looks like an extremely colorfull Argus. The breeders have claimed they are less agressive than the origional Argus. Those "hybrids" are still to large of a monitor for my personal taste but defintiely headed in the direction that many and myself prefer.

In the end, this seems to be an argument that will never end. About 50/50 which sounds just like politics. I personally am not worried about the small handfull of crosses/hybrids/whatevername floating about in the general public. I made a choice of a breeder for my T purchases whom I believe will allways tell me exactly what he has with total truth. If I wanted a hybrid then I would have not bought any of my "pure_lines". Yes in time there will be those who will look at the hybrid and say, well, it looks like a "name" therefore I will sell it as "name". It will happen with a high percentage of probibility.

I would prefer them to be honest but like so many will sale out for a few bucks and those could care less. Even those who sale T's in some pet shops. I have seen several T's at different shops labeled Avicularia PinkToe. When I asked what species the store manager said Pink Toe, the species name is not pink toe but I cornered him on it and he said that is what it was sold to us as. I have seen the same with giant white knee common name that does not look like any giant white knee that I have ever seen. Now that so called honest line, "that is what it was sold to us as", which they think that makes it OK, is also getting pretty darn old as well IMHO.

BinarySpider



Again... Proof? Documentation? Anything? When I see/read proof of it, I will believe this is an appropriate analogy. Were the Labs? Pseudos? Haps? Any kind of information at all?! Suppose dogs weren't a great analogy for you to have used either though, but it is better than promoting hybridizing more cichlids in the hobby so those of us that still pursue it have more hybrid crap to deal with.

Also, having a "few crosses/hybrids/whatevernames" in the hobby, will eventually lead to dirty bloodlines throughout the entire hobby. How is that ok with you? Or anyone else? Aren't we captive breeding to prevent mass collecting in the wild? So, if we screw up the bloodlines in the hobby, aren't we going to have to start all over again in order to get true species to maintain in the hobby?

I won't be reading this thread anymore; however, it's just depressing to see what a sorry direction this hobby could be going in.

Suppose threads like this are the basis of these pissing contest forums though.

T

Greyhalo
04-08-2007, 05:36 PM
What would be the point, if any, in creating hybrid tarantulas? Besides feeding your own curiosity or making a buck off of selling them. The reason people breed the tarantlas we have in the hobby is so that we dont have to constantly collect wild specimens and to prevent killing what wild populations are left. Even if hybrids of tarantula species accur in the wild, they happen by chance or accident and not by us creating situations that wouldn't happen under normal circumstances. To try and create hybrids under such abnormal circumstances is irresponsible and defeats the purpose of us breeding the specimens in the hobby since the purpose is for us to continually have that specific species available in the hobby without being destructive. The reason that infertility occurs between hybrids is to prevent them from reproducing because they werent meant to be. Honestly, give one truely benificial reason to create hybrid T's. If you cant then obviouslly they shouldn't be created.

ShadowBlade
04-08-2007, 05:43 PM
What would be the point, if any, in creating hybrid tarantulas? Besides feeding your own curiosity or making a buck off of selling them. The reason people breed the tarantlas we have in the hobby is so that we dont have to constantly collect wild specimens and to prevent killing what wild populations are left.

In casual hobby conditions? There isn't much benefit for the hobby.
But under research conditions, there is much to learn from attempting tarantula hybridization.

-Sean

Greyhalo
04-08-2007, 05:47 PM
Ill agree it can serve a purpose for research but purely research only. But yea, for the hobby it serves no benefit.

As for phil jones, do you ever post anything worth reading, seriously.

spider_fan
04-08-2007, 06:01 PM
Hyrbrydization for reasearch could actually be quite valuable. That we we would have solid proof that T hybrids are either mostly sterile or mostly fertile. It could also help us better understand the genetics of tarantulas. My philosphy as I sated earlier is that I don't mind hybridization as long as the hybrids are kept from breeding or being sold.


What on earth are you talking about?

I've learned that its best to ignore those who replace proper grammar and punctuation with an excessive use of smilies.

BinarySpider
04-08-2007, 07:31 PM
Again... Proof? Documentation? Anything? When I see/read proof of it, I will believe this is an appropriate analogy. Were the Labs? Pseudos? Haps? Any kind of information at all?! Suppose dogs weren't a great analogy for you to have used either though, but it is better than promoting hybridizing more cichlids in the hobby so those of us that still pursue it have more hybrid crap to deal with.

Owe, you want the so called genus/species names that have been given to the animals that were in the aquarium by the so called experts who merely look at the animal structure rather than performing a full DNA analysis.

OK, just a second here. They were both Mbuna. One was a female, very common animal, Labidochromis caeruleus, often called an Electric Yellow. These get very large. My female was around 4 inches long at the breeding. The male was a Melanochromis johannii who was around 5 inches long at the breeding. He had more of a longer type body. Yep, both were mouth brooders. And yes the eggs hatched and were allowed to grow into juveniles. They were included with the aquariums that I sold and yes the owner liked the way they looked and knew exactly what they were. Sorry but I am not in that hobby anymore but hey, my 5 year old has both black neons and blood fins in the same tank, just maybe?:clap:

Actually dogs were just fine for an example. Like I said the so called genus/species grouping is not solid proof IMO. That grouping is based on the animal's structure. I would consider accepting a grouping of the absolute molecular structures of the DNA molecules for each animal or plant as more solid proof. Nothing less.


Also, having a "few crosses/hybrids/whatevernames" in the hobby, will eventually lead to dirty bloodlines throughout the entire hobby. How is that ok with you? Or anyone else? Aren't we captive breeding to prevent mass collecting in the wild? So, if we screw up the bloodlines in the hobby, aren't we going to have to start all over again in order to get true species to maintain in the hobby?.

It seems that the pet trade is allready pretty well screwed up. So nope, it really doesnot bother me in the least. I know exactly what I want. I know that I can wait for a few months to find it as well which includes the research. In the past I have spent anywhere from 1 to 2 years looking for the right show dog. Like I said before, I found a T breeder that I trust totally. You can check this person by searching BinarySpider in this forum. I am not worried about the other guys who sale a "hybrid" because I am not buying hybrid tarantulas. There are a couple of other breeders that I am looking at also. So far they have exelent crudentials and I will consider them as well.

Owe, yes, I also believe that it is very good that so many are trying to preserve some of the so called lines since they very well could become extinct in the wild. That is connected to one of my origional statements. The genetic material is disappearing at an alarming rate do to the destruction of the wildlife and habitat. I think that another patch of S.A.rainforrest the size of a football field vannished for all times in the time that it took me to respond to your post.


I won't be reading this thread anymore; however, it's just depressing to see what a sorry direction this hobby could be going in.

Suppose threads like this are the basis of these pissing contest forums though.

T

Ahhhhhhhh, come on, you know that you will read it. Your addicted to your side of the coin toss. Yep, something to argue about when there is nothing else to argue about.

BinarySpider

BinarySpider
04-08-2007, 07:46 PM
:) Well, back to Easter. Later all. My time is very short these days but I do get back to this forum once in while.

I really found the information that I have seen in this forum a benefit. Especially the husbandry. I switched from the ground dwelling species to the tree dwelling Avicularia pink toes.

Yep, I know, those are really messed up with the same species names used for different animals. What can you do, it will continue to happen. I think what I have so far is fine and what I get in the future will be fine.

BinarySpider

Cheshire
04-08-2007, 09:28 PM
So looking at your source you given. I counted 25 fertile hybrids and 27 sterile hybrids example given.

But that is mostly plants lets to animals, not insects, which have lower surivual of animals.

http://www.bird-hybrids.com/
http://www.uwyo.edu/dbmcd/molmark/lect2a.html
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2005/07/0727_050727_evolution.html
Sorry last one in insect

Actually, I looked through some of your older posts and came to the conclusion that you're better qualified to speak on the subject than I am. Genetics isn't my strong suit. I am more familiar with the evolutionary process than I am with the study of genetics.

So let me go back through my posts and update them. I've been known to be wrong (http://www.arachnoboards.com/ab/showthread.php?t=89129&highlight=giant+crystals) from time to time.

First, I'll re-address the post that I replied to that you quoted from. The quote is actually a little out of context, as we are talking ethics and not biology. I don't think this was your intention, so I'll leave it at that. I think you'll see what I'm talking about after reading what I'm about to say.




I use to raise champion AKC ChowChows. I personally handled and showed my own champions at AKC sanctioned shows. There is NOT a single ChowChow in any show ring that does not have one or more serious health problems. This is directly do the massive inbreeding in which you have no choice of if you are raising pedigree dogs. In fact every single pure breed dog has some serious health issues directly from the inbreeding. I always hated mix breeds until I saw a BUG. That is pure Pug crossed to a pure Boston Terrier. It looked pretty darn neat to me.

Well...no, this does not apply. Dogs are one species. As this is common knowledge, I shouldn't need a source. However, as I'm sure my credibility is suspect at the moment then here it is:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/bookres.fcgi/coffeebrk/cb27_dogs_d1.pdf


The same goes from the tropical fish industry. Just last weekend I went to get some lemon tetras for my son's frog/fish aquarium. I turned them down. Every single one was deformed to some extent. While looking at several other species in the store many of those had suttle deformities. The employee said it was most likely from the inbreeding done generation after generation after generation by tropical fish breeders in an attempt to maintain purity by the breeders.

Inbreeding is continually using animals that are related by immediate relatives as your breeding stock. A lot of breeders that are more worried about quantity than quality use animals that are produced by them to avoid buying new stock to save money. This is why a lot of animals are inbred in any hobby. No real source, save a few exotic pet breeders I know. This makes sense to me, so it's not suspect.

The inbreeding of these animals has more to do with specific strains within the species, not the species itself.


Personally I would believe that hybrids would produce a stronger genetic pool of much healthier animals.

While true for dogs, this does not apply to hybrids in the sense we are talking. Generally, there will be deformities for hybrids (including sterility), or the hybrids will be a third species that is not found in nature. This is a statement that assumes that dog breeds and biological species are similar. They are not.

I already posted my public apology for this post, so please forgive me...however this also applies to this portion of the post:

Dark Finder since you're more up on your genetics than I am, please tell me if I'm wrong on this. The methodology comes from a Richard Dawkins book, however I've found a couple other sources backing this up:


New bloodlines are created every so often. Any animal that is created through sexual reproduction recieves half it's genes from it's parents. It's half related to both of it's parents. Therefore, one fourth of it's DNA came from each grandparent. One eighth of it's DNA came from each of it's eight great grandparent, so on and so forth. New bloodlines are created at the point where the offspring are no more related to their ancestors genetically then they are to their parents.

According to Wade here on the boards, the original stock for the superworms you can buy at petsmart orriginally came from roughly 25 individuals. For arguement's sake, let's say the superworm's DNA had roughly the same number of genes as we (http://www.ornl.gov/sci/techresources/Human_Genome/home.shtml)do. I'll use the number 24,000. Bob and Cindy came from the same parent.

The first generation recieves 12,000 genes from the father (or Bob) and 12,000 from an unrelated mother...Samantha.
The second recieves 6,000 from that first father
The third, 3,000 from Bob
the fourth 1,500 from Bob
the fifth 750 from Bob
the sixth 375 from Bob
the seventh (we'll round up because you can't recieve half a gene) 188 genes from Bob
the eighth generation: 94
ninth: 47
tenth (again, rounding up) 24
eleventh: 12
generation number twelve: 6
generation number thirteen: 3
the fourteenth generation: 2
fifteenth generation: 1 gene
The sixteenth generation of Bob's progeny is no more related genetically to Cindy's progeny at the sixteenth generation as Bob and Samantha were when they had children. In other words as long as the numbers of whatever species we're talking about are increasing and specimens are bred with those individuals that are less closely related than the average of the population from which they come, it's relatively safe to say that inbreeding will not occurr.


The problem with the pet trade is that the genes aren't shuffled as effectively as they are in the wild, leading to inbreeding either purposefully such as that of dogs, or unintentionally as with our roach colonies (although, I don't think anyone really gets up in arms about the inbreeding of roaches).


I also believe that if sold into the general population the hybrid should at least be noted with maybe a...

(species name / breeder name) X (species name / breeder name)

...where the breeder would be the origional source of the animal or line of animals. Many breeders can have the same species name on their website but comparing the animals from each breeder they just may look very different from one another.

So I'll run with this for a second. If everybody in the world is responsible, then a lot of things would be OK. If marijuanna came from other sources than hyperviolent drug cartels, I would be OK with it's legalization. On the other hand, if people used heroin and methamphetamine responsibly, there would be little problem with either of these drugs.

Now...let's blast back to reality for one second. Here on this forum, we actually need an entire forum (http://www.arachnoboards.com/ab/gallery/browseimages.php?c=11) specifically for the identification of spiders that were sold to members under incorrect names or even no name at all.

Since most of the WC spiders are collected in their native habitat by locals who don't know what they're doing, they're given common names. Read through these forums for any amount of times, you know these common names mean nothing. Tarantulas are commonly misidentified...often grossly. I once saw a mature male A. seemani labeled as a Xenesthis immanis in a local pet store (proced for $50, too) so what makes you think for even one second that they will not be mixed up?

I'm not going to even get to first time owners who breed without realizing the consequences, and I'm not going to touch sexual dimorphism.


A very nice looking hybrid could be more valuable than the combined values of the parents.

Not going to argue there. It's true. However, the risks from hybridization outweigh any benefits. There is actually no benefit from hybridization. Sure, you might make a buck...but this is not an acceptable reason. Eventually, the hybrids will somehow get into the gene pool of other species and will spread to the point where we have no more of that species, only hybrid. Some species such as b. smithi are no longer imported from their natural environment and are only kept in the pet trade through the efforts of captive breeders.

As I said earlier, the problem with CITES is that it does not provide a gene bank for endangered species. The pet hobby, if done appropriately could.

Now, earlier I said that it was difficult to do things appropriately. However, appropriately breeding endangered animals specifically for the pet trade could actually be more beneficial for the economy than irresponsibly.

This is elaborated more in other posts of mine spread across the forum and is another subject alltogether.


In the end this planet is running short of genetic material simply because of the lost of wildlife and their habitat. We may have no choice but to consume that Gecho_x_Owl_x_Bass_x_Pig for dinner. It may be all that is left to us for food except for Soylent Green

Again, we are not running short on genetic material. We are running short on species.


Actually I believe that you are absolutely wrong about those statements. They do in "fact" hybridize in the wild and in the aquarium. Your statement is based on your opinions only which you have a right, no dought at all. I believe IMO that the hybrids occur both in the wild and in captivity.

Hybrids occurr in the wild and captivity, however we have no way to know which is which. Hybridizing for scientiffic purposes is OK, and as long as there is no contamination of any gene pools of proper species this is OK. The only way to ensure that contamination of gene pools does not happen is to not sell them.




Actually NO, they were NOT incredibly deformed at all when I did it in an aquarium with two completely different genus from Malawi. It was accidental in that case but it happend since they were the only two fish in the tank. It was over 6 months after I bought them when it happened. The offspring contained characterisitcs of both parents. This happens all of the time. I wish that I still had the cichlids to show them off. This was about 8 years ago when I had my small African Cichlid hobby.

A lot of african cichlids come from Lake Victoria, which has suffered an unimaginable catastrophe (http://www.american.edu/projects/mandala/TED/VICTORIA.HTM)caused in part by an introduced fish.

Let's assume you sold those fish to another pet store owner who had about as much knowledge in fish as most pet store owners have about tarantulas, and he sold them as the same species as one of their parents because he didn't quite get the hybridizing part. They're bred into the population and it spreads throughout the population of those species.

Now, let's say they fix all the problems with Lake Victoria after those species go extinct. How will they re-introduce those species?


You definitely have the right to your beliefs, absolutely. But so does everybody else.

You are right to a point:

My beliefs are based on conservation and I am focusing on the benefit of the animals under our care by preserving the species by not allowing their gene pool to be contaminated. You are focusing on your pocketbook.


I personally find it very amusing how so many people can be so paranoid about a small number of hybrid animals entering the market place. It absolutely will happen all of the time if it is possible.


The worn out claim that different_species_name_x_different_species_name is a hybrid and that same_species_name_x_same_species_name is not a hybrid is getting pretty darn old.

Definition of hybrid...the offspring of two animals who are two different species. Enough said.


Species are grouped into a genus by a few individuals who examine the physical structure of the animal.

They examine the physical structure, the habitat and their habits. They try to determine if these creatures mate in the wild or can reproduce. They will attempt to hybridize them to see if they can, in fact reproduce and then determine if these are species.


These people are no different than anybody else.

Except for the fact that they study these animals for a living, have years of education behind them, they know the definition of species and actually have good reasons for classifying their animals as different species.


When they are grouped by the chemical structure of the DNA molecules that are responsible for the animal I might consider that grouping valid but until then I do not.

Well, good luck with that. Genetic studies are rarely done among invertebrates. The physical characteristics that scientists look at generally betray genetic characteristics that lead to the conclusion that the animals they are studying are different species.

Coloration means very little little, however a swelling on tibias three through four would be major.

Sometimes variations between younger species are smaller than variations between older species, however they don't interbreed in the wild through certian means such as mating calls or different drumming patterns.


Of course yes, the obvious, it would be rediculus to group lets say a bear with a termite. Oddly imagine if those two animals were nearly identical at a molecular genetic level, that would rip.

What are you trying to say here?

Again...the only reasons that the people who support hybridization have offered is their desire to own one, and have cited the problems with classifying spiders.

The economic arguement is crap, plain and simple. There is no way to effectively argue that creating species for your sole profit is ethical.

By allowing hybridization, they're allowing the eventual destruction of the species in the hobby. Pointing out the problems with classification is not a proper arguement for the popularization fo hybrids. It is an excuse that they use to justify doing something they want to do for the sole reason of lining their wallet.


1.) Creating new species for the sole reason of your own profit, and not the benefit of society is wrong.

2.) Hybridizing for the purpose of taxonomical research benefits society. Therefore this is acceptable, as long as the spiders are not released for general sale to the public.

3.) Allowing hybridized spiders into the hobby could weaken the gene pool and basically destroy the species in the hobby. This could be catastrophic if any of these spiders became endangered or extinct in the wild. Extinction is an hourly thing, so you can bet at least one tarantula species has gone extinct this month. It's bad enough that we have to have a sub-forum dedicated to misidentified spiders. Imagine the chaos if hybrids were common.

4.) Although the vast majority of tarantula species are not in trouble, the pet hobby is the driving interest to describe and import new species. Because of this, we do not need to be creating our own new species. This practice makes the pet hobby be taken less seriously to conservation groups, and this is a detriment to anyone and everyone involved.

Greyhalo
04-08-2007, 10:01 PM
What are you trying to say here?

Again...the only reasons that the people who support hybridization have offered is their desire to own one, and have cited the problems with classifying spiders.

The economic arguement is crap, plain and simple. There is no way to effectively argue that creating species for your sole profit is ethical.

By allowing hybridization, they're allowing the eventual destruction of the species in the hobby. Pointing out the problems with classification is not a proper arguement for the popularization fo hybrids. It is an excuse that they use to justify doing something they want to do for the sole reason of lining their wallet.

I couldnt agree anymore, nicely said.

Cheshire
04-09-2007, 07:27 AM
Your words show immaturity so maybe you should grow up...... go be a lurker. The board is better off.

Hey, now. Everyone can add something to anything. What they add is what makes the difference. Binary spider is technically correct when he says there are problems with classifying on physical characteristics. In the centipede world, coloration and size means nothing. Adults within the same colormorph can be highly variable in size and color, but these mean nothing in nature as they interbreed.

Take a look at scolopendra polymorpha. I've seen close to a dozen colormorphs, and their physiology isn't much understood.

Although he is technically correct in pointing out the problems with taxonomy, this is not an excuse to cross breed.

I said some things I regret in a moment of bad judgement in the middle of a horrendously bad cigarette craving. My post earlier was out of character and out of line and it should not be an example of how to deal with someone you do not agree with.

Please do not follow my example as far as that post is concerned. I do not wish to push any member* into oblivion. As Sheri said, this is a community and we should not be doing anything that would discourage people from posting. This is why I posted a public apology, PMed the member it was intended for with a link to my apology and even posted a link to the apology in my signature.

Within five minutes of me posting the link (http://www.arachnoboards.com/ab/showpost.php?p=859821&postcount=61) in my signature, the views on this thread had gone up by nearly 200, so believe me when I say I made every effort to ensure this apology was as public as possible.

(*well, the one in question. I do have an ignore list of people who I believe will never add anything to any subject in which they speak because they usually interject into a conversation with something completely random, misspelled and with a complete lack of punctuation that has no bearing on the actual topic at hand. I place people like this on my ignore list, not people who I disagree with. If you would wish to add me or anyone else to your ignore list, look at their profile and right above the signature there is an option for a buddy list and an ignore list. The ignore list is on the right. Click on that link and follow the directions. Instead of attacking people, add them to your ignore list. That is why it is there.



Maybe try lightening up a bit Cheshire. This is one reason that many of us are tired of it including myself. I allready feel that I should no longer post here because you are constantly ripping apart my posts and placing little chunks of what you believe to be actual science fact in place to make yourself feel important.

Although I was wrong about what percentage of hybrids are sterile, the facts in my posts still stand alone. We are arguing ethics, a large majority of which is personal opinion backed up by science.

I tend to make my opinions by thinking them through. How I normally do this is by breaking posts into single statements and logically think them through point by point.

Of course you can accuse me of preaching pseudoscience to make a point to make me feel important, however I am not the one who is attempting to redefine the term species by ignoring the definition. There is a distinct difference between what happens in nature and what happens in the lab.


You are also attempting to impose your ideas of what is correct and what is not correct on those who will not bow down to your trivial statements.

I am arguing the ethics of the situation and have not yet heard a convincing arguement about why creating a new species not found in nature by mating two species that would never actually meet just because you want to make a few dollars is ethical.

Again...personal opinion. These are my opinions, and quite a few people share them. If I'm wrong, then someone will come along and set me straight by explaining the other side to my satisfaction. It has happened a few times before, and once in this very thread.

Quite frankly, I do not care whether or not you bow down to me. Hybridizing different species is unethical and has the potential to destroy entire species as found in the hobby, which would raise the price of the actual *natural* species, which would lead to more illegal wild collecting which in turn would lead to more habitat destruction.

To sway my mind you need to prove that selling hybrids will somehow improve the hobby and not degrade it through empirical evidence and practical logic, something you have utterly failed at. In taxonomy, there are two distinct groups of thought...lumpers and splitters.

You are a lumper. You lump everything into one group without paying attention to whether or not the animals actually mate in the wild. While this may be relevant if we were discussing fossils, this has no bearing on this discussion.

I'm in the middle. In addition to paying attention to mortality rates, as well as deformations, I believe if the spiders distinguish between their two populations voluntarily in the wild, the two populations are different species. If they don't mate in the wild due to seperation of some type, whether it be mating seasons or geography or a combination of the two, they are different species. Both of these must be backed up with physiological differences.


This includes the little tidbit of catagorical slots that you are claiming to be set in stone. You are making a fool out of yourself.

I've said several times that the term species is merely an artificial barrier that is set in a straight continuum in both this thread and others. What I am saying is that we should respect species as they are found in nature.

The pet hobby could be used for so much more than our enjoyment. We could have people in the countries from which our pets came get export liscenses and breed these spiders to re-seed destroyed and rebuilt habitat. This would both increase the variety of animals in our hobby, encourage discovery and create jobs for people in third world countries (again...the short version).

However, for this to happen our hobby needs to be taken seriously among conservation groups.

I've said it before and I'll say it again, the consequences outweigh the benefits.


Look, Nothing Is absolute Or Set In Stone.

I'm not saying it is. I'm saying we should stick to nature the best we're able. Just because species aren't set in stone doesn't mean we should hybridize anything. Many people enjoy this hobby because it gives them the chance to research their pet and find out where it is found in the wild. If there's nothing but half breeds left in the hobby where none of the pets are actually exotic...just man made, we become the Wal*Mart of the pet world. Nobody wants this.


You will see this when you decide to grow up. The sandbox is down the road on the net.

I've already apologized to you and fully understand why you may not like me. Feel free to attack me, I can understand why you may feel this is warranted. I attempted to send you a private message to explain my views in private and offer a chance to bury the hatchet, however it seems you have found the ignore list function. I believe private messages are just that...private and not meant to be brought up in a public setting so I'm not going to say any more on this subject other than there is a certian irony involved.

I do bring up many salient points in my posts and have a wealth of knowledge on the subject. I was mistaken on the percentage of hybrids that were sterile, however the rest of my posts should stand up to empirical or logical scrutiny. Feel more than free to double check, as Dark Finder did.

Taxonomy is something that is difficult to understand unless you've read a handfull of species descriptions. I've read about half a dozen or so and physical characteristics aren't the only things taken into account. There is environment, where they're found, how they breed, where they breed and whether there is a true seperation of breeding populations in the wild. If one group favors it's own group far more than the other, it's generally considered a species as the animals make a distinction between each other.

http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evosite/evo101/VA1BioSpeciesConcept.shtml
http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evosite/evo101/VBDefiningSpeciation.shtml
http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evosite/evo101/VCCausesSpeciation.shtml
http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evosite/evo101/VC1iSpeciationPlants.shtml
http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evosite/evo101/VC1aModesSpeciation.shtml
http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evosite/evo101/VC1bAllopatric.shtml
http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evosite/evo101/VC1cPeripatric.shtml
http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evosite/evo101/VC1dParapatric.shtml
http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evosite/evo101/VC1eSympatric.shtml
http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evosite/evo101/VC1fEvidenceSpeciation.shtml
http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evosite/evo101/VC1gReproIsolation.shtml
http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evosite/evo101/VC1hCospeciation.shtml
http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evosite/evo101/VADefiningSpecies.shtml

Taxonomy is a complicated subject.

Again...my position, which has yet to be touched by the pro-hybridization side. The fact that tarantula species are not well understood has very little to do with this arguement. The high mortality rates between a lot of hybrid species should be more than enough of an arguement for the genetic variable. The posts from Berkely I posted should be an arguement for the rest.

Species descriptions are written by those who have gone to school long enough to attain a PHD. You can not simply dismiss them by calling them idiots and assuming you're superior without any actual hard evidence.

My position on the subject which has yet to be touched by the pro-hybridization side:



1.) Creating new species for the sole reason of your own profit, and not the benefit of society is wrong.

2.) Hybridizing for the purpose of taxonomical research benefits society. Therefore this is acceptable, as long as the spiders are not released for general sale to the public.

3.) Allowing hybridized spiders into the hobby could weaken the gene pool and basically destroy the species in the hobby. This could be catastrophic if any of these spiders became endangered or extinct in the wild. Extinction is an hourly thing, so you can bet at least one tarantula species has gone extinct this month. It's bad enough that we have to have a sub-forum dedicated to misidentified spiders. Imagine the chaos if hybrids were common.

4.) Although the vast majority of tarantula species are not in trouble, the pet hobby is the driving interest to describe and import new species. Because of this, we do not need to be creating our own new species. This practice makes the pet hobby be taken less seriously to conservation groups, and this is a detriment to anyone and everyone involved.

TheDarkFinder
04-09-2007, 07:03 PM
I'm going to quit now.
1.)
Cheshire I see nothing wrong with anything you said. Nothing. Most hybrids are sterile, if you consider the mating between two species hybrids*.
*The footnote to the statement is that we need make sure we have each species reproductively isolated from each other, not just named different species because we think they are or want to name them.

Think about dogs, if we did not know they come from the same species then they would been labled as different species, ie wolf, Canis lupus ssp, vs coyote, Canis latrans ssp. The latest in genetic research show both species (or ssp or both) gave raise to the domestic dog, hybridization and inbreeding. So, for example, B smithi and B. klaasi are the same species. I have seen the f3 generation form this cross breed personally, many years ago.

2.) I do not support any hybrids for fun, none. For just research ok but be careful and be ready to take care of the animals for all their lives or the freezer for them. Hybridization will be the biggest mistake that we will make in the hobby and will continue to pay for it for years and years.

3.)People, for what ever reason, want to remove the science out of the hobby, they want morals, ethics, and religion to play into this hobby. They do not want to talk about hybrids because it will ruin the hobby, which it will. So it is easier for them to just say it can not happen.

They want terms to be politically correct, best light, so that way tarantula may be seen in a positive light. They want defensive because it sounds better, ignoring about 60 years of animal research into behavior and the correct terms for such a subject. They think it just sounds better.

4.) Really do not care about the hobby anymore. I keep tarantulas because I love them. I do not keep them because there is a board where you can talk about them.

5.)It really does not matter. If people want morals, ethics, or religion in this hobby great.

6.)everyone has the right to chime in here. Some people get really upset about what they read. I do not care, ever have so the madness.

Hybrids in tarantula probably not really possible, personal opinion. Be careful if you think you want to try.

If you are doing research into this topic pm me.

If anyone notices I only come here and post when someone goes off with the ipsedixitisms and shoots themselves in the foot. Properly selected hybrids are not sterile, for the most part.

As for you under-note cheshire, I always considered you the Robert Lowth of the tarantula hobby- minus the chruch.

thedarkfinder

David Burns
04-09-2007, 07:27 PM
How do you know you don't have hybrids in your collection? :)

Crotalus
04-09-2007, 08:01 PM
I agree.

Come on Phil Jones, your responses are completely unneccessary.

And how is your brilliant post any different?
:? :? :?

P. Novak
04-09-2007, 08:07 PM
And how is your brilliant post any different?
:? :? :?


Ive already said what I needed to say in this thread about hybrids and what not. Though not scientific or fact based, but opinionated, but I said that because someone has to tell him something. HIs comments are completely unneccessary. Yes Crotalus, I agree the last thing I posted was of no use to this thread as well, but you have to agree his are even worse. I'm done.

Crotalus
04-09-2007, 08:12 PM
Most hybrids are sterile.




Give us some references to this please.
If not people might think its just your own opinion. The +7 lettering dont make it more true.

I gave you some herptile examples and Im sure I can dig up more. Why would tarantulas be so special that fertile hybrids absolutely not can occur in this group of animals?

Again, alot of animals can produce fertile hybrid offspring. Some cant. Are you 100% certain that all 890 species of tarantula dont produce fertile hybrids? I doubt that.
The few tests that been made in the area dont prove a thing or disprove anything.

Cheshire
04-09-2007, 08:34 PM
Give us some references to this please.
If not people might think its just your own opinion. The +7 lettering dont make it more true.

I gave you some herptile examples and Im sure I can dig up more. Why would tarantulas be so special that fertile hybrids absolutely not can occur in this group of animals?

Again, alot of animals can produce fertile hybrid offspring. Some cant. Are you 100% certain that all 890 species of tarantula dont produce fertile hybrids? I doubt that.
The few tests that been made in the area dont prove a thing or disprove anything.

Please read my later posts all the way through. This has already been dealt with, I have admitted that I was unfamiliar with the concept of vialbe hybrids several times after that initial post. I even went back and updated my earlier post.

Either way, if all hybrids were sterile my posts would not only be much shorter but of a different persuasion.

DrAce
04-10-2007, 09:42 AM
There's actually another part to this discussion... the 'breedability' or compatability of the Male and Female...

It's not actually as simple to cross-breed animals as people may think. Sperm has to actually get into the egg, and there's stacks of evidence (some work on it coming from my lab at the Ottawa Health Research Institute) to suggest that there is a highly species-specific interaction between the sperm and the egg in the process of fertilization (particularly tunneling through the zona pellucida and getting at the egg, and then getting through the egg cell membrane).

And it's not Genus specific... we're talking true species dependancy.

Brian S
04-10-2007, 09:55 AM
I'm gonna crossbreed a B smithi with a scorpion (havent decided which sp yet). I think I'll call it a scorpula;P :D