# Is it bad to buy brother and sister. Same clutch.



## Camo (Jul 3, 2006)

Hey all,

Is it bad to buy 2 snakes, male and female from the same clutch?

Cheers

Cameron


----------



## AustHerps (Jul 3, 2006)

Not at all 

We often buy a male and female from each clutch... Because, ultimately, when buying an animal, you generally want it to look like it's parents. Buying two means there's a higher chance of ending up with a purchase closest to what you're after. Another reason for buying two animals from a clutch is that each might display better phenotypes than the other. I.e. one might show the brilliant red a father bredli, whilst another might have the much nicer patterning of the mother. Buying both means you get the best of both worlds 

However, if you plan on owning just ONE breeding pair, it's not advisable to buy related snakes. Inbreeding leads to shorter lifespans, health defects, etc etc. And nobody wants a redneck snake :S In the end, buying in bulk is cheaper... so, if it suits your purpose, breeding wise, etc, buy one pair from one person, and another pair from someone else, that way you'll have two pairs 

Cheers,
Austy.


----------



## snakegal (Jul 3, 2006)

*Re: RE: Is it bad to buy brother and sister. Same clutch.*

I've been told theres nothing wrong with breeding bro and sis? Or is that more after 3-4 generations of in-breeding?



AustHerps said:


> Not at all
> 
> We often buy a male and female from each clutch... Because, ultimately, when buying an animal, you generally want it to look like it's parents. Buying two means there's a higher chance of ending up with a purchase closest to what you're after. Another reason for buying two animals from a clutch is that each might display better phenotypes than the other. I.e. one might show the brilliant red a father bredli, whilst another might have the much nicer patterning of the mother. Buying both means you get the best of both worlds
> 
> ...


----------



## Davo66 (Jul 4, 2006)

The whole concept of breeding with closely related stock annoys the crap out of me! How many animals, (varying species) do humans have to interbreed and do immence genetic damage to? Referring to the dog world, we have bulldogs and pug dogs which were heavily interbreed and the end result is an animal that can hardly breath properly. I am a huge German Shepherd fan and I do not need to mention the shocking hip problems associated with the breed and other large breeds resulting from interbreeding and irresponsible selective breeding. I conceed the whole selective breeding thing, but when interbreeding causes slight, minor and in some case terrible genetic problems and ailments then is the whole process worth it. There is ample breeding stock out there to experiment with, why be cheap and lazy and breed with animals of the same birth stock? do pythons naturally interbreed, (incestually I mean) in the wild? Very few animal species reproduce incestually. The african cheetah is an example where incestual breeding is force upon then due to deminishing numbers. This has led to the decline of the animals immune system and a variety of other genetic deformities and deficiencies.

It astounds me that we can convince ourselves that it is OK! Scientifically and genetically speaking I am sure there is someone out there who can shoot my points down in flames with documented evidence and case studies, but if it was the norm for wildlife to mate with their siblings or parents surely it would be evident in a greater number of species.

Well thats it for what grinds my gears!!! lol


Cheers, Davo


----------



## Retic (Jul 4, 2006)

As has been said before reptiles by and large seem not to be affected in the same way as mammals when it comes to inbreeding. I think it was the Barkers who have shown that pythons can be bred 6 or more generations without ill affects. 2 or 3 generations certainly aren't a problem.
Mammal examples can't be used with reptiles.


----------



## FAY (Jul 4, 2006)

HAHA I am sure in the wild when it is time to mate....they don't say to each other Are you my Bro or Sis???


----------



## raptor (Jul 4, 2006)

Davo said:


> The whole concept of breeding with closely related stock annoys the crap out of me! How many animals, (varying species) do humans have to interbreed and do immence genetic damage to? Referring to the dog world, we have bulldogs and pug dogs which were heavily interbreed and the end result is an animal that can hardly breath properly. I am a huge German Shepherd fan and I do not need to mention the shocking hip problems associated with the breed and other large breeds resulting from interbreeding and irresponsible selective breeding. I conceed the whole selective breeding thing, but when interbreeding causes slight, minor and in some case terrible genetic problems and ailments then is the whole process worth it. There is ample breeding stock out there to experiment with, why be cheap and lazy and breed with animals of the same birth stock? do pythons naturally interbreed, (incestually I mean) in the wild? Very few animal species reproduce incestually. The african cheetah is an example where incestual breeding is force upon then due to deminishing numbers. This has led to the decline of the animals immune system and a variety of other genetic deformities and deficiencies.
> 
> It astounds me that we can convince ourselves that it is OK! Scientifically and genetically speaking I am sure there is someone out there who can shoot my points down in flames with documented evidence and case studies, but if it was the norm for wildlife to mate with their siblings or parents surely it would be evident in a greater number of species.
> 
> ...




Couldnt Agree more


----------



## rexs1 (Jul 4, 2006)

boa said:


> As has been said before reptiles by and large seem not to be affected in the same way as mammals when it comes to inbreeding. I think it was the Barkers who have shown that pythons can be bred 6 or more generations without ill affects. 2 or 3 generations certainly aren't a problem.
> Mammal examples can't be used with reptiles.



I couldnt agree more boa.
90% of captive black and gold jungles all came from the same line.

Think about how many adds you see for sale quoting '' Krauss'' line black and gold jungles. That line started years ago, and its producing better animals all the time
nick


----------



## Magpie (Jul 4, 2006)

> Couldnt Agree more



So how do you determine if your reptiles are "unrelated"?
Do you have genetic tests done on them?
Or do you only ever breed animals from totally diferent localities together?


----------



## munkee (Jul 4, 2006)

Inbreeding is not what causes the degredation of the animals 'vigor' it is the selection process by the breeder. Cattle, horses, dogs and cats are all line bred (especially competition breeders) to achieve certain characteristics that are deemed desirable. The problems arise when a breeder selects a less than healthy animal that has a very nice tail for example and starts a line with it. Realistically the breeder should remove the animal from the breeding program as soon as it is apparent that it is deformed/ill/'sick'/less than healthy. Ideally all of its progeny should be removed from the breeding program to eliminate all chance of the problem. 

Most breeders bar large commercial breeders will not have the amount of animals available to them to be able to cull anything let alone a whole line of animals. For example a recessive problem for blindness occurs in hatchlings the parents should be removed as well potentially all of the parents siblings and grandparents this is in an attempt to remove the problem genetics. 

Inbreeding is not the problem but how the inbreeding is done by many. Not by choice necessarily but due to resources available. 

The locality genepool will reduce regardless of sibling breeding as there is only a number of locality animals. This doesn't mean that they are going to be sickly and ill ten years from now but breeders should cull deformed animals at least to ensure any (not saying there is any ) recessive problems remain recessive.


----------



## snakegal (Jul 4, 2006)

LOL sorry to get technical here but I was told by a very well known and large breeder that snakes are different to mammals due to the way they disperse throughout their habitats. They tend to be found in clumps where there may be numerous individuals in a certain area of habitat that is ideal (eg along a creek). So the localised populations are clumped in these areas as offspring also tend to stay around. Then there may be some distance from there to where another population is located. 

This also supports the fact that one species can have so many phenotypic variations (eg various colours and patternings), as there is spatial separation of individuals allowing this phenotypic variation. If they were to breed then you would get merging of the phenotypes (eg all jungles or diamonds would look similar).

If the separation of local populations is true, it seems they can survive with limited genetic variation, as due to random factors it's unlikely siblings will be mating over many generations and you will predominantly most likely get some breeding from snakes of different genotypes interspersed with in-breeding.

However where does this leave the integrade variations? Are they just exceptions where ideal habitats range over long distances and therefore these local populations interbreed producing phenotypic morphs?

Any ideas/thoughts anyone? I'm trying to suss out whether this local population separation is the case, in which a bit in-breeding is what occurs naturally.

FYI definitions: 
Genotype= the genetic makeup of an individual (eg. genes the individuals carry)
Phenotype= the physical and physiological traits of an individual resulting from genotype (eg. diamonds may range from almost black to high yellow - this is genotypic variation manifesdting in phenotypic variation)


----------



## Glimmerman (Jul 4, 2006)

Davo said:


> do pythons naturally interbreed, (incestually I mean) in the wild? Very few animal species reproduce incestually.



If a mother disowns their young and shows no parental gestures or traits and these young 2-4yrs down the track come of age to breed, Do they ask if they are related? :wink: I cant see how a region with these species can survive without interbreeding, especially in smaller areas.

The only thing I disagree with in inbreeding in our collections, is when, a clutch is born with obvious defects, then this clutch is sold off and those same parents are put back into mating next season. Now that IMO is just WRONG :evil:


----------



## munkee (Jul 4, 2006)

Glimmerman you are bang on the money!! That is the danger of inbreeding. People who continue to breed less than healthy animals and sell off the less than healthy animals. Breeders should cull sick animals to keep rest of the genepool healthier. 

In the wild if siblings survive and reproduce, evolution wise they have been doing something right (staying alive ) the siblings would potentially reinforce the trait that helped them survive. Any sickly animals would die still.

To sum up Charles Darwin's arguement "evolution is random mutations with non-random selection".


----------



## JungleRob (Jul 4, 2006)

I couldnt agree more boa.
90% of captive black and gold jungles all came from the same line.

Think about how many adds you see for sale quoting '' Krauss'' line black and gold jungles. That line started years ago, and its producing better animals all the time
nick[/quote]

LOL...did you know 47% of statistics are made up on the spot? :wink: 

Nick, I've heard something similar re: B&amp;G Jungles. Most of the captive bred jungles come from about 12 animals originally taken out of the wild however many years back. Can anyone let me know how much truth there is in this?

I don't agree that inbreeding is right at all. Even if inbreeding for 2 or generations was ok, how would you be 100% sure you weren't getting a hatchling that was 4th generation inbred already?

Interesting thread and comments.


----------



## Retic (Jul 4, 2006)

I would imagine a great many Jungles would have been taken from the wild over the years so I doubt the majority would have come from 12 or 20 or however many were taken originally. 
It is imposible to know if a hatchling you are purchasing is 1st generation or 5 generation line bred.


----------



## Australis (Jul 4, 2006)

Its not impossible to obtain a hatching and know how many generations it has been line bred :wink: 




boa said:


> I would imagine a great many Jungles would have been taken from the wild over the years so I doubt the majority would have come from 12 or 20 or however many were taken originally.
> It is imposible to know if a hatchling you are purchasing is 1st generation or 5 generation line bred.


----------



## Retic (Jul 4, 2006)

Yes you are right but legally it is hard but easier with the wild caught stuff on the market now.



MattQld83 said:


> Its not impossible to obtain a hatching and know how many generations it has been line bred :wink:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## Magpie (Jul 4, 2006)

> Its not impossible to obtain a hatching and know how many generations it has been line bred



Of course not, but does the breeder know if it's parents were related? Unless they were WC from totally diferent localities... no. Two WC animals from the same locality are almost certainly closely related, it's just a question of how closely.


----------



## Glimmerman (Jul 4, 2006)

> It is imposible to know if a hatchling you are purchasing is 1st generation or 5 generation line bred.



Even if it has been taken from the wild!!!! 


> I would imagine a great many Jungles would have been taken from the wild over the years



Yes but it's a Krauss line :lol: that makes 21


----------



## Australis (Jul 4, 2006)

Magpie said:


> > Its not impossible to obtain a hatching and know how many generations it has been line bred
> 
> 
> 
> Of course not, but does the breeder know if it's parents were related? Unless they were WC from totally diferent localities... no. Two WC animals from the same locality are almost certainly closely related, it's just a question of how closely.




Of course locality pure animals have a high chance of being related.

I was just trying to saying you can get captive bred animals and know how many generations they have been line bred.

Matt


----------



## Retic (Jul 4, 2006)

How ? You can take the word of the breeder but people lie or bend the truth especially in this game unfortunately.



MattQld83 said:


> I was just trying to saying you can get captive bred animals and know how many generations they have been line bred.
> 
> Matt


----------



## snakegal (Jul 4, 2006)

Yeah thats what I'm worried about- unless the person selling the snake, and the one before that etc are keeping records and honest no hope. 
:cry: 



boa said:


> It is imposible to know if a hatchling you are purchasing is 1st generation or 5 generation line bred.


----------



## snakegal (Jul 4, 2006)

...so are we at a consesus here (more or less) that inbreeding isn't unnatural and therefore isn't bad in captivity? Of course with the exception of inbreeding bad mutations/problems and with the acknowledgement that in the wild although some inbreeding would occurr it wouldn't be from very closely related individuals (eg.parent-sibling / sibling-sibling breeding) all the time...maybe aunties-neices etc and some new bloodlines would mix in occassionally. 

So inbreeding isn't bad unless it happens for too many generations with very close relatives of with the breeding or bad mutations.


----------



## Retic (Jul 4, 2006)

I have no problem with linebreeding and most of us are unlikely to be breeding enough generations for it to ever become a problem.


----------



## The Devil (Jul 4, 2006)

I asked the question of inbreeding some years ago and it was pointed out to me that the Chappel Island tiger snakes have been cut off from the mainland for 1000's of years so they must inter breed and they seem to be doing fine.


----------



## Camo (Jul 4, 2006)

OK, got a little bit hectic there but all good. 

Thanks all you have been a great help.

Cameron


----------



## snakegal (Jul 4, 2006)

And sayin that, Chappell Island only 803 acres or 3.25 square km (325 ha), which isn't massive, but enough room for snakes to move about and find new partners for breeding. Guess they don't need a huge amount of genetic variability to sustain populations without birth defects. 




Nev said:


> I asked the question of inbreeding some years ago and it was pointed out to me that the Chappel Island tiger snakes have been cut off from the mainland for 1000's of years so they must inter breed and they seem to be doing fine.


----------



## munkee (Jul 4, 2006)

Snakegal there would be birth defects in the tiger snakes offspring on Chappel Island. All species with or without inbreeding have birth defects in a percentage of their offspring (the percentage changes depending on circumstances). If it impairs their survival they die and don't reproduce. Thus the gene pool is not affected overall.


----------



## schontier (Jul 4, 2006)

I too have many yaers experience in the Dod breeding world, where the "controling body"(canine council) have in place breed standards which as a breeder you are meant to follow, it is these standards that dogs are judgesd by. this means that in order to get your "lines" closer to the standard you line breed. the consequences are almost catastrophic. breeds such as Rottweilers can be traced back to only a few individuals. this example shows just how narrow sighted we can get. SOooo personally, IMO we should learn from the other controlling bodies and not be so controlling. Oh yes, to answer the question.i would not ever breed brother sister/ father daughter/ mother son etc. this duplicates what happens in nature when the genetic pool is reduced, extinction follows.


----------



## Ricko (Jul 4, 2006)

Line breeding in dogs is done alot. they do it to double up on good points in that dog. but the downside to it is that it can double faults or even tripple them.


----------



## snakegal (Jul 5, 2006)

True, natural selection would be weeding out the mutations that aren't selected for.



munkee said:


> Snakegal there would be birth defects in the tiger snakes offspring on Chappel Island. All species with or without inbreeding have birth defects in a percentage of their offspring (the percentage changes depending on circumstances). If it impairs their survival they die and don't reproduce. Thus the gene pool is not affected overall.





munkee said:


> Snakegal there would be birth defects in the tiger snakes offspring on Chappel Island. All species with or without inbreeding have birth defects in a percentage of their offspring (the percentage changes depending on circumstances). If it impairs their survival they die and don't reproduce. Thus the gene pool is not affected overall.


----------



## junglemad (Jul 5, 2006)

i am going to line breed my snakes. i have purposely bought pairs from the same clutch from a number of species. It is my understanding that line-bred snakes suffer (add a fake percentage here) no loss of vigour and it is the best way to fluke a hypo or albino specimen.


----------



## Retic (Jul 5, 2006)

Linebreeding definitely gives you a better chance of getting a morph of some sort and it is the best way of persuing a trait you already have and yes it doesn't affect the snakes.


----------



## steve6610 (Jul 5, 2006)

i also prefer to buy pairs from the same parents, or if thats not possible, then at least from the same seller, the reason is for the same reasons boa and junglemad have said, 

cheers,
steve.........


----------



## AustHerps (Jul 5, 2006)

JungleRob said:


> Nick, I've heard something similar re: B&amp;G Jungles. Most of the captive bred jungles come from about 12 animals originally taken out of the wild however many years back. Can anyone let me know how much truth there is in this?



I've heard the same told re Pseudechis colletti. 7 original dams and sires. Come on people... do you really think that every single collett's snake in captivity is descended from these? New blood comes from wildcaught animals.

As for inbreeding... all these claims as to 4th generation, 6-8 generation (whatever!)... may I see proof? Who has done the genetic breakdowns?

So... it happens it the wild... that makes it ok in captivity. This seams to be a common conception.

Mites happen in the wild.
The vast majority of eggs are eaten too.
So does ringworm.
And respiratory infection.

Yep... they survive... so why don't we just let our captive snakes bare these things?

Bottom line... we deprive our snakes of a natural environment. We put them in little boxes with lightbulbs for heat. So just because every now and then inbreeding might occur in the wild is NO justification for inbreeding in captivity.

Wow, I'm ranting.

Cheers,
Aaron.

EDIT - damned spelling :S


----------



## PeterM (Jul 6, 2006)

Aaron,

I agree - we should be trying to enhance the gene pool of our captives rather than reducing it. Can't do anything but create a generally healthier population, and in my opinion the expression "hybrid vigour" says it all! Wild populations with a very limited gene pool just don't have the natural physical and physiological variation for selection to act on when their environment changes, and can't cope with this as well as a more genetically diverse population. As you point out, they're on the slippery slope . . . Are our captive populations any different? The more inbred snakes may be the prettiest you've ever seen, but how healthy are their immune systems? What happens when their environment changes, for example a rampant new pneumonia or OPMV strain running through our captives? Will they cope as well as more genetically variable animals?

Also, contrary to popular belief, natural selection generally operates on variability in populations rather than mutations as such. The giraffe with the slightly longer neck can reach just that little bit more browse and is likely to be better nourished and statistically have 0.001 (or whatever) more offspring with longer necks than average. Over 1 or 2 generations this is insignificant, but over 1,000 we have natural selection for giraffes with longer necks! 

Back to Camo's original question though, he did actually ask if it was OK to BUY siblings (there was no mention of breeding in that query even though that is most likely what he meant!). I bought a male/female pair of sibling yearling Childrens in January and I reckon that was fine, but I don't keep them together and have no intention whatsoever of ever breeding them with each other. I'll get another couple of unrelated snakes for that, if I ever bother.

Pete.


----------



## nvenm8 (Jul 6, 2006)

I am still at a loss here, how in hades can you tell if they aren't related? there is no register to ensure that you don't breed relatives. Yep buy your animals from different breeders and still you can't tell. And after reading this thread how many breeders know for sure 100% that their herps aren't related? not many i bet? I don't! I also bet that no-one will tell you that they inter -breed nor give a guarantee that they are completely unrelated either. 
You can only make your choices and hope they are the right ones ( whatever they may be). And camo you can purchase whatever you like, if you want it get it.


----------



## AustHerps (Jul 6, 2006)

nvenm8 said:


> I am still at a loss here, how in hades can you tell if they aren't related? there is no register to ensure that you don't breed relatives. Yep buy your animals from different breeders and still you can't tell. And after reading this thread how many breeders know for sure 100% that their herps aren't related? not many i bet? I don't! I also bet that no-one will tell you that they inter -breed nor give a guarantee that they are completely unrelated either.
> You can only make your choices and hope they are the right ones ( whatever they may be). And camo you can purchase whatever you like, if you want it get it.



Most good breeders keep track of their lines - Where their snakes came from, where the parents of those snakes came from, and where their offspring are going.

Yep, they can lie, but hell, that's herpers for ya.


----------



## nvenm8 (Jul 6, 2006)

Most good breeders keep track of their lines - Where their snakes came from, where the parents of those snakes came from, and where their offspring are going.

Yep, they can lie, but hell, that's herpers for ya.[/quote]

Too true, it doesn't help when i know for a fact that there are breeders with 20+ years behind them doing multiple back breeding and in-breeding. With this happening it makes it near impossible to track herp history.
And before anyone asks - no i wont name names i wish to keep my house :wink:


----------



## indicus (Jul 6, 2006)

A good thread with a varied response of oppinions.
As has been suggested, alot of breeders line breed to bring out desired traits whether it's right or wrong....I guess it's up to the individual. The advice given to me when i first got into herps was; by all means line breed for a few generations to bring out the desired trait your after....Once you have it; out breed with an unrelated line to avoid the chances of defects etc.....


----------



## nvenm8 (Jul 6, 2006)

indicus said:


> A good thread with a varied response of oppinions.
> As has been suggested, alot of breeders line breed to bring out desired traits whether it's right or wrong....I guess it's up to the individual. The advice given to me when i first got into herps was; by all means line breed for a few generations to bring out the desired trait your after....Once you have it; out breed with an unrelated line to avoid the chances of defects etc.....



Wise words indicus.


----------



## Zeus_the_beardie (Jul 6, 2006)

well is it ok for turtles to be brother and sister, and have baby turtles?
i know i have another thread but may aswell ask here


----------



## schontier (Jul 6, 2006)

lets not fool ourselves int o thinking we are saving a species when we breed for when most people breed (whatever animal) we sell the progeny to people who want pets. To this end we strive for brighter colours, better temperament (tamer) Bolder patterns etc. in fact the same type of traits that we imbue into anything we domesticate. we are not then maintaining the species as they present in nature. true we do have an animal that is representive of its origins, but it is not the same. so while we can state we are saving a species or prolonging it, the truth is that we need to achieve this in the wild. its great to have pets that look like thier wild counterparts. but the true wild populations must be maintained. and this can only happen through diversity! not line breeding, remeber "natural selection" weeds out the freaks.


----------



## abitfishy (Jul 6, 2006)

Ah, so I can marry my sister afterall.


----------



## Australis (Jul 6, 2006)

schontier said:


> remeber "natural selection" weeds out the freaks.


Natural selection, selects *for *freaks as much as it weeds them out.


Non line bred/inbred offspring produced in captivity, can be just as undesirable. in the context of natural selection.

For example:
Problem feeders, alot of which might not survive in the wild, does this mean they shouldnt be bred, because natural selection might have removed them from the gene pull in the wild.



Matt
(Edited for spelling)


----------



## Nagraj (Jul 6, 2006)

snakegal said:


> True, natural selection would be weeding out the mutations that aren't selected for.



If I understand your statement correctly it's not really correct. Natural selection either selects 'against' any given trait or has no effect on it. As an example note the large colour variations within even a single clutch of wild bred snakes.


Line breeding in captivity progressively causes health problems but it has been an accepted practice in aviculture forever and vigour can be returned to the line with out-crossing once a trait has been established.

My own opposition to it (and this applies to cross species breeding as well) is due to the fact that almost every breeder will succumb to temptation to sell their halfway animals as pure to recoup some of the costs of keeping large numbers of animals.


----------



## schontier (Jul 6, 2006)

I would say yes if we are trying to preserve a wild population. but i suppose we can get to the point and i can use the cheeta as an example where any progeny that can survive are better then non.
sorry for the freaks word. perhaps wide genetic variation would have been more politically correct.


----------



## schontier (Jul 6, 2006)

sorry spell check has spoiled a generation
he he


----------



## Retic (Jul 6, 2006)

It has been established that linebreeding in reptiles doesn't cause any discernible health problems, of course those against will no doubt argue that there could be hidden health problems we can't see. Of course if they never show themselves over the course of the animals life then I guess they are of little concern.

What exactly is a halfway animal in the context of line bred animals ? Line bred snakes would be pure so in what way are they 'halfway' ?



Nagraj said:


> Line breeding in captivity progressively causes health problems but it has been an accepted practice in aviculture forever and vigour can be returned to the line with out-crossing once a trait has been established.
> 
> My own opposition to it (and this applies to cross species breeding as well) is due to the fact that almost every breeder will succumb to temptation to sell their halfway animals as pure to recoup some of the costs of keeping large numbers of animals.


----------



## JandC_Reptiles (Jul 6, 2006)

Alot of people here that are FOR line breeding are also saying to out-cross to get new blood in after 4-5 generations &amp; that line breeding is fine up untill 4th-5th generation.

It sounds to me like those claiming it is fine are also sceptical about future health issues lol, So my question is has anyone got any proof that inbreeding in reptiles has an effect on health? Or are we all posting information that we do not actually know facts about?


----------



## schontier (Jul 6, 2006)

pure, is this pure in the arian way. or pure in the brother sister uncle way. (same thing?)
Where are te facts and figures on exactly what happens when reps are line bred, how many generations before the bad traits are undesireable. what are these BAD traits. please someone quote some scientific facts either way.


----------



## Retic (Jul 6, 2006)

I think it would be safe to say that no-one has proof it IS harmful. I think people advocate out crossing after 4 or 5 generations to be on the safe side, it doesn't mean there is or isn't a problem.


----------



## schontier (Jul 6, 2006)

why then play safe at all. and dogs cats rats flies moths in fact most other animals have major genetic problems when we inbreed them. the old double double up is when your line can come to an idiosyncratic end.


----------



## Nagraj (Jul 6, 2006)

boa said:


> It has been established that linebreeding in reptiles doesn't cause any discernible health problems



It has? Evidence please.




boa said:


> Of course if they never show themselves over the course of the animals life then I guess they are of little concern.



They are certainly of concern for any subsequent generations.




boa said:


> What exactly is a halfway animal in the context of line bred animals ? Line bred snakes would be pure so in what way are they 'halfway' ?



They are halfway in that they are less vigorous than a more genetically diverse animal which hasn't been line bred.


----------



## Nagraj (Jul 6, 2006)

JandC_Reptiles said:


> So my question is has anyone got any proof that inbreeding in reptiles has an effect on health?




There is ample documented evidence that line breeding affects the vigour of many species of birds and animals and it is reasonable to assume that the same occurs in reptiles until proven otherwise.


----------



## nvenm8 (Jul 7, 2006)

http://www.mesc.usgs.gov/resources/education/bts/bts_home.asp  

Reptiles aren’t people so get over the whole inbreeding thing for a moment and have a look at this site. These BTS have for the last 50+ years have had no option except to mate with a relative. Decide for yourself, I know where my vote goes.


----------



## Retic (Jul 7, 2006)

By all means be against line breeding if you wish but show me evidence that line breeding actually DOES cause any health problems in REPTILES. 

Please show me proof that a genetically diverse reptile is more vigorous than a line bred animal. 



Nagraj said:


> boa said:
> 
> 
> > It has been established that linebreeding in reptiles doesn't cause any discernible health problems
> ...


----------



## FAY (Jul 7, 2006)

There are only a few RSP in captivity ( and are under the impression, very few in the wild)......what will happen to them down the track??


----------



## Nagraj (Jul 7, 2006)

nvenm8 said:


> These BTS have for the last 50+ years have had no option except to mate with a relative.



There have almost certainly been multiple introductions of BTS to Guam due to the large volume of military and cargo traffic.


Introduced Species Summary Project 

"Mode(s) of Introduction: It is believed that the brown tree snake was introduced as a stowaway in cargo transported from the Admiralty Islands (near Papua New Guinea) by U.S. military ships during World War II. Based on their ability to hide in small, confined places, the brown tree snake may also have been dispersed by U.S. military planes, especially within plane wheel-wells."


----------



## Retic (Jul 7, 2006)

But their genetic diversity would be tiny.


----------



## Glimmerman (Jul 7, 2006)

I have enjoyed reading this thread. It is good to see people are being civilised and putting valid points and opinions across. I'm glad it hasn't turned nasty like a few of the other heated debates.

I don't foresee a great linebreeding defect issues, if, as some members have already mentioned, protective and responsible measures are taken into practice. That is, if your offspring hatch and defects and severe mutation (kinked spines etc) have occured - you no longer breed those parents and either cull or keep (without breeding) the offspring. 

This is JMO but the flame suite is on (safety precaution) :lol: 

There's a well known breeder in Sydney, a member of this site, that last season advertised 8th - 9th Generation Blonde Macs. I would be interested in the data and information he has collected over the years.


----------



## junglemad (Jul 7, 2006)

Nagraj said:


> nvenm8 said:
> 
> 
> > These BTS have for the last 50+ years have had no option except to mate with a relative.
> ...




It has got to be too cold to survive in an aircraft wheel well...didn't you see that movie with the frozen bloke?


----------



## Retic (Jul 7, 2006)

And I would put money on the fact that he hasn't experienced any problems that can be put down to the line breeding. 



Glimmerman said:


> I
> 
> There's a well known breeder in Sydney, a member of this site, that last season advertised 8th - 9th Generation Blonde Macs. I would be interested in the data and information he has collected over the years.


----------



## Glimmerman (Jul 7, 2006)

boa said:


> And I would put money on the fact that he hasn't experienced any problems that can be put down to the line breeding.



I don't think he would have either if line breeding was done correctly. 

People will say, " that because they are his stock he wouldn't come out and openly admit that his linebreeding is actually inbreeding and has had defects or negative mutation, as it will be a major loss to his income and reputation. " I have seen his stock, have offspring from him and know people with his stock. None of us have any visual hereditary problems thus far. 

That is not to say that will not be, but after nine generations, if it was detremental to the gene pool - Would it have not popped up it ugly head by now???


----------



## Nagraj (Jul 7, 2006)

junglemad said:


> It has got to be too cold to survive in an aircraft wheel well...didn't you see that movie with the frozen bloke?



Not that it's really relevant due to other viable methods of entry but ...


"Almost 60 years ago, a young Indonesian boy made world headlines with an amazing feat of escape and survival.

Bas Wie was only 12 years old when he stowed away in the undercarriage of a DC-3 aeroplane."

7:30 report


----------



## schontier (Jul 8, 2006)

> But their genetic diversity would be tiny.


again we all seem to be able to make supporting asumptions.


----------



## Nagraj (Jul 8, 2006)

Glimmerman said:


> That is not to say that will not be, but after nine generations, if it was detremental to the gene pool - Would it have not popped up it ugly head by now???




What are you expecting to pop up? Do you think it will be neatly labelled with a genetic defect tag?


----------



## Nagraj (Jul 9, 2006)

boa said:


> It has been established that linebreeding in reptiles doesn't cause any discernible health problems ...



I've finally found a link I have been searching for and it presents proof for quite the opposite in fact. This data should not be ruled out as relevant for the pre hatch mortality thread as well.


Inbreeding depression

"For example, a population of 40 adders (Vipera berus, shown at right) experienced inbreeding depression when farming activities in Sweden isolated them from other adder populations. Higher proportions of stillborn and deformed offspring were born in the isolated population than in the larger populations."


----------



## Retic (Jul 9, 2006)

That's an interesting story, it doesn't unfortunately tell us how long the population has been isolated and for how many generations. 
I thought this was interesting "The explanation for inbreeding depression lies in the evolutionary history of the population." I assume they are saying that if the population is isolated from new blood for say 20 generations which in the case of adders could be as little as 50 or 60 years then problems would no doubt occur.
No-one is saying they can be line bred indefinitely, that would be irresponsible and indeed naive. 
I don't see it has much to do with the pre hatch thread as most of the animals involved would be 3 or 4 th generation at most and those involving WP carpets probably even less.


----------



## Glimmerman (Jul 9, 2006)

Nagraj said:


> [ Do you think it will be neatly labelled with a genetic defect tag?



Yeah with a big NEON flashing light coming through the egg. :wink: 

I was refering to visual birth defects eg, kinked spine etc or a reduced birth survival rate.


----------



## schontier (Jul 9, 2006)

OMG genetics are a science which, i beleive they(the educations institutions) touch on during high school. they teach the basic theories as espoused by Mendel. these are about things like dominant and resesive genetics. most people may have lost interest during their lecture or have forgotten these theories. IMO these theories are as applicable to reptiles as they are to plants, mammals fish etc. just because we start out with percieved perfect("pure") genetic specimens does not most liokely mean they do not have recessive genetic. i have to agree with NAGRAJ on the topic of vigor. but this is only a problem to line breeders when their birth rates fall thus they are forced to outcross. I have no arguments with line breeding as such. it is only when it is inferred as the answer to a species survival that i have a problem.


----------



## snakegal (Jul 10, 2006)

I just want to point out I had my definition of phenotype wrong :roll: 

Phenotype is the interaction of genes and the environment. Eg. if you had 2 genetically identical snakes, but one was brought up with a major lack of food and the other had plenty of food they would look different. The one with food would be a good size whereas the one with lack of food would be thin and short. 



snakegal said:


> FYI definitions:
> Genotype= the genetic makeup of an individual (eg. genes the individuals carry)
> Phenotype= the physical and physiological traits of an individual resulting from genotype (eg. diamonds may range from almost black to high yellow - this is genotypic variation manifesdting in phenotypic variation)


----------



## deathinfire (Jul 11, 2006)

Wow this is an awesome and interesting trend, i cant believe I havent looked at it until today

Well heres my little bit of input  

Inbreeding in a wild population wouldn't be as harmful as inbreeding in a captive population, In a wild population of animals only the strongest and fittest would mature to reach breeding age, in contrast captive breed animals have a much higher survial rate than wild populations (optimal artifical incubation conditions, absence of natural predators etc.). Thus, animals that wouldnt of matured to breeding in the wild, via natural selection are able to become breeders. As a result of this, the inbreeding of captive animals may result in more genetic related defects in future captive populations. 

Anyways this topic is actually way more complicated than I can clearly wrap my head around atm


----------



## AustHerps (Jul 11, 2006)

Lets look at some FACTS -

FACT - Inbreeding in mammals and birds has GENETICALLY proven to be the cause of shorter lifespans, a lessening of vigour, a higher level of stillborns, higher perceptability to contract disease, higher possibility of being born with genetic problems.

FACT - no examples given so far speak of genetic evidence. Just what 'seems' to be happening.

Now, If we DON'T know for sure that it's ok to do, why should it be done?
True, several generations have been inbred with no APPARENT problems, but there is no proof to say it's safe. 

So, If there's no proof either way... and we can look to see that EVERYWHERE ELSE inbreeding has occurred has led to problems, shouldn't we ere on the side of caution?

Some say it's ok provided new blood in introduced every now and then...

We can look at this two ways...
1. This is an admission that they don't know it's safe
2. "First generation inbred is ok. Second generation ok. Third generation ok... ... sixth generation, oh crap there's a clutch of disformed snakes." Um, I doubt it works this way... Firstly, my guess would be that in each generation, the problems get worse and worse, until finally, they are apparent to the breeder. Secondly, if the sixth generation is showing the deformities, doesn't this suggest that the fifth generation carried the poor genes (and the fourth generation to a lesser extent? as so on and so forth)? Bottom line, producing snakes that hold genes that make them more likely to produce unhealthy offspring is just as bad as producing the bad offspring itself.

Cheers,
Austy.


----------



## JEZ (Jul 11, 2006)

I haven't bred pythons yet but I do plan on doing it eventually...I don't have much experience with regards to this topic but I'd like to put my 2cents in too...

When I do decide to bred my pythons I do plan on getting unrelated pythons (to the best of my ability). In fact I plan on getting a pair of diamonds very soon from unrelated clutches, so I can breed them later on down the track. 

Just how I feel about the subject.

I tend to agree with Austy. 


> and we can look to see that EVERYWHERE ELSE inbreeding has occurred has led to problems, shouldn't we ere on the side of caution?


----------



## soulweaver (Jul 11, 2006)

Sorry if this has been covered, as i only skimmed over the last few pages.

If you look at humans for example, there has been cases where inbreeding has lead to birth of offspring with defects. Some are things like 'retards' (no offence ment for using this word) and some complications like skin problems, and limbs not forming properly.

Not sure if anyone saw the program on T.V, but there was a show where two parents produced offspring that had skin defects and basically they had to wash and cover them self with lotion. If not, they would in fact die. Study was made into why, and it was discovered about 300 years ago the parents familys were infact related, but over time for what ever reason the familys split and they became 'strangers'. So the two people met, and carried the some of the same genes, causing birth defects.


In terms of snakes, line breeding will reduce the amount of eggs the female produces, meaning that new blood needs to be brought in to increase the clutch rate again.

as for morphs? this is three diffferent things. One is a cross, or hybrid. One is a selective gene that shows itself in that particular offspring, and one is cross breeding.

there are many books on this subject, which are quite interesting to read, that go into more depth. I would now but gotta actually work today


----------



## Tanny (Jul 12, 2006)

I have been told by a number of breeders that reptiles don't have the same problems as mammals with inbreeding. As has been stated by others, it is only those breeders that don't cull unhealthy animals that create the problems. 
My family was involved with breeding Arab horses for many years and our stallion had 22 crosses to a stallion that was regarded as the best in the world to his type. I have also known dog breeders that cross regularly with their own bloodline to get certain colour or temperament.


----------



## Monkeyman (Jul 12, 2006)

If you breed too many generations saying "there don't appear to be any ill-side effects", by the time they do appear then it may be too late for that snakes' family line, as has been stated. Their parents' and their parents parents may all be carrying the same mutant gene, and outbreeding may only half solve the problem... you will then still half have the problem, while thinking you have a genetically diverse line. A little minor inbreeding may not do much damage short-term, or even long term. but for the future generations who inherit these problems, there will be nothing that can be done about it. (such as with pug dogs)

with those bts's there would have been many more snakes have made it into the country in the same way (it would have been cracked down on now with all the new customs laws and such, but i'm sure they couldn't ensure 100% success). And with even one snake making it to the island every ten years, the lines would be sufficiently diversified (If we're going by the "4th/5th generations are ok before you need to outbreed" theory)

IMO snakes (reptiles) because of their slow nature/body/metabolism needs they may evolve slower than other species of creature, and as a result of their not having to create their own energy, one of the side effects may be a slower evolution rate. (my supposition).



> I have been told by a number of breeders that reptiles don't have the same problems as mammals with inbreeding. As has been stated by others, it is only those breeders that don't cull unhealthy animals that create the problems.


This is just the opinion of those breeders. They cannot know/prove that snakes don't have the same problems. The apparent defects may appear slower for any reason. e.g. my supposition of slower evolution or some other reason like inbreeding may occur more in wild snakes than other creatures, so they have developed a slower evolution capability to stop from inbreeding themselves to extinction.

Because of the 'cushy' lives of captive snakes even those that appear large and healthy may have been killed and weeded out in the wild because they might never have reached the size they did in captivity if forced to live they way they would have naturally. so the genes of these weaker(but normal appearing) snakes will be passed on to possibly parent weaker lines of snakes. Like i've said, this may not be so crucial short term. but when it happens an overt amount, then the future result could mean trouble.

Also. if everyone is of this opinion ("4th/5th generations are ok"), then what happens when we get the majority of breeders taking this up? There will be a whole lot of breeders breeding their 5th generation snakes with other breeders' 5th generation snakes... Increasing the likelyhood of the genetic defects becoming apparent.. the defects may not become visible until bred with another bloodline who has a similar genetic defect which will suddenly spring up. and even going back to previous generations won't fix it because they will all have the same genetic traits. The whole time this is occurring, they are beleiving they are outbreeding, but down the track, they will all be slightly inbreeding (which has been suggested has occurred in nature (leading to differences for localities and such)).

As said by someone before, best to err on the side of caution. There is no way of eradicating inbreeding of course, but minimising it cannot do any harm. Surely it's not too hard to buy snakes from different sources. Even if you cannot prove that they aren't related, the chances are greater (100% greater) of not having related snakes than if you by a Brother/Sister or Auntie/Uncle and breed them.

There are so many posts that were earlier on that i want to try to dispute and add my opinion to, but i can't think much after writing ALL this (it's like i just sat and wrote an english essay. (btw this thread is awesome, i'm thinking and having to bend my thoughts around these thoughts and opinions (or so it feels).(do i use brackets too much?))).

Teh Monkey


----------



## Ramsayi (Jul 12, 2006)

Bottom line is people want really nice looking animals.High this,reduced that,freeky patterns etc etc.Take a guess as to how these traits are developed? Whatever the arguments for or against are comparisons shouldnt be made with mammals etc.Its like comparing apples and oranges.


----------



## nickvelez (Jul 12, 2006)

Have you considered the leucistic snakes which have been produced? pure white animals with dark blue eyes. Leucistic ball pythons have been bred, along with leucistic texas ratsnakes. I know that there is a problem with some leucistic texas ratsnakes in that there may be a bug eyed appearance - the eye balls appearing to be too large. I was under the impression that this was related to inbreeding problems. The jaguar carpet pythons also seem to have health problems when inbred. the leucistic form of the jaguar carpet python appears to be fatal, although it has been suggested outbreeding would eventually allow 2 jaguars to produce a viable leucistic animal. I've seen pictures of ball python morphs which although totally freaky in appearance were also so lacking in 'vigour' that they died. 
Outbreeding is always preferable IMO


----------



## RaggaMuffin (Jul 13, 2006)

i say lets mess about with selective breeding and get some funkie looking animals everyone else who wants boring **** looking herps can stick with their primitive methods of breeding snakes that are probably related anyways, most of the breeders i have purchased animals off don't know a great deal or will tell you what ever you wanna hear. i can't believe this post has gone on for so long. anything can be over done but how cool are jaguar carpets i'd rather one than a mankie coastal carpet anyday.


----------



## rexs1 (Jul 13, 2006)

We have sold over 475 jungles and we have never had anyone contact us about our snakes having any defects or other weird things.

You would tend to think that if something was to go wrong we would of found out by know?

Most our jungles are multi gen captives and the best ones that we produce are all min 4th gen.

Good looking snakes will always sell no matter how many times they have been crossed back to the same genetic line.

nick


----------



## schontier (Jul 13, 2006)

Hope you can say the same after 20 gens
or thirty gens.


----------



## schontier (Jul 13, 2006)

sorry, do you mean that you have bred father daughter, mother son, sister brother etc. for 4 gens. and r u happy enough to never continually inbreed :?: .


----------



## Retic (Jul 13, 2006)

Absolutely right, reptiles are very different to mammals, the same rules don't apply. A great many breeders regularly breed 5, 6 or more generations without ill effects.



rexs1 said:


> We have sold over 475 jungles and we have never had anyone contact us about our snakes having any defects or other weird things.
> 
> 
> nick


----------



## Retic (Jul 13, 2006)

I think Nick is saying he is happy to line breed for 4 or more generations. 



schontier said:


> sorry, do you mean that you have bred father daughter, mother son, sister brother etc. for 4 gens. and r u happy enough to never continually inbreed :?: .


----------



## Tanny (Jul 13, 2006)

Always an interesting discussion when talking about breeding animals. Congratulations to all for conducting themselves in an adult manner.

Spoke to a couple of horse and dog breeders today... they tell me they've had no problems for at least eight generations after putting brother over sister and father over daughter. The defects always show up when putting son over mother. I wonder if this would be the case with reptiles? 

Isn't cross-breeding the way most Europeans and Americans have developed their different morphs?

I have tried to get onto the university here today but no-one was available to answer any questions. Will try again tomorrow. Don't know if they will be able to make it any clearer though as I don't believe they have been breeding or studying reptiles in depth.

:?:


----------



## misky (Jul 13, 2006)

Tanny said:


> Spoke to a couple of horse and dog breeders today... they tell me they've had no problems for at least eight generations after putting brother over sister and father over daughter. The defects always show up when putting son over mother. I wonder if this would be the case with reptiles?



I have been involved in showing and breeding dogs and have seen the damage done by inbreeding (including brother over sister, son over mother and father over daughter).... everything from chronic hip dysplacia to von willebrands disease!! I know there are many honest and decent people involved in breeding dogs/cats/horses etc. but i highly doubt that there are many out there that will openly admit to inbreeding and getting a whole litter of pups (or a foal) riddled with health defects as it would tarnish their good name as a breeder. Also, in the breed i was involved in (where especially overseas, where inbreeding for generation upon generation is common practice) many breeders have inbred to improve type with no regard to the fact that with every generation of inbreeding the health of the dogs being produced is steadily declining. I know of one australian kennel in particular (who i obviously will not name) who has been inbreeding for generations, who is now at the stage where large numbers of the pups he is producing are being put down by 12 months as theye are suffering from hip and/or elbow dysplacia that chronic that the poor pups are struggling to walk. 

I personally have heard the whole "it's okay to inbreed as long as you don't put son over mother" thing before.... interestingly enough though, the people who have told me this have not be able to give me, or tell me where i can find, proof that this information is correct. Personally, i believe it's an old wives tale.... but would be interested in knowing if there has been any actual research done on the subject.

Cheers,
Misky


----------



## Australis (Jul 13, 2006)

RaggaMuffin said:


> anything can be over done but how cool are jaguar carpets i'd rather one than a mankie coastal carpet anyday.




Jaguars are Coastal Morphs!!
:wink: 

Matt


----------



## rexs1 (Jul 13, 2006)

schontier said:


> Hope you can say the same after 20 gens
> or thirty gens.




Thirty gens ......... if our line of jungles is still going strong in around 90 odd years i will be stoked! :lol: 

nick


----------



## moosenoose (Jul 13, 2006)

misky said:


> (including brother over sister, son over mother and father over daughter)....



Uuuuurgh icky icky!!!!


----------



## schontier (Jul 14, 2006)

> Thirty gens


good luck.


----------



## schontier (Jul 14, 2006)

do we have to wait for rexs1 to have his 90 years of records or are there breeders who do have these sort of figures who are happy to share them.
or will reptile breeders do the same as in the dogworld where the early purebred breeders were breeding to consolidate type. they set in train the future breeding problems. almost every breed of dog has severe hereditory problems, while your average mongrel outlive, outbreed and in most cases outsmart the purebreds.
Most of these purebreds started thier slide in the late 19th / early 20th century so they have had around 50 to 100 generations.(based on breeding around 2 years of age)


----------



## rexs1 (Jul 14, 2006)

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:


----------

