# Carpet Python Genetics



## Retic (May 28, 2006)

There was apparently a recent study that showed the Jungle and Coastal Carpet share the exact same genetic make up so are in fact the same species. Does any have anymore information on this study, eg links to it ?
If this is the case does that mean the names cheynei and mcdowelli are redundant and crossbreeding isn't in fact an issue ? I have no interest in crossing them but it does seem like a very important piece of news especially considering the laws up here in Queensland. 
I apologise if this has already been posted.


----------



## krusty (May 28, 2006)

that would be very interesting to check out boa.


----------



## Dicco (May 28, 2006)

I'd also like to hear about this study, I've heard a variety of things involving Carpet Python Genetics, from the sub species being chopped up into full species to them all being basically the same things simply with a high variety of forms. Would love to see papers about this.

Nothing wrong with reclassifying so long as there is good reason to.


----------



## Retic (May 28, 2006)

I think we will see huge advances in the next few years. I think I go along with them all being basically the same species with as you say a huge variety of colour forms. The ONLY way to classify them is through the use of DNA. If they are identical genetically then any clour or pattern variation is completely irrelevant as far as species classification goes I would have thought ?


----------



## Moreliaman (May 28, 2006)

so............, does anyone have any info on it ? pretty please !! with a fat cherry on top ! (who stole my smileys?!!)


----------



## Retic (May 28, 2006)

I am still trying to track down the info on it now.


----------



## ad (May 28, 2006)

Boa, regardless of any re-classification that may happen. A jungle is still a jungle.
Justify your crossbreeding some other way - morals outweigh technicalities.
Good luck with your 'huge advances' .


----------



## Retic (May 28, 2006)

:lol: I haven't crossbred anything. :lol: My huge advances statement referred to the advances in classifying morelia species through DNA. The morals statement is very funny.


----------



## TrueBlue (May 28, 2006)

they are the same species, thats been known for years, but they are sud-species. so crossing IMO is a form of cross breeding. Just like diamonds and carpets.


----------



## Retic (May 28, 2006)

Of course the fact that they are the same species has been known for years the point of this research seems to be that they are not sub species as they are genetically identical. It is sort of like saying someone with pale skin and red hair is a sub species of homo sapien. 
It's absolutely fine for you to have the opinion that it is cross breeding but if they are genetically identical it quite clearly can't be cross breeding. 
I'm not to sure about the genetics of coastals and Diamonds but I would guess they are different ?

I should add that of course a Jungle is still a Jungle just like a Birsbane coastal will always be just that and all the other forms of coastals as well.


----------



## TrueBlue (May 28, 2006)

well think about it boa, they are NOT genetically identical, look at the size and patteren differences, thats all down to genetics, and they are miles apart in most cases there.????


----------



## Retic (May 28, 2006)

So you are saying that if in fact this study does show them to be genetically identical as a species you will dimiss it ? Look at humans, I am 6 foot 5 with darkish hair and my wife is 5 foot 4 with light hair, we are both the same species but differ remarkably.
Should all he 'different' coastals be reclassified because some get to be 10 feet long and others 7 feet and some are light with big boofy heads and other dark with slimmer heads ?
How can you say that they are NOT genetically identical if a scientific study of their DNA shows they are ?


----------



## TrueBlue (May 28, 2006)

Why will certain animals of the same species only grow to a very small size and others to a very larger size in certain areas?, this is genetic evolution and differs from each other. Thats how i can say that.!!


----------



## Dicco (May 28, 2006)

I doubt they'd be identical genetically, quite similar maybe, but identical? I have my doubts, they are two very different snakes and at the very least are seperate races as I see it.


----------



## Retic (May 28, 2006)

Again whay are some humans from certain areas short and blond or others tall and dark or any other combination ? So am I right in saying that you think coastals should be divided into many sub species as they show remarkable diversity ?
What I am saying is if it turns out to be true you cant argue with DNA it doesn't matter how strongly you feel about it.


----------



## peterjohnson64 (May 28, 2006)

I guess this comes down to what is "genetically identical". True Blue and I are the same species (notwithstanding that he is actually a Kiwi) yet we do not have identical DNA. At what stage does a geneticist state that DNA is still identical.

perhaps if we bred & sold humans some people would cross negros with aborigines and some people would want to keep them locality pure. I don't know that we have acually given sub-speicies status to caucasian humans yet but there is little argument that they are soemwhat different to aborigine humans.

But back to the Carpet isue. I know I keep repeating myself here. But when I learned about herps Bredlis were m. spilota variegata as were Jungles, Coastals, Darwins and MD's. Something just changed between 1988 and now.

Personally (and this is merely my own position) I wouldn't cross a WA with a QLD BHP so even if Junglegs do become the same species as a Coastal (again) I still wouldn't want to cross breed them.


----------



## Retic (May 28, 2006)

I absolutely understand what you are saying but we are talking about scientific research not someone off the street just deciding they are the same. IF and I keep repeating IF the scientific research shows them to be identical we as non scientists can take it upon ourselves to just decide we don't agree. 




Dicco said:


> I doubt they'd be identical genetically, quite similar maybe, but identical? I have my doubts, they are two very different snakes and at the very least are seperate races as I see it.


----------



## Dicco (May 28, 2006)

Boa, only DNA can tell us about it, and I can't argue over that, what I mean is that they are not exactly the same, even if they are of the same sub-species, they are considerably different, enough for me to consider them to be of a different 'race'. I consider McDowell's to be of many 'races' but still the same subspecies. All I'm saying is they are still different, even if it isn't a great deal, not trying to defy genetics at all


----------



## TrueBlue (May 28, 2006)

It only seens to be the northern carpets,(north of townsville), that differ so much from the rest, most other forms/morhps can be found everwhere up and down the coast.
So your saying that geneticaly your the same as an afrian pygmy, boa.


----------



## Retic (May 28, 2006)

Peter, I don't think the cross breeding thing is the issue BUT it does have repurcussions up here with our legislation. As I pointed out in my original post I have no interest in cross breeding the 2, it was someone else who twisted it around. 
Most of us wouldn't cross a WA and QLD BHP, there is no real point.


----------



## Retic (May 28, 2006)

Absolutely, as a species we are all the same, we are genetically different as individuals obviously. 



TrueBlue said:


> So your saying that geneticaly your the same as an afrian pygmy, boa.


----------



## TrueBlue (May 28, 2006)

:shock: :roll:


----------



## Snake Catcher Victoria (May 28, 2006)

> There was apparently a recent study that showed the Jungle and Coastal Carpet share the exact same genetic make up so are in fact the same species.


probably a stupid question but what type of jungle was the study done with,ie' atherton etc


----------



## Retic (May 28, 2006)

I have no idea what that refers to ?



TrueBlue said:


> :shock: :roll:


----------



## ad (May 28, 2006)

> Most of us wouldn't cross a WA and QLD BHP, there is no real point.



So what animals is there a 'point' to crossing? :roll: :roll:


----------



## Retic (May 28, 2006)

I don't know, maybe a Taipan and a Scrubbie, it would make a great guard 'dog'.


----------



## Nome (May 28, 2006)

What bothers me is the amount of clear crosses I've seen lately been advertised, even on this site, as a pure snake. These are people that probably don't know any different, but what happens when the next person who buys them, breeds them, sells them off as pure when they aren't? 

Boa, dogs can not be differentiated genetically, but there are clear problems with breeding a small dog to a very large dog. The offspring off crossed dogs can have massive health and temperment problems.

This sounds like a very weak argument IMO.


----------



## dee4 (May 28, 2006)

I beleive peter, that there were DNA tests done that actually seperated Bredlis from Spilota. I can't remeber who but I remember reading it. Not sure of the others but I think that's what Boa is getting at.


----------



## Retic (May 28, 2006)

What exactly is a weak argument ? I wasn't aware there was any argument at all. I am just reporting on the fact that it appears that scientists have discovered that these 2 snakes are genetically identical.


----------



## Retic (May 28, 2006)

No that isn't the research I am talking about, I think the Bredls study was done a little while ago, this coastal/jungle research is current.



dee4 said:


> I beleive peter, that there were DNA tests done that actually seperated Bredlis from Spilota. I can't remeber who but I remember reading it. Not sure of the others but I think that's what Boa is getting at.


----------



## dee4 (May 28, 2006)

I'm not saying it wasn't, don't be so defensive. I beleive you are talking about the same sort of thing though aren't you?? No argument from me.


----------



## Nome (May 28, 2006)

A weak argument to support your signature  

It's been said before, people that want to buy or produce hybrids say all the same things. I know that whether I like it or not, it's going to happen :roll: 

I wish herp breeders had some kind of organization such as is used with dogs, where there is a code of ethics adhered to in regards to cross breeding.


----------



## Retic (May 28, 2006)

Sorry, defensive, did I miss something ? I was just pointing out that I knew about the Bredli stuff but that wasn't part of it. Confused.



dee4 said:


> I'm not saying it wasn't, don't be so defensive. I beleive you are talking about the same sort of thing though aren't you?? No argument from me.


----------



## dee4 (May 28, 2006)

Maybe you , maybe me. Wasn't sure wether or not Peter was aware so i thought I would add. Maybe I should have quoted!!!!! Sorry.  



peterjohnson64 said:


> But back to the Carpet isue. I know I keep repeating myself here. But when I learned about herps Bredlis were m. spilota variegata as were Jungles, Coastals, Darwins and MD's. Something just changed between 1988 and now.



Hope you find what you are actually after then!!!


----------



## Retic (May 28, 2006)

Nome, I have no need or desire to justify my signature. I love hybrids but I could also add pure, intergrades, crosses, blah blah blah 
The post was to inform people that something interesting was happening with carpet genetics, I'm not saying I agree or disagree and I haven't even read it yet and it may not be true. 
The people against hybrids also trot out the same things, there is no difference.
I think to be fair we have an unofficial code of ethics which I think the majority stick to. Unethical behaviour certainly isn't restricted to those who cross breed believe me.


----------



## Retic (May 28, 2006)

I was hoping this might promote a little good natured friendly debate, it's an interesting subject but could do with out the usual mud slinging.


----------



## Nome (May 28, 2006)

I know you don't need to justify your signature, you've made it clear how you feel before...i was typing with tongue in cheek.

Yes, we do spout the same arguments also, the problem for us though is that it's happening, and even if we don't support it, it affects us. Just look at the amount of hybrids being advertised as pure snakes lately. Whether people like it or not, if thye can't see the differences, and many can't, they might go on to breed these. Makes it hard to have a choice whether you want to be contributing to the hybrid problem or not. I had the same argument as many do, if there must be hybrids in the hobby, at least they need to be advertised as hybrids- but this is clearly not happening in many cases. 

Back to your genetic post, I'd like to refer you back to the post I made about dog genetics. Even if the study does show identical genetics between a coastal carpet and jungle, the are still a different subspecies. There are clear differences between them, as there are between different breeds of dogs.


----------



## Nome (May 28, 2006)

huh?? where's the mud slinging??


----------



## Retic (May 28, 2006)

Nome, I knew it was tongue in cheek that's why I put the smiley after my response. 
I must admit I haven't seen many hybrids advertised and I can't recall any advertised as pure. I am absolutely 100% with you on the subject of selling a snake for exactly what it is. 

I think the dog issue is very different to the situation we see with snakes. Many of the problems that we see in some dog breeds are due to intensive inbreeding over many generations and often centuries. I'm not saying that we couldn't see some problems with hybrids in 200 years from now but equally it is impossible to say there will be problems.


----------



## Moreliaman (May 28, 2006)

Arent most GTP's in aus cross bred with new guinea stock ?? you'll have to kill those green mongrels soon !! :wink: :lol:


----------



## Retic (May 28, 2006)

Wasn't referring to you Nome. 



Nome said:


> huh?? where's the mud slinging??


----------



## Retic (May 28, 2006)

Yeah but aren't they the same species even though they can look very different ? Still mongrels to me though :lol: 



Moreliaman said:


> Arent most GTP's in aus cross bred with new guinea stock ?? you'll have to kill those mongrels soon !! :wink: :lol:


----------



## ad (May 28, 2006)

> The post was to inform people that something interesting was happening with carpet genetics, I'm not saying I agree or disagree and I haven't even read it yet and it may not be true.



An odd thread to start Boa, maybe you should detirmine if there is even a scientific study on carpet python genetics happening at all before starting your thread. 
Thank you for 'informing' us of this 'interesting' study that you are so in tune with.


----------



## Retic (May 28, 2006)

No 'problem.'


----------



## Moreliaman (May 28, 2006)

how can a thread asking people about information/ or more the validity of it be odd ?


----------



## Retic (May 28, 2006)

You are quite right, it isn't odd at all. It is a thread regarding some very interesting information on morelia, this is after all an Australian Reptile forum.
I did start the thread with 'There was apparently a recent study' so there was no inference that it was factual at all.



Moreliaman said:


> how can a thread asking people about information/ or more the validity of it be odd ?


----------



## ad (May 28, 2006)

Odd in the fact Boa is speculating on results of a study he knows nothing about - even if it exists.


----------



## Moreliaman (May 28, 2006)

I just see him asking others if the information is valid or not !! I find nothing odd about it !


----------



## Retic (May 28, 2006)

Again, you are right, it was a request for information regarding the existence or otherwise of the study. This is the primary purpose of this forum I would have thought ?



Moreliaman said:


> I just see him asking others if the information is valid or not !! I find nothing odd about it !


----------



## Kyro (May 28, 2006)

Just found this web page, may help boa 

www.apscience.org.au/projects


----------



## Snake Catcher Victoria (May 28, 2006)

http://www.apscience.org.au/projects/APSF_02_4/apsf_02_4.htm
i think you get it from here if that one dosnt work


----------



## Kyro (May 28, 2006)

Thanks snakeman; )


----------



## Magpie (May 28, 2006)

The study was:
D. Taylor, L. Rawlings, SC. Donnellan, and AE Goodman. 
Population structure of the highly polytypic Australian carpet pythons (Reptilia: Morelia spilota) 
It was presented at the 2003 meeting of THE AUSTRALIAN SOCIETY OF 
HERPETOLOGISTS INCORPORATED.

As far as I can tell, it has not been published, this may be because it failed in peer review, it may be for some other reason.
Basically, there has to be a certain level of DNA diference for diferent forms to be a subspecies and these researchers found that there was not. From memory, they considered Bredli, South westerns and possibly diamonds to be seperate species and everything else the same species without any subsepcies. ie. Morelia 
bredli, Morelia imbricata, Morelia spilota and Morelia variegata.

Clearly they are not genetically identical, cloning species are the only ones that are. But what they found was that the level of genetic diference did not warrant subspecies classification.


----------



## Retic (May 28, 2006)

Thanks Magpie, that was what I was looking for. I agree it was wrong to say genetically identical as you rightly say only clones would be identical. On a species level I guess it shows they are as close as it's possible to be. 
I thank you and others for seeing what I was trying to find out. 
Leaving supposed moral questions out of it from a legal perspective what would this mean as far as breeding betwwen these 2 forms in Queensland ? If they are shown to be one species then their is surely no legal impediment to breeding them together ? I should add once again I have no plans to do it but it highlights the problems with wildlife laws.

Thanks Kyro and Sssssssnakeman for those links.


----------



## Magpie (May 28, 2006)

There is no imperative for Qld EPA to adopt even if it is confirmed.
Look at Victoria, they are using taxonomy that has not been widely accepted for decades.


----------



## Retic (May 28, 2006)

As I said it highlights the problems with wildlife laws. If someone is prosecuted for 'crossing' a caostal with a Jungle they could take the EPA to court and I would imagine have the case laughed out of court ?


----------



## NCHERPS (May 28, 2006)

Magpie said:


> The study was:
> D. Taylor, L. Rawlings, SC. Donnellan, and AE Goodman.
> Population structure of the highly polytypic Australian carpet pythons (Reptilia: Morelia spilota)
> It was presented at the 2003 meeting of THE AUSTRALIAN SOCIETY OF
> ...



Yes, I think it was just Morelia spilota, morelia bredli and morelia imbricata from Memory.

Your right, I think there may be a problem with the researchers peer reviews, as you would expect such ground breaking news to of been published before now, but who knows, it must have some foundation to it to of been presented in 2003.

Neil


----------



## peterjohnson64 (May 28, 2006)

So, bascially, it is almost going back to where it was when I first learned about Morelia spilota except Bredli's have replaced Diamonds.

Yes, I was fully aware of the post 1988 studies. it just took me a while to understand that things had changed. I came into this forum, Cogger in hand, and started learning abotu Cheynii, McDowelli etc and thinking; "What the heck are they?" Did a bit iof research and found out that all had changed. Now we here of some study that is aiming to reverse it back again. 

And at least now we have access to that study thanks to this thread. There have been previous threads on here mentioning that this change was imminent but no direct refence to the study.


----------



## Moreliaman (May 28, 2006)

the only info i can find on this is other people on reptile sites asking for it !!!

Oh and i found the minutes to the meeting !! :wink:


----------



## ad (May 28, 2006)

> And at least now we have access to that study thanks to this thread. There have been previous threads on here mentioning that this change was imminent but no direct refence to the study.



Where is the study?


----------



## Snake Catcher Victoria (May 28, 2006)

> Where is the study?


good question


----------



## Moreliaman (May 28, 2006)

jeez ad......




:wink: :lol:


----------



## Retic (May 28, 2006)

:lol:


----------



## peterjohnson64 (May 28, 2006)

Sorry folks, mu\isunderstanding, I meant access to what study was done, not access to the written results. I had read people saying that they heard that a study had been done and now we know which one.

Go to page 11 here: http://72.14.203.104/search?q=cache...an,+and+AE+Goodman."&hl=en&gl=au&ct=clnk&cd=1


----------



## Retic (May 28, 2006)

No problem, I think most of us understood. 



peterjohnson64 said:


> Sorry folks, mu\isunderstanding, I meant access to what study was done, not access to the written results. I had read people saying that they heard that a study had been done and now we know which one.
> 
> Go to page 11 here: http://72.14.203.104/search?q=cache...an,+and+AE+Goodman."&hl=en&gl=au&ct=clnk&cd=1


----------



## ad (May 28, 2006)

So, what are the chances of that study changing current classifications or being used in court to justify cross breeding? Absolutely Nil.
Cross that one off the list.


----------



## Moreliaman (May 28, 2006)

ad said:


> So, what are the chances of that study changing current classifications or being used in court to justify cross breeding? Absolutely Nil.
> Cross that one off the list.



You cant say that, how do you know it wont be used ?? Like Neil has already said.....it must have some foundation to it, to have been presented in the first place !


----------



## Parko (May 28, 2006)

Well til the study is actually accepted and here for us to read it all means squat diddly. I could present a scientific study with my findings suggesting that all life began in Jamaica but til it is accepted by the scientific community is it really meaningful for me to start waffling on about it?


----------



## Retic (May 28, 2006)

I don't know, try us with your theory, it sounds like it has some merit, we'll kick it around a bit and mull it over and sleep on it and get back to you tomorrow with some conclusions.



Parko said:


> Well til the study is actually accepted and here for us to read it all means squat diddly. I could present a scientific study with my findings suggesting that all life began in Jamaica but til it is accepted by the scientific community is it really meaningful for me to start waffling on about it?


----------



## Moreliaman (May 28, 2006)

True to some extent parko, but the findings presented in the report are plausible........unlike yours would be !! :lol:


----------



## Parko (May 28, 2006)

Yeah i guess there's no harm in meaningless chatter, nothing gained or lost really. 
Either way genetics aside, for me personally it'll be a shame to see the true body shapes, patterns and colours which make up the various morelia lost or at least become hard to find and more expensive when people no longer care.


----------



## Parko (May 28, 2006)

Now listen here moreliaman i've spent a lot of time going into deep trance like ponderings in Jamaica ,man, so i think it fair to say my theories are at least plausible, man.


----------



## Dicco (May 28, 2006)

Ah well Parko, it's 'the way of the future'.


----------



## Moreliaman (May 28, 2006)

yes the way of the future......all original gene pools will be lost forever !! :roll:


----------



## Parko (May 28, 2006)

Dicco said:


> Ah well Parko, it's 'the way of the future'.



:lol: Oh yeah sometimes old fashioned dudes like me forget about the future, i'm more interested in the natural history of Morelia than the trendy future of captive morelia, those new age funkadelic carpets will blow our minds. :wink:


----------



## Nome (May 28, 2006)

With all due respect MoreliaMan, it's what's happened in the hobby where you live in the UK and also in the US that makes me have the feelings I do about hybrids here. Come over here to Australia, see our beautiful pure animals in the flesh, and I look forward to reading what you have to say about hybridising then.

Since it's the 'way of the future' and new people in the hobby jump on the bandwagon and just go with it instead of having their own opinion, no doubt pure and locale pure species will be fewer and farer between, and the prices of them will go up. Yes, there will always be people breeding them but what I fear is already happening- people who want pure species more often are sourcing our wild caught animals to get what they are after, people unsuspectingly are buying hybrids and breeding them, and then selling them as pure animals.

I remember 3 years ago, people who knowingly bred hybrids were social outcasts in this hobby and their snakes were worth nothing, no matter how 'pretty' they were. It only took a few people to change this, and now you are much more readily bagged on forums if you do believe that our species should be not knowingly crossed.

I'd like to ask people that are for hybridising, what are the reasons you want to have/buy/see crossed animals?


----------



## Moreliaman (May 28, 2006)

dont worry parko, if it does happen i cant see it in yours or my lifetime !!

how old fashioned are you ?? 1970's ? 1960's ?? 1890's :wink: :lol:


----------



## Parko (May 28, 2006)

Moreliaman said:


> dont worry parko, if it does happen i cant see it in yours or my lifetime !!
> 
> how old fashioned are you ?? 1970's ? 1960's ?? 1890's :wink: :lol:



Well you may be correct and it may not happen in our lifetime, or you could be wrong, i've got my opinion and you have yours, you aren't even living here so i dont really see your opinion as being valid for the hobby here anyway, no offence intended mate but that is how i see it.

PS i'm a 1969 creation.


----------



## Moreliaman (May 28, 2006)

but some of the reason why its hard to find pure species over could be because the buyer prefers the cross bred over the wild form !


----------



## Moreliaman (May 28, 2006)

Parko said:


> you aren't even living here so i dont really see your opinion as being valid for the hobby here anyway, no offence intended mate but that is how i see it.



nice ! atleast i know where i stand with you! 
perhaps i should regard everything you say with the same chain of thought !
Infact if thats the case, why are you bothering to reply !!?

and your only 1 year older than me so your not that old !!


----------



## Parko (May 28, 2006)

Did i say i was old? I don't remember saying i was old? My memory must be failing me?
I did say no offence intended, and that was genuine, but whatever.


----------



## Moreliaman (May 28, 2006)

Parko said:


> Oh yeah sometimes old fashioned dudes like me forget about the future :wink:



Ok you implied you were old....! good enough !!
yes you did say "no offence intended" & none has been taken....why does everyone on here think your arguing when a topic gets going ??? is it an australian thing ?


----------



## Parko (May 28, 2006)

The written word is taken to seriously in forums from all over the globe as far as i've seen moreliaman, perhaps i should type ''i am sitting here calmly and lightheartedly conversing in a very mellow manner'' at the end of each post.


----------



## Moreliaman (May 28, 2006)

Well if you’re going to take everything to the extreme, then yes that would be better than assuming everyone is arguing with you! 
but hey,,,,up to you eh !! :wink:




Parko said:


> The written word is taken to seriously in forums from all over the globe as far as i've seen.


p.s just because others do, mean you have to follow suit ?? i dont !! :?


----------



## Retic (May 28, 2006)

From what I know of the UK, USA and European market is that pure animals are available and it's not like you have to scour the country for them. Morphs are definitely more popular hence the fact that pure animals are fewer, as Moreliaman said. 
The purists usually get far more heated in these discusions probably because they feel as though the 'mongrels' are going to over run their pure animals. 
From a personal point of view I have 99% pure animals and will only breed pure animals from these, now that isn't to say that I wont dabble in other things in the future and I have no trouble being up front about that. Honesty is the best policy.


----------



## Parko (May 28, 2006)

Moreliaman said:


> p.s just because others do, mean you have to follow suit ?? i dont !! :?



LMAO nope can't say i was ''following suit'' by taking anyone too seriously, i can understand your initial sensitive reaction to my comments but if everyones happy now then that is just wonderful, now we can get on with this interesting discussion on the new findings which haven't been made public yet and nobody seems to know anything interesting about.


----------



## Retic (May 28, 2006)

Well from what I understand the findings have been made public and some do know things of interest but I am trying to find out who knows.


----------



## Parko (May 28, 2006)

Well when you know let us know, then it may be somewhat more interesting than the usual hybrid love vs hybrid hate thread.


----------



## Moreliaman (May 28, 2006)

Moreliaman said:


> p.s just because others do, mean you have to follow suit ?? i dont !! :?


 well by youre own admission you thought i was getting angry.!



Parko said:


> i can understand your initial sensitive reaction to my comments but if everyones happy now then that is just wonderful, now we can get on with this interesting discussion on the new findings which haven't been made public yet and nobody seems to know anything interesting about.



so you start off claiming you know my personality by assuming i reacted to one of your comments in a particular way! ! ..................&amp; then end it being sarcastic.......which is fair enough ......i like a bit of sarcasum!! :lol: &lt;-- best put a smiley there or people could read into this post the wrong way ! :wink:


----------



## Retic (May 28, 2006)

Exactly, why it got turned into another tired old hybrid thread I don't know, it would have been nice if it had stayed on topic. I assumed a few wouldn't find it interesting but that's always going to be the case.


----------



## crackers (May 28, 2006)

wow ....there are some real eye openers in this thread :roll: 

if there is anything ive taken away from this site its to keep your opinion to yourself and just sit back and watch these jokers go at it   

it seems like your going out on a limb aking for advice or info from some folks

get to see some good pics though :wink:


----------



## Retic (May 28, 2006)

Yes I can't disagree with that. 

'it seems like your going out on a limb aking for advice or info from some folks'


----------



## ihaveherps (May 28, 2006)

these debates always get heated..... the being a purist, I find the crux of the matter to simply be that the pure line breeders will have no effect on the hybrid breeders stock, but those who breed hybrids can pollute the locality breeders stock by a hybrid accidentally infecting the pure lines, anywhere in the generations preceeding the animal in question. 

Unfortunately, the only group of keepers that will be affected are the purist breeders.... throughout the short life of legal amateur herping in this country many unscrupulous keepers/breeders have already raised their ugly heads, and as hybrid snakes become more popular, and as generations go on, the pollution of pure lines will continue at an exponential rate.

The problem isnt really with the hybrid snakes, more-so the human condition.


----------



## Moreliaman (May 28, 2006)

good point ihaveherps.................but im asuming you dont like crossbreeds !! :lol: 
although i'd like to know how this hybrid is going to manage to get into the purists stock ? is the purist going to allow the xbreeding ?? what self respecting purist would allow it to happen....because when dealing with captive animals i cant envisage an "acidential pairing" ever happening !!

theres a "part" solution to the human condition.......its called education/information. :wink: 


crackers im starting to think that too mate ! best to keep opinions to yourself ......or they'll think youre arguing !! :roll:


----------



## elapid68 (May 28, 2006)

TrueBlue said:


> well think about it boa, they are NOT genetically identical, look at the size and patteren differences, thats all down to genetics, and they are miles apart in most cases there.????



_Notechis_ is another example, some people are now saying that _N.scutatus_ and _N.ater_ are actually the same species, yet they are totally different colours and _N.a. serventyi_ are giants compared with _N.scutatus_. And I'm fairly sure (don't quote me on this) that the venoms are slighly different as well.


----------



## ihaveherps (May 28, 2006)

Moreliaman, I am a pure stock keeper, how could you tell? lol. 

I dont hate hybrids, I dont trust everyone is more correct. 

eg. I do the right thing, i inform everyone that buys my clutch of 20 jungle x coastals of what they are, they are all sold to different homes and are happy knowing with what they own. 3yrs later all the hatchys in their respective homes are bred and have 20 each in their clutches... if all of these owners are honest about the linage there will be 420 of these hybrids out there (400 hatchys and the 20 originals).... how long can we honestly expect that everyone in the chain will have ethics, when a pure jungle can cost up to $800 and hybrids are pushing to hit $200 in the current market here. 

The entire problem is the human element.

My apologies Boa for taking this thread off the original subject, but I am enjoying the civil debate with Moreliaman...


----------



## Retic (May 28, 2006)

No apology necessary. This is exactly how these debates should be. I happen to agree with what you are saying. Of course nothing is going to stop this sort of thing happening, there are unfortunately lots of untrustworthy sorts in this game.


----------



## NCHERPS (May 28, 2006)

This has turned into a real good thought provoking thread.
It will be interesting to re-read and get individuals thoughts on the topic 5 years from now, just to see how things have changed, as Duga stated earlier, 3 years ago, you were strung up if you had or spoke about breeding Hybrids/intergrades, it was Oh, those yanks are terrible for doing what they do, they have no pure this and that, nowadays, most are admiring there animals on sites like 'Morelia Pythons'.

I truely believe that alot more people than you would think actually have crosses to some degree or another, the Antaresia group are one that I believe has been crossed loads in the past and sold as a pure this or that.
I know people that have bought from respected breeders that have been sold crosses, but were told they were pure.

Neil


----------



## Nagraj (May 28, 2006)

boa said:


> Of course nothing is going to stop this sort of thing happening, there are unfortunately lots of untrustworthy sorts in this game.




No doubt there are some less than honest people who will sell their experiments as purebreds but it can just as easily happen without intentional dishonesty. If you end up with a cross without actually knowing it and breed it true to what you believe it to be then sell the offspring as pure, you can potentially introduce a tainted bloodline to the whole of Australias captive population (or worse).

This has already happened in Australian aviculture and there are almost certainly complete populations of captive foreign birds which are not pure. I believe the Red Cheeked Cordon Bleu is an example of such. All the specimens of this species in Australia are probably tainted with another species.


----------



## Retic (May 28, 2006)

Neil, that was certainly the intention and it has mostly been good. I think the next 5 years are going to be huge for everyone purist and non purist alike. I can't wait.


----------



## Nome (May 28, 2006)

Neil, I think you'll find it was me that said that about 3 years ago...I do have my own opinions on it :wink:

And as you said, the Antaresia group is one that is very much tainted, whether knowingly or not. That is why I mentioned that more people are going to source from wild caught animals, it's very hard for the average person to note the difference if it is even visible.


----------



## NCHERPS (May 28, 2006)

Nome said:


> Neil, I think you'll find it was me that said that about 3 years ago...I do have my own opinions on it :wink:



Sorry Nome, I didn't Mean to get you mixed up ! LOL!

Cheers Neil


----------



## Nome (May 28, 2006)

No problem


----------



## NCHERPS (May 28, 2006)

I believe that in the past people have palmed off there crosses because they knew that they wouldn't be able to get much for them if they told the truth, but nowadays that mentality has changed alot, and 5 years from now people will be alot more honest, as there snakes will be worth the same as the pures, if not more to the right people.
NSW NPWS are not burrowing their heads into the sand, and have last year placed alot more crosses onto the keepers list, they take the path, that it's going to happen, so they would rather know about it and allow people to be honest about it.(There not condoning it , but not condeming it either).
It can only be good, as then hopefully more will be honest when they sell there offspring.


----------



## Moreliaman (May 28, 2006)

ihaveherps said:


> Moreliaman, I am a pure stock keeper, how could you tell? lol


Just a wild guess mate !! :wink: 



ihaveherps said:


> how long can we honestly expect that everyone in the chain will have ethics.


But you'll get this in everything, theres always the odd percentage who are lying swines !! ....but the xbreeding is happening now with dog/cats/birds/fish etc that breeders claim to be pure but they arent !!!! 
A friend told me he'd bought "wild guppies" from the aquatics shop down the road, they were actually "endlers livebearers" but the shop had them labled up as "wild guppies" !




ihaveherps said:


> I am enjoying the civil debate with Moreliaman...


AHHHHH but how do you know im not arguing with you ?? :wink: :lol:


----------



## Moreliaman (May 28, 2006)

personally i would have thought it being a good thing as the xbreeds would releive some of the demand of pure stock, thus being left for the serious herpers who wish to concentrate their efforts in keeping/breeding/selling pure local stock!
dunno if that makes any sence now !! :lol:


----------



## hugsta (May 28, 2006)

The reason most people aren't honest when selling hybrids is the ear bashing they get on forums like this. There was a thread not long ago by someone selling crossbred animals and he got hammered for it to the point the 'for sale' thread got locked. Here is someone doing the right thing by telling someone and those 'purists' hammered him for it. You wonder why people don't want to advertise what the animal truely is.

Ans as for the arguement of impure lines getting into purists collections, well surely the purist would only be dealing with other purists who will only be dealing with other purists etc etc. 

I know I will be keeping my animals as pure breeds and will not be crossing, however, if the opportunity to own a pair of Jags or some other cross came my way that were equally stunning, I would snatch them up without hesitation and I would breed them. That doesn't mean I would put my pure animals over them, as I certainly wouldn't, I do like locality specific animals but I believe there is romm for both. As long as we don't crucify those that are crossing animals there is no reason why they shouldn't be honest.


----------



## pugsly (May 28, 2006)

I'm with you Huggy.


----------



## Nagraj (May 28, 2006)

hugsta said:


> The reason most people aren't honest when selling hybrids is the ear bashing they get on forums like this.




Sorry, but I simply don't buy that. 

The number of breeders who have anything to do with fora like this are a minority.

Any particular clutch has a wide distribution of colour variables and those that look most like a pure parent will no doubt be sold as such by some breeders because they will sell more easily.


----------



## hugsta (May 28, 2006)

"Any particular clutch has a wide distribution of colour variables and those that look most like a pure parent will no doubt be sold as such by some breeders because they will sell more easily."

Exactly my point. They don't advertise them as what they are because they get condemmed for it and also people buying them are now hesitant as there is a stigma that is attached to it, which, depending on whos eyes you are looking through, may or may not be deserved.

No different to a natural integrade, they are naturally occuring snake, not a cross, not a hybrid, not an integrade as such, but due to the name, it has a stigma and therefore they are not seen as being as valuable as diamond, although they are just as nice an animal IMO.


----------



## Nagraj (May 28, 2006)

hugsta said:


> They don't advertise them as what they are because they get condemmed for it and also people buying them are now hesitant as there is a stigma that is attached to it, which, depending on whos eyes you are looking through, may or may not be deserved.




Again I disagree.

Let's say there are 15 from a clutch, 10 of which closely resemble either of the pure parents. If you try to sell the 10 as hybrids nobody will be interested as they aren't unique but the local pet shop will take all 10 at a wholesale price, as purebreds, without knowing any better. Then you're still left with the 5 more unique hatchlings to make a good profit from as hybrids by selling them here.


----------



## indicus (May 29, 2006)

The study in which jungles and coastals share the same genetic make up etc.......
This may very well be true, how would i know?, i'm just a keeper -with this in mind.... 
I can only surmise that the two are quite different; which in my mind separates them.
Apart from the obvious; size colour etc "general behavioural differences", may help separate them...IMO.
Now imagine the jungle hanging from the perch on the prod; classic jungle pose.
Then look at the coastal 1 / 3 out of it's box.... in waiting...Sounds simple enough; generally speaking.
To complicate the matter; now add colour, size, and food intake into the picture..
For example: One finds he/she has a jungle that displays obvious differences in over all behaviour; general size, colour and larger then average food intake........whether it's a captive animal or not; i'd tend to think its origins are closer to a coastal etc in make up rather then a jungle.....
A guess none the less; but not without the obvious taken into account......did i get it right???
Want to confuse me more?......throw a bredli over it, darwin etc etc.....pretty soon i dont know what i've got.; thats what i believe will be/ is the problem.....total chaos!!!
The real purist is left with one possible solution.......buy off licenced collector; how else will you know? :shock: , take the breeders word for it? :shock: ......For most of us; we can only try.... :? 
But to call yourself a 'purist'....... you can only be as pure as your stock.
Please forgive my ramblings..... :?


----------



## Moreliaman (May 29, 2006)

not ramblings at all !! we need good stuff like this to read .......whilst we all work away in our drug dens to pay the eletric bill !! :lol:


----------



## Hickson (May 29, 2006)

I hate to take evryone away from the hybrid debate that we all so lo9ve to get stuck into periodically, but I have some knowledge of the study that Boa was referring to. I'm just sorry I wasn't online yesterday, otherwise I would have posted before now.

Duncan Taylor is a PhD student. One of his supervisors is Steve Donnellan. I spoke to Donellan a few months ago, specifically about this paper. The presentation back in 2003 was a 15 minute presentation on what they had found so far. That's why it was never published, it had nothing to do with peer review.

Taylor has taken samples from more than 600 snakes. The DNA needs to be extracted and analysed and that takes time (if you've ever watched CSI or NCIS you know this takes more than a few minutes). I haven't been in a genetics lab for a few years, Sdaji is probably in a better position to tell you how long it would take to get just one sample done. And they're not doing just one test - they are looking at microsatellites _*and*_ allozyme electrophoresis.

The study is now complete, and the analysis of the 600+ results is also complete (and the analysis would take as long as the testing, if not longer).

Donellan says that there are 4 papers currently being written as a result of this study. The first - and most important - is Taylors PhD thesis. That takes priority. Two other papers, referring to the thesis, will subsequently be published. The final paper will refer to the preceding three, and is the one we are waiting for, and will be published around the end of the year (or maybe in the new year).

Obviously, I asked about the results. In a nutshell, the genetics identify _M.bredli_ and _M.imbricata _as distinct from _M.spilota_, which we all expected. However, the genetics of M.spilota were diverse. All characteristics they were investigating were found in all subspecies and throughout the range. Certain genes were more predominant in some subspecies, but there were no autopomorphies for any subspecies. Most importantly, he said that by looking at a DNA sequence there was no way they could predict what the phenotype would look like (i.e. the snakes pattern). For those reasons, they don't believe that the subspecies are justified. That includes the Diamond Python.

He also said that he believes the Green Tree Python should be in the genus _Chondropython_, and will probably move back there soon.



HIx


----------



## NCHERPS (May 29, 2006)

Interesting stuff Hix, thanks for letting us all know.
Yes, Alot of people have been stating the same in regards Chondropython, most people always refered to them as such anyway, so not much to change there in the hobbiest's mindset.

Neil


----------



## Retic (May 29, 2006)

Thanks Hix, very interesting and exactly what I was looking for. Not such an odd thread after all :lol: 
I'm not quite sure where this thread sort of morphed into a hybrid thread but it has been interesting none the less.


----------



## ad (May 29, 2006)

boa said:


> There was apparently a recent study that showed the Jungle and Coastal Carpet share the exact same genetic make up so are in fact the same species. Does any have anymore information on this study, eg links to it ?
> If this is the case does that mean the names cheynei and mcdowelli are redundant and crossbreeding isn't in fact an issue ? I have no interest in crossing them but it does seem like a very important piece of news especially considering the laws up here in Queensland.
> I apologise if this has already been posted.



Boa - you ask the question in your original post re: crossing a cheyni with a mcdowelli.
This is a hybrid question. Why do you think it is not? :roll: 

The fact that in 2003 they had tested 350 snakes - they have tested an extra 150 in the last 3 years and still havent published a paper.
How soon before their findings change our record books? if ever?
So back to your original question - in the short term it will not effect qld legislation, if ever.

Even if you justify the legalities of hybrid breeding in qld - you will never justify the morals. I have still yet to see 1 positive to hybrid breeding and never had my negatives to it challanged.

Go and breed your hybrids - dont think you can have a bet each way and breed hybrids and pures.
If i hatch an albino jungle - people will believe it
If you hatch an albino jungle - your credibility will be on the line - guaranteed.

'Trust Me' is a great sales pitch.


----------



## PilbaraPythons (May 29, 2006)

You have to wonder what reptiles or where they have taken blood from in so called jungles. Considering many people are passing of Athertons as jungles which are different in size, coloration, temperament., and look closer to a coastal carpet than does the miniature jungle form. I would wonder if this would have any bearing on the genetic results being obscured. I haven't ever heard of blood samples taken from wild jungles in Innisfail, lower Palmerston,Babinda. by any one analyzing or looking at DNA. That not to say they haven't but I have to wonder.


----------



## Moreliaman (May 29, 2006)

thanks for that Hix, sounds like they'll be a rush for that paper when its released! :wink:


----------



## PilbaraPythons (May 29, 2006)

After reading Hix's post it sounds like it wouldn't have made much difference either way.


----------



## Snake Catcher Victoria (May 29, 2006)

> probably a stupid question but what type of 'jungle' was the study done with,ie' atherton etc





> Considering many people are passing of Athertons as jungles which are different in size, coloration, temperament., and look closer to a coastal carpet than does the miniature jungle form


that would explain it nicely


----------



## Retic (May 29, 2006)

Adam, just drop it. You have a problem with me that's fine but I'm really not interested in your constant little digs and attacks. Please don't talk to me about credibility and morals and being law abiding, don't forget I know you. 
I don't have to 'justify my hybrids' as you put it because I HAVEN'T GOT ANY. 
I try at all costs to avoid personal attacks but you just wont let it drop.


----------



## ad (May 29, 2006)

If you don't own a hybrid (which surprises me - you post 'lovely snake' for every pic of one and you claim you buy snakes on looks primarily - never found a nice hybrid?)
and you dont intend breeding them as you state,
What is your agenda?
If it is to poke sticks in my cage, dont cry when I respond.


----------



## Retic (May 29, 2006)

Tremain, you really need to post more often :lol: 
I totally agree the 2 snakes are very different in lots of ways but it would seem genetically they appear to be the same. I have no problem with snakes from different areas being called whatever someone chooses to call them but the facts of DNA can't be argued with. 
My initial request was for information regarding this study and unfortunately it inevitably turned into a pro/anti hybrid argument for some.
My thoughts were how this would affect the legalities up here for people breeding these animals, IF the findings are accepted when the study is completed then the law regarding the inter breeding of these 2 'species' will not apply as they would in fact be one species.
I feel I have to reinterate one again that I have no interest in breeding a cross between jungles and coastals but I am sure many do have the interest and will be keen to see the results. 

The following was sent to me this moring and I am sure the author wont mind me posting it here
' Whilst it is common knowledge that the
Morelia spilota group is very poorly described at best (refer to Wilson and
Swan) - you might want to make reference to Tiger Snakes. They were recently
lumped together in Notechis scutatas, although they do share quite large
differences. Colouration, size and habits all differ between the different
locations. This is called phenotypic plasticity - a trait that allows the
individual animal morph a particular aspect (say, colouration) to increase
the chance of survival, all whilst remaining genetically identical. If
you've ever seen a Tasmanian Tiger Snake next to a Kreffts, you'll know what
I mean! '
What this basically means is that while there is vast intraspecies variation they remain a single species genetically. IF the study in fact returns that result then it really can't be argued with.
A someone who presently has 99% pure animals (the exception being a Tully/Atherton) I share peoples fears but it is up to everyone to keep the 2 separate and be honest. It wont always happen but that is the way of things.


----------



## Retic (May 29, 2006)

Adam, I don't really care if it surprises you I don't own a hybrid.
Agenda ? Mmm, maybe I find things like this interesting, it broadens your horizons, you should try it 
To poke sticks in your cage :lol: Don't flatter yourself.


----------



## PilbaraPythons (May 29, 2006)

Boa 
If you really want to know what legality of the situation as far as it stands in Queensland, well here it is, or at least the way it was unless there have been major changes in legal interpretation. In a court of law in Queensland the QED use as a rule Hal Coggers to quantify what a valid reptile species in their eyes as far as species legally kept in that state under reptile licenses. This was also the stance in N.S.W as well. As Coggers has covered jungles and diamonds as Morelia spilota and QED recognize this then you have no problems. I wrote cheynei in my record fauna book many years ago and they got all excited and it brought the jungle it to their attention some what. 
Cheers Dave


----------



## Hickson (May 29, 2006)

boa said:


> but the facts of DNA can't be argued with.


and


boa said:


> IF the study in fact returns that result then it really can't be argued with.



Lets be clear here - the DNA results cannot be argued with. 

But the interpretation of those results - well, that's another thing altogether!



Hix


----------



## indicus (May 29, 2006)

Granted Boa, i see what your refering to.....
However to a layman like myself, they will always be different, regardless of new studies and or possible name or laws changes.......imo 
Inregards to dna being similar or the same, maybe so; but still rather different to me; in many ways....(natural / man made hybrids/ intergrades will always pose problems).....


----------



## Moreliaman (May 29, 2006)

PilbaraPythons said:


> After reading Hix's post it sounds like it wouldn't have made much difference either way.


 well true, but im sure it will still be an interesting read & be much more popular after this : the 1353rd debate on hybrids :wink: :lol: (just a guess but im presuming theres been alot of topics on this!)


----------



## Retic (May 29, 2006)

Absolutely right, as I said people will always call them Jungles or whatever but my point and the point of the thread is that if the results of this study show as they seem to at this stage that they are one in the same then the legal situation will have to change. 




indicus said:


> Granted Boa, i see what your refering to.....
> However to a layman like myself, they will always be different, regardless of new studies and or possible name or laws changes.......imo
> Inregards to dna being similar or the same, maybe so; but still rather different to me; in many ways....(natural / man made hybrids/ intergrades will always pose problems).....


----------



## Retic (May 29, 2006)

It wont actually affect me either way but I am just interested in how they stand. The number of posts has shown that there is a lot of interest in this which is good. 



PilbaraPythons said:


> Boa
> As Coggers has covered jungles and diamonds as Morelia spilota and QED recognize this then you have no problems. I wrote cheynei in my record fauna book many years ago and they got all excited and it brought the jungle it to their attention some what.
> Cheers Dave


----------



## Moreliaman (May 29, 2006)

this is a breif summary i found

Population structure of the highly polytypic Australian carpet pythons
(Reptilia: Morelia spilota) Molecular genetic population structure was investigated in the polytypic and widespread Australian carpet snake complex (Morelia spilota species complex). Currently two species and six subspecies are recognized based on color, pattern and details of scutation, however the nature of this variation and its geographic distribution has not been rigorously determined. We examined variation in mtDNA control region sequences, 22 allozyme loci and eight microsatellite loci from 350 snakes sampled from 119 locations throughout the range of the complex in Australia and New Guinea. Concordant patterns of variation in all three sets of markers support the taxonomic separation of three sets of populations: central Australia (M. bredli), south-western WA/Eyre Peninsula (M. s. imbricata) and eastern/northern (M. s.spilota). Patterns of variation in flanking sequences and motif arrays for three microsatellite loci provided two diagnostic markers and an insight into the extent of microsatellite allele homoplasy.
above study by: D. Taylor, L. Rawlings, SC. Donnellan and AE. Goodman


----------



## ad (May 29, 2006)

I hereby unreservedly apologize to Boa for any attacks percieved or otherwise.

It is obvious my views and passion for our native animals, I will refrain from any further posts on the subject.

Adam


----------



## Stevo (May 29, 2006)

Maybe instead of calling one side "purists" and one side "hybrids" we will have to now call them "locality carpet breeders" and "non locality carpet breeders". If this paper ends up gospel and there are only 3 species/subspecies then it will be hard to call someone breeding a coastal and a jungle from Nth qld a hybrid breeder. I agree with tremain in as most people have the opinion they are diferent sub species but times change and peoples opinions also change. Who knows 15 years from now what we will call what. 
**** who really knows???


----------



## Jason (May 29, 2006)

ill b honest and say that i only red the first post, but dont know if has been said, the polar bear and brown bear in an area have absolutly identical DNA, sorry cant remember any more then that. i was almost falling asleep in genetics so im happy i remembered something


----------



## Hickson (May 29, 2006)

I think you had already fallen asleep.

The Brown Bear and the Polar Bear don't have identical DNA.

Sorry.



Hix


----------



## jack (May 29, 2006)

I just read the whole post...whew! It has occured to me that the word "sub-species" doesnt really mean diddly sqat, maybe just two members of the same species that to human eyes are a little bit different, but to each other are similar enough to reproduce..and produce fertile offspring...(the highschool definition of a species incidently)..they are on their way as far as allopatric speciation goes...
and if you think about it "species" is only meaningful right at this very moment in time, not in the future , not in the past...let me explain, everyone would agree that humans and chimps are different species but humans and chimps share a common ancestor, so if we skip back generations along both genetic trajectories we reach the same point...so where do we become different species? and are we even the same species as our great great great grandparents? We certainly can't reproduce with them...

and to finish, the selective pressures that have driven evolution have given us all the lovely locality specific colours, sizes etc...but in captivity the natural selection is removed, it is artificial selection in place...so all you hybrid breeders go for it, all you locality purists go for it- its all artificial selection, and the whole lot of you make sure to vote green to protect the beasties in the wild, the ones who really matter in the long run for genetic diversity...who knows what all the carpet snakes will look like in a few million years


----------



## peterescue (May 29, 2006)

Nobody has fully mapped the DNA of Morelia spilota. No two snakes have identical genes. There are minute differences. Remember, genes are what give us our physical differences. Homo sapiens have different genes to each other. Thats why we dont all look identical. Thats why carpets from different locales look different.


----------



## hugsta (May 29, 2006)

If this study proves true, which is most likely to be so, then the laws in QLD will have to change as you can't prosecute someone for producing hybrids if DNA testing has proven them to be the same species. Obvioulsy, this will make a lot of people happy in the sense that they can produce hybrids legally and upset those that want to keep it pure. 

When it is all said and done, there will be more hybrids in the next 5 yrs or so and no matter what we think, it will not change. We all know you will be getting albino "you name its" in the near future as so many people already have plans on crossing them with other species, sad, but true. Will make it very hard for someone like myself who cannot afford an albino darwin right now but would certainly like one. In 5 or so years I will be very careful of who I buy an albino off as I would like one to be true to its location. However, I find it fascinating to see what people will produce, the amount of new "morphs" as such, that will be available will be unending. And also, as future keepers enter the hobby, they will not care as much for locality pure animals, but will prefer the pretty coloured snake sitting in the tub, not the locality specific blonde mac. As much as we hate it or like it, it is happening now.


----------



## bigguy (May 29, 2006)

For what is worth, this is my understanding, as well as many of Australias leading herpetoligists, of the Carpet paper.

The are now 3 distinct species of Carpets in Australia and PNG. These are the Eastern form(Spilotas). The Central form(Bredli). and the Southern western form(imbricata). All three forms are completely isolated from each other and appear to have been for a very long period of time.

However, even though there are now 3 recognised species of Carpets, the paper DID NOT state that all of the spilota form's were identical as is being suggested by certain individuals. There is infact enough genetic variance within the species between each form to still warrant sub species status. Remember, a subspecies is not a seperate species, but a variation between a single species. The paper only confirmed what has been know for years that these different Eastern forms are only subspecies, not full species. This is why spilota has remaned in each of the variations latin names.

A similar result was found with the Green Pythons. It has been found there are now 2 totally distinct species of Greens. The Northern and the Southern. However, it was also found that there was enough variation in the Southern form to warrant 4 distinct subspecies.

Pilbara, here in NSW the NPWS has recognised each of the know subspecies of Spilota(including the most famous of the intergrades) and have alotted different species numbers to each form


----------



## Hickson (May 30, 2006)

Bob,

According to what one of the authors told me, while there is enormous genetic variance with spilota, it does not differentiate between the currently recognised subspecies.

And from what I've been told by a prominent herpetologist, this fits with one of the authors who doesn't like the concept of 'subspecies'.



Hix


----------



## TrueBlue (May 30, 2006)

thank you bigguy, you hit the nail on the head with my understanding of it all.


----------



## Retic (May 30, 2006)

I don't think there is any question that Jungles for instance are considered a 'subspecies', I think the point is that they are not separated on a genetic level which is the point I have made from the start.
As Hugsta pointed out this will have to bring about a change in law up here, either that or the EPA will have to turn a blind eye to any snakes produced within the spilota species. 
Obviously individual snakes are different genetically but on a species level they are more or less identical or at least close enough to not warrant separate staus.

Bob, from what I understand NSW NPWS allocate a number for any hybrid produced, is this the case ?


----------



## NCHERPS (May 30, 2006)

boa said:


> I don't think there is any question that Jungles for instance are considered a 'subspecies', I think the point is that they are not separated on a genetic level which is the point I have made from the start.
> As Hugsta pointed out this will have to bring about a change in law up here, either that or the EPA will have to turn a blind eye to any snakes produced within the spilota species.
> Obviously individual snakes are different genetically but on a species level they are more or less identical or at least close enough to not warrant separate staus.



Boa,
As a few others have stated, there are many state NPWS dept's doing there own thing in relation to rules and reg's, including the one in relation to deliberately breeding different subspecies/species.
I wouldn't get excited anytime soon, as the wheels of red tape and paperwork are slow.
Also, remember that just because a couple of individuals have written a paper, doesn't mean it will be accepted by Goverment officials, unless challenged in the courts(Which would cost a fortune) it might just never happen.
I would like to think that within a few years they might just turn a blind eye, but they may be pig headed about actually saying it is now ok in QLD, go ahead and produce your Intergrades/hybrids. You may have to move to NSW! LOL!

Neil


----------



## NCHERPS (May 30, 2006)

boa said:


> I don't think there is any question that Jungles for instance are considered a 'subspecies', I think the point is that they are not separated on a genetic level which is the point I have made from the start.



Maybe not on a genetic level, but they are on a phenotype level, which will probably be enough for most to keep the subspecies names in place.

Neil


----------



## Stevo (May 30, 2006)

Has anyone in Qld ever been charged or fined for crossing said pythons?


----------



## Retic (May 30, 2006)

Neil, don't worry I'm not getting excited at all it wont affect me one way or the other but I am sure there will be plenty of people keeping an eye on proceedings. 
As far as moving to NSW, do you really think things will get THAT bad ? :lol:


----------



## Retic (May 30, 2006)

Not that I am aware of.



Stevo said:


> Has anyone in Qld ever been charged or fined for crossing said pythons?


----------



## flavirufus (May 30, 2006)

> this fits with one of the authors who doesn't like the concept of 'subspecies'



This is a key. The senior author is reluctant to recognise subspecies. This is primarily because there are no robust concepts of what constitutes a sub-species. We need to remember that 'species' and 'sub-species' are human constructs and don't necessarily fit neatly into what's happening in the natural world. Neither the carpet study, nor the GTP study (which were both done in the same lab) recognised new sub-species, but they both identified new 'species'.

In my opinion, the most interesting fact to come out of the study is that imbricata is distinct enough to warrant full species status. Beyond that, its not telling us anything new, except that its hard to split the rest of the spilota forms (which we pretty much knew anyway). However, having seen the actual paper (sorry, the draft is not available for distribution and I don't know when its due to be published) it's apparent to me that there are a number of genetically different 'forms' of spilota. These may not warrant sub-specific status (because how do you define a sub-species anyway) but are none-the-less worthy, in my opinion, of being acknowledged as being 'a bit different'. Certainly, as a keeper and an appreciator of locality specifics, I'll be acknowledging them as such.

Matt
http://www.users.on.net/~jbonnett/


----------



## Magpie (May 30, 2006)

> However, having seen the actual paper (sorry, the draft is not available for distribution and I don't know when its due to be published) it's apparent to me that there are a number of genetically different 'forms' of spilota. These may not warrant sub-specific status (because how do you define a sub-species anyway) but are none-the-less worthy, in my opinion, of being acknowledged as being 'a bit different'. Certainly, as a keeper and an appreciator of locality specifics, I'll be acknowledging them as such.
> 
> Matt



This is pretty much my point. We go off at someone who crosses two snakes bacause they are "subspecies" but we never stop to question whether our concept is correct. Look at Stimmies, there is every bit as much variation in them as in spilota, yet the only two subspecies are poorly described and ignored. There are stimmies that only grow to less than 2', are strongly marked and are striped (equivalent to jungles) and stimmies that are 5' and poorly patterned (equivalent to coastals). Cross your WA stimmies with North Queensland stimmies, no one calls them mongrel hybrids and they are worth just as much as locality bred.
By the same token, there are black and green coastals, green and green coastal, black and yellow coastals, striped, blocthed, ones that grow to 6', ones that grow to 10' but no one cares if you cross them as some author at some time said they are the same sub species?
No one can deny there is genetic variance, what can be denied is that our current nomenclature is correct.


----------



## hugsta (May 30, 2006)

I agree Mags, it seems very much a concern with highly obvious crosses such as a darwin and a diamond and people forget about "crosses" such as a NT stimmie and a QLD stimmie. Anyone that owns a GTP, more than likely owns a "hybrid" as such as those that are around are mostly Australian/merauke crosses. Not to mention those illegally brought in from the US which have filtered out into the private keepers collections that can afford to have them. Does this mean those that have GTPs should avoid buying other GTPs as well, apparently there are no 'true' Aussie GTPs around.

I guess the question remains, where does a hybrid not become a hybrid?? Are GTPs considered hybrids? If not, then why!!!!!! Along with stimmies, macs, childrens, coastals...etc etc etc.


----------



## PilbaraPythons (May 30, 2006)

Magpie
Sorry but I have to disagree with you when you say no one would call a W.A crossed QLD stimson a mongrel, as l can assure you that many people indeed would, and further more would never ever do it. I am not argueing the fors and against here, just stating a fact. I can also add that we are constantly getting calls and e-mails from people only chasing locality pacific reptiles. It seems as though it has become trendy or something :lol: 

Cheers Dave


----------



## Retic (May 30, 2006)

Well I guess the simple answer at least in regard carpets is that the 'crossing' of any type other than Bredli and imbricata cannot be considered hybrids as they are the same species, I'm not even sure if the term intergrade is accurate for the same reason.



hugsta said:


> I guess the question remains, where does a hybrid not become a hybrid?? Are GTPs considered hybrids? If not, then why!!!!!! Along with stimmies, macs, childrens, coastals...etc etc etc.


----------



## PilbaraPythons (May 30, 2006)

hugsta
I can categorically guarantee you that there are native greens pythons held and breeding in private collections here in Australia.


----------



## Magpie (May 30, 2006)

> Magpie
> Sorry but I have to disagree with you when you say no one would call a W.A crossed QLD stimson a mongrel, as l can assure you that many people indeed would, and further more would never ever do it. I am not argueing the fors and against here, just stating a fact. I can also add that we are constantly getting calls and e-mails from people only chasing locality pacific reptiles. It seems as though it has become trendy or something



Ah, but I did not say no one would, I said no one does. I must admit, I was purely referring to online forums.
I would consider a WA stimmie crossed with a Qld one as much of a "hybrid" as a Jungle x Coastal and more so than a Diamond x Coastal.
But the fact is that all the online bashing of "hybridisers" is only when they cross sub species or species.


----------



## flavirufus (May 30, 2006)

> cannot be considered hybrids as they are the same species



They can't be considered species hybrids, but can possibly be considered sub-specific hybrids and can definitely be considered form or locality hybrids. In the same way, the integrade term is also valid.



> I can categorically guarantee you that there are native greens pythons held and breeding in private collections here in Australia.



I can confirm that also.



> I did not say no one would, I said no one does



I do, you do, Dave does :wink:


----------



## Retic (May 30, 2006)

I agree, they could be considered sub species hybrids if you in fact recognised the sub species. It must be remembered that few people have a locality pure collection, one of the only ways of guaranteeing that is to collect from the wild or to buy wild caught and even then you are accepting the word of the seller. 

I think it is a safe bet to assume there are Australian GTP's in collections, it would be naive to think they haven't been collected from the wild.



flavirufus said:


> They can't be considered species hybrids, but can possibly be considered sub-specific hybrids and can definitely be considered form or locality hybrids. In the same way, the integrade term is slos valid.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## hugsta (May 30, 2006)

PilbaraPythons said:


> hugsta
> I can categorically guarantee you that there are native greens pythons held and breeding in private collections here in Australia.



I know there are native greens availabe here, but, how does the unassumig buyer that is getting their first green know? The breeder can say it is true Aussie, but is it? Obvioulsy there are colour differences and patterns etc etc but most ppl wouldn't know what to look for in a GTP to know if it was 100% Australian or not and even then so, it can be difficult to tell. And, in the future, with all the 'non-native' GTPs around, how are you going to know if it is true or not.

All goes back to the one great debate - hybrids getting into locality specific collections.


----------



## PilbaraPythons (May 30, 2006)

The unassuming or un experinced might never know unless he was up Cape York to witness their theft. :lol:


----------



## Dicco (May 30, 2006)

You can't tell if a green is Aussie based on colouration, Aussie/Non Native locale Green crossed can be dead ringers for pure aussies based on colouration.


----------



## hugsta (May 30, 2006)

PilbaraPythons said:


> The unassuming or un experinced might never know unless he was up Cape York to witness their theft. :lol:



LOL, the only true way of getting an Aussie GTP eh!!! :wink: :lol: 

True dicco, but some are quite obvious as hatchlings.


----------



## Retic (May 30, 2006)

That is of course the only way to get a guaranteed anything and even then it is hard to know if a wild population has been tainted by something else over the years, eg where snakes overlap in their range.


----------



## Retic (May 31, 2006)

I would like to thank everyone for their contribution to this thread, it actually turned out to be more interesting than I had hoped


----------

