HELP.... My Gravid Jag Escaped

[FAY]

Going on about jags is becoming tiresome, they are here to stay..............I personally would never buy one, they do not interest me.

 

[nervous]

to my knowledge it is only jags themselves that carry the defect issue, the mutt sibs do not carry this... so this leads me to believe that if a jag escape and bred with say a diamond it would be no different then a jungle escaping and breeding with a diamond... they both would produce mutts and pollute that area...

so im saying if a jag escaped and bred with a diamond you would get a mixture of mutts and morphs... no different to the jungle and diamond except they wouldn't produce morphs, just mutts.

 

[wranga]

think afew more people need to find alittle more out about the jag gene before worrying about afew escapees

 

[BARRAMUNDI]

Jay
I actually agree with some parts of your answer but would natural selection be enough to get rid of this seemingly very powerful mutation?
That is why I put up both of my thoughts there
If I am incorrect calling it a mutation please correct me as now I am following that line of thought through the links
If say a diamond etc escaped anywhere else it would be assimilated into the gene pool fairly quickly if I read Carpets post correctly

Barramundi and abnormal
While I completely agree that any animal can have devastating results if released very very few could lead to the damage these could cause if this gene/mutation is as strong as it appears to be
Cane toads and rabbits, while having enormous environmental impacts, did not introduce a 'new' gene/mutation

Hnn17
Oh No I never thought any aussie would do such a thing??
[it was a bit tongue in cheek]
The reason I believe it is the Irian Jayas is that I can find no neuro problems reported before they were introduced into the breeding

Wookie
That is exactly what I am trying to decide with everyones input

Every argument when it comes to JAGS always comes back to neuro, there are very few people who have significant hands on experience with JAGS, yet every JAG hater with his/her non existent experience with jags portrays them to all be retards or mongeloids, mainly becuase thats what they want them to be. Sadly for them this is not the case and these descriptions of them is dribble and uneducated with an obvious agenda........Simply ask any new owners of JAGS .......

longqi.....I think someone eluded to the fact that it is a very real possibility that this morph/mutation may have or may well already exist within our wild populations of morelia. Whether it does or not is speculation, but it is a distinct and very very real possibility.......

Once again the bottom line is, do everything in your power to prevent captive reptile escapes, all are potentially catastrophic.......

 

[longqi]

Silverback
Correct me if Im wrong
But
If Jags really were smuggled into Aus then there is no reason to believe that this gene would have ever surfaced here before??
As stated previously and probably proved through Carpets reply a healthy non locale sub species would be simply be assimilated into the local population fairly quickly with little side effects even if it did breed

D3PO and Python
Hopefully it is all bollocks
Hopefully none will ever escape and we never have to find out
Hopefully someone can prove that this theory is incorrect

I have lots more reading to do before I can decide

 

[Kitah]

I would have thought they would be just as big a risk as any other snake that escaped into an area where that particular subspecies is not normally found. Is it correct that if you cross a jag with a normal, healthy python with no genetic relationship to jags, that the offspring would come out 'normal' without the apparent neurological signs? (my apologies, I'll admit I haven't followed the genetics of the jag mutation). I suppose if say for example a mature adult jag male escaped during the breeding season and was able to mate with natural, wild females, the surviving offspring could perhaps then reproduce and would the jag gene then arise again, if siblings from the father were to by chance survive and find each other? Even if this were the case, the offspring would stand out considerably, and if there were neurological issues in addition, they would be a prime target for predation. To even initiate this though, the male jag would have to survive long enough to locate females and mate successfully.. which would be significantly hindered by stress and neurological issues.

As said by others before, the best method to prevent the crossing of Morelia, take all measures to prevent escapee's to start with, whether they are jags, jungles, murray darlings or whatever. The same goes for other captive kept reptiles and amphibians as well.

Granted, admittedly this is just my opinion from the 'outside,' considering I don't keep any jags and don't have any experience with them. Just my thoughts

 

[longqi]

Barramundi
This neuro problem has not gone away
Nor by the overseas reports does it seem likely that it can be bred out in fact it is being reported as perfectly acceptable and fully expected that if you buy a jag you are buying one with this problem to a greater or lesser extent

Believe me ... I dont hate jags
I will not ever buy one until I could be guaranteed that it had no neuro problems
But I think colour wise they can be magic

Kitah
Mixing in 'normal healthy morelia with Jags has not decreased the incidence of neuro problems

 

[CarpetPythons.com.au]

healthy non locale sub species would be simply be assimilated into the local population fairly quickly with little side effects even if it did breed

Correct, it would be the same with all carpet pythons! Including Jags.

 

[BARRAMUNDI]

Another major factor that has been overlooked here is the survival rate of natural wild reptile populations, that being less than 1%. (The source of that info was from a paper presented at a ARAZPA Zoological conference, I will try and get the abstract if I can) If the survival rate of fit wild reptile populations is suggested to be less than 1%, then the survival rate of neonates from a captive background gene pool would be even less.

This still does not negate the fact that any escape of any type of captive reptile is detrimental.........

 

[silverback]

Silverback
Correct me if Im wrong
But
If Jags really were smuggled into Aus then there is no reason to believe that this gene would have ever surfaced here before??

yes, you are wrong. the occurrence of a mutant gene is not geographically dependent. the likelihood of any mutation where the wild population vastly exceeds the captive popultion, is more likely in the wild.
note i am not referring to the incidence of a mutation, which would be expressed per number and may be higher in captive breeding due to a smaller gene pool.

 

[noved]

They have all ready escaped,there are exotics turning up in back yards even up here in the north and i am sure no one would let a exotic go on purpose after they have gone to the extent of risking a fine keeping them hidden and so on, so it doesn't take a stretch of the imagination to assume jags have all ready escaped.lets hope the Australian wildlife and there genetic make up can put up a decent fight.

 

[silverback]

Another major factor that has been overlooked here is the survival rate of natural wild reptile populations, that being less than 1%.

illogical and mathematically ludicrous.....a pair of knobbies say would have to produce 5 clutches per year for ten years for one to survive to replace one of the thousands of adults that get squashed on the roads every night just to keep the populations stable. if 1% was even close to the figure, all reptiles would have been extinct years ago.

 

[BARRAMUNDI]

Exactly, you say a pair of nobbies, there are perhaps tens of thousands of pairs of nobbies of said particular species in the wild, probably more.......Less than 1% makes total sense. Look at the big picture.

There are vast areas of thousands of hectares of land that exists in species home ranges.

Anyway off topic

 

[longqi]

yes, you are wrong. the occurrence of a mutant gene is not geographically dependent. the likelihood of any mutation where the wild population vastly exceeds the captive popultion, is more likely in the wild.
note i am not referring to the incidence of a mutation, which would be expressed per number and may be higher in captive breeding due to a smaller gene pool.

Ty ty ty
And once 'started' would be more prevalent in captive bred Jags simply because they have been bred together??

So this neuro/gene; even though it can skip a generation and then come back; would eventually be bred out if they escaped and bred?

 

[Just_Plain_Nuts]

I am not going to get involved with this discussion again. There are certain evolutionary processes involved in a situation like this that zoologists and geneticists would be well aware of. I have taken the liberty to find some information on the Internet that would enlighten the majority of you about what exactly happens to a wild population if new alleles are introduced to it. You can read the below to familiarise yourselves with some of the correct terminology that zoologist and geneticists use. I would be very surprised to see if anybody posting in this thread actually took the time to read it. Here is the link to the webpage

Population Genetics - Biology Encyclopedia - body, examples, human, process, different, chromosomes, DNA, blood

And a few more links:

Basics of population genetics
Introduction to Evolutionary Biology


The field of population genetics examines the amount of genetic variation within populations and the processes that influence this variation. A population is defined as a group of interbreeding individuals that exist together at the same time. Genetic variation refers to the degree of difference found among individuals, for instance in height, coat color, or other less observable traits. The particular set of genes carried by an individual is known as his or her genotype, while all the genes in a population together comprise the "gene pool."

Foundations

The foundation for population genetics was laid in 1908, when Godfrey Hardy and Wilhelm Weinberg independently published what is now known as the Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium. The "equilibrium" is a simple prediction of genotype frequencies in any given generation, and the observation that the genotype frequencies are expected to remain constant from generation to generation as long as several simple assumptions are met. This description of stasis provides a counterpoint to studies of how populations change over time.

The 1920s and 1930s witnessed the real development of population genetics, with important contributions by Ronald Fisher, Sewall Wright, and John B. S. Haldane. They, with many others, clearly established the basic processes which caused populations to change over time: selection, genetic drift, migration, and mutation. The change in the genetic makeup of a population over time, usually measured in terms of allele frequencies, is equivalent to evolutionary change. For this reason, population genetics provides the groundwork for scientists' understanding of evolution, in particular microevolution, or changes within one or several populations over a limited time span.

The questions addressed by population genetics are quite varied, but many fall within several broad categories. How much genetic variation is found in populations, and what processes govern this? How will a population change over time, and can a stable endpoint be determined? How much and why do populations of the same species differ? The answer is always cast in terms of selection, drift, mutation, migration, and the complex interplay among them. Of the four, selection and genetic drift are usually given credit as the major forces.

Selection

Simply put, selection occurs when some genotypes in the population are on average more successful in reproduction. These genotypes may survive better, produce more offspring, or be more successful in attracting mates; the alleles responsible for these traits are then passed on to offspring. There is broad theoretical consensus and abundant empirical data to suggest that selection can change populations radically and quickly. If one genetic variant, or allele, increases survivorship or fertility, selection will increase the frequency of the favored allele, and concurrently eliminate other alleles. This type of selection, called directional selection, decreases the amount of genetic variation in populations.

Alternatively, an individual carrying two different alleles for the same gene (a heterozygote) may have advantages, as exemplified by the well-known example of the sickle-cell allele in Africa, in which heterozygotes are more resistant to malaria. In this case, called overdominant selection, genetic variation is preserved in the population. Although a number of similar examples are known, directional selection is much more common than overdominant selection; this implies that the common action of selection is to decrease genetic variation within populations. It is equally clear that if different (initally similar) populations occupy different habitats, selection can create differences among populations by favoring different alleles in different areas.

Genetic Drift

Often overlooked by the layperson, genetic drift is given a place of importance in population genetics. While some analyses of genetic drift quickly become complicated, the basic process of drift is simple and involves random


Cheetahs, which have very little genetic variation, are presumed to have gone through several genetic bottlenecks.
changes in allele frequency. In sexual species, the frequency of alleles contained in the progeny may not perfectly match the frequency of the alleles contained in the parents. As an analogy, consider flipping a coin twenty times. Although one might expect ten heads and ten tails, the actual outcome may be slightly different; in this example, the outcome (progeny) does not perfectly represent the relative frequency of heads and tails (the parents).
What does this mean for populations? Start by considering neutral alleles, which have no impact on survival or reproduction. (An example is the presence or absence of a widow's peak hairline.) The frequency of a neutral allele may shift slightly between generations, sometimes increasing and sometimes decreasing. What outcomes are expected from this process? Suppose that a particular allele shifts frequency at random for a number of generations, eventually becoming very rare, with perhaps only one copy in the population. If the individual carrying this allele does not pass it on to any offspring or fails to have any offspring, the allele will be lost to the population. Once lost, the allele is gone from the population forever. In this light, drift causes the loss of genetic variation over time. All populations are subject to this process, with smaller populations more strongly affected than larger ones.

Perhaps better known than the pervasive, general effects of genetic drift are special examples of drift associated with unusually small populations. Genetic bottlenecks occur when a small number of individuals from a much larger population are the sole contributors to future generations; this occurs when a catastrophe kills most of the population, or when a few individuals start a new population in different area. Genetic bottlenecks reduce the genetic variation in the new or subsequent population relative to the old. Cheetahs, which have very little genetic variation, are presumed to have gone through several genetic bottlenecks. Occasionally, these new populations may have particular alleles that are much more common than in the original population, by chance alone. This is usually called the founder effect.

Migration and Mutation

Migration may also be important in shaping the genetic variation within populations and the differences among them. To geneticists, the word "migration" is synonymous with the term "gene flow." Immigration may change allele frequencies within a population if the immigrants differ genetically. The general effect of gene flow among populations is to make all of the populations of a species more similar. It can also restore alleles lost through genetic drift, or introduce new alleles formed by mutation in another population. Migration is often seen as the "glue" that binds the subpopulation of a species together. Emigration is not expected to change populations unless the migrants are genetically different from those that remain; this is rarely observed, so emigration is often ignored.

The last important process is mutation. Mutation is now understood in great detail at the molecular level, and consists of any change in the deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) sequence of an organism. These mutations range from single base substitutions to the deletion or addition of tens or hundreds of bases to the duplication or reorganization of entire chromosomes . Mutation is most important as the sole source of all new genetic variation, which can then be spread from the population of origin by migration. This importance should not be undervalued, although the impact of mutation on most populations is negligible at any given time. This is because mutation rates are typically very low.

Questions and Contributions

The real challenge of population genetics has been in understanding how the four processes work together to produce the observable patterns. For instance, genetic drift eliminates variation from populations, as do the most common modes of natural selection. How then can the abundance of genetic variation in the world be explained?

This question has many complicated answers, but some cases, such as the observation of deleterious alleles in humans (for example, alleles for phenylketonuria, a genetic disease), might be explained in terms of mutation and selection. Mutation adds these alleles to a population, and selection removes them; although the rate of mutation is likely to be nearly constant, the rate at which selection removes them increases as the abundance of the allele increases. This is certainly true for recessive alleles, which are only expressed when an individual has two copies. With only one, the allele remains unexpressed and therefore not selected. At some point, predictable from the mutation rate and physical consequences of the disease, the two opposing forces balance, producing the stable persistence of the disease allele at low frequency.

As a discipline, population genetics has contributed greatly to scientists' understanding of many disparate topics, including the development of resistance of insects to insecticides and of pathogenic bacteria to antibiotics, an explanation of human genetic variation like the alleles for sickle-cell anemia and blood groups, the evolutionary relationships among species, and many others. Of particular interest is the use of genetic data in conservation biology.

By definition, endangered and threatened species have reduced population sizes, making them subject to the vagaries of genetic drift and also to inbreeding. Inbreeding is mating between genetically related individuals, and often leads to inbreeding depression, a reduction of health, vigor, and fertility. Genetic drift leads to a loss of genetic variation, which limits what selection can do to produce adaptations if the environment changes. Keeping these two issues in mind, greatly reduced populations may be at increasingly greater risk for genetic reasons, leading to further declines.

SEE ALSO C ONSERVATION ; E NDANGERED S PECIES ; E VOLUTION ; E XTINCTION ; H ARDY -W EINBERG E QUILIBRIUM ; N ATURAL S ELECTION ; S EXUAL R EPRODUCTION

Paul R. Cabe

Bibliography

Gillespie, John H. Population Genetics: A Concise Guide. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1998.

Hardy, Godfrey. "Mendelian Proportions in Mixed Populations." Science 28 (1908): 49–50.

Hartl, Daniel. A Primer of Population Genetics. Sunderland, MA: Sinauer Associates, 1999.

Hedrick, Philip W. Genetics of Populations. Boston, MA: Jones and Bartlett, 2000.

Smith, John Maynard. Evolutionary Genetics, 2nd ed. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press, 1998.

I can appreciate that this has taken a long time for you to put on here, but I fail to see it having a huge relevance to the question asked? Are you trying to point out that the Jags are so genetically inferior that they will just fail to thrive in the wild and not produce any offspring? Do you think that "natural selection" is so powerful that it will instantly erradicate them? Any effect that natural selection has on the population is only going to be long term and gradual working on the statistical chances of survival. I dont think we really have the ability to discount the possible threat of them having an impact on the population and fitting in as a new species per say that does not naturally belong here. I dont have any first hand experience with jags and their neuro problems but with people claiming their jags show no effects of neuro problems it cant be that big a problem for them that they cant survive and reproduce in the wild.

 

[Morelia4life]

to my knowledge it is only jags themselves that carry the defect issue, the mutt sibs do not carry this... so this leads me to believe that if a jag escape and bred with say a diamond it would be no different then a jungle escaping and breeding with a diamond... they both would produce mutts and pollute that area...

so im saying if a jag escaped and bred with a diamond you would get a mixture of mutts and morphs... no different to the jungle and diamond except they wouldn't produce morphs, just mutts.

I think that all jags carry the neuro genes but they are dormant and don't start to show up until the animal itself is stressed out enough. I have a jag and he started showing slight neuro issues about a week ago. I don't know if they could survive in the wild or not. Anything is possible.

 

[spotlight]

I think that all jags carry the neuro genes but they are dormant and don't start to show up until the animal itself is stressed out enough. I have a jag and he started showing slight neuro issues about a week ago. I don't know if they could survive in the wild or not. Anything is possible.

did you get told by the breeder that your snake would develope nero issues?, its funny how things change depending on the snake at hand ,if i sold say a Blackheaded python that showed nero signs i would get a bad rep from all the breeders out there? but because its a Jag you get a pat on the back because its normal ?, really cant get my head around this, maybe ive been breedings snakes for way to many years and just dont fit in anymore???

 

[nervous]

I think that all jags carry the neuro genes but they are dormant and don't start to show up until the animal itself is stressed out enough. I have a jag and he started showing slight neuro issues about a week ago. I don't know if they could survive in the wild or not. Anything is possible.

i know all jags have the "possibility" to have neuro problems... i was refering to there "mutt" siblings, you know the siblings that dont carry the mutant gene...

 

[Cockney_Red]

I am not going to get involved with this discussion again. There are certain evolutionary processes involved in a situation like this that zoologists and geneticists would be well aware of. I have taken the liberty to find some information on the Internet that would enlighten the majority of you about what exactly happens to a wild population if new alleles are introduced to it. You can read the below to familiarise yourselves with some of the correct terminology that zoologist and geneticists use. I would be very surprised to see if anybody posting in this thread actually took the time to read it. Here is the link to the webpage

Population Genetics - Biology Encyclopedia - body, examples, human, process, different, chromosomes, DNA, blood

And a few more links:

Basics of population genetics
Introduction to Evolutionary Biology


The field of population genetics examines the amount of genetic variation within populations and the processes that influence this variation. A population is defined as a group of interbreeding individuals that exist together at the same time. Genetic variation refers to the degree of difference found among individuals, for instance in height, coat color, or other less observable traits. The particular set of genes carried by an individual is known as his or her genotype, while all the genes in a population together comprise the "gene pool."

Foundations

The foundation for population genetics was laid in 1908, when Godfrey Hardy and Wilhelm Weinberg independently published what is now known as the Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium. The "equilibrium" is a simple prediction of genotype frequencies in any given generation, and the observation that the genotype frequencies are expected to remain constant from generation to generation as long as several simple assumptions are met. This description of stasis provides a counterpoint to studies of how populations change over time.

The 1920s and 1930s witnessed the real development of population genetics, with important contributions by Ronald Fisher, Sewall Wright, and John B. S. Haldane. They, with many others, clearly established the basic processes which caused populations to change over time: selection, genetic drift, migration, and mutation. The change in the genetic makeup of a population over time, usually measured in terms of allele frequencies, is equivalent to evolutionary change. For this reason, population genetics provides the groundwork for scientists' understanding of evolution, in particular microevolution, or changes within one or several populations over a limited time span.

The questions addressed by population genetics are quite varied, but many fall within several broad categories. How much genetic variation is found in populations, and what processes govern this? How will a population change over time, and can a stable endpoint be determined? How much and why do populations of the same species differ? The answer is always cast in terms of selection, drift, mutation, migration, and the complex interplay among them. Of the four, selection and genetic drift are usually given credit as the major forces.

Selection

Simply put, selection occurs when some genotypes in the population are on average more successful in reproduction. These genotypes may survive better, produce more offspring, or be more successful in attracting mates; the alleles responsible for these traits are then passed on to offspring. There is broad theoretical consensus and abundant empirical data to suggest that selection can change populations radically and quickly. If one genetic variant, or allele, increases survivorship or fertility, selection will increase the frequency of the favored allele, and concurrently eliminate other alleles. This type of selection, called directional selection, decreases the amount of genetic variation in populations.

Alternatively, an individual carrying two different alleles for the same gene (a heterozygote) may have advantages, as exemplified by the well-known example of the sickle-cell allele in Africa, in which heterozygotes are more resistant to malaria. In this case, called overdominant selection, genetic variation is preserved in the population. Although a number of similar examples are known, directional selection is much more common than overdominant selection; this implies that the common action of selection is to decrease genetic variation within populations. It is equally clear that if different (initally similar) populations occupy different habitats, selection can create differences among populations by favoring different alleles in different areas.

Genetic Drift

Often overlooked by the layperson, genetic drift is given a place of importance in population genetics. While some analyses of genetic drift quickly become complicated, the basic process of drift is simple and involves random


Cheetahs, which have very little genetic variation, are presumed to have gone through several genetic bottlenecks.
changes in allele frequency. In sexual species, the frequency of alleles contained in the progeny may not perfectly match the frequency of the alleles contained in the parents. As an analogy, consider flipping a coin twenty times. Although one might expect ten heads and ten tails, the actual outcome may be slightly different; in this example, the outcome (progeny) does not perfectly represent the relative frequency of heads and tails (the parents).
What does this mean for populations? Start by considering neutral alleles, which have no impact on survival or reproduction. (An example is the presence or absence of a widow's peak hairline.) The frequency of a neutral allele may shift slightly between generations, sometimes increasing and sometimes decreasing. What outcomes are expected from this process? Suppose that a particular allele shifts frequency at random for a number of generations, eventually becoming very rare, with perhaps only one copy in the population. If the individual carrying this allele does not pass it on to any offspring or fails to have any offspring, the allele will be lost to the population. Once lost, the allele is gone from the population forever. In this light, drift causes the loss of genetic variation over time. All populations are subject to this process, with smaller populations more strongly affected than larger ones.

Perhaps better known than the pervasive, general effects of genetic drift are special examples of drift associated with unusually small populations. Genetic bottlenecks occur when a small number of individuals from a much larger population are the sole contributors to future generations; this occurs when a catastrophe kills most of the population, or when a few individuals start a new population in different area. Genetic bottlenecks reduce the genetic variation in the new or subsequent population relative to the old. Cheetahs, which have very little genetic variation, are presumed to have gone through several genetic bottlenecks. Occasionally, these new populations may have particular alleles that are much more common than in the original population, by chance alone. This is usually called the founder effect.

Migration and Mutation

Migration may also be important in shaping the genetic variation within populations and the differences among them. To geneticists, the word "migration" is synonymous with the term "gene flow." Immigration may change allele frequencies within a population if the immigrants differ genetically. The general effect of gene flow among populations is to make all of the populations of a species more similar. It can also restore alleles lost through genetic drift, or introduce new alleles formed by mutation in another population. Migration is often seen as the "glue" that binds the subpopulation of a species together. Emigration is not expected to change populations unless the migrants are genetically different from those that remain; this is rarely observed, so emigration is often ignored.

The last important process is mutation. Mutation is now understood in great detail at the molecular level, and consists of any change in the deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) sequence of an organism. These mutations range from single base substitutions to the deletion or addition of tens or hundreds of bases to the duplication or reorganization of entire chromosomes . Mutation is most important as the sole source of all new genetic variation, which can then be spread from the population of origin by migration. This importance should not be undervalued, although the impact of mutation on most populations is negligible at any given time. This is because mutation rates are typically very low.

Questions and Contributions

The real challenge of population genetics has been in understanding how the four processes work together to produce the observable patterns. For instance, genetic drift eliminates variation from populations, as do the most common modes of natural selection. How then can the abundance of genetic variation in the world be explained?

This question has many complicated answers, but some cases, such as the observation of deleterious alleles in humans (for example, alleles for phenylketonuria, a genetic disease), might be explained in terms of mutation and selection. Mutation adds these alleles to a population, and selection removes them; although the rate of mutation is likely to be nearly constant, the rate at which selection removes them increases as the abundance of the allele increases. This is certainly true for recessive alleles, which are only expressed when an individual has two copies. With only one, the allele remains unexpressed and therefore not selected. At some point, predictable from the mutation rate and physical consequences of the disease, the two opposing forces balance, producing the stable persistence of the disease allele at low frequency.

As a discipline, population genetics has contributed greatly to scientists' understanding of many disparate topics, including the development of resistance of insects to insecticides and of pathogenic bacteria to antibiotics, an explanation of human genetic variation like the alleles for sickle-cell anemia and blood groups, the evolutionary relationships among species, and many others. Of particular interest is the use of genetic data in conservation biology.

By definition, endangered and threatened species have reduced population sizes, making them subject to the vagaries of genetic drift and also to inbreeding. Inbreeding is mating between genetically related individuals, and often leads to inbreeding depression, a reduction of health, vigor, and fertility. Genetic drift leads to a loss of genetic variation, which limits what selection can do to produce adaptations if the environment changes. Keeping these two issues in mind, greatly reduced populations may be at increasingly greater risk for genetic reasons, leading to further declines.

SEE ALSO C ONSERVATION ; E NDANGERED S PECIES ; E VOLUTION ; E XTINCTION ; H ARDY -W EINBERG E QUILIBRIUM ; N ATURAL S ELECTION ; S EXUAL R EPRODUCTION

Paul R. Cabe

Bibliography

Gillespie, John H. Population Genetics: A Concise Guide. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1998.

Hardy, Godfrey. "Mendelian Proportions in Mixed Populations." Science 28 (1908): 49–50.

Hartl, Daniel. A Primer of Population Genetics. Sunderland, MA: Sinauer Associates, 1999.

Hedrick, Philip W. Genetics of Populations. Boston, MA: Jones and Bartlett, 2000.

Smith, John Maynard. Evolutionary Genetics, 2nd ed. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press, 1998.

Cant be more uninvolved if you tried....

 

[longqi]

i know all jags have the "possibility" to have neuro problems... i was refering to there "mutt" siblings, you know the siblings that dont carry the mutant gene...

Well that is another interesting point
Some Jags overseas have displayed no symptoms at all for up to 5 years and then fallen over [so to speak]
So could these 'mutts' also be carriers but display nothing??
Does a 'mutt' still carry the same genes as a morph?
I would think it must do if its from the same parents and only one male and female were involved
Maybe 'mutts' still carry the neuro but dont display the colours??

[More internet work]

Morelia
So what was the stress factor that 'activated' the neuro in yours if you dont mind me asking?
I have heard that theory from a few places now
But most of the keepers saying it are pretty good keepers who would seldom if ever allow their animals to get stressed
If you cant remember an incident could it be that yours was just one of these 'delayed neuro' ones?