What one does in their home regarding breeding is not something that can be regulated by the community of hobbyists.Diverting time and specimens to pointless and fruitless hybridizing is detrimental to our efforts to increase the number of specimens of many rarer species, and thereby hurts our hobby.
I disagree with that thought. I have bred my share of Ts this year, legit breeding that had nothing to do with crossing species. My own experiment should not negate all of my other efforts especially when none of the offspring from my crossing ever made it into the hobby.Diverting time and specimens to pointless and fruitless hybridizing is detrimental to our efforts to increase the number of specimens of many rarer species, and thereby hurts our hobby.
I agree with you to some extent, however most of the tarantulas used in hybridization are fairly common. How many people are going to use a rare male for this when they can put it out on loan or sell it? The risk of losing a MM is too great. Who in their right mind would use a MM P metallica in an attempt to make a hybrid? If he gets eaten or the slings are sickly then you wasted the male. I think the great majority of keepers understand that, and would send him off to a same species pairing, at least them you would get a chance at some desirable slings. Who would purchase a rare MM just to try making a hybrid, when the chances of success are so slim? I wouldn't be able to afford it.What it does do, on the other hand, is waste breeding efforts. It consumes time, and often males that could be used to produce viable, pure-species offspring. Many of our T's are NOT available for import anymore, and are maintained in captivity by our breeding efforts. Diverting time and specimens to pointless and fruitless hybridizing is detrimental to our efforts to increase the number of specimens of many rarer species, and thereby hurts our hobby.
Hyalophora cecropia and hyalophora colombia are currently taxinomically classified as different species. Whether you want to call them sub-species or not, by crossing them you get 100% infertility. This happens whether you cross the hybrids to themselves, or if you cross the hybrids back to pure cecropia or pure colombia. Their ranges overlap and natural crossbreeding does occur, but produces a dead end. I believe vagans and albos probably naturally breed in a similar fashion in the wild and probably produce infertility in both the males and females. I would love to see Ryan cross his albovagans (I like the name albovagans, but was it an albo male and female vagans or vice versa?) to see if they produce viable offspring. It's a question worth answering and I'm looking forward to Ryan answering it. Some of you textbook scientists can pull out all the thoeries you want and argue parts of them until your blue in the face, but do the cross and give us some real info please.I would also like to point out things like Hyalophora cecropia and Hyalophora colombia which bases solely on classification in my opinion are not technically hybrids but rather sub-species
Well if your theory is correct about infertility than all the Ballyhoo about producing hybrids and the problems they will cause will be completely irrelevent as they would be a dead end as you say. I am curious what you base your theory that they will be infertile on. Seems there are many more examples in nature of fertile hybrids than infertile dead ends.Hyalophora cecropia and hyalophora colombia are currently taxinomically classified as different species. Whether you want to call them sub-species or not, by crossing them you get 100% infertility. This happens whether you cross the hybrids to themselves, or if you cross the hybrids back to pure cecropia or pure colombia. Their ranges overlap and natural crossbreeding does occur, but produces a dead end. I believe vagans and albos probably naturally breed in a similar fashion in the wild and probably produce infertility in both the males and females. I would love to see Ryan cross his albovagans (I like the name albovagans, but was it an albo male and female vagans or vice versa?) to see if they produce viable offspring. It's a question worth answering and I'm looking forward to Ryan answering it. Some of you textbook scientists can pull out all the thoeries you want and argue parts of them until your blue in the face, but do the cross and give us some real info please.
And such a cross would produce what relevant information? What if the cross produces fertile offspring? infertile offspring? Either way, the results don't impinge on the species hypotheses called B. vagans and B. albopilosum. Hybrid zones are not uncommon, and interfertility is not evidence against recognizing distinct species.I would love to see Ryan cross his albovagans (I like the name albovagans, but was it an albo male and female vagans or vice versa?) to see if they produce viable offspring. It's a question worth answering and I'm looking forward to Ryan answering it. Some of you textbook scientists can pull out all the thoeries you want and argue parts of them until your blue in the face, but do the cross and give us some real info please.
I know there's no guarantee they will be infertile, just a liklyhood, in my opinion. I'm basing my opinion on actual breeding of cecropia and colombia. I don't know what will happen with Ts. It needs to be done to find out. You're right, both fertile hybrids and infertile hybrids are proven. Here are a few fun ones....Well if your theory is correct about infertility than all the Ballyhoo about producing hybrids and the problems they will cause will be completely irrelevent as they would be a dead end as you say. I am curious what you base your theory that they will be infertile on. Seems there are many more examples in nature of fertile hybrids than infertile dead ends.
Sorry, I didn't mean to insult you in any way. I'm not a biologist and I don't hold you in disdain. (Although I think it would be an interesting turn of events since many biologists hold hobbiests in disdain. ) The point I was trying to make is we don't know if the T hybrids will be fertile or not. And why is it relevant? Just because I'd like to know what the end result is. Any unanswered question deserves an answer if we can find one.And such a cross would produce what relevant information? What if the cross produces fertile offspring? infertile offspring? Either way, the results don't impinge on the species hypotheses called B. vagans and B. albopilosum. Hybrid zones are not uncommon, and interfertility is not evidence against recognizing distinct species.
Just sign me one of those "textbook scientists," with 30 years of field research experience, with whom you express unfounded disdain.
Actually, your examples point out an important caveat, that hybridization often occurs under extenuating circumstances. There is the tendency for members of different species with overlap to have isolating mechanisms, e.g. behavioral, that preclude hybridization, or at least keep the hybrid zone narrow.You're right, both fertile hybrids and infertile hybrids are proven. Here are a few fun ones....
A leopon (leopard/lion cross) resulted in 100% infertile offspring.
Ligers (lion/tiger cross) Males are sterile while the females are often fertile.
Wolf/dog hybrids are mostly fertile in both male and female.
A Zebroid (horse/zebra cross) Both male and female fertile offspring have been reported but generally fertility rates are low.
A cama (camel/llama cross) Only one mature male exists and is assumed sterile since mules are sterile.
Turkey-chicken crosses, when successful, produced all males..
No offense taken. I'm also a hobbyist (and I assure you, I have biologist colleagues to which the term 'disdain' does apply!). I find the wealth of knowledge on AB to be fantastic. I just try to sprinkle in a bit of science here and there if I think it might be useful.Sorry, I didn't mean to insult you in any way. I'm not a biologist and I don't hold you in disdain. (Although I think it would be an interesting turn of events since many biologists hold hobbiests in disdain. ) The point I was trying to make is we don't know if the T hybrids will be fertile or not. And why is it relevant? Just because I'd like to know what the end result is. Any unanswered question deserves an answer if we can find one.
No, members of a species in any particular genus are not necessarily interfertile. Being able to interbreed is a primitive character, which in some instances is not lost among a group of organisms regardless of phylogenetic distance. Disputes as to assignment of an individual to a genus resides with the presence or absence of the characters to which the genus refers as a phylogenetic hypothesis. Such disputes tend to indicate that one or more genera are in need of revision, which moves the problem down to carefully examining members of the species in those genera. Interbreeding experiments don't solve that problem.so what I got from this is that all tarantulas in the same genus are able to hybridize. If this is true, then couldn't this be used to find the true genus of a tarantula species with a diputed genus? i.e. there is debate over if Lasiodora sp. A is in Lasiodora or Acanthoscuria. So then someone attempts multiple times to hybridize Lasiodora sp. A with Lasiodora sp. B, a ell established species in the genus. All of the attempts fail. Then, someone attempts multiple times to breed Lasiodora sp. A with Aacanthoscuria sp. A, a well established species in the Genus Acanthoscuria. All of the attempts succeed. Is this considered definitive evidence that Lasiodora sp. A is really in acanthoscuria?
Wow I really wish it was that simple.............................This kind of taxonomy stuff makes my head hurt and the only cure is a tall glass of Chivas. :wall: :} I'm going to admire some of my getula x elaphe hybrids now that should be more inclined to eat eachother rather than breed to help me maintain some perspective on this thread.so what I got from this is that all tarantulas in the same genus are able to hybridize. If this is true, then couldn't this be used to find the true genus of a tarantula species with a diputed genus? i.e. there is debate over if Lasiodora sp. A is in Lasiodora or Acanthoscuria. So then someone attempts multiple times to hybridize Lasiodora sp. A with Lasiodora sp. B, a ell established species in the genus. All of the attempts fail. Then, someone attempts multiple times to breed Lasiodora sp. A with Aacanthoscuria sp. A, a well established species in the Genus Acanthoscuria. All of the attempts succeed. Is this considered definitive evidence that Lasiodora sp. A is really in acanthoscuria?
As a child, my parents told me "Don't do drugs." What they neglected to tell me was, "Don't become a taxonomist."Wow I really wish it was that simple.............................This kind of taxonomy stuff makes my head hurt and the only cure is a tall glass of Chivas.
You're missing the point.I don't have an opinion about hybrids on T's yet. However this whole debate has raged for years with snakes and I definately do enjoy hybrids in that capacity. The market is driven by the new and unusual a fact that just has to be accepted otherwise people wouldn't be paying tens of thousands of dollars (or more) for new ball python morphs. I have many fabulous looking hybrid snakes in my collection and greatly enjoy them, however you are right in the sense that hybrids if misidentified can water down a pure genetic pool, but so does mixing localities where the same species has begun to seperately evolve due to habitat fragmentation or just plain distance. Seems most of the old school herpers are the ones that really get upset at hybrids seems the younger guys and gals are much more accepting of hybrids. I fully believe in the case of endangered species steps should be taken to ensure assurance colonies are kept pure otherwise captive animals are not ever intended to be released into the wild so a bit of playing God with their genetics shouldn't matter terribly much..........I have a feeling there will be no lack of strong opinions on this one lol.
amen......If nature didn't create it. Then i wont want it. That's my view