# SNITCH - Say NO to irresponsible Tarantula crossbreeding and hybridization



## Scoolman (Oct 11, 2010)

Keep the species pure and say NO to Tarantula crossbreeding and hybridization.
Join the group and help the hobby.SNITCH





Tell 'em you heard it here.

Please do not turn this into some petty, uneducated, useless, quibble. I am just sending out an invite for those who care. Please do not allow yourselves to be baited.
Thank you.


----------



## Salamanderhead (Oct 11, 2010)

Could have at least used proper spelling if this is a serious cause hahah.

"Say NO 2<---? ? ?"

Don't use numbers instead of words if you're trying to look professional hahah.


----------



## Scoolman (Oct 11, 2010)

Salamanderhead said:


> Could have at least used proper spelling if this is a serious cause hahah.
> 
> "Say NO 2<---? ? ?"
> 
> Don't use numbers instead of words if you're trying to look professional hahah.


It's just a logo (not my design). And yes this is legit. Just trying to raise awareness.


----------



## Suzjohnson (Oct 11, 2010)

Maybe we could start with "Say No To Irresponsible Breeding".  I've always wondered what happens to all those adorable little spiderlings that never find a home.  Do they just languish on a shelf somewhere slowly being moved aside in favor of more interesting projects?


----------



## bobusboy (Oct 11, 2010)

This post was just going to piss people off

-deleted-


----------



## Scoolman (Oct 11, 2010)

Suzjohnson said:


> Maybe we could start with "Say No To Irresponsible Breeding".  I've always wondered what happens to all those adorable little spiderlings that never find a home.  Do they just languish on a shelf somewhere slowly being moved aside in favor of more interesting projects?


Very good point Suz. I have often wondered that myself.


----------



## hassman789 (Oct 11, 2010)

bobusboy said:


> I figure I might attempt crossbreeding at some point for personal purposes, just because I want to.
> 
> But in saying that; I would NEVER sell or give away ANY successful slings.


OH THE HORROR! THE AGGONY!!!!!!!!!!! lol. I hope your post dosn't create a debate. We all know the hybridization coversations can get a little heated. lol


----------



## BrettG (Oct 11, 2010)

This post is about to take a turn for the worse I fear. And to the guy who said they are going to crossbreed,what do you plan on doing with the offspring??Keeping 100+slings that will never be sold,or cannot be bred even will be a nightmare.....That said,I am turning and running as fast as I can from this thread.Most of you know why......


----------



## Scoolman (Oct 11, 2010)

hassman789 said:


> OH THE HORROR! THE AGGONY!!!!!!!!!!! lol. I hope your post dosn't create a debate. We all know the hybridization coversations can get a little heated. lol


So true. As long as people do not allow themselves to be drawn in there should be no problems.
Let us just put this to rest right now. This post was not created to insight a riot. I f you agree then follow the link and join the group. If you do not, then so be it; don't join the group.
How about we limit this thread to single comments giving your thoughts, and nothing more. No follow up posts.


----------



## Great Basin Ben (Oct 11, 2010)

I am totally NEW here, and will not probably receive my first T, for another week and a half. BUT, with that said, haven't plate tectonics, and natural selection been responsible for hybridization, and cross breeding of all of the Theraposidae that we currently have today? I can see the etichal concerns for not turning the Tarantula family to what man has done to say Canis Lupis, but is it truly this big of a problem? Again, I'm not passing judgements, but as a complete Novice, I'm simply curious, as to what the eminant concerns are. Again, Thank you all for your time, and patience with me. I'm sure I'll have A LOT of questions, that I'll be able to answer here, and again, I thank you all ahead of time.


----------



## Scoolman (Oct 11, 2010)

Great Basin Ben said:


> I am totally NEW here, and will not probably receive my first T, for another week and a half. BUT, with that said, haven't plate tectonics, and natural selection been responsible for hybridization, and cross breeding of all of the Theraposidae that we currently have today? I can see the etichal concerns for not turning the Tarantula family to what man has done to say Canis Lupis, but is it truly this big of a problem? Again, I'm not passing judgements, but as a complete Novice, I'm simply curious, as to what the eminant concerns are. Again, Thank you all for your time, and patience with me. I'm sure I'll have A LOT of questions, that I'll be able to answer here, and again, I thank you all ahead of time.


Welcome to the hobby Ben. You have a valid point, than you for your input.


----------



## bobusboy (Oct 11, 2010)

Scoolman said:


> So true. As long as people do not allow themselves to be drawn in there should be no problems.
> Let us just put this to rest right now. This post was not created to insight a riot. I f you agree then follow the link and join the group. If you do not, then so be it; don't join the group.
> How about we limit this thread to single comments giving your thoughts, and nothing more. No follow up posts.



x_X i forgot how bad this topic can get,  I'll remove my post in a second.

There was no intention to disturb the peace, only meant I might do it and if I did I'd take notes and study it. It wouldn't be some "ha ha look what I did" endeavor.


----------



## Chris_Skeleton (Oct 11, 2010)

bobusboy said:


> I figure I might attempt crossbreeding at some point for personal purposes, just because I want to.
> 
> But in saying that; I would NEVER sell or give away ANY successful slings.


:wall:


----------



## Scoolman (Oct 11, 2010)

bobusboy said:


> x_X i forgot how bad this topic can get,  I'll remove my post in a second.
> 
> There was no intention to disturb the peace, only meant I might do it and if I did I'd take notes and study it. It wouldn't be some "ha ha look what I did" endeavor.


No worries. Your opinion is valid and welcomed. We just dont need the back comments for every post. Thats when it gets ugly. If everyone can restrain themselves from commenting to other posts we will get a goo representation of individual positions.


----------



## JimM (Oct 11, 2010)

Salamanderhead said:


> Could have at least used proper spelling if this is a serious cause hahah.
> 
> "Say NO 2<---? ? ?"
> 
> Don't use numbers instead of words if you're trying to look professional hahah.


----------



## Great Basin Ben (Oct 11, 2010)

I greatly understand that if any of these "Hybrids" actually got into Native Ecosystems, then they would certainly pose a threat to, at minimum, breeding habitat, and prey availability of Native species, but what would be their REAL liklihood of survival? Also, Is this really a common enough practice, that it has already posed problems, or is it a matter of taste, within the hobby?


----------



## bobusboy (Oct 11, 2010)

Great Basin Ben said:


> I greatly understand that if any of these "Hybrids" actually got into Native Ecosystems, then they would certainly pose a threat to, at minimum, breeding habitat, and prey availability of Native species, but what would be their REAL liklihood of survival? Also, Is this really a common enough practice, that it has already posed problems, or is it a matter of taste, within the hobby?


I think the issue revolves around the pure bred tarantulas being watered down with look-a-likes which are actually hybridized versions of said species. And due to the lack of research and credibility of sellers people take issue with not getting what they paid for, as well as all the potential for sterile or sickly tarantulas. 

I agree with not selling/redistributing hybrid Ts.

But if some one wants to do it for the purposes of studying and or personal satisfaction I don't see the issue with it.

PS: to your question about it being a common practice, No not yet it isn't as far as i can tell.


----------



## rbailey1010 (Oct 11, 2010)

I think crossbreeding/hybridization should only take place when it benefits a breed/ species. Kind of like how the texas longhorn was created by breeding two different breeds of cow and taking the dominant traits of each so they cow would have a better chance of survival on the texas plains........

As far as plate techtonics and what not - natural selection has its way of making things work out for the better. The strong survive and the weak parish. If it was a good hybrid, it would thrive in the wild due to characteristics of each species to make it withstand its environment.....if it didnt, the offspring of this crossbreeding would die....

In captivity, I personally feel it is irresponsible because you breed tarantulas for selling the slings. I seriously doubt people breed these spiders so they can raise 100-1000 spiderlings. Crossbreeds make the slings unmarketable as previously mentioned....and they will eventually die due to neglect or something else.....


----------



## Chris_Skeleton (Oct 11, 2010)

bobusboy said:


> But if some one wants to do it for the purposes of studying and or personal satisfaction I don't see the issue with it.


Studying, yes, that's fine, but ONLY by organizations and people affiliated with those organizations or somebody responsible researching for the purpose of submitting those findings to said organizations for the sake of gaining knowledge for scientific purposes.  

BUT...

There is no validity in personal satisfaction. What do you gain from it? If you want satisfaction, breed two Ts that are the same species. Then you could give them away or sell them.


----------



## bobusboy (Oct 11, 2010)

Ah to hell with this, i don't feel like being flamed for my opinion.


----------



## Chris_Skeleton (Oct 11, 2010)

Those scientists that euthanize them are not hobbyists. We are. And if you are in this hobby, and you purposely crossbreed, only to kill what you CAN'T take care of. That's complete irresponsibility.

Okay well I will end with that so this thread doesn't become a disaster.


----------



## rbailey1010 (Oct 11, 2010)

Sorry, I am with Chris on the personal satisfaction part.... what is satisfying about breeding two different species together? I dont see how it could be anymore satisfying than breeding 2 of the same species together.....


----------



## Great Basin Ben (Oct 11, 2010)

Does ANYONE here find it interesting that it is actually possibly to hybridize two different genus, let alone species. The common "Dog" for example, while it may have been hybridized to become the many HUNDREDS of breeds, that it has, they are all essentially still Canis Lupis. BUT the hybridization of a completely different Genus, is an altogether different story! I am beginning to see the ethical delimna here. With this kind of "whilly-nilly" approach to creating "pretty bugs", there's BOUND to be genetic bottlenecks, that could eventually pose a problem to pure strains, if their genetic defficiencies were then bred BACK into the pure (although similar looking in appearance) species lines... 

See, you (I) learn something new every day! 

Thanks for all of your guys' input. This is AWESOME info...


----------



## Bill S (Oct 11, 2010)

Great Basin Ben said:


> .... BUT, with that said, haven't plate tectonics, and natural selection been responsible for hybridization, and cross breeding of all of the Theraposidae that we currently have today?


No.  Plate tectonics and natural selection do not in any way result in hybridization.  The explanations behind this are way too lengthy to post here, but if you drop me an e-mail I'll try to sort out your confusion.


----------



## JimM (Oct 11, 2010)

Great Basin Ben said:


> I greatly understand that if any of these "Hybrids" actually got into Native Ecosystems, then they would certainly pose a threat to, at minimum, breeding habitat, and prey availability of Native species, but what would be their REAL liklihood of survival? Also, Is this really a common enough practice, that it has already posed problems, or is it a matter of taste, within the hobby?



Look here's the problem, and I suggest anyone considering crossbreeding take this to heart.

First, with the exception of a few aphonopelma species where pollution of the wild gene pool is a danger (and arguably has already happened), it's not about wild populations so much. The problem is that lets say you cross a regalis with a fasciata, just for your own curiosities sake. I'll even give the person the benefit of the doubt for this example, and suggest that they never had any intention of slings ever getting out into the hobby, but things happen. Life happens. You give some to a buddy who says he'll keep them, but for whatever reason he gives them away or sells them...or breeds them.

Let's say he gave them away....now somebody out there has a nice adult female or two, and has no idea that it's not just a fasciata. He breeds it with a male fasciata, and sells a sac of "fasciata" slings. Now what? There's a bunch of the pokies around that are not P. fasciata, they're not P. regalis...they're not anything. They're just a mut out there polluting the genetics of possibly both species within the hobby. At some point down the road the genetics of a large quantity of animals within the hobby is polluted.

This is why crossbreeding, for any reason, whether you're talking about fish, spiders, reptiles, whatever - is utterly irresponsible. If you go shopping for a regalis, you want a REGALIS, not some "sorta, kinda" regalis-like pokey.

You have to be either completely ignorant of the possible ramifications of your actions, or inexcusably disrespectful of the hobby and species in question to intentional crossbreed these animals.

Ignorance is one thing, that can be assuaged. People who just don't give a damn are another story.

Peace


----------



## Great Basin Ben (Oct 11, 2010)

JimM said:


> Look here's the problem, and I suggest anyone considering crossbreeding take this to heart.
> 
> First, with the exception of a few aphonopelma species where pollution of the wild gene pool is a danger (and arguably has already happened), it's not about wild populations so much. The problem is that lets say you cross a regalis with a fasciata, just for your own curiosities sake. I'll even give the person the benefit of the doubt for this example, and suggest that they never had any intention of slings ever getting out into the hobby, but things happen. Life happens. You give some to a buddy who says he'll keep them, but for whatever reason he gives them away or sells them...or breeds them.
> 
> ...


I admittedly AM completely ignorant, and this is why I ask the questions that I do. I am COMPLETELY NEW to the hobby, and as such, hope to be as informed as possible. I try to be as educated as possible when it come to just about everything I find myself doing, and figured this is no different.

Your points, are exactly as I suspected, and I GREATLY APPRECIATE your time, and willingness to explain. 

I'd be interested to read anything about the muddying of the Aphonopelma that you mention as well. This was going to be my next question in regards to this topic. I am curious if for example if the Aphonopelma iodium is really just a hybridized, or even isolated sub-species of simple A. hentzi?


----------



## JimM (Oct 11, 2010)

No problem Ben.
PM me any time.

I'm not the one to speak on the specifics of Aphonopelma,  there are people doing the work trying to get a handle on all that.


----------



## ZergFront (Oct 11, 2010)

Already on there. Good idea though. Now if only we can make one for stupid bug fighting arenas.


----------



## k2power (Oct 11, 2010)

I personally do not have a problem with it if the breeder is completely upfront and ethical about it AND there is no chance of these crosses getting out into the wild and mating with wild species.  That is not likely in the US except for Aphonopelma where that could be a distinct problem.  This is really no different than orchid breeding and hybridization.  In many places in the tropics and subtropics, orchids are kept outside where the pollinators have the chance of taking pollen to or from a wild to hybridized plant slight as it may be and I have never heard of hybrids being developed that way, although with orchids it may be hard to prove.  From a personal viewpoint it would be neat to see outcomes of some crosses and it may even bring light to the relations of species and genera by answering questions about whether or not they are capable of reproduction when crossed (=closely related and recently diverged).

I can understand the desire for the preservation of wild species but I wonder how may of us have hybrids or have bred spiders from widely differing locales that we thought and were told were the same species.  Truth is we don't have much location data on any of our spiders to begin with.  I can't imagine importers keeping good notes on the closest town an individual spider is caught from or lat/long in the event there is no town or village nearby..  I believe it rarely happens, maybe only in the US some.  We have already muddied the locality specific genomes so have species level mutts in many cases, which are scientifically useless for comparisons, descriptions and the like because they do not represent the unique genetics of a given locality.


----------



## AphonopelmaTX (Oct 11, 2010)

Where's the data to back up that hybridization occurs in captivity and it's effects on any population wild or captive?  If phylogenetic relationships within the Theraphosidae are so poorly understood, how would you know if you have a hybrid or not?

Here's an interesting article about hybrid speciation from National Geographic:
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2005/07/0727_050727_evolution.html


----------



## ajhere (Oct 12, 2010)

im a novice in this hobby but cn u even hybrid or crossbreed a t. i never seen one just heard bad arguements bout it im just wondering have any seen one just wondering no need to stir thngs up


----------



## Alex G (Oct 12, 2010)

ajhere said:


> im a novice in this hobby but cn u even hybrid or crossbreed a t. i never seen one just heard bad arguements bout it im just wondering have any seen one just wondering no need to stir thngs up


Yes, you can. I guess what I'M wondering is, if it looks like a duck and it quacks like a duck, does the average hobbyist really care whether it's a duck or not? I could sort of understand for breeders that hybrids might have throwbacks to the wrong lineage, but if it's within the same Genus with similar looking parents, who is going to notice or care? Or, hypothetically, what if a hybrid was made that was faster growing, more docile, and more hardy than either of the originals? Would it still be unethical to sell this new hybridized T?


----------



## KnightinGale (Oct 12, 2010)

I had read that the offspring of cross-bred tarantulas, even in the same genus, are most often (apart from not having the best of both parents) unable to subsequently breed and produce their own offspring. Rather like mules. If such were true, it would seem particularly pointless to make them. (I don't really like mules either.) However, since most anti-cross-breeding people seem concerned with keeping species' pure, I guess that book must be out of date. Does this mean that there have been several documented "mutt" tarantulas bred now that have had the capability to breed themselves? Does anybody have any links to studies on the subject? 

Thanks,

Knight in Gale


----------



## Bill S (Oct 12, 2010)

There are lots of rumors of hybrids on the market, but it's hard to say how many of these are really hybrids.  Tarantula taxonomy is still a bit cloudy for some of the popular groups of tarantulas, and misidentified species are not rare in the hobby.  With new wild populations being tapped into to supply the hobby trade we're getting variations of known species and sometimes new unrecognized species tossed into the mix.  Hybrids are SOMETIMES sterile, but certainly not always.  Sterile hybrids are generally the result of crossing two animals that are fairly closely related but have a different number of chromosome pairs.  But if two closely related species of tarantula that have the same number of chromosome pairs are bred together, there's a good chance their offspring will be able to breed and multiply.


----------



## Suzjohnson (Oct 12, 2010)

Well, we know it's going to happen and we also know that those spiders are eventually going to make it into the hands of others that believe they are mating true to true.  Makes me happy I'm collecting and enjoying tarantulas now rather than 20 years in the future.


----------



## captmarga (Oct 12, 2010)

Bill S said:


> There are lots of rumors of hybrids on the market, but it's hard to say how many of these are really hybrids.  Tarantula taxonomy is still a bit cloudy for some of the popular groups of tarantulas, and misidentified species are not rare in the hobby.  With new wild populations being tapped into to supply the hobby trade we're getting variations of known species and sometimes new unrecognized species tossed into the mix.  Hybrids are SOMETIMES sterile, but certainly not always.  Sterile hybrids are generally the result of crossing two animals that are fairly closely related but have a different number of chromosome pairs.  But if two closely related species of tarantula that have the same number of chromosome pairs are bred together, there's a good chance their offspring will be able to breed and multiply.


I am not trying to stir the pot, nor even keep this thread alive.  BUT as a genetics researcher AND the registrar for the Am. Donkey and Mule Soc...

Here goes. 

Mules are true hybrids.  They are the result of crossing a donkey to a horse (a hinny is for all practical purposes a mule, stallion x jennet, instead of jack x mare).  Donkeys have 62 chromosomes, horses have 64, mules/hinnies have 63.  F1 crosses (half donkey, half horse) are sterile 100% of the time if male, 1:1,000,000 females is fertile.  This has also been shown to be the case in cat hybrids (Bengal cats).  The F1 males are sterile, only when F3 (87.5% domestic cat) is reached are the males reliably fertile. 

IF tarantulas have different chromosome counts in different species, then yes, you would have strange hybrids all over the place, and some would be sterile.  If not, the line is blurred, as with breeding dogs.  All dogs have the same chromosome count, regardless of "breed".  Cross a boxer to a dachshund and you still have a dog, not a mule.  Eventual cross-breeding of all sorts of dogs produces the Pariah-type dog, a generic, hardy mutt.  

Crossbreeding between two species, done long enough, with careful selection, can create a new breed (the Morgan Horse is an example).  But it takes many generations of animals, and there will be excellent animals, culls, some that have all of the characteristics of one parent breed, some that are a blend. 

In recreating an endangered breed, the males from the endangered breed are crossed back to females that are similar in type (creating halfbreds, or F1s) and then again and again until the F4 or F5 generation, which is nearly pure.  With no recordable breeding records for most inverts, who would know how to keep track and be sure? 

It's known that pet animals are released into the wild all the time.  Cross-breeding COULD occur this way as well.  As a T owner, I'd prefer to see pure-bred as long as possible. 

Just my input. 

Marga


----------



## KnightinGale (Oct 12, 2010)

Hey, thanks Bill and Captmarga. That clarifies alot for me as to how this actually works. I certainly didn't know the part about the chromosome number being the relevant factor. I did know that "hybrid" as a term is often misused. I learned that back when they decided that it was no longer an appropriate term for wolf/dog cross-breeds. Or rather, that it never was an appropriate term and they decided to stop using it for that purpose.  
  I find genetics in general quite fascinating, but the most I've really looked into them was in regards to colours and dilutions in horses, so it was cool to learn something new today.
Cheers!

Knight in Gale


----------



## pwilson5 (Oct 12, 2010)

is this where i go for some hybrids? you are selling them right?


----------



## JimM (Oct 12, 2010)

Alex G said:


> Yes, you can. I guess what I'M wondering is, if it looks like a duck and it quacks like a duck, does the average hobbyist really care whether it's a duck or not? I could sort of understand for breeders that hybrids might have throwbacks to the wrong lineage, but if it's within the same Genus with similar looking parents, who is going to notice or care? Or, hypothetically, what if a hybrid was made that was faster growing, more docile, and more hardy than either of the originals? Would it still be unethical to sell this new hybridized T?


It's a question of maintaining the integrity of the species, not so much about who knows or cares.

How would you like to at some point, not be able to obtain an actual P. fasciata? I don't know about you...but I would care.


----------



## Alex G (Oct 12, 2010)

JimM said:


> It's a question of maintaining the integrity of the species, not so much about who knows or cares.
> 
> How would you like to at some point, not be able to obtain an actual P. fasciata? I don't know about you...but I would care.


One could argue that the integrity of a species is already disturbed the moment it was picked up and put in a glass tank to be fed a small selection of insects compared to the variety it might encounter in the wild. I'm not for or against hybrids, I just don't understand why people are always either indifferent to them or believe they're the cancer killing a hobby.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Anastasia (Oct 12, 2010)

This thread not first nor last on this subject
I actually had a dream not long time ago I cross bred regalis with metallica and ...
end up wit bunch of "regalica's" 
and ornata with metallica made cute little "ornatica's" 
Man! we need more POECS!!!


PS, NOW, that was only dream


----------



## JimM (Oct 12, 2010)

Alex G said:


> One could argue that the integrity of a species is already disturbed the moment it was picked up and put in a glass tank to be fed a small selection of insects compared to the variety it might encounter in the wild. I'm not for or against hybrids, I just don't understand why people are always either indifferent to them or believe they're the cancer killing a hobby.



With respect - no you can't argue that at all. Diet is neither here nor there with regard to what we're actually talking about here.  Your analogy is beyond throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

I also never said they are a cancer killing the hobby. I simply explained possible ramifications of hybridization, and why it should be discouraged.

People are indifferent them out of ignorance or apathy.


----------



## Alex G (Oct 12, 2010)

JimM said:


> With respect - no you can't argue that at all. Diet is neither here nor there with regard to what we're actually talking about here.  Your analogy is beyond throwing the baby out with the bathwater.
> 
> I also never said they are a cancer killing the hobby. I simply explained possible ramifications of hybridization, and why it should be discouraged.
> 
> People are indifferent them out of ignorance or apathy.


The diet was one of several components to that analogy, the point of which was to point out that no part of this hobby is natural for the spiders, and no, _you_ never said it was the cancer killing the hobby, that was hyperbole. I'm still not understanding the issue with hybridization, if the animals in question are labeled and sold as such. Coming from reptiles, there are many people who like the way crossbred animals look, and actively seek them out and specialize in them. Mesozoic Reptiles jumps to mind. There are also people who think that they're hideous and want nothing to do with them and feel that they are polluting the hobby. I guess what I'm asking is, why are you right on this and everyone who is indifferent or likes hybrids is wrong?

-Off topic- New to this board's system, why are my posts not being counted?


----------



## Bill S (Oct 12, 2010)

Alex G said:


> One could argue that the integrity of a species is already disturbed the moment it was picked up and put in a glass tank .....


My first reaction to this statement was similar to Jim's.  But then as I thought about it I think I figured out where your information got crossed.  The integrity of the species remains the same until you hybridize it - but the ecological viability of an organism is lost as soon as the animal is removed from the wild.  I suspect this is what you were thinking of.  Once an animal is removed from the wild natural breeding population it is no longer a component of the ecosystem.


----------



## Bill S (Oct 12, 2010)

KnightinGale said:


> I did know that "hybrid" as a term is often misused. I learned that back when they decided that it was no longer an appropriate term for wolf/dog cross-breeds. Or rather, that it never was an appropriate term and they decided to stop using it for that purpose.


This might be drifting a tiny bit from arachnids, but the wolf/dog issue touches on something that does fit here (sort of).  Back a number of decades a biologist named Konrad Lorenz theorized that breeds of dogs were so diverse because they had multiple canine ancestors mixed into the pot.  Depending on geographical area the ancestors of the modern dog included wolves, coyotes, jackals, and other canines.  The different balances in the mix brought different features into the species "_Canis familiaris_".  This was a popular theory until modern technologies allowed better genetic research, which blew that theory out of the water.  Wolves and dogs both have the same number of chromosome pairs - but coyotes, jackals, etc., have different numbers.  It is now overwhelmingly accepted that the modern dog is derived completely from the wolf.  Just a lot of selective breeding over a great amount of time shaped the results.


----------



## JimM (Oct 12, 2010)

Alex G said:


> The diet was one of several components to that analogy, the point of which was to point out that no part of this hobby is natural for the spiders, and no, _you_ never said it was the cancer killing the hobby, that was hyperbole. I'm still not understanding the issue with hybridization, if the animals in question are labeled and sold as such. Coming from reptiles, there are many people who like the way crossbred animals look, and actively seek them out and specialize in them. Mesozoic Reptiles jumps to mind. There are also people who think that they're hideous and want nothing to do with them and feel that they are polluting the hobby. I guess what I'm asking is, why are you right on this and everyone who is indifferent or likes hybrids is wrong?
> 
> -Off topic- New to this board's system, why are my posts not being counted?


For starters, Bill is indeed correct that we're talking about two different things with regard to "integrity" of the species. I'm speaking of genetics - period.

As far as right and wrong, I'm not "right fighting" at all. Just presenting a point of view and why I feel that way. Something labeled or sold as a hybrid at one point in time is ultimately meaningless as they will not always be that way. You can't control who gets all those offspring, or what they do with them, or what they choose to do with them.

As far as the problem with hybrids, or what in my view is a potential problem, I spelled that out as best I can above.

I come from reptiles as well, and fish going even further back.
My feelings are the same across the board. The American Cichlid Society for instance had a big problem with the "Parrot" Cichlids, and for good reason IMO.

Someone crosses a hybrid male with a true female, then sells off the offspring...pretty soon you have people selling animals as species X or Y...and truly they are not. Now keep in mind I'm not running around screaming and panicking about hybrids, just trying to present thoughts as to why they are in my view a bad thing for the hobby in general.


----------



## k2power (Oct 12, 2010)

Do we know for sure the purity of what tarantulas we have right now.  Not unless we caught it ourselves and even then there are questions about what it is.  Same goes for wild caught except we dont know exactly where it is from so in some cases we may not know exactly what it is.  Even with breeding tarantulas of a single species we may be breeding tarantulas together from two separate populations that would have never mixed in the first place (eg. an island form with a mainland form or two members from opposite ends of the range).  So in a sense we have already mixed genes that would have never mixed.  There is more to it than chromosome number population genetics is important in keeping true naturally occurring species lines correct.  Kingsnakes and cornsnakes come to mind.  Think about the variation among populations across the ranges....striking.  Mixing them would only create a species but not the proper subspecies or even locality specific form.  Now tarantulas dont have as much variation that I see so visually in snakes and there may only be subtle differences but genetically you could have an artificially created non naturally occurring genetic mix and not know it.  the truth is most of us don't have much knowledge of what we do own.  I do not think we shouldn't keep lines as pure as possible but also it is not the end of the world if some mixing occurs as it has already happened by now and we are happy with what we have now arent we?  I am unless they stop eating or have other problems.


----------



## Alex G (Oct 12, 2010)

JimM said:


> For starters, Bill is indeed correct that we're talking about two different things with regard to "integrity" of the species. I'm speaking of genetics - period.
> 
> As far as right and wrong, I'm not "right fighting" at all. Just presenting a point of view and why I feel that way. Something labeled or sold as a hybrid at one point in time is ultimately meaningless as they will not always be that way. You can't control who gets all those offspring, or what they do with them, or what they choose to do with them.


Oh, I see now. That was my mistake. And you make a good point, you CAN'T control what will happen to the offspring, who they will go to and what they will be sold or given as.


> The American Cichlid Society for instance had a big problem with the "Parrot" Cichlids, and for good reason IMO.


I'm not at all familiar with fish, could you elaborate on this for me?


----------



## JimM (Oct 12, 2010)

k2power said:


> Do we know for sure the purity of what tarantulas we have right now.  Not unless we caught it ourselves and even then there are questions about what it is.  Same goes for wild caught except we dont know exactly where it is from so in some cases we may not know exactly what it is.  Even with breeding tarantulas of a single species we may be breeding tarantulas together from two separate populations that would have never mixed in the first place (eg. an island form with a mainland form or two members from opposite ends of the range).  So in a sense we have already mixed genes that would have never mixed.  There is more to it than chromosome number population genetics is important in keeping true naturally occurring species lines correct.  Kingsnakes and cornsnakes come to mind.  Think about the variation among populations across the ranges....striking.  Mixing them would only create a species but not the proper subspecies or even locality specific form.  Now tarantulas dont have as much variation that I see so visually in snakes and there may only be subtle differences but genetically you could have an artificially created non naturally occurring genetic mix and not know it.  the truth is most of us don't have much knowledge of what we do own.  I do not think we shouldn't keep lines as pure as possible but also it is not the end of the world if some mixing occurs as it has already happened by now and we are happy with what we have now arent we?  I am unless they stop eating or have other problems.








There's always unknowns...that's pretty much a constant, but we don't consider those unknowns and make the huge leap that it's now OK to be careless.

"well, there may be some manufacturing defects in my engine...so no point in changing the oil"


----------



## JimM (Oct 12, 2010)

Alex G said:


> Oh, I see now. That was my mistake. And you make a good point, you CAN'T control what will happen to the offspring, who they will go to and what they will be sold or given as.
> 
> I'm not at all familiar with fish, could you elaborate on this for me?


Ahh...the infamous parrot cichlid. (Not to be confused with Hoplarchus psittacus, the actual parrot cichlid) is a hideous cross between several Central/South american cichlids. 

The reaction of the ACA was basically "we're not amused"
A blight on the hobby they are. As with tarantulas (and reptiles IMO) the many naturally occurring species and color phases makes hybrids at best silly.


----------



## Scoolman (Oct 12, 2010)

captmarga said:


> I am not trying to stir the pot, nor even keep this thread alive.  BUT as a genetics researcher AND the registrar for the Am. Donkey and Mule Soc...
> 
> Here goes.
> 
> ...


Eloquently worded. I think this puts it into the simplest explanation. 
I do not believe the genetics of tarantulas is yet fully understood, and it is a given that pets, of all varieties, are regularly, and irresponsibly dumped into whatever habitat in closest. It is bad enough that invasive species have taken hold in many areas they do not belong, disrupting the natural cycle. What could be the result of unknown, unstudied species invading non-native habitats?
I have posed the question about tracking breeding, and offspring and have routinely been told it is too difficult to do. With this in mind, how would anyone ever know what was bred with what? Tarantula identification is difficult enough as it is without adding hybrids into the mix.

I would like to thank everyone for keeping this discussion informed and educated. There is plenty of useful information, and valid points available here.


----------



## Obelisk (Oct 12, 2010)

I'm not a big fan of cross-breeding T's because it creates spiders that blur the line between the species. I wouldn't like it at all if, let's say I'm looking for a certain species, but a large portion of the captives available are from a mixed lineage and thus might not have the patterns, colors, behavior, etc that I'm looking for.


----------



## Chris_Skeleton (Oct 12, 2010)

k2power said:


> Even with breeding tarantulas of a single species we may be breeding tarantulas together from two separate populations that would have never mixed in the first place (eg. an island form with a mainland form or two members from opposite ends of the range).  So in a sense we have already mixed genes that would have never mixed.  There is more to it than chromosome number population genetics is important in keeping true naturally occurring species lines correct.  Kingsnakes and cornsnakes come to mind.  Think about the variation among populations across the ranges....striking.  Mixing them would only create a species but not the proper subspecies or even locality specific form.


This thread is about the crossbreeding and hybridization of DIFFERENT species. Someone will have to shed light on the locale information, but I don't see how breeding different Ts of the same species from different locales is anything to worry about. You breed a G. rosea from one locale with a G. rosea from another and you are still gonna have a G. rosea. Heck, you breed a G. rosea RCF with a G. rosea and you get a mix of G. rosea and RCF, but it's still a G. rosea. 

Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't all cornsnakes the same species, E. guttata, they just have different subspecies, much like the dog. So I don't see how you can compare breeding snakes that are the SAME species to breeding Ts that are not. 

If anything I say is wrong, please correct me, as I'm no expert.


----------



## Bill S (Oct 12, 2010)

Chris_Skeleton said:


> Someone will have to shed light on the locale information, but I don't see how breeding different Ts of the same species from different locales is anything to worry about.


If you use a species that has a large geographical range, and shows a fair amount of physical variation within that geographical range, you might be crossing different species without realizing it.  For example, _Aphonopelma chalcodes_.  There is taxonomic work being done on the _Aphonopelma_ in the US, and in the end some widespread species like _chalcodes_ may be divided into different species.  So if you had crossed two _A. chalcodes_ from different geographical locations, and those two populations are later recognized to be different species - you've got hybrids.


----------



## k2power (Oct 13, 2010)

I may have not worded it well but mixing tarantulas of the same species from differing locales may be a slightly less offensive version of a hybrid to some people.  Yes all corn snakes are E guttata BUT mixing FL keys subspecies and Great Plains or Okeetees is not much different than a hybridization of closely related but different species due to the snakes unique locality specific genetics and likely non-mixing of populations.  Our traditional understanding of species has been dramatically changed with our interpetation of genetic differences.  I called it interpretation because species we now recognize through genetic and molecular means will undoubtedly change in the future as we learn more and further refine our definition of species.  This is relevant in that as was stated earlier, some of our pure species today may actually be tomorrow mutts.  This is based on differing definitions of species now and in the future and the results of todays crossings would be tomorrows hybrids.  Today most hybrids are among species of the same genera and we don't have a way of knowing what is pure now much less the future so it is mut to worry too much about it.  I am not saying we should try to maintain purity but I beleve we should go a step further and try to develop locality lineages whenever possible.  In reptiles the hybrids are not too common among species but mutations are propagated a lot. Some like them...I do not. 

The comparison to dog breeds is somewhat different in that breeds were artificially created hybrids much like artificial tarantula hybrids but locality specific subspecies are natural.  

My point is that I wouldn't call breeding hybrids irresponsible UNLESS there is deception involved to make a buck or get rid of spiderlings or hybrids that are released in the wild.  I personally would not get a hybrid of differing tarantula species but don't have much of a problem with locality mutts.  The cream of the crop are locality specific animals whether wild or captive propagated in my opinion.  The problem is from lack of records and that will remain a problem in perpetuity. 

The definiton of crossbreeding could be large or small and is an interesting topic.  I have always enjoyed the subtle differences in snakes among ranges and always tried to preserve locality specific types but the truth is our lack of information  of species half a world away or more makes it difficult to preserve locality specific genetic lines.  The only caveat is that maybe tarantula dealers may be able to identify the localities that some wild caught species are most likely to occur from and disseminate that information for species that are from very narrow locales.  Wide ranging species may not be feasible.  My thought is that there are some small areas that tarantula collecting occurs within a species range versus throughout and that information is out there somewhere.

Keep the insight coming


----------



## Rowdy Hotel (Oct 13, 2010)

I'm in the reptile and fish hobbies as well, it's amusing to see the differences in feeling towards hybridization in their respective hobbies. On one extreme you have the dart froggers (like myself), who cringe at the notion that some person has ever intentionally or otherwise created a hybrid dart frog. Not only is mixing species highly frowned upon, but mixing subspecies of species is also just as bad. Many dart frog species, such as dendrobates tinctorious, have many subspecies in many locales: New Rivers, Sipaliwinis, Suriname Cobalts to name a few. If a hobbyist was known to mix species, they'd probably be blackballed from the hobby as many darts are endangered because they live only in tiny pockets of rain forests, isolated from others. 

You also have the milksnake nuts and other colubrid keepers. The genus Lampropeltis has many species which are closely related and readily breed with others. Many keeprs intentionally mix species to try to create snakes with different patterns than anything found in nature, while others mix different subspecies or locales stating that it happens in nature in areas with overlapping species boundaries. 

I just take the dart frog approach to all my animals. Don't mix species, ever...period. I know it happens in nature where subspecies overlap, but that's the only place where it is fine. In captivity I think it would be best if people tried to preserve the species' pure genetics to prevent it from going extinct through genetic pollution in the hobby.


----------



## Mister Internet (Oct 13, 2010)

I'm going to be perfectly honest and just say that I had no idea this "problem" was even REMOTELY prevalent enough to warrant a call to action/cause/organization.  I mean, I'm sure it happens, and I'm sure it's better for everyone if it doesn't, but like, a CAUSE?

Maybe I'm sheltered.  I've been keeping T's for almost a decade and I've never even had a hybrid offered to me.


----------



## Alex G (Oct 13, 2010)

Mister Internet said:


> I'm going to be perfectly honest and just say that I had no idea this "problem" was even REMOTELY prevalent enough to warrant a call to action/cause/organization.  I mean, I'm sure it happens, and I'm sure it's better for everyone if it doesn't, but like, a CAUSE?
> 
> Maybe I'm sheltered.  I've been keeping T's for almost a decade and I've never even had a hybrid offered to me.


That you know of... 


Chris_Skeleton said:


> This thread is about the crossbreeding and hybridization of DIFFERENT species. Someone will have to shed light on the locale information, but I don't see how breeding different Ts of the same species from different locales is anything to worry about. You breed a G. rosea from one locale with a G. rosea from another and you are still gonna have a G. rosea. Heck, you breed a G. rosea RCF with a G. rosea and you get a mix of G. rosea and RCF, but it's still a G. rosea.
> 
> Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't all cornsnakes the same species, E. guttata, they just have different subspecies, much like the dog. So I don't see how you can compare breeding snakes that are the SAME species to breeding Ts that are not.
> 
> If anything I say is wrong, please correct me, as I'm no expert.





Bill S said:


> If you use a species that has a large geographical range, and shows a fair amount of physical variation within that geographical range, you might be crossing different species without realizing it.  For example, _Aphonopelma chalcodes_.  There is taxonomic work being done on the _Aphonopelma_ in the US, and in the end some widespread species like _chalcodes_ may be divided into different species.  So if you had crossed two _A. chalcodes_ from different geographical locations, and those two populations are later recognized to be different species - you've got hybrids.


Just wanted to clarify something about the corn snakes... the different colors and such you see in corns (E. g. guttata) are just morphs of the the same species... color varieties already naturally present, almost universally recessive, that have been brought out with repetitive captive breeding. The Florida Keys corns/Okeetee/Miami corns are another locality specific color phase of these animals, resulting in somewhat metallic, naturally hypomelanistic looking animals, animals with bold black patterning and bright oranges and reds, and animals with largely grey background coloration and bright oranges or reds, respectively. These are all still true corn snakes, and when bred to a plain ole normal, will produce plain ole normals that may or may not resemble the trait of their locality-specific parents. The Emory (Great Plains) Ratsnakes, on the other hand, are an entirely different subspecies, easily distinguishable from a true corn snake by their pattern and range. Mated with a cornsnake, they produce what is known as "Root Beer" corns, named for their sepia-toned appearance, but they are neither corns nor emorys.

Ok, sorry for nerding out on you all there! Corns were my first love in the herp/invert hobby, so I know a lot about them.


----------



## Scoolman (Oct 13, 2010)

Mister Internet said:


> I'm going to be perfectly honest and just say that I had no idea this "problem" was even REMOTELY prevalent enough to warrant a call to action/cause/organization.  I mean, I'm sure it happens, and I'm sure it's better for everyone if it doesn't, but like, a CAUSE?
> 
> Maybe I'm sheltered.  I've been keeping T's for almost a decade and I've never even had a hybrid offered to me.


An ounce of prevention...


----------



## jeryst (Oct 13, 2010)

I know this is sidetracking a bit, but does anyone know if anyone is doing genetic manipulation on T's?

I'm talking about stuff like the infamous "Glow fish" that were created through genetic manipulation/replacement.


----------



## k2power (Oct 13, 2010)

Yes the Great Plains rat is a recognized subspecies of the corn and I believe the keys morph is too.  If not it is protected by FL as one  I think.  I used corn snakes as an example of what we should strive for in tarantulas....preserving the genetic variation as much as possible at a population level just as the rosy boa, dart frog and some corn snake enthusiasts are doing. 

While matings of individuals of the same species form different places may produce the same species in offspring they are artificially genetically muddied and any population biologist will tell you they are useless scientifically.  Researchers are unable to get meaningful information about a species morphological differences across its range, DNA variation within a species and so on from an unnatural cross. On a hobby level hybridization should be avoided but scientifically it has no real bearing in natural systems unless hybrids escape and establish themselves and begin intermixing with wild spiders.  Then we have created a problem,  otherwise it is just our vanity calling it bad.  

I will use my pet store purchased pink-toe as an example.  It is an Avicularia we all agree and could be A. avicularia as advertised but not definitely.  After that we can't say decisively what it is.  First off, the genus probably has not seen the last stroke of the splitters brush and new species will likely be eventually derived from ones with large ranges.  Can we identify it definitively from a photo.  I doubt it as it seems that many of the genus look remarkably similar so that is out.  My next step in determinng what it is would be to try and track down my pet store's supplier to see if it is wild caught and can they tell me where it (probably not likely) or most of their "pink toes" come from.  If I have that information I can look up the species accounts to see what species occur in that area.  There may or may not be a good key in determing the species in Avicularia that could help too.  If a few of these steps produce dead ends, I am left with an Avicularia that may be Avic avic but I do not know for sure.  Is it ethical to mate it with another Avic avic to observe the process and undertake the challenge?  Why not.  Since we don't know exactly what it is I see no problem in mating it with another like it.  I personally would give it a try but would be forthright about what it may or may not be when finding spiderlings new homes.  They would be great for displays and mating with other questionalble lineage Avics but not for mating with those that have well documented lineages.  Those should carry a premium price due to the work to keep the genetic makeup as close to natural as possible.  But many people don't care about that and just want a pink toe because they are cute and docile and don't care that it may not represent a naturally occurring genotype.  

I feel we should just enjoy our spiders and not worry so much about the little things and put more energy into more useful matters relating to tarantulas such as habitat conservation.  We really need to SNITCH to mean something like...Starting Now International Tarantula Conservation Help.  that should be our focus so that we don't loose some of the se species in the wild forever.


----------



## What (Oct 14, 2010)

Scoolman said:


> An ounce of prevention...


Is promoting responsibility across the board in the hobby...not drumming up fear about a non-issue.

I made my points on their facebook page, pointed out their complete lack of citations for their info...some of their members came in and started calling names... My post was deleted. Case closed, a group that hides its criticism is not a group to associate with.

Hybrids are not something to be worried about, as Mr. I pointed out they are not even a common occurrence in the hobby. The double abdomen T in their logo is something that has been documented in "pure breeds" as well. We have *NO* documentation that hybridizing tarantulas has any greater risk associated with it than normal breedings(other than sterility). In fact, a very well respected theraphosid researcher had this to say:


Martin H. said:


> there are more examples of abnormalities in "pure" lines, than with hybrids.
> all the best,
> Martin


Their lines about "hybrids in the wild" or whatever are a red herring. Unless you are irresponsible or have your collection compromised by forces beyond your control you have no excuse for your Ts ending up in the wild. Not to mention unless you are breeding Aphonopelmas, your hybrid's chance to mate with another of its species in the "wild" is smaller than any odds I know of.

Telling hybrids apart is irrelevant(another red herring). Both the hybrids I have seen(albovagans & cambridgeiXirminia) have very distinctive looks and would be difficult to mistake for another T... Some of the pokie species are harder to tell apart.

There is also no mention of the fact that hybrids likely occur naturally in the wild in some areas, the ranges of the Brachypelmas are very close together/overlapping. 

(In b4 responsible people dont hybridize: http://www.european-arachnology.org/proceedings/13th/215-222_Schmidt.pdf And in b4 "hybrid lover!" yeah, I have a hybrid, here is my post from the infamous thread: http://www.arachnoboards.com/ab/showpost.php?p=1681833&postcount=196)

Anyway... Take their fear mongering with a grain of salt. I have said all Im going to say, if you have an issue or whatever PM me. 

*And go ahead and "snitch" on your fellow T keepers with hybrids while "keep[ing] the pure breeds pure"! I think thats the entire message of their group, it sounds familiar...*

(Did I Godwin there? Oops...its really more of a "first they came" kinda thing. And see! I can fear monger too!)


----------



## BillieJean (Oct 14, 2010)

What said:


> *And go ahead and "snitch" on your fellow T keepers with hybrids while "keep[ing] the pure breeds pure"! I think thats the entire message of their group, it sounds familiar...*


Don't be stupid! Be a smarty, come and join the Nazi party!


----------



## sharpfang (Oct 14, 2010)

Bill S said:


> If you use a species that has a large geographical range, and shows a fair amount of physical variation within that geographical range, you might be crossing different species without realizing it.  For example, _Aphonopelma chalcodes_.  There is taxonomic work being done on the _Aphonopelma_ in the US, and in the end some widespread species like _chalcodes_ may be divided into different species.  So if you had crossed two _A. chalcodes_ from different geographical locations, and those two populations are later recognized to be different species - you've got hybrids.


Same Dynamic applies to the Theraphosa Sp. "Burgundy" How many well-meaning Hobbyists *paired* specimens, from vastly seperated Locales of French Guyana - ONLY a couple = Don't fool yourself - and do Not "freak-out" and Hate someone about it either 



Bill S said:


> Tarantula taxonomy is still a bit cloudy for some of the popular groups of tarantulas, and misidentified species are not rare in the hobby.  Hybrids are SOMETIMES sterile, but certainly not always.  Sterile hybrids are generally the result of crossing two animals that are fairly closely related but have a different number of chromosome pairs.  But if two closely related species of tarantula that have the same number of chromosome pairs are bred together, there's a good chance their offspring will be able to breed and multiply.


Thus, it's also MORE likely, that the two specimens were BOTH, Sub-Species of the Same species. And w/ some more research and experimenting, that may in some cases - of Over-Lapping boundary T's {like Brachy's & Aphono's}, be proven-out over the years...Or we could go back into the Dark Ages of knowledge in the Hobby 

I have seen more than a couple examples of Ball Python & Woma crosses - I don't feel it is a useful *project*, but, I did Not give the Breeders Suga-Honey-Iced-Tea bout' it, and they even let me Hold a specimen  {quite odd combo}



captmarga said:


> I am not trying to stir the pot, nor even keep this thread alive.  BUT as a genetics researcher AND the registrar for the Am. Donkey and Mule Soc...
> 
> Here goes.
> 
> ...


And interesting input it is - Is it Not Hypothesized, that a Wooly Mammoth can be re-created "Jurrasic Park" style 

And what Continent did B. Angustum & B. Sabulosum originate  Could they even in the Realm-of-Possibility, be from the cross-breeding and Natural Selection of other Brachypelma Sp. combinations ? 



Alex G said:


> I guess what I'm asking is, why are you right on this and everyone who is indifferent or likes hybrids is wrong?


:? 



k2power said:


> Do we know for sure the purity of what tarantulas we have right now.  Not unless we caught it ourselves and even then there are questions about what it is.  Same goes for wild caught except we dont know exactly where it is from so in some cases we may not know exactly what it is.  Even with breeding tarantulas of a single species we may be breeding tarantulas together from two separate populations that would have never mixed in the first place (eg. an island form with a mainland form or two members from opposite ends of the range).  So in a sense we have already mixed genes that would have never mixed.  I do not think we shouldn't keep lines as pure as possible but also it is not the end of the world if some mixing occurs as it has already happened by now and we are happy with what we have now arent we?  I am unless they stop eating or have other problems.


Don't you desire an A.K.C. "papered" tarantula :razz: My beloved Black Labrador {Not even from that Country } "Sophie" once had in her ancestry, a Father - bred back to the Daughter = to ensure the likelihood of Blonde offspring  Only detectable w/ the EXTENDED family-tree I purchased......A.K.C. can easily trace back to the 70's w/ Labs, & Money.

It's _NOT_, the End-O-the-World!  And to think, some people used to Whole-Heartedly & Adamently beleive - That our Planet was FLAT 

"The End of the World, is right over that Horizon!"  



JimM said:


> There's always unknowns...


And there Always will be - No one individual, is Truely, a Know-it-All - Unless they have a MASTERS in "Life-Sciences"  



Mister Internet said:


> I'm going to be perfectly honest and just say that I had no idea this "problem" was even REMOTELY prevalent enough to warrant a call to action/cause/organization.  I mean, I'm sure it happens, and I'm sure it's better for everyone if it doesn't, but like, a CAUSE?
> 
> Maybe I'm sheltered.  I've been keeping T's for almost a decade and I've never even had a hybrid offered to me.


You can have one of Mine *Tee-Hee* - just don't Muddy the Hobby w/ it 



Scoolman said:


> An ounce of prevention...


And a Pound of "PURIST" ;P 

And ALL your Pulchra specimens came from a tight-knit LOCALE, and were Guaranteed to have ended up in your collection - via an Originally tracable, COMPLETELY Legal process & documentation out of BRAZIL, 2-your-door, right  



k2power said:


> ....preserving the genetic variation as much as possible at a population level just as the rosy boa, dart frog and some corn snake enthusiasts are doing.
> 
> While matings of individuals of the same species form different places may produce the same species in offspring they are artificially genetically muddied and any population biologist will tell you they are useless scientifically.  Researchers are unable to get meaningful information about a species morphological differences across its range, DNA variation within a species and so on from an unnatural cross. On a hobby level hybridization should be avoided but scientifically it has no real bearing in natural systems unless hybrids escape and establish themselves and begin intermixing with wild spiders.  Then we have created a problem,  otherwise it is just our vanity calling it bad.
> 
> I feel we should just enjoy our spiders and not worry so much about the little things and put more energy into more useful matters relating to tarantulas such as habitat conservation.  We really need to SNITCH to mean something like...Starting Now International Tarantula Conservation Help.  that should be our focus so that we don't loose some of the se species in the wild forever.


Like GENETICALLY altered Tomatoes  "Attack of the...." 

Ironically  Even though I crossed a Brachypelma Albopilosum w/ a Brachypelma Vagans = OMG 

My obsession w/ captive creatures started w/ Rosy Boas  and I religiously kept the precise Locale specimens distinct, and never "mixed" outside a few miles of type-specimens {thanx to collecting, and the Long-term efforts of Jerry Hartley & Randy Wright :worship:}
I had Clear Representation of: Anerys, Axanthics, Albinos, etc. Multiple seperate lines, locales. Was alotta Fun :razz: Fascinating creatures.

I do Not agree w/ crossing KINGS & CORNS, but I am Not gonna dislike, or Hate :evil: someone for it = *Sheesh* 
IMO - when a person get's All, _That_ upset bout' it :8o:8o They are ONLY hurting themselves, and their Own, Energy :clap:



What said:


> Is promoting responsibility across the board in the hobby...not drumming up fear about a non-issue.
> 
> I made my points on their facebook page, pointed out their complete lack of citations for their info...some of their members came in and started calling names... My post was deleted. Case closed, a group that hides its criticism is not a group to associate with.
> 
> ...


What ? I cannot hear you, "What" ?.....2 much Grapevine mumbling 

& Do Not forget Pepper, Paprika, Ceyanne, Oregano & other Herbs 



BillieJean said:


> Don't be stupid! Be a smarty, come and join the Nazi party!


Everyone Loves SNITCHES & Nazi's, right  - We should be "taught" to Hate potential "Hybridizers" of Tarantulas though.
Let's go Euthenize ALL the Galapagos Is. Iguanas {3 types now}, and shoot the Polar Bear/Grizzly crosses! While we are @ it! *march!~march!*


----------



## Bill S (Oct 14, 2010)

sharpfang said:


> ... And to think, some people used to Whole-Heartedly & Adamently beleive - That our Planet was FLAT
> 
> "The End of the World, is right over that Horizon!"


I'll leave most of your post to others who may be more inspired, but just as a bit of historical trivia I'll tackle the "flat Earth" myth.  The story many of us may have heard in school about Chris Columbus proving that the Earth was round is false.  Mariners of his time knew that the Earth was round and that you couldn't see to the end of a flat ocean.  They just didn't know that there was a whole set of continents out there waiting to be discovered.  The ancient Romans knew that the Earth was a globe, and portrayed it as such in statues of their gods holding the Earth, on coins, etc.  Some of the early Roman mathematicians and philosophers had even calculated (with pretty decent accuracy) the diameter of the Earth.  I have no idea why historians in the 20th century conjured up the story of the "Flat Earth", but they did, and they tried (somewhat successfully) to convince generations of American school children that the "Round Earth Discovery" was a shocking and important outcome of Columbus' voyage.

The "Flat Earth Society" is a purely modern invention, presumably by people seriously lacking a life.


----------



## sharpfang (Oct 14, 2010)

Bill S said:


> The story many of us may have heard in school about Chris Columbus proving that the Earth was round is false.  I have no idea why historians in the 20th century conjured up the story of the "Flat Earth", but they did, and they tried (somewhat successfully) to convince generations of American school children that the "Round Earth Discovery" was a shocking and important outcome of Columbus' voyage.
> 
> The "Flat Earth Society" is a purely modern invention, presumably by people seriously lacking a life.


Yeah Bill, well, "_I_, have No idea"  why using the same line-of-thinking, That people will somehow "beleive", that Columbus "DISCOVERED" North America!  Apparently the Natives had Not discovered themselves & their environment yet 

We have "learned" much from School Man  

Sometimes ya just gotta consider the sources , and use common sense 

And thanx to Columbus Day  All my shipping/receiving was off a day....


----------



## BlackCat (Oct 14, 2010)

There are still people who believe the Earth is flat. http://theflatearthsociety.org/cms/


----------



## Bill S (Oct 14, 2010)

sharpfang said:


> Yeah Bill, well, "_I_, have No idea"  why using the same line-of-thinking, That people will somehow "beleive", that Columbus "DISCOVERED" North America!  Apparently the Natives had Not discovered themselves & their environment yet


Columbus DID discover North America.  The fact that Asians did too when they crossed the Bering Strait doesn't change that.  The fact that Vikings established a short term colony in North America long before Columbus crossed the ocean doesn't change it either.  As of when Columbus sailed west, Europe in general did not know anything about the continents out there, and Columbus was the first to bring back proof that they were there and detailed information about how to get there.  Columbus was not the first human to find North America, but he did make the discovery and opened the possibilities of exploration and colonization to Western Civilization.  It's a little difficult to deny the impact of his discovery (unless you are a devout Flat Earth Society member).


----------



## codykrr (Oct 15, 2010)

Its funny how these threads wind up.

I wont join a group, but I have posted my feelings towards hybrids, and the idiots that breed them.  

Ill say this, If someone sells me a hybrid it will be killed. 

END OF STORY.


----------



## MIC (Oct 15, 2010)

In my place we say that if you cannot avoid the rape just enjoy it.

We are considering all the times if something is legal, ethical, useful and ...... without considering that if something is possible to happen will take place anyway. This is the nature of humans, we like it or not. 

Hybridization, Cloning, DNA manipulation and alteration and all this stuff are occuring and will continue to occur regardless laws and ethics.

The only hope to this is to reuse the intelligence, used to create such a morph, to heal the wounds if any. 

So, lets play the role of a small God, until a space rock or virus or ..... will exterminate us off the face of the earth.

And do not consider that we are something important or that our actions is somehow determinant. For the Universe we are simply dust.


----------



## Scoolman (Oct 15, 2010)

Bill S said:


> Columbus DID discover North America.  The fact that Asians did too when they crossed the Bering Strait doesn't change that.  The fact that Vikings established a short term colony in North America long before Columbus crossed the ocean doesn't change it either.  As of when Columbus sailed west, Europe in general did not know anything about the continents out there, and Columbus was the first to bring back proof that they were there and detailed information about how to get there.  Columbus was not the first human to find North America, but he did make the discovery and opened the possibilities of exploration and colonization to Western Civilization.  It's a little difficult to deny the impact of his discovery (unless you are a devout Flat Earth Society member).


Columbus was lost when he stumbled upon the continent. And just happened to do so at a time when exploration was at the forefront of European conquest.
He should not be celebrated for anything more than pure dumb luck.


----------



## Scoolman (Oct 15, 2010)

MIC said:


> In my place we say that if you cannot avoid the rape just enjoy it.
> 
> We are considering all the times if something is legal, ethical, useful and ...... without considering that if something is possible to happen will take place anyway. This is the nature of humans, we like it or not.
> 
> ...


So you're saying that we should just give up because it is going to happen any way? 
I say no matter how big the foe or how daunting the task...
Never Give Up


----------



## LeilaNami (Oct 15, 2010)

I would like to clear up some incorrect things said about Canis lupus in this thread.  

Dog breeds are starting to be considered as distinct species from Canis lupus familiaris based on physical compatibility.  Some are much much further away from the original species and some are much closer.  The problem is, no one wants to do the work to revamp the taxonomic status which is also why birds are still in their own class Aves and not in the correct order Saurischia which should contain both lizard-hipped dinosaurs and birds.

Comparing dogs to tarantula hybridization is only analogous in the way that hybrids would rule the market instead of pure species.  The issue isn't really what they would do if they were released, but what they would do to the hobby itself.  Hybrids would muddle the market and no one would know what they had. 

 Cross-breeding itself wouldn't be irresponsible if done for science (within a scientific community or for your personal discovery should you choose to write a paper on it or continue the study later in a more professional environment).  I am particularly against *irresponsible* hybridization.  This would entail selling the hybrid slings in fear that it would be a game of species telephone as they were passed a long.  100+ hybrid slings floating around is a lot within our hobby. 

As was said before, I believe that hybridizing should be done if it benefited the animal or IMO was for scientific discovery.  I believe this is the case for other animals as well.


----------



## Bill S (Oct 16, 2010)

Scoolman said:


> Columbus was lost when he stumbled upon the continent. And just happened to do so at a time when exploration was at the forefront of European conquest.
> He should not be celebrated for anything more than pure dumb luck.


Not lost.  He had his bearings down well enough to repeat the journey several times and to provide information that many others were able to use to reach the new world.  He knew where he was - it was the location of the "Indian Continent" that was unknown.  None of the previous "discoverers" of North America were able to report the location to anyone else.  The various waves of Asians (later to be called "Native Americans") had no clue they'd found a new continent and they were unable to guide future people to this new land.  (They were probably the only "discoverers" who were actually lost.)  The Vikings left only vague references to western lands adjoining the north seas.  Columbus was the first to go there, report back to other people about the discovery, and provide maps and navigational information on how to get there.



> ...at a time when exploration was at the forefront of European conquest.


Exploration always precedes conquest.  The first wave of people who crossed the Bering Strait didn't have any people to conquer, but they started decimating the wildlife.  Later waves conquered or displaced the first waves.  This was still going on when Cortez landed - the Aztecs conquered those who preceded them into the Valley of Mexico.  In Europe empires had risen and fallen through conquests and reconquests for thousands of years before Columbus was born.  Same thing happened in all corners of the world.  It's what people do.  The European colonization of the Americas was no different than all the other colonizations all over the world throughout history and pre-history, going back to _Homo sapiens _vs Neanderthal and even before that.


----------



## Bill S (Oct 16, 2010)

LeilaNami said:


> I would like to clear up some incorrect things said about Canis lupus in this thread.
> 
> Dog breeds are starting to be considered as distinct species from Canis lupus familiaris based on physical compatibility.  Some are much much further away from the original species and some are much closer.  The problem is, no one wants to do the work to revamp the taxonomic status...


Dogs have long been classified as _Canis familiaris_, a separate species from _Canis lupus_, the wolf.  This is not new.  The "new" part is that their line of evolution is finally being clarified.


----------



## LeilaNami (Oct 16, 2010)

Bill S said:


> Dogs have long been classified as _Canis familiaris_, a separate species from _Canis lupus_, the wolf.  This is not new.  The "new" part is that their line of evolution is finally being clarified.


There are still several authorities that continue to classify the domestic dog as a subspecies.


----------



## MIC (Oct 17, 2010)

Scoolman said:


> So you're saying that we should just give up because it is going to happen any way?
> I say no matter how big the foe or how daunting the task...
> Never Give Up


No, I am saying what I have already mentioned.

"_The only hope to this is to reuse the intelligence, used to create such a morph, to heal the wounds if any_". 

I think, this isn't a give up statement.


----------



## Scoolman (Oct 17, 2010)

MIC said:


> No, I am saying what I have already mentioned.
> 
> "_The only hope to this is to reuse the intelligence, used to create such a morph, to heal the wounds if any_".
> 
> I think, this isn't a give up statement.


I understand. Learn from our mistakes, and don't repeat them.


----------



## VaporRyder (Jun 16, 2021)

Could someone accidentally create giant Ts by hybridisation? 









						Why Ligers Grow Bigger?
					

Ligers grow bigger than lions and tigers but why? One possible theory explains that the ligers lack growth inhibiting genes and because of that they grow bigger than lions and tigers.




					www.ligerworld.com
				




Since lions and tigers are both in the genus Panthera, does this not suggest that some combination of Poecilotheria (for example) could theoretically result in significantly larger offspring?

Obviously this would be unholy.

“There were were Nephilim on the earth in those days, and also after that…”


----------



## Neonblizzard (Jun 16, 2021)

VaporRyder said:


> Could someone accidentally create giant Ts by hybridisation?
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Netflix exclusive - "Spider King"

Reactions: Funny 2


----------



## VaporRyder (Jun 16, 2021)

.


----------

