Pics of panther hybrids anyone????

:D There definitely is crossing in nature. Technically the only way to be sure of a panthers locale is to hand pick one from the town itself. There are some geographical barriers between certain locales (islands for example) but there are many areas where there are crosses from nature. They are all panthers.

I am just speculating, but I imagine there would be almost no variation in the locales if they never ever could/did cross. If you look at nosy be panthers, they are all blue or green with maybe a few speckles of red. Nosy mitsios generally are green and yellow with red (I can't remember if there is any blue...) And nosy faly panthers are either blue or blue with white and they may have red speckling on the body mainly around the bars from what I've seen. They are all island locales.

Mainland locales seem to have more variation. Ambilobe for example can be just about any color with either red or blue bars. Ambanjas can also be just about any color with red or blue bars. Sambavas tend to be more red/yellow but can have black bars, blue bars, have a green or grey body, have an overall baby poop (in my opinion) look, and may or may not have extra white.

Maybe I'm completely wrong... Some one with more knowledge on the subject should chime in.
 
Cross-local breeding is going to happen, even if the purists would rather it did not. Those who want to keep pure locals can do so, and those who like crosses can have them. Its not mutally exclusive - both are entirely possible and both are currently happening. Get over it. And dont forget that many of the "pure" breeds in captivity do not totally match the original locals; humans have breed those that appeal to them the most (NoseBe being all blue isnt all that common in the wild), not according to what is natural.

Gimlie is a cross of mostly NoseBe with a little Ambilobe.
I have purposefully bred him with a pure Ambilobe, and so far the offspring look great. I also breed pure Nose Be and pure Ambilobe.

Gimlie:
DSC08723.jpg IMG_0980.jpg

full
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Other threads that have pictures of cross-locals:

https://www.chameleonforums.com/ambilobe-x-nosy-38884/
https://www.chameleonforums.com/mcnasty-his-nameless-brother-38014/
https://www.chameleonforums.com/mclovin-sgt-pepper-baby-quad-27213/
https://www.chameleonforums.com/mee...ld-sambava-x-ambanja-panther-chameleon-36592/
https://www.chameleonforums.com/update-my-boy-spyro-49251/


If you want to read debates about the right or wrongness of panther cross breeding, check these threads (or start your own, rather than take this thread off topic):
https://www.chameleonforums.com/breeding-true-bloodlines-27185/
https://www.chameleonforums.com/panther-hybrids-329/
https://www.chameleonforums.com/cross...panthers-31504
https://www.chameleonforums.com/crossbreeding-25079/
https://www.chameleonforums.com/why-n...ambilobe-7124/
https://www.chameleonforums.com/why-o...08/#post378125
https://www.chameleonforums.com/cross-breeding-40955
 
Last edited:
There seems to be a general misunderstanding about the definition of a locale, the barriers or lack there of between said locales, and what a barrier or lack there of between said locales means. I'm not trying to start a debate regarding the ethics or considerations of crossing locales, my opinion and rational for that opinion are fairly well known, but I do think its important to clarify some of the misconceptions that have seemed to have surfaced in this thread, as they are important to anyone looking to understand what locales are or how they are maintained in the wild.

From a general terminology standpoint, crossing different locales of Furcifer pardalis is in fact a form of hybridization or cross breeding. It does not need to be between different species to technically be hybridizing or cross breeding, it is simply the interbreeding of two groups, whether those groups be species, subspecies, populations, localities, breeds, etc.. By interbreeding two locales, you have hybridized or crossed the locales.

A locality is simply the subset of individuals from the entire population of a species that are found in a particular subsection of the range of the entire species. When a locality name is given to specimens from a given location it is typically because the individuals at that location tend to exhibit a set of characteristic that differentiate them from other named locales. Typically this set of characteristics is genetically coded resulting in a high likelihood of the next generation showing a similar set of characters. In the case of F. pardalis, these characteristics typically are a general combination of colors and patterns shown in the males.

While the range of some localities are easily defined, particularly when the locality is an island such as Nosy Be, Nosy Faly, Nosy Mitsio, etc., not all localities have as clear or defined boarders. For island localities, obviously the surrounding water provides a barrier to the exchange of genetic material with other localities. In some cases stretches of rivers, mountains, uninhabitable environments, etc., can similarly serve as a barrier to the exchange of genetic material. Finally, in some cases, the barrier to the exchange of genetic material between localities is simply distance. An important thing to note, however, is that these barriers are not perfect barriers and there is still genetic exchanges between locales, even to island locales. This exchange of genetic material is called gene flow.

While genetic material is still exchanged between localities, the fact remains that these localities maintain differing gene frequencies that result in the particular color characteristics. This is because this exchange in genetic material is done at such a low level that the localities maintain their characteristic look. This is true even between localities with less effective barriers (i.e. distance rather than a physical barrier).

There seems to be the most misunderstanding regarding cases of mainland locales where there are ineffective natural barriers and the majority of the limitation in gene flow is distance. In these cases, what ends up happening is that a continuum between locales is seen. This occurs because individuals do not move long distances in their generation to breed. If locale A and B are 100km away from each other and each individual only travels 5km in their generation to breed, the overall genetic contribution from locality A is all but washed out by the time any genetic material travels from the center of it's locality to the center of locality B. This is because each parent only gives 1/2 of their genes and it would take 20 generations any contribution from locale A to reach locale B. The result is that there is no change to the gene frequencies of each population even though there is gene flow.

The thing that people seem to misunderstand is gene flow and the exchange of genetic material on this level is completely different than taking an animal from Ambilobe and an animal from Ambanja and breeding them. This does not occur in the wild and arguing that there is no difference simply shows a complete misunderstanding of population genetics and gene flow. Saying there is no fence between locales as a justification for such hybridization being natural shows a similar lack of understanding of these principles. While the right of a keeper to perform such hybridizations in captivity is completely different, no one should ever claim such hybrids are natural or try to use the lack of effective barriers to gene flow as justification for such hybrids occurring naturally.

Obviously this goes back to the issue of how you then define each locale if no geographic barrier exists and distance is the driving genetic barrier. The important thing to remember is that a locality is simply where an animal came from. Our concept of a locality as far as what they look like, however, is simply a representation of what animals from a particular point in the natural continuum look like. While a certain amount of variation at each point is seen, the further you travel away from that point, the more variation you will observe. Therefore, within a limited range of that particular point, you would not expect to see a lot of variation that wouldn't simply be explained by natural in-location variation. Our designation of localities is based primarily on the assumption that an animal exported from a given locale was collected within a range of that locale that would minimize that additional observed variation. When exporter's labels prove unreliable, however, our designation is based on categorizing the animal based on its features and the range we know to be observed within a reasonable range of each given locale.

I'm sure that may have confused a lot of people but hopefully it makes sense to some.

Chris
 
sandrachameleon said:
Other threads that have pictures of cross-locals:

https://www.chameleonforums.com/ambilobe-x-nosy-38884/
https://www.chameleonforums.com/mcnasty-his-nameless-brother-38014/
https://www.chameleonforums.com/mclovin-sgt-pepper-baby-quad-27213/
https://www.chameleonforums.com/mee...ld-sambava-x-ambanja-panther-chameleon-36592/
https://www.chameleonforums.com/update-my-boy-spyro-49251/


If you want to read debates about the right or wrongness of panther cross breeding, check these threads (or start your own, rather than take this thread off topic):
https://www.chameleonforums.com/breeding-true-bloodlines-27185/
https://www.chameleonforums.com/panther-hybrids-329/
https://www.chameleonforums.com/cross...panthers-31504
https://www.chameleonforums.com/crossbreeding-25079/
https://www.chameleonforums.com/why-n...ambilobe-7124/
https://www.chameleonforums.com/why-o...08/#post378125
https://www.chameleonforums.com/cross-breeding-40955
Click to expand...

Yea guys, can we please stop derailing this thread? Lets see some more pics!
 
So Chris, are you saying that crosses never occur in nature or that certain crosses simply cannot happen? I'm a little confused as you said that there is gene flow from one locale to another, but then you say "no one should ever claim such hybrids are natural or try to use the lack of effective barriers to gene flow as justification for such hybrids occurring naturally."

OR are you just saying that the arguments in this thread are backed by false information?
 
Chris Anderson said:
There seems to be a general misunderstanding about the definition of a locale, the barriers or lack there of between said locales, and what a barrier or lack there of between said locales means. I'm not trying to start a debate regarding the ethics or considerations of crossing locales, my opinion and rational for that opinion are fairly well known, but I do think its important to clarify some of the misconceptions that have seemed to have surfaced in this thread, as they are important to anyone looking to understand what locales are or how they are maintained in the wild.

From a general terminology standpoint, crossing different locales of Furcifer pardalis is in fact a form of hybridization or cross breeding. It does not need to be between different species to technically be hybridizing or cross breeding, it is simply the interbreeding of two groups, whether those groups be species, subspecies, populations, localities, breeds, etc.. By interbreeding two locales, you have hybridized or crossed the locales.

A locality is simply the subset of individuals from the entire population of a species that are found in a particular subsection of the range of the entire species. When a locality name is given to specimens from a given location it is typically because the individuals at that location tend to exhibit a set of characteristic that differentiate them from other named locales. Typically this set of characteristics is genetically coded resulting in a high likelihood of the next generation showing a similar set of characters. In the case of F. pardalis, these characteristics typically are a general combination of colors and patterns shown in the males.

While the range of some localities are easily defined, particularly when the locality is an island such as Nosy Be, Nosy Faly, Nosy Mitsio, etc., not all localities have as clear or defined boarders. For island localities, obviously the surrounding water provides a barrier to the exchange of genetic material with other localities. In some cases stretches of rivers, mountains, uninhabitable environments, etc., can similarly serve as a barrier to the exchange of genetic material. Finally, in some cases, the barrier to the exchange of genetic material between localities is simply distance. An important thing to note, however, is that these barriers are not perfect barriers and there is still genetic exchanges between locales, even to island locales. This exchange of genetic material is called gene flow.

While genetic material is still exchanged between localities, the fact remains that these localities maintain differing gene frequencies that result in the particular color characteristics. This is because this exchange in genetic material is done at such a low level that the localities maintain their characteristic look. This is true even between localities with less effective barriers (i.e. distance rather than a physical barrier).

There seems to be the most misunderstanding regarding cases of mainland locales where there are ineffective natural barriers and the majority of the limitation in gene flow is distance. In these cases, what ends up happening is that a continuum between locales is seen. This occurs because individuals do not move long distances in their generation to breed. If locale A and B are 100km away from each other and each individual only travels 5km in their generation to breed, the overall genetic contribution from locality A is all but washed out by the time any genetic material travels from the center of it's locality to the center of locality B. This is because each parent only gives 1/2 of their genes and it would take 20 generations any contribution from locale A to reach locale B. The result is that there is no change to the gene frequencies of each population even though there is gene flow.

The thing that people seem to misunderstand is gene flow and the exchange of genetic material on this level is completely different than taking an animal from Ambilobe and an animal from Ambanja and breeding them. This does not occur in the wild and arguing that there is no difference simply shows a complete misunderstanding of population genetics and gene flow. Saying there is no fence between locales as a justification for such hybridization being natural shows a similar lack of understanding of these principles. While the right of a keeper to perform such hybridizations in captivity is completely different, no one should ever claim such hybrids are natural or try to use the lack of effective barriers to gene flow as justification for such hybrids occurring naturally.

Obviously this goes back to the issue of how you then define each locale if no geographic barrier exists and distance is the driving genetic barrier. The important thing to remember is that a locality is simply where an animal came from. Our concept of a locality as far as what they look like, however, is simply a representation of what animals from a particular point in the natural continuum look like. While a certain amount of variation at each point is seen, the further you travel away from that point, the more variation you will observe. Therefore, within a limited range of that particular point, you would not expect to see a lot of variation that wouldn't simply be explained by natural in-location variation. Our designation of localities is based primarily on the assumption that an animal exported from a given locale was collected within a range of that locale that would minimize that additional observed variation. When exporter's labels prove unreliable, however, our designation is based on categorizing the animal based on its features and the range we know to be observed within a reasonable range of each given locale.

I'm sure that may have confused a lot of people but hopefully it makes sense to some.

Chris
Click to expand...

well said, "like always":cool:

this makes ALOT of sense to me and thank you for clarifying these sadly COMMON misconceptions.


off topic(sort of) Now i gotta say by dream cross is 50% Nosy Be and 50% sambava:cool:
 
pssh said:
So Chris, are you saying that crosses never occur in nature or that certain crosses simply cannot happen? I'm a little confused as you said that there is gene flow from one locale to another, but then you say "no one should ever claim such hybrids are natural or try to use the lack of effective barriers to gene flow as justification for such hybrids occurring naturally."

OR are you just saying that the arguments in this thread are backed by false information?
Click to expand...

intersting...i thought females of a given "locale" would rather mate with the color morph it is associated with in nature....example :thus nosy be females would go for the most bluish greens of nosy be males, and keep the the nosy be morph going.....not just by physical barries only but the i guess "biological interfernce" of female panther prefernces of mating with particular males.....


im not stating this is true, but wondering if anyone can carify this to me if this what happens in nature??

T.I.A:)
 
I'm getting confused. It reads, in my mind, like you are backtracking on your info and taking a different route...

Obviously the females do have a certain amount of play in the genetic game, but those female nosy bes didn't start out with only blue genes from the beginning (unless some how only blue females were put on the island with red/green/blue males and the natural selection worked it's way towards blue with very little red and green in the mix, OR when panthers were first becoming their own species the first color the chameleons on that island developed was blue [but I'm not sure that is likely]) Perhaps a few females were more attracted to bluer males, or the biggest and most dominant males were more blue, or both. They would have eventually begun to eliminate the other genetics for dominant greens and reds. That's how my science teachers explained it in a watered down version. There is obviously more to it than that but I wouldn't be able to tell you what exactly unless I went on a massive search for information and what not on panther chameleons.
 
Well, since everybody is done posting pics, I might aswell join the discussion...

So Chris, are you (basically) saying that these crosses can theoretically happen in nature, but they will eventually just be drown out by future 'genetic exchanges'?
 
Females rarely descriminate like that between members of their own species, they tend to go for the most brightly colored male, but I don't think they would be like "eh, sorry really red Nosy be, I only do all blues." Most probably, the female might actually go for a Nosy be that showed really particular coloration because females love new and shiny, so to speak. And perhaps if a member of another locale wandered by, they would consider that extremely new and interesting. Nature loves new and different. But I can only speculate if this is what happens in panthers.

That being said, I'm sad this thread had to be derailled.
 
I don't think females have a choice in the matter. I would think the idea of survival of the fittest would apply, the biggest and strongest mate, not most colorful, at least most of the time.
 
Fidel said:
I don't think females have a choice in the matter. I would think the idea of survival of the fittest would apply, the biggest and strongest mate, not most colorful, at least most of the time.
Click to expand...

A lot of times color is an excellent sign of health. We see it all the time here on the forum where people have dull, sickly animals. Usually the most beautiful male is also the healthiest.
 
Olimpia said:
A lot of times color is an excellent sign of health. We see it all the time here on the forum where people have dull, sickly animals. Usually the most beautiful male is also the healthiest.
Click to expand...

agreeded. speaking of brightly colored animals.....lets post some pictures!!!
 
i have a ambilobe x nosy some reason it wont let me up load any pics but if you have a look in my profile i have pics of him there.
 
i have a ambilobe x nosy be some reason it wont let me up load any pics but if you have a look in my profile i have pics of him there.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

A
Mold Concerns with Screen Cages for Chameleons - Advice Needed
Replies
13
Views
311
Beman
Beman
sketchtone
My happy boy!
Replies
1
Views
231
BleuSaphir
BleuSaphir
Beman
Contribute pics! Member Spotlight feature.
9 10 11
Replies
215
Views
14K
nicholas harcourt
N
StevensUneven
Meet Chemilio
Replies
6
Views
393
Sonny13
Sonny13
elizaann2
Internal Infection
2
Replies
27
Views
979
elizaann2
elizaann2
Back
Top Bottom