Why I Hate Hybrids - Controversial

[starsevol]

I am not saying "natural is better"...I am a morph nut.
Things evolve, I understand that.

But do things really have to evolve to a point where any snake you buy could have 2 or 3 seperate species in its makeup?

Or are hybrid breeders trying to create a new species?
Something standard? A totally domesticated man made snake?
I just don't understand...

 

[Serpwidgets]

But Kat, in your first scenerio you said if a SCIENTIST discovered a way to isolate genes. And I am saying fine, but NATURE has not discovered a way to isolate genes yet.

You can breed pure to cream forever but if 0000000000000000001 % of emoryi blood is there, it's there!

It doesn't work that way. There are not an infinite number of genes. The denominator is finite...

Take 10,000 red marbles, and 10,000 blue marbles (wow, this is deja vu) and pour them all into a bucket.

Now, take 10,000 randomly picked marbles out of the bucket, and add 10,000 blue marbles to the bucket. You now have (statistically) 5,000 red marbles.

Repeat the above step. You will have 2500, then 1250, then 625, etc etc, and at some point, you will not have ANY red marbles left.

Genes are not infinitely divisible. They are not even sorted individually, which is why trait linkage occurs. At some point there will be nothing more to divide.

 

[Hurley]

That logic is only true if corns and emoryi have an infinite number of genes...which they do not.

Corns and Emorys already are very similar in genetic makeup. I'd be willing to bet that they share the exact same genes 95% of the time or more. It IS possible to keep combining and end up with a 100% corn snake genome. The number of genes is finite and if you are only dealing with (for example) a 2% difference to begin with...it won't take long.

edit: D'oh! Serp beat me to it. On that note work is calling me...

 

[Joejr14]

That logic is only true if corns and emoryi have an infinite number of genes...which they do not.

Corns and Emorys already are very similar in genetic makeup. I'd be willing to bet that they share the exact same genes 95% of the time or more. It IS possible to keep combining and end up with a 100% corn snake genome. The number of genes is finite and if you are only dealing with (for example) a 2% difference to begin with...it won't take long.

edit: D'oh! Serp beat me to it. On that note work is calling me...

Very well, but how do you define that? Does one make 10 crosses and claim, I have taken the emory blood out of this particular animal---it is a pure cornsnake again? It's essentially an impossible thing to do without DNA testing.

 

[Roy Munson]

I love these discussions. I'm no hybrid-hater, but I have a preference for corn purity, peace on earth, and utopia now. But seriously, the "purity" ideal is too elusive a concept to obsess about (much). I especially struggle with emoryi, since they were once considered to be a sub-species of corn. If taxonomists change their minds next year, and arbitrarily place emoryi back under the corn umbrella, what will it mean to my views?

I would prefer that my corns have no emoryi or king background, but I can't get that worked up about it. I will admit that when I see that a breeder deals in creamsicles, a little red flag goes up in my head. It's like racial/ethnic stereotypes among humans: regrettable but inescapable.

And Serp, you ARE evil.

 

[Serpwidgets]

After several generations, it would be IMPOSSIBLE for the emoryi influence to ever hit zero. It's very simply math. It can be diffused to almost nothing, but it's a number that approaches zero, but never touches.

Not true. The percentage is a fraction generated by an integer divided by another integer.

Also, since all corns and emoryi share a common ancestor, how are either of them pure? If you go back even further, all ratsnakes and kingsnakes share a common ancestor. Doesn't this mean that all corns are part kingsnake?

 

[Kat]

But Kat, in your first scenerio you said if a SCIENTIST discovered a way to isolate genes. And I am saying fine, but NATURE has not discovered a way to isolate genes yet.

I'm not sure what you mean by this... There are a finite number of genes, and if you took one chromosome pair that differed from a second chromosome pair by only one gene pair, "nature" can sure tell the difference... After all, that one gene pair difference is all there is between "normal" and "lavender". Heck... nature can tell the difference between single copies of genes... for example, "ultramel" vs. "amel". Just because we ourselves can't match up every gene to every difference between the two species yet doesn't mean "nature" can't tell the difference. Nor does it mean that every difference must be measurable by the naked eye to count. The time between the lightbulb going on and the light hitting our eyes is exceedingly small, but that doesn't mean that the photons hit our eyes instantly.

And yes... Serp and Hurley beat me to the finite gene explaination.

-Kat

 

[starsevol]

ok ok maybe I am not a hybrid "hater" just a hybrid extreme disliker. lol

Wierd, knowing about the finite number of genomes makes me feel better.

Now I stay away from cream breeders...not that creams arent beautiful, they are...But I like knowing for sure what is what...
It is one of those "If I knew then what I know now" kind of things.

 

[Serpwidgets]

Very well, but how do you define that? Does one make 10 crosses and claim, I have taken the emory blood out of this particular animal---it is a pure cornsnake again? It's essentially an impossible thing to do without DNA testing.

Right. And, since wild hybridization is a reality, if you catch a wild corn, how many generations back can you look and say "there are definitely no non-corn ancestors" in order to make the same judgement call about any wild-caught animal?

For me, it simply boils down to common sense and what is practical. If it is in all measurable ways "corn" to me, then it is a corn. Obsessing over things I cannot measure or percieve and that cannot be controlled by me does nothing but shorten my life span.

As far as "non-corn" genes getting lost in the shuffle, I feel the same exact same way about "lizard eater" genes, and "stripe" genes, and any other genes I may or may not like. I believe the registry can help people who want to track hybrids and locality and that type of stuff, which is why we decided to include those fields.

I have my own ideas about what is corny and what is not, and some corns are "more corny" than others. I pick my stock based on what I desire in a "corn snake." Based on that and the type of offspring it throws, I decide whether or not it is "good" or "bad." I'd certainly rather have a good "hybrid" than a bad "pure corn."

 

[Kat]

Very well, but how do you define that? Does one make 10 crosses and claim, I have taken the emory blood out of this particular animal---it is a pure cornsnake again? It's essentially an impossible thing to do without DNA testing.

Right. It is impossible to tell the difference between a hybrid with a single emoryi gene and an animal with 100% cornsnake genes WITHOUT DNA TESTING. But if DNA testing proves it 100% pure, even though it's ancestor was an emoryi... then how can it NOT be a pure corn, as starsevol postulates?



Scenario 3 for starsevol:

Using your answer from Scenario 2, where if a cornsnake has a mutated gene that's the same as an emoryi gene...

If Fred then shows his mutated snake to the Scientist, and proves to the Scientist that it came from two pure corns... the Scientist will then change the 'E' in the database to an 'A', since that gene is found in both pure corns and in pure emoryi rats.

Fred has some CC CC CC CE hybrids from earlier breedings in scenario 1. With the new updated definition, they now become CC CC CC CA animals. Since A is a gene found in cornsnakes, they possess no non-cornsnake genes.

Are these snakes still hybrids?




Incidentally, I absolutely agree with your answer to scenario 2. This is how species change and evolve (the definition NEVER stays constant). The definition of a species is like the definition of a color. You start out with red, red gets more and more orangish... and at some point you decide it's no longer red, but now orange (a new species).

Also, in nature, it's always possible to make a change that's been made before, so a mutation to a gene that's identical to one in another species is quite possible! Heck, it's probably more likely to survive, assuming that other species is similar to the first, because the gene has already proven to be benign or even useful in atleast one other case. (On the other hand, if the mutation is specific to one's environment, it could be detrimental... assuming the two similar species do not share environments.)

-Kat

 

[Kat]

Addendum to the last post I made....

Convergance of species is just as possible as divergance. It's just that divergance is the more interesting example than convergance. Convergance happens when two populations, which have been separated by a geographical factor are no longer separated and interbreed. This is what's happening when you cross corns and emoryis. Most people value diversity... they like variety and difference. There also aren't nearly as many ready examples of convergance as there are divergance, so it seems a little ...strange.

Incidentally, this whole gene-hybrid-pure problem is the same as, say... if you were to pour, say... green paint into red paint... If you kept pouring half the container of mixed paint into a fresh gallon of pure red paint and the other half into another fresh gallon of red paint, would you ever get rid of all the green paint? The answer is surprising to most people, but the answer is yes. And it's yes for the same reason Hurley and Chuck cited for genes. There are a finite number of molecules of green paint. Eventually you'll have 1 molecule of green paint in a bucket of red paint, and when you divide that bucket in half, that molecule's gotta pick one or the other.

-Kat

 

[starsevol]

Ok now my answer to scenario 3 is that if the mutated E were turned into A by the scientist, then it still wouldnt be a hybrid since the E that was changed to an A was naturally occuring.

I think my head might explode

 

[Kat]

Hmm... I think you missed the point of the question... I asked whether the CC CC CC CA corns that came from the emoryi ancestry were still hybrids.

I guess what I'm trying to point out is... if you define cornsnake species as anything that came from cornsnake X cornsnake, and anything that came from cornsnake X snake who's ancestor was an emoryi to be non-cornsnake, then there's no test in the world that can ever tell you what's hybrid and what's not.

A sane and testable definition would be if anything had soley genes that are found in cornsnakes and no genes that are found in non-cornsnakes, then it's a corn.
There is no difference between a snake with
CC CC CC CA
and a snake with
CC CC CC CA
even though one had pure corn ancestry and one had some emoryi way back in its family tree.

I think my head might explode

Let me go get my umbrella first...

-Kat

 

[Serpwidgets]

It's good to see a thread on this that doesn't have people jumping up and down and screaming their heads off and calling each other names.

I am not saying "natural is better"...I am a morph nut.
Things evolve, I understand that.

But do things really have to evolve to a point where any snake you buy could have 2 or 3 seperate species in its makeup?

The question can be asked from the opposite perspective: do they have to stay the same? Or, why should they stay the same?

Or are hybrid breeders trying to create a new species?
Something standard? A totally domesticated man made snake?
I just don't understand...

I can't speak for anyone but myself. I would guess that some people do it out of curiosity, some do it because they think the immediate offspring are cool, some might do it with long-term ideas, in order to create something that does not exist right now. I think a "species" of captive-created jungle corns, with the closest "pure corn" or "pure king" ancestors generations and generations away, would be pretty nifty, myself.

 

[starsevol]

If the genetics are the same, then its a cornsnake.

 

[Kat]

Incidentally, the 'purification' of genes can only happen if atleast one of the pure cornsnakes was female. Why? Because there's a second, different set of DNA that lives in a cell's mitochondria, and this DNA is -ONLY- inherited from the mother. So guess what? A 50% emoryi creamsicle is actually either 50.00000...001% or 49.99999...999% creamsicle, depending on whether the emoryi was the male or the female. :blowup:

-Kat

 

[starsevol]

It is kind of a touchy thing.

If you go to a show (or petshop) and see rootbeer corn or jungle corn or pueblan x corn x cal king you would know what they are. But you can't police other peoples ethics. I wonder what happens to hybrids that are not at all what was intended, such as really muddy snakes? Are they kept? Euthanized? Dumped at petstores under any label that fits?

You know the one GOOD thing about pure species (or nearly pure) is that you have a pretty good idea what the offspring will look like.

 

[Kat]

Right... getting unwanted genes popping up in the offspring can be a problem. But it's not worth losing sleep over, IMO.

-Kat

 

[dionythicus]

It is kind of a touchy thing.

If you go to a show (or petshop) and see rootbeer corn or jungle corn or pueblan x corn x cal king you would know what they are. But you can't police other peoples ethics. I wonder what happens to hybrids that are not at all what was intended, such as really muddy snakes? Are they kept? Euthanized? Dumped at petstores under any label that fits?

You know the one GOOD thing about pure species (or nearly pure) is that you have a pretty good idea what the offspring will look like.

I am thinking about what to do with the hybrids I might be producing next year. I have a specific look that I want, but I can't keep them all, especially if they don't have the look I want. This is the kind of thing that has always bothered me about producing living creatures for money. I will label them specifically as what they really are if I sell any to a pet store and online and I certainly don't expect to flood the market with them. But it is making me think twice about producing them.

 

[Serpwidgets]

I wonder what happens to hybrids that are not at all what was intended, such as really muddy snakes? Are they kept? Euthanized? Dumped at petstores under any label that fits?

Well, I wouldn't pick a snake I thought was ugly in order to start a breeding project. So I don't think I have much to be concerned with in that way.

You know the one GOOD thing about pure species (or nearly pure) is that you have a pretty good idea what the offspring will look like.

True, you might have a better idea of what the offspring will look like, but that isn't all that makes a corn a corn. Lizard eating is a great example. You can't tell what a snake wants to eat just by looking at it. Whether it throws "bad" patterns/colors or it throws hatchlings that never eat, it sucks either way. :santa: