Does inbreeding really hurt anything?

[pet_snake_78]

I know there are some fatal homozygous morphs so obviously the siblings would be a pure choice to breed together. What I am asking about is more as a general rule. It seems in school it was always stressed that inbreeding was bad but some of the lines in herpetoculture are said to have started from a very small number of founders and are still going. Does anyone have first hand experience with inbreeding issues (with snakes that is lol)

Also when snakes first landed on small islands, wouldn't they have came from just a few specimens to begin with? Seems places like the galapagos would have shown issues in their populations after hundreds or years if inbreeding were a big enough issue?

[franks]

Perpetuated inbreeding causes problems but if you are referring to getting "a pair" from the same clutch that does not necessarily have any negative consequences to those animals or their offspring. Personally, it would be cool if nobody breeder siblings but that just is not practical. (I actually recently ordered a 1.1 pair.) The problems we see are in lines that were never outcrossed.

And Mikoh- (since I know you will read this) I asked Nick about the question you posted regarding other carpet python lines. He said the other lines were outcrossed from the get go and that the problem is made worse by jets. For instance, the zebra line started with an animal that was sexes wrong and could not breed. (Obviously) it was sold and the first time it ever bred was to a completely unrelated Line.

[Mikoh4792]

And Mikoh- (since I know you will read this) I asked Nick about the question you posted regarding other carpet python lines. He said the other lines were outcrossed from the get go and that the problem is made worse by jets. For instance, the zebra line started with an animal that was sexes wrong and could not breed. (Obviously) it was sold and the first time it ever bred was to a completely unrelated Line.

You're a psychic! which lines are you talking about? Are you talking about the ivory line?

To the OP, inbreeding for a generation or so shouldn't cause problems in snakes. People do it all the time and that's what it means to line breed. Just make it a point not to breed anything with obvious problems/defects. Inbreeding happens a lot in the wild where a snake's range is not large and they end up breeding with related animals.

[shaunyboy]

its called line breeding mate

Carpet Pythons can be line bred right up to and past F5 with no issues

ive heard some boa's can have physical defects when line bred too far,born blind,or with one or no eyes

imo it all depends on the species


cheers shaun

[Will0W783]

In my opinion, yes, it does. You might not see any outward signs in one generation, but inbred snakes can have weaker immune systems, higher propensity for diseases like cancer and kinking, and subtle proportion abnormalities.

For example, inbred eyelash vipers tend to have larger eyes, under- or overbite, smaller heads, and tend to die young. I've seen some ball pythons with messed-up looking heads (weird snout shapes, eyes buggy, etc).

There are so many beautiful, natural variations in snakes- why intentionally do something that could decrease an animal's quality of life just to take a breeding shortcut or try to perpetuate a tiny pattern/color variation?

Just my $0.02, and I know it will not be a popular opinion, but I'm in it for the animals and their best interest.

[Aaron_S]

In my opinion, yes, it does. You might not see any outward signs in one generation, but inbred snakes can have weaker immune systems, higher propensity for diseases like cancer and kinking, and subtle proportion abnormalities.

For example, inbred eyelash vipers tend to have larger eyes, under- or overbite, smaller heads, and tend to die young. I've seen some ball pythons with messed-up looking heads (weird snout shapes, eyes buggy, etc).

There are so many beautiful, natural variations in snakes- why intentionally do something that could decrease an animal's quality of life just to take a breeding shortcut or try to perpetuate a tiny pattern/color variation?

Just my $0.02, and I know it will not be a popular opinion, but I'm in it for the animals and their best interest.

Many ball python deformities have nothing to do with inbreeding. Bug eyes or weird shaped heads can be caused by incubation problems or just general abnormalities.

I find your opinion interesting when you say it's for the animals but yet you own and wish to breed many venomous species that which are wild caught purely to own captive bred specimens. If you were in it for the animals, why not just let them be in the wild and deal with what we've already got?

[Mikoh4792]

Many ball python deformities have nothing to do with inbreeding. Bug eyes or weird shaped heads can be caused by incubation problems or just general abnormalities.

I find your opinion interesting when you say it's for the animals but yet you own and wish to breed many venomous species that which are wild caught purely to own captive bred specimens. If you were in it for the animals, why not just let them be in the wild and deal with what we've already got?

In my opinion, yes, it does. You might not see any outward signs in one generation, but inbred snakes can have weaker immune systems, higher propensity for diseases like cancer and kinking, and subtle proportion abnormalities.

For example, inbred eyelash vipers tend to have larger eyes, under- or overbite, smaller heads, and tend to die young. I've seen some ball pythons with messed-up looking heads (weird snout shapes, eyes buggy, etc).

There are so many beautiful, natural variations in snakes- why intentionally do something that could decrease an animal's quality of life just to take a breeding shortcut or try to perpetuate a tiny pattern/color variation?

Just my $0.02, and I know it will not be a popular opinion, but I'm in it for the animals and their best interest.

Would you guys agree that it really depends on the type of snake? For example dwarf island boas and some type of kingsnake(I forgot. I think it was mountain or scarlet kings) don't have very large ranges in the wild and are very isolated populations. Therefore they are for the most part or completely(in the case of some island boas) very inbred. Maybe there are snakes that have not been inbreeding as long in the wild and do not handle it well.

[Georgia]

would you guys agree that it really depends on the type of snake? For example dwarf island boas and some type of kingsnake(i forgot. I think it was mountain or scarlet kings) don't have very large ranges in the wild and are very isolated populations. Therefore they are for the most part or completely(in the case of some island boas) very inbred. Maybe there are snakes that have not been inbreeding as long in the wild and do not handle it well.

100% fact..

[Will0W783]

Aaron, yes many deformities have absolutely nothing to do with inbreeding. And, one or two generations probably doesn't hurt. But, why take the chance?

I do own wild-caught animals. The wild-caught vipers I work with are usually rarer species that would benefit from captive bred lines being established. People are going to want to own them, so solid healthy CBB lines take pressure off wild populations by decreasing the need for further importation and establishing populations to keep the species alive if habitat is lost. I do go for captive bred whenever I can however. So from a scientific research and preservation standpoint I do feel I'm in it for the animals.

Many morphs and line-bred pythons/boas do great and have no problems. I just personally feel that it's best to avoid inbreeding, even if it takes longer to establish a given trait.

[formica]

Natural Selection/Evolution, requires inbreeding, without it, there is no 'survial of the fittest' as genes will not come to dominate a species without inbreeding.

problems arise when bad genes are inbred, in the wild bad genes would mean early death in many cases, a reduced chance of passing on genes to a new generation, so even tho it results in some death of individuals, over all in the wild it actually helps a species become stronger, by helping to remove bad genes and reinforcing good ones

in captivity its a different story, those bad genes may not lead the animal to an early death, it may even breed, in which case those bad genes (leading to deformation, disorders etc), if they exist, will be passed on and further weaken the species overall


most of the time, when people talk about inbreeding in this sense, they tend to react on a moral level, which is not helpful in tis case imo

[StudentoReptile]

Ahh...another discussion on the ethics of captive breeding.

I think I'll just watch this one.

[smy_749]

I know there are some fatal homozygous morphs so obviously the siblings would be a pure choice to breed together. What I am asking about is more as a general rule. It seems in school it was always stressed that inbreeding was bad (This is not true, it can be both beneficial or detrimental, depending on the gene as formica pointed out, it is an essential piece of the puzzle in evolution / survival of the fittest ) but some of the lines in herpetoculture are said to have started from a very small number of founders and are still going.(This is true, but many of these lines have issues, or were later crossed with new wild caught blood.) Does anyone have first hand experience with inbreeding issues (with snakes that is lol)

Also when snakes first landed on small islands, wouldn't they have came from just a few specimens to begin with? Seems places like the galapagos would have shown issues in their populations after hundreds or years if inbreeding were a big enough issue?


Formica hit the nail on the head. People will argue about the scaleless morph, the blind more, the brainless morph, whatever the hell morph, because they think (I don't know for sure) that these morphs have negative physical effects, and some of them do (jags in carpets for example), but nobody talks about line breeding that resulted in better eyesight, better muscle tone, better camoflauge, etc...Why's that? Because we are not nature, we are not predators, we don't know whats good for the species, and even if we did, we probably wouldn't breed it out unless it was marketable ($$$$$).

My point is that line breeding can go either way, if you know what your doing. I'm not expert on dog breeds to say the least, but look at how my specialized breeds for specialized tasks we've managed to come up with by picking out the fastest/largest/strongest/best sense of smell/ blah blah blah.

[shaunyboy]

Would you guys agree that it really depends on the type of snake? For example dwarf island boas and some type of kingsnake(I forgot. I think it was mountain or scarlet kings) don't have very large ranges in the wild and are very isolated populations. Therefore they are for the most part or completely(in the case of some island boas) very inbred. Maybe there are snakes that have not been inbreeding as long in the wild and do not handle it well.

i agree completely mate.....


its all depends on which species

there are islands with limited bloodlines and as far as i know,the island populations don't have a high rate of deformed snakes


cheers shaun


cheers shaun

[Aaron_S]

Would you guys agree that it really depends on the type of snake? For example dwarf island boas and some type of kingsnake(I forgot. I think it was mountain or scarlet kings) don't have very large ranges in the wild and are very isolated populations. Therefore they are for the most part or completely(in the case of some island boas) very inbred. Maybe there are snakes that have not been inbreeding as long in the wild and do not handle it well.

I am speaking from a standpoint of captivity. Comparing the wild vs captivity is comparing apples to oranges. Not the same two topics so I refrain from that.

[Aaron_S]

Aaron, yes many deformities have absolutely nothing to do with inbreeding. And, one or two generations probably doesn't hurt. But, why take the chance?

I do own wild-caught animals. The wild-caught vipers I work with are usually rarer species that would benefit from captive bred lines being established. People are going to want to own them, so solid healthy CBB lines take pressure off wild populations by decreasing the need for further importation and establishing populations to keep the species alive if habitat is lost. I do go for captive bred whenever I can however. So from a scientific research and preservation standpoint I do feel I'm in it for the animals.

Many morphs and line-bred pythons/boas do great and have no problems. I just personally feel that it's best to avoid inbreeding, even if it takes longer to establish a given trait.

At one point ball pythons were a difficult species to keep, breed and people wanted them. The original keepers who accomplished this goal of reproducing it in captivity probably had the same idea of "decreasing wild populations" and "further importation". It didn't really help did it?

My point is, it's still not really for the animals because you're doing it for "scientific" purposes.

We all keep these animals for selfish reasons is my point. It's never really "for the animals".

[StudentoReptile]

At one point ball pythons were a difficult species to keep, breed and people wanted them. The original keepers who accomplished this goal of reproducing it in captivity probably had the same idea of "decreasing wild populations" and "further importation". It didn't really help did it?


I wasn't planning on commenting on this thread, but I do disagree greatly with the statement in bold.

It was not that ball pythons were difficult to breed. Its simply that there was not enough incentive at the time to put forth the effort to breed them in captivity....until say, 1986 (I think?) when the first captive-bred albino was produced. Then people started breeding them left and right. There was no secret code that we broke to breed BPs; it was simply that up until that point, it was cheaper to import and sell WC specimens than try to start captive breeding populations. The albino increased the general market value of normals (at that time, anyway), and it changed the game.*

But there was no grand delusions of conservation for ball pythons. It was all in the name of money and morphs.

NOTE: You are of course, correct in that it did not change anything about the numbers being imported.

*I do understand that this cannot be said about every species. I know there are a myriad of herp species of which albino specimens have been documented, yet a boom in captive breeding has yet to occur.
---
Now, before everyone jumps down my throat about having an agenda against the entire industry, please continue your discussion about line-in-breeding.

[formica]

i agree completely mate.....


its all depends on which species

there are islands with limited bloodlines and as far as i know,the island populations don't have a high rate of deformed snakes


cheers shaun


cheers shaun

thats a great example of how inbreeding reinforces useful genes and kills off ones which are detrimental

but the problem with that kind of very closely related population, is that the small gene pool means they are far less likely to adapt to changes in their environment, the randomness found in wider gene pools is what allows a species as a whole, to constantly adapt to changes in its enviroment

[SSSSnakes]

In my opinion, yes, it does. You might not see any outward signs in one generation, but inbred snakes can have weaker immune systems, higher propensity for diseases like cancer and kinking, and subtle proportion abnormalities.

For example, inbred eyelash vipers tend to have larger eyes, under- or overbite, smaller heads, and tend to die young. I've seen some ball pythons with messed-up looking heads (weird snout shapes, eyes buggy, etc).

There are so many beautiful, natural variations in snakes- why intentionally do something that could decrease an animal's quality of life just to take a breeding shortcut or try to perpetuate a tiny pattern/color variation?

Just my $0.02, and I know it will not be a popular opinion, but I'm in it for the animals and their best interest.

I agree with you 100%. You are right, this is not going to be the popular opinion.

[franks]

I am speaking from a standpoint of captivity. Comparing the wild vs captivity is comparing apples to oranges. Not the same two topics so I refrain from that.

I think the two topics are related. All of our breeding cones from lines or a line of wild caught specimens. I have been looking into getting a hogg island boa. First off, they are almost extinct (they were believed extinct for about 10 yrs I think) but such a small island population must have been pretty inbred and trying to find a pure captive means it will be even more inbred. If i ever were to breed them I will be further inbreeding these snakes. This is why I think the question is relevant and crossed over. If a snake is inbred in its natural environment it will only be more inbred when coming to captivity.

[Aaron_S]

I wasn't planning on commenting on this thread, but I do disagree greatly with the statement in bold.

It was not that ball pythons were difficult to breed. Its simply that there was not enough incentive at the time to put forth the effort to breed them in captivity....until say, 1986 (I think?) when the first captive-bred albino was produced. Then people started breeding them left and right. There was no secret code that we broke to breed BPs; it was simply that up until that point, it was cheaper to import and sell WC specimens than try to start captive breeding populations. The albino increased the general market value of normals (at that time, anyway), and it changed the game.*

But there was no grand delusions of conservation for ball pythons. It was all in the name of money and morphs.

NOTE: You are of course, correct in that it did not change anything about the numbers being imported.

*I do understand that this cannot be said about every species. I know there are a myriad of herp species of which albino specimens have been documented, yet a boom in captive breeding has yet to occur.
---
Now, before everyone jumps down my throat about having an agenda against the entire industry, please continue your discussion about line-in-breeding.

I would have to disagree with you. I have spoken with with Roy Stockwell up here in Canada. Some KSB keepers know of him.

Anyway, he was the first to breed ball pythons up here. He has the pics too and the stories he's recounted many times on forums as well. He may have done it here...

My point is, if you read his stories, they were actually difficult to breed and no one really could accomplish it. As we know their wild caught imports to be, they are feeder finicky and go on long famines so many of them died and no one really could figure them out. He wasn't the first, just the first up here, but for him to do it he had a rain chamber and had to mimic the natural rainy season.

We look at how we do it today and realize all it took was some really snug fitting bins and some temps and voila we are where we are.

[franks]

I would have to disagree with you. I have spoken with with Roy Stockwell up here in Canada. Some KSB keepers know of him.

Anyway, he was the first to breed ball pythons up here. He has the pics too and the stories he's recounted many times on forums as well. He may have done it here...

My point is, if you read his stories, they were actually difficult to breed and no one really could accomplish it. As we know their wild caught imports to be, they are feeder finicky and go on long famines so many of them died and no one really could figure them out. He wasn't the first, just the first up here, but for him to do it he had a rain chamber and had to mimic the natural rainy season.

We look at how we do it today and realize all it took was some really snug fitting bins and some temps and voila we are where we are.

That is so interesting. So he built a rain chamber into his enclosure. That's pretty cool. When I kept royals I would get mine to eat by spraying down the whole cage and leaving a rat in. Do you have any links to these stories? Sounds like a good read.

[Mikoh4792]

I think the two topics are related. All of our breeding cones from lines or a line of wild caught specimens. I have been looking into getting a hogg island boa. First off, they are almost extinct (they were believed extinct for about 10 yrs I think) but such a small island population must have been pretty inbred and trying to find a pure captive means it will be even more inbred. If i ever were to breed them I will be further inbreeding these snakes. This is why I think the question is relevant and crossed over. If a snake is inbred in its natural environment it will only be more inbred when coming to captivity.

That's the point I was getting at. Atleast for several generations taking a very isolated and inbred population from the wild and breeding them in captivity would still be very similar. Sure, natural selection gets thrown out the window but wouldn't they still be able to handle inbreeding better than other non-isolated populations that often breed with unrelated animals? I'm only thinking this because the animals would come already resistant to inbreeding depression.

[Aaron_S]

That is so interesting. So he built a rain chamber into his enclosure. That's pretty cool. When I kept royals I would get mine to eat by spraying down the whole cage and leaving a rat in. Do you have any links to these stories? Sounds like a good read.

I will find it from home. My work computer is filtering some of the content when I search for things on a forum.

[fedupdon]

Dr viper without wild caught we would have no cb don't fall in those cb herpers traps you can never change there minds there like the ones who think that all is right I. The world stand your ground and keep up the good work