Regions

[choriona]

But I am wondering if this difference in color is in fact the beginnings of a new species. Distinctive traits between many chameleons are morphological, like different rosette or scaling patterns, rostral projections, overall body size, or dorsal spines. My understanding is that chameleons change their colors by hormonal control of the skin pigments. How many they have of one color compared to another is the same as a person having freckles and another having very pale skin. It is just caused by pigments in the dermis.
Another comparison may be hair and skin color seen in humans. Interbreeding is common and without ill effects to the offspring. These color variations are just random non-survivalist traits. Mates may be selected on these grounds, but it may just come down to what is available. In any case, the genes are readily mixed and accepted between a blonde haired person and a brunette. Sure, they had some sort of evolutionary significance at the time these traits evolved, but these traits are not strong determinants of overall fitness.
The fact that chameleons use deception as a defense against predators does make their ability to display different colors a desirable trait. Now I may sound a little stupid here, as I have no experience with the different locales, but I am assuming that they are all able to flash through the same palate of colors and all exhibit certain patterns that are meant to relay a message of sorts to other things encountered in their environment. If the relaxed state color/pattern is the only thing unique between them, how is it any different?
If these panthers of different regions do readily intermingle, are able to communicate with their bodies and understand one another, can produce viable offspring...etc, are they even close to being labeled a sub-species?
If they are becoming isolated from one another due to loss of habitat at the fringes, how is it right to promote this isolation when in so many other cases the same situation leads to extinction of a species. Is keeping the localities a conservation of monetary gain or is it a true conservation effort to preserve the species as a whole?

[Chris_Anderson]

Choriona,

There is a bran new book out by Gary Ferguson, et. al., called "The Panther Chameleon Color Variation, Natural History, Conservation, and Captive Management" that tabulated the hues and paterns of different locals. While the different morphs seem to be able to communicate, their color spectrum and patern are distinct from eachother and not all locales are able to show colors and paterns that other locales are. Tamataves are not able to show blue like Ambanjas, Nosy Be are not able to show pink like Amkaramy, some localities have U shaped bars, some V shaped, etc. While they change color and patern using cromatifores, their spectrum of colors and patern are locality specific. You don't find specimens in Ambanja that look like an Ambilobe or a Tamatave. I'm in no way saying they should be reclassified as species or subspecies, i'm simply saying they have naturally diverged into what you could call geographic races. I think race is a better comparison than hair color. Human races all have different gene frequencies for certain traits, morphological or not. While they can communicate, interbreed and are obviously the same species, there has been a naturally occuring selection that has favored certain traits thereby creating distinct races/localities. For the chameleons, these locale specific variations in color and patern are not a result of human habitat destruction and isolation as a result, they are naturally occuring. Their isolation is due to natural habitat change. The terain the Amkaramy pinks live in, although close to the Ambanja region, is very different and their adaptations for this environment has made them distinct, not man made isolation. The tsingy (limestone mountain ranges with sharp errosion) isolates other locales from eachother as well. By maintaining their purity by not hybridizing, we are not promoting their demise, we are maintaining the variation nature has intended. I firmly believe that these distinct locales should remain pure in captivity. If they don't, we will end up with a huge population of mutts that are, in my opinion from a breeding stand point, useless. I do not agree that by breeding a cross back to pure animals for a number of generations you once again have a pure locality. I believe that the only way to maintain the purity is to manage breedings and bloodlines now before we end up not being able to replenish out bloodlines with wild caught animals. With enough managed bloodlines, genetic diversity within the morphs should remain sufficient for multigenerational breedings.

Chris

[choriona]

Chris, thanks for the enlightenment. I am definately curious now and will have to get my hands on that book!!

[DragnDrop]

Let's stay on topic, and stop messing up a good discussion. I've cleaned out all the non-relevant posts, hopefully we won't find any more snide comments.