Berichten

Ik heb er zelf geen ervaring mee, maar ik heb me laten vertellen dat de kans het grootst is bij de zwarte veldkrekel. Deze hebben sowieso sterkere kaken.

Het probleem is niet alleen dat de krekels fysiek kan de salamanders verwonden volgens mij, maar ook dat ze angst voor de salamanders kunnen veroorzaken. En zodra ik deze speldenknop krekels zetten in het terrarium, is het niet zo eenvoudig te verwijderen van de restjes. Ik moet elke keer de salamanders te verhuizen! >:( Zij zullen niet uit mijn handen of pincet eten.

Gosh, our bad luck, Joost! I'm moving :(! Is there a comprehensive list on this website of everything legal?

It's simple, every native newt/salamander incl. it's subspecies are illegal. So no L.helveticus, no L.vulgaris, no T.cristatus, no I. alpestris and no S.salamandra

So it's not Salamandra terrestris, but Salamandra salamandra terrestris. And T. marmoratus isn't a subspecies of T.cristatus so it's ok? And everything else is alright?

Gosh, our bad luck, Joost! I'm moving :(! Is there a comprehensive list on this website of everything legal?

The big difference is that we humans are one species. The difference of interbreeding within one species might heighten fitness in some cases. From my own experience, muds can become older than pure bred dog races. This has likely to do with the cumulative stacking of disease caused recessive genes in the pure bred races.

However, what would your opinion be about interbreeding with chimpansees? I mean, thats in fact what you are asking. Its exactly the same if we talk about hybridizing between the Californian tiger salamander (Ambystoma californiense) with the  Barred tiger salamander (A. tigrinum). Or which ever other species you can mention.

So you are saying that there might be benefits? I wrote this 6 weeks ago after acquiring a completely new hobby, and upon coming across what seemed to me to be extreme political correctness and condescension towards less experienced newt keepers, I reacted quite sensitively. I want to learn proper care and breeding, as long as it is not taken for granted that I "should" accept something before I've learned the principle behind it.

I can only say that my partner is quite hairy, but she's not quite a chimpanzee, and I've always felt queer, so I've personally never felt an interest to procreate. ;) But if others want to give it a go, I think courtship should be based on mutual attraction. Remember that woman who used to flirt with Bokito the gorilla from R'dam 5 years ago? He didn't have the same feelings for her and even innocent bystanders got attacked for it. ;D

Is it legal to buy Salamandra terrestris in DE, and bring to NL? Which of the two legal forms do I need to do this? After subsequent generations of S. terrestris have been born, is it legal to sell those in NL? Is it legal to sell those offspring of original purchase in DE and other EU member countries? Thank you in advance; I find all these legalities very confusing. :P

This study shows that salamander inbreeding isn't a major cause of physical malformations:

http://web.ics.purdue.edu/~rodw/documents/BIOLLETT_AmphibianMalformations.pdf

Of course I like to keep looking for more evidence, as my cousin-in-law is a scientist, and says that there is funding and careers at stake when such studies are done, and the amount of data they choose NOT to report, far exceeds the amount which they do.

History has good examples of humans introducing species in an ecosystem only to wittness it turning into a disaster.

I don't know if I'd call this "funny", but it certainly does illustrate your point:
http://mysmelly.com/Archive/FunnyStoryAboutIguanasTakingSouth-Florida/bbqpw/post.htm

I definitely wouldn't go so far as saying hybrids always make better specimens than their parents. I'm very curious now to see some Ligers & Tigons! I wasn't arguing for messing w/ nature, just that I'm aware from visiting greenhouses, that so many varieties are possible. Whether what cultivators do is ethical or not is a separate issue.

"Inbreeding has become an important consideration for wildlife conservationists. Many wild populations are in danger of extinction due to some combination of habitat destruction and hunting of the animals, either to protect humans or because the animal parts are considered valuable. (Examples are ivory, rhinorcerus horn, and infant apes for the pet trade, as well as meat hunting.) For some of these animals the only real hope of survival is captive breeding programs. But the number of animals available in such captive breeding programs, especially at a single zoo, is often limited. Biologists are concerned that the resulting inbred populations would not have all of the genes found in the wild populations, and thus lose some flexibility in responding to change. In reaction to this threat they have developed networks such that animals can be exchanged among captive breeding poplulations in such a way as to minimize the overall inbreeding of the captive population. The idea is to select pairs in such a way that the inbreeding coefficient of the offspring is kept as low as possible." -http://bowlingsite.mcf.com/genetics/inbreeding.html

Human beings are considered one species (w/ not only differences in appearance, but also corresponding differences in diet, climate preference, courtship patterns and other behavior), but for that matter, how many times do scientists identify and name two different species, just to later realize they were actually variations on one species?  

I like what Jeroen said and esp. appreciate Joep's comments; I also think we shouldn't take ourselves overly seriously. Hugo, I think I addressed your concern w/ this:

Ok, I can understand that if someone is raising any animals and selling them as something they are not, that's plain, outright cheating.

No?

I'm still wondering why we talk about "pure bloodlines" here, but if we talk about it in terms of humans, who have so many different colors, bodily shapes and sizes, it is politically incorrect? And about the health of two newts who are siblings or cousins having children. Inbreeding increases the chances of the young being affected by recessive genes. Any proof that this isn't the case among amphibians?

First of all excuse me because I'm totally new to the concept of breeding, so perhaps I'm missing something. But as I have been reading on this and other salamander sites the last couple of days, some things I've read seemed like they could have been taken from Mein Kamph (ooops, I'm not allowed to mention that book in the Netherlands:P)! Ok, I can understand that if someone is raising any animals and selling them as something they are not, that's plain, outright cheating. But I've read people saying that if, for ex. one species of Triturus was released into the wild where another species of Triturus lives, and they mated it would be a terrible shame. My question is why??? Triturus carnifex's area of distibution seems to cross that of Triturus karelinii anyway, so if two of them get together and have sexual intercourse, what is the problem? Actually it seems to me that this would create stronger, healthier offspring than two newts who are brother and sister (as the case often is) having children. Inbreding increases the chances of the young being affected by recessive genes. With flowers, combining different traits is appreciated, as it adds almost unlimitedly to the possibilities of shapes, hues, height.

Or is it a question of old-school type nationialism? Should all newts go back to the "Wildersness" ;) from which they came, or that we are proud of our Great Crested Newt in that it is part of our Dutch culture, and therefore we fear losing a cultural icon if Southern Crested Newts with their darker patches and significantly smaller stature mix with them? Is the important point that we can count on fixed behavioral patterns such as eating a cold meal of frozen bloodworms at noon and a warm meal of live worms at EXACTLY 18:00? And not be aggressive towards male-male pairing newts :P?