"Proven", "Probable" ect as a Breeding designation

Eggs, Tadpoles, Froglets
User avatar
Philsuma
Site Owner
Posts: 10494
Joined: Mon Oct 13, 2008 2:10 am
Location: Harrisburg, PA
Contact:

"Proven", "Probable" ect as a Breeding designation

Postby Philsuma » Fri Aug 12, 2011 6:52 pm

What are the differences between “Pairs”?

1.good “Probable Pair” – Usually no more than a @ 85% educated guess as to the sex of two (02) frogs. The “first frog” is usually 100% a male frog due to calling, but the “second frog” –female, is much less accurate and is primarily based on body size (round) and behavior (non calling). There is always the chance of the “second frog” being a non-calling or submissive male.

2. Better Sexed Pair – Should have laid eggs, but you are going off the word of the seller and must rely and trust his reputation. No tadpoles. ONE of them should have been noticed to have called, so the male is def present. Eggs CAN be laid without a male but again, the calling together with eggs is the key here.

3. BEST PROVEN PAIR – Fertile eggs have been laid - tadpoles. As long as the tadpole part is achieved , they should be considered proven. SLS or other issues may not be their fault and due to keeper error.

Michael Lawrence
Posts: 350
Joined: Fri Mar 12, 2010 8:51 am
Location: Atlanta Ga

Re: Proven, Probable ect as Breeding designation

Postby Michael Lawrence » Fri Aug 12, 2011 8:05 pm

I would call a sexed pair definitely a calling male and laying female. Probable needs to at least be verifiable through age and certainly at least a noticeable difference the body and overall stance of the frogs. Proven is the 100% laying of fertile eggs but to sell a proven pair it needs to be the actual pair that laid, not two provens from separate groups put together that have not.

Michael
Everyday I meet someone I dislike, are you today's pick? If you dislike me it's because somethings wrong with you!

Don't Be A Hybridiot!

frogface
Posts: 233
Joined: Tue Feb 22, 2011 8:20 pm
Location: Raleigh, NC

Re: Proven, Probable ect as Breeding designation

Postby frogface » Sat Aug 13, 2011 10:58 pm

Where would you put a courting pair? Probable Pair? Maybe another designation as Courting Pair?

I have a pair of cobalts that have been courting up a storm but no eggs yet. Physiologically they are clearly a pair (but I think we've all been tricked by frogs before). I was thinking that if this pair was put up for sale, I'd make a short video of them courting to go with the add.
Do you know where your frogs have been?

User avatar
Philsuma
Site Owner
Posts: 10494
Joined: Mon Oct 13, 2008 2:10 am
Location: Harrisburg, PA
Contact:

Re: Proven, Probable ect as Breeding designation

Postby Philsuma » Sat Aug 20, 2011 1:21 am

The production of eggs seals the designation IMO.

Unless there have been eggs laid, then no matter what, you only have a "Probable Pair"

I would not use the word 'Courting' as it is so much still a guess as to whether you have a sexual pair or not. Too much room for error until eggs have been laid.

Eggs laid PLUS calling = "Sexed pair"

Eggs laid and tadpoles produced = "Proven Pair"

User avatar
Philsuma
Site Owner
Posts: 10494
Joined: Mon Oct 13, 2008 2:10 am
Location: Harrisburg, PA
Contact:

Re: Proven, Probable ect as Breeding designation

Postby Philsuma » Sun Sep 04, 2011 1:58 pm

Got another couple PM's on this subject....made the post a sticky....

Only Developing eggs must occur to be = Proven.

SLS or froglets that "Don't thrive or do well" do not matter with regards to the "Proven" designation. SLS and most all "breeding issues" are the responsibility of the human caretaker (nutrition, ect). The frogs successfully bred and held up their part of the bargain.

Natures Gems
Posts: 80
Joined: Mon Aug 15, 2011 11:38 am
Location: South Carolina

Re: Proven, Probable ect as Breeding designation

Postby Natures Gems » Mon Sep 05, 2011 9:04 am

phil,

thanks for the info. i as well was thinking proven would be developing eggs not just eggs laid. it was my though process about a month ago also when i questioned proven. thank you very much for sharing the info you got in your pm's also.

tom

User avatar
Philsuma
Site Owner
Posts: 10494
Joined: Mon Oct 13, 2008 2:10 am
Location: Harrisburg, PA
Contact:

Re: Proven, Probable ect as Breeding designation

Postby Philsuma » Mon Sep 05, 2011 9:52 am

Natures Gems wrote:phil,

thanks for the info. i as well was thinking proven would be developing eggs not just eggs laid. it was my though process about a month ago also when i questioned proven. thank you very much for sharing the info you got in your pm's also.

tom


For "Proven" I DO mean developing eggs. "Eggs - Tadpoles"

Natures Gems
Posts: 80
Joined: Mon Aug 15, 2011 11:38 am
Location: South Carolina

Re: Proven, Probable ect as Breeding designation

Postby Natures Gems » Mon Sep 05, 2011 9:59 am

Philsuma wrote:
Natures Gems wrote:phil,

thanks for the info. i as well was thinking proven would be developing eggs not just eggs laid. it was my though process about a month ago also when i questioned proven. thank you very much for sharing the info you got in your pm's also.

tom


For "Proven" I DO mean developing eggs. "Eggs - Tadpoles"


right, for proven-developing eggs and tads not just eggs layed. did i say different? LOL

User avatar
Philsuma
Site Owner
Posts: 10494
Joined: Mon Oct 13, 2008 2:10 am
Location: Harrisburg, PA
Contact:

Re: Proven, Probable ect as Breeding designation

Postby Philsuma » Mon Sep 05, 2011 10:05 am

yeah....ya did. lol

Natures Gems
Posts: 80
Joined: Mon Aug 15, 2011 11:38 am
Location: South Carolina

Re: Proven, Probable ect as Breeding designation

Postby Natures Gems » Mon Sep 05, 2011 10:29 am

phil,

i must be having too much alcohol this weekend.
you said proven developing eggs and tads.
i said i as well thought proven meant developing eggs not just laid.i didn;t mention tads but developing eggs are still viable and i would think enough for the proven designation. so i agreed.
i don't know where i said different.i'm missing it.please bring to my attention.it has been a long weekend. thanks

tom

User avatar
Philsuma
Site Owner
Posts: 10494
Joined: Mon Oct 13, 2008 2:10 am
Location: Harrisburg, PA
Contact:

Re: Proven, Probable ect as Breeding designation

Postby Philsuma » Mon Sep 05, 2011 10:41 am

oh.. I see now. You were just agreeing with me and I took it the other way. My bad.

Natures Gems
Posts: 80
Joined: Mon Aug 15, 2011 11:38 am
Location: South Carolina

Re: Proven, Probable ect as Breeding designation

Postby Natures Gems » Sun Oct 30, 2011 3:25 pm

Philsuma wrote:oh.. I see now. You were just agreeing with me and I took it the other way. My bad.


no problem phil. i thought for a second there that my last brain cell was shot after this weekend. one too many buds for me the past few days. i'm ready for the weekend to be over... hope you enjoyed the weekend as well.

tom

User avatar
EntoCraig
Posts: 375
Joined: Mon Oct 10, 2011 10:19 am
Location: UT, USA

Re: Proven, Probable ect as Breeding designation

Postby EntoCraig » Wed Nov 02, 2011 5:58 pm

Question on the sexed pair:

Is it possible a female would lay eggs without the presence of a male? Or do they only lay with a male in the tank?

User avatar
Philsuma
Site Owner
Posts: 10494
Joined: Mon Oct 13, 2008 2:10 am
Location: Harrisburg, PA
Contact:

Re: Proven, Probable ect as a Breeding designation

Postby Philsuma » Fri Apr 13, 2012 9:34 pm

Seeing some people using the term "courting pair". I'm not a fan of this description...seems much less accurate than what we have above and it also plays upon the desire of the buyer to acquire frogs that breed, i.e "Courting must = Breeding".

Misleading term.

BcsTx
Senior Member
Posts: 625
Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2009 8:58 am
Location: Plano, Texas

Re: Proven, Probable ect as a Breeding designation

Postby BcsTx » Fri Apr 13, 2012 9:57 pm

IMO with probable pair with pums 1 calling, male following female calling, no aggression.

With proven pairs - froglets
-Beth

User avatar
Philsuma
Site Owner
Posts: 10494
Joined: Mon Oct 13, 2008 2:10 am
Location: Harrisburg, PA
Contact:

Re: Proven, Probable ect as a Breeding designation

Postby Philsuma » Fri Apr 13, 2012 10:08 pm

some people do go further for proven = healthy, non SLS froglets.

I've seen a few people use that designation.

Anything less than tadpoles means = not proven - that is pretty much set.

User avatar
Rusty_Shackleford
Senior Member
Posts: 840
Joined: Thu Sep 02, 2010 3:52 pm
Location: Ft. Myers, FL

Re: Proven, Probable ect as a Breeding designation

Postby Rusty_Shackleford » Fri Apr 13, 2012 10:51 pm

Philsuma wrote:some people do go further for proven - healthy, non SLS froglets. I've seen a few people use that designation.

Anything less than tadpoles means = not proven - that is pretty much set.



I like that designation! That says even more about the pair of frogs.
Jon - Ft. Myers, FL
Help stop the spread of Chytrid! Disinfect your waste water before disposing of it and double bag all solid wastes please!!

User avatar
Lady Bullseye
Posts: 245
Joined: Thu Oct 13, 2011 2:22 pm
Location: Syracuse, New York

Re: Proven, Probable ect as a Breeding designation

Postby Lady Bullseye » Sat Apr 14, 2012 8:35 am

Rusty_Shackleford wrote:
Philsuma wrote:some people do go further for proven - healthy, non SLS froglets. I've seen a few people use that designation.

Anything less than tadpoles means = not proven - that is pretty much set.



I like that designation! That says even more about the pair of frogs.


Guys, question... Do you think non SLS froglets say more about the pair of frogs or just more about the keeper's supplementation?
Lisa
In central NY

R. Imitator 'Cainarachi Valley' 2.3.0
R. Imitator 'Cainarachi Valley' Froglets 8 and counting.

User avatar
Philsuma
Site Owner
Posts: 10494
Joined: Mon Oct 13, 2008 2:10 am
Location: Harrisburg, PA
Contact:

Re: Proven, Probable ect as a Breeding designation

Postby Philsuma » Sat Apr 14, 2012 8:54 am

^^ there's a thread on that somewhere....let me look for it.

User avatar
Rusty_Shackleford
Senior Member
Posts: 840
Joined: Thu Sep 02, 2010 3:52 pm
Location: Ft. Myers, FL

Re: Proven, Probable ect as a Breeding designation

Postby Rusty_Shackleford » Sat Apr 14, 2012 10:06 am

Lady Bullseye wrote:
Rusty_Shackleford wrote:
Philsuma wrote:some people do go further for proven - healthy, non SLS froglets. I've seen a few people use that designation.

Anything less than tadpoles means = not proven - that is pretty much set.



I like that designation! That says even more about the pair of frogs.


Guys, question... Do you think non SLS froglets say more about the pair of frogs or just more about the keeper's supplementation?


I think it says a lot about frogs and keeper. By disclosing the parents have produced non SLS froglets it tells me that not only the frogs have probably been properly supplemented but that the keeper knows what SLS is and is an experienced enough breeder that they take steps to avoid SLS. Maybe it's just another notch in the breeders belt and another level of competence.
Here's another bit of a philosophical question. What if someone has a pair of frogs they are selling as a proven pair. They've laid a clutch of fertile eggs which developed normally, but due to human error (keeper) they either accidentally killed the eggs or tads. Does that make the "proven pair" any less proven? Not in my eyes. Had they been left to their own devices they would have raised the tads successfully. I would still accept purchasing those frogs as a proven pair. Just my personal view.
Jon - Ft. Myers, FL
Help stop the spread of Chytrid! Disinfect your waste water before disposing of it and double bag all solid wastes please!!


Return to “Breeding - Eggs, Tadpoles, Froglets”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 23 guests