D tinctorius True Sipaliwini lines and management

Dendrobates auratus
Dendrobates azureus
Dendrobates leucomelas
Dendrobates tinctorius
Dendrobates truncatus
User avatar
joneill809
Site Admin
Posts: 1644
Joined: Fri Feb 24, 2012 10:18 pm
Location: Austin TX
Contact:

D tinctorius True Sipaliwini lines and management

Postby joneill809 » Sat Apr 02, 2016 12:05 pm

I wanted to start a discussion on the proper management of the True Sipaliwini lines of D. tinctorius now in the hobby.

Definitions
  • NAIB True Sipaliwini: animals from this lineage are the original True Sipaliwini brought in by the National Aquarium. Sean Stewart acquired a pair and has been releasing F1's to the hobby since the 90's. I have not seen Stewart release additional animals in several years, and the last time I contacted them Barbara said they were holding back their animals for international zoo sales moving forward.
  • 2012 Blue / True Sipaliwini: a group of animals surfaced on Kingsnake in 2012 as "Blue Sips" which were re-classified as True Sips by hobbyists. Attempts were made to obtain locale data, but no data was ever published. There is additional anecdotal information that some Cobalt offspring can throw similar looking animals to a True Sip, so the origin of these animals and their relationship to the NAIB line remain in question.
  • NAIB/2012 outcross: there's at least one hobbyist selling an outcross of an NAIB and a 2012 animal.
  • DFW "Sipaliwini Savannah" hybrid: DFW has released a phenotypically sorted hybrid animal that they claim resembles an NAIB True Sip. Visually I don't see the resemblance, but they occasionally use the NAIB reference when advertising this class of hybrid. I'm including it here for informational purposes since it has used the name.

Management Questions / Debate
Setting aside the DFW animals which are (in my view) completely illegitimate and not part of any management discussions, we are left with three hobby lines. In my opinion the NAIB and 2012 animals should not be crossed, as there are too many open questions about the 2012 import to ever warrant an outcross with the limited NAIB stock within the hobby.

I don't know what to call them, but in my opinion this is now a third category of animals that need to be maintained separately from the original two imports. In a quick survey of animals being offered last year, the volumes being sold of these crosses seem to be greater than animals from the original two lines. This is problematic to me, as all three lines use "True Sip" for shorthand, which will inevitably create confusion for new entrants in the hobby. Couple this with the price point of the outcross at $40 or so per animal, and you are left playing a numbers game where the outcrosses will quickly eclipse the NAIB and 2012 numbers present in the hobby.

Questions
  • Do we agree on the four categories I have listed?
  • Do we agree there are two legitimate, separate lines that share the same name (NAIB and 2012 being the distinction)?
  • Is there any disagreement that these lines should not be crossed?
  • What do we call the outcross? How do we handle it within the hobby? Will people take offense to being called out for lax labelling when it happens?
  • Is the NAIB line essentially dead? Do people care about the history of the lines, or do they just want a $40 animal that looks like an NAIB True Sipaliwini?

This reminds me of the Regina, GO, and "corrected" animals that were prevalent in the hobby at one time. They have seemingly fallen out of favor in the hobby, and I think that is in part due to the confusion in the labels and the way they were managed. I don't want to see that happen to True Sips. I've gone through several stages of reactions to the 2012/NAIB outcross. I was appalled when I first saw it happened. I still get annoyed every time I see animals up for sale, but I am glad they are at least posted as an outcross, though not as obvious to most as I would like. So now I'm trying to enlist the hobby to figure out a path forward so we can guide the proper management of the lines.

I'll stop there and open it for debate. There really isn't one in my mind, but perhaps I'm missing some angle here that puts me in the minority.
Jim from Austin please contact me if you are willing to trade offspring from:
lorenzo - schwinn line|NAIB true sips|fantastica nominant
http://www.oneillscrossing.com/dart-frogs/

User avatar
Philsuma
Site Owner
Posts: 10495
Joined: Mon Oct 13, 2008 2:10 am
Location: Harrisburg, PA
Contact:

Re: D tinctorius True Sipaliwini lines and management

Postby Philsuma » Sat Apr 02, 2016 1:09 pm

A suggestion. Preface those categories(definitions) with a date - YEAR, approx or otherwise or span of years ects, for the initial entrance of the morph into the hobby. I used to try for adding a month or barring that, a 'season' but now I feel those additional descriptors are hard to reach and even possibly irrelevant.

I think that the 'Year of Introduction' is of paramount importance to our hobby - a starting point for all discussions.

User avatar
joneill809
Site Admin
Posts: 1644
Joined: Fri Feb 24, 2012 10:18 pm
Location: Austin TX
Contact:

Re: D tinctorius True Sipaliwini lines and management

Postby joneill809 » Sat Apr 02, 2016 1:44 pm

Yeah I will have to check with Barbara on a year for NAIB.
Jim from Austin please contact me if you are willing to trade offspring from:
lorenzo - schwinn line|NAIB true sips|fantastica nominant
http://www.oneillscrossing.com/dart-frogs/

goods
Posts: 254
Joined: Wed Jan 25, 2012 12:46 pm
Location: Baton Rouge

Re: D tinctorius True Sipaliwini lines and management

Postby goods » Sat Apr 02, 2016 8:01 pm

Normally, I am very much on the side of managing to maintain "vintage" lines within the hobby, but I am going to provide a possibly dissenting opinion on these. The NAIB frogs all originate from a single pair collected by national aquarium some years ago, and the '12-13 True sips originate from 6 pairs that went to 5 people initially. I know for a fact that 3 of those 5 had both '12-13s and also NAIB frogs and know of at least one of those where they were mixed from the start. The vast majority of the offspring that made it to the market early on came from a NAIB x '12-13 crossing.

My reasoning for being ok with mixing these comes from a few things. First founding stock of 7 unrelated pairs is pretty close to a genetic dead end to being with. Most institutional management procedures recommend something like 50 pairs in a management program. That's a pretty tough task at a hobby level even with a large-scale cooperative, but we are at 14% of that as founders even if both lines are combined. My second reasoning is that, at this point, we have no way of knowing what are NAIB and what are '12-13 besides yours, Sean's (NAIB) and maybe Josh's Frogs (12-13) as far as I know. The others could very well have all been mixed at the time of arrival. Third, I know Jeremy spoke to Brice Noonan at Ole Miss at length about these prior to decided that they were True Sips. He felt fairly confident with that label, so I will defer to his expertise.

With all that said, I don't think what you're doing is wrong, Jim, but I think that in time genetic issues may manifest themselves in the NAIB frogs similar to what you're seeing in Lorenzo that would warrant incorporating them into a more genetically broad line.
ZG

User avatar
Philsuma
Site Owner
Posts: 10495
Joined: Mon Oct 13, 2008 2:10 am
Location: Harrisburg, PA
Contact:

Re: D tinctorius True Sipaliwini lines and management

Postby Philsuma » Sat Apr 02, 2016 8:13 pm

Jeremy ? Jeremy Huff?

User avatar
joneill809
Site Admin
Posts: 1644
Joined: Fri Feb 24, 2012 10:18 pm
Location: Austin TX
Contact:

Re: D tinctorius True Sipaliwini lines and management

Postby joneill809 » Sat Apr 02, 2016 11:33 pm

Philsuma wrote:Jeremy ? Jeremy Huff?

Yes.

goods wrote:Normally, I am very much on the side of managing to maintain "vintage" lines within the hobby, but I am going to provide a possibly dissenting opinion on these.

I appreciate the discussion Zach. That's why I started the thread. I'd rather have the discussion on the boards so we can share the information we have on the decision making process that went into this outcross and what to do with the remaining animals.

goods wrote:The NAIB frogs all originate from a single pair collected by national aquarium some years ago, and the '12-13 True sips originate from 6 pairs that went to 5 people initially. I know for a fact that 3 of those 5 had both '12-13s and also NAIB frogs and know of at least one of those where they were mixed from the start. The vast majority of the offspring that made it to the market early on came from a NAIB x '12-13 crossing.

My reasoning for being ok with mixing these comes from a few things. First founding stock of 7 unrelated pairs is pretty close to a genetic dead end to being with. Most institutional management procedures recommend something like 50 pairs in a management program. That's a pretty tough task at a hobby level even with a large-scale cooperative, but we are at 14% of that as founders even if both lines are combined. My second reasoning is that, at this point, we have no way of knowing what are NAIB and what are '12-13 besides yours, Sean's (NAIB) and maybe Josh's Frogs (12-13) as far as I know. The others could very well have all been mixed at the time of arrival. Third, I know Jeremy spoke to Brice Noonan at Ole Miss at length about these prior to decided that they were True Sips. He felt fairly confident with that label, so I will defer to his expertise.

With all that said, I don't think what you're doing is wrong, Jim, but I think that in time genetic issues may manifest themselves in the NAIB frogs similar to what you're seeing in Lorenzo that would warrant incorporating them into a more genetically broad line.

I see your logic, and cannot disagree with that line of reasoning from a population management perspective (given we really don't have a sustainable population), but one thing really bothers me with all of this. "I know Jeremy spoke to Brice Noonan at Ole Miss at length about these prior to decided that they were True Sips. He felt fairly confident with that label". It bothers me that this decision was made based on what seems to be a visual inspection of the animals, with, AFAIK, no other supporting data. Not that he's a pillar of the hobby, but Justin (BluePumilio) had mentioned in a discussion thread that an importer had said they often see a random cobalt that looks like a true sip (he quoted something like 1 in 40). It's certainly possible that a "few nice looking cobalts" were sorted and formed this new import. We just don't know.

Maybe tinc lineage is just going to be a mess and we'll only go on visual identification. It's just disappointing if that is the case. Perhaps I'm biased, but many of the 2012 F1's I've seen offered have yellow past the eyes down on the trunk and sometimes on the belly. This is something I don't see on pictures of Sean's F0, or the F1 or F2 I have, or any other NAIB F1 images I have seen, which forms a large part of my opposition to the outcross. Maybe it's a lack of genetic diversity with NAIB, but Justin's comment just sticks with me, and I'm wondering if more yellow will start popping.

It sounds like there isn't much of a point to distinguishing between 2012 and the NAIBx2012 outcross. I've asked Barbara and Sean for any additional information they can provide on the original animals from NAIB. I'd at least like to document it, but I agree, we cannot unring the outcross bell if it's as extensive as you indicated.

I feel like we need to maintain at least some NAIB animals at this point, in case we decide at F2 / F3 that these start looking like low yellow cobalts and this experiment was a mistake. Or is that just a waste of my three NAIB TS vivs? :?
Jim from Austin please contact me if you are willing to trade offspring from:
lorenzo - schwinn line|NAIB true sips|fantastica nominant
http://www.oneillscrossing.com/dart-frogs/

goods
Posts: 254
Joined: Wed Jan 25, 2012 12:46 pm
Location: Baton Rouge

Re: D tinctorius True Sipaliwini lines and management

Postby goods » Sun Apr 03, 2016 12:36 am

While we as hobbyists recommend against ID'ing based on phenotype, I think if anyone is capable it's folks like Brice Noonan (tincs), Kyle Summers and labmates (Ranitomeya), Justin Yeager (pumilio) and a few others. They've spent a significant amount of time in the field and actually have a handle on the diversity within populations. I'm not saying any of them are infallible, but I would trust a visual inspection from them over an opinion from a hobbyist with a potential agenda.

If these were cobalts, I think you'd see an even greater diversity with the F1s with some looking identical to a traditional cobalt. A local friend ended up with an unrelated '13F1 X '13WC and had over 50 offspring at one point that I saw in person. All were pretty uniform in color.

I would also like to mention here the effects that bottlenecking a captive population will do on phenotype expression. When green sips first entered the hobby, the person who received the majority of the imports selected for the green look and essentially tried to remove variability from the captive population. That's why you saw mostly greenish animals within the hobby. The same friend who bred the true sips got a WC pair of green sips from said supplier not long after they were imported and did not selectively breed them. That pair and pairings of subsequent populations produce the most variable green sips I've ever seen. Offspring range from "Cobalt" yellows to the blue "green sips" that resemble Koetari with the majority falling between these two extremes. I use this example to illustrate that a single pair of similar looking founders and subsequent sib-only crosses can quickly suppress any variability over few generations.

I agree that distinguishing between outcrosses and '13WC's is probably pointless.

It's all going to boil down to a balance between maintaining localities to a T in captivity and managing genetics for population health while potentially losing some locale specificity. I do think it's best to combine for optimal captive population health, but maintaining the old line is not a futile attempt.

The big difference between these and Lorenzos is that American founders of True Sips are WC and (I'm assuming) American founders of Lorenzo were from EU and thus could have been CB many generations there before reaching us. Our NAIB animals are probably no deeper than F4 or so, whereas, it's possible that Lorenzos are F8-F10 who knows?? As long as we do our best to avoid sib crosses leading to a fast dive into deeper F generations, NAIB frogs can be successfully maintained for many years. One day, there may be a need to re-invigorate this line by combining, but I think the hobby will have more hurdles to cross before we reach that point.
ZG

User avatar
joneill809
Site Admin
Posts: 1644
Joined: Fri Feb 24, 2012 10:18 pm
Location: Austin TX
Contact:

Re: D tinctorius True Sipaliwini lines and management

Postby joneill809 » Sun Apr 03, 2016 9:04 am

In terms of 2012/2013, the original 5 pair first surfaced in May of 2012, with Jeremy finding them on Kingsnake. The sixth popped up in June of 2012 on the same DB thread. Should we refer to them as 2012 (year of import) or 2013 (year when F1's started becoming available)? I've been sticking with 2012, but perhaps I'm mislabeling. I don't mind switching, but I just wanted to ask.

Please don't take my questioning this decision the wrong way. I know I'm not a biologist and there are people way more experienced than me in this field and I seem to be the only one concerned about this, so perhaps I'm way off here and showing my inexperience. I really want to understand what went into the decision, and how we as a hobby can best manage the animals we have. I appreciate all the time you are spending educating me - I know you don't have to. It's pretty obvious I would have liked there to be a stronger delineation between the 90's TS and 2012 TS, and that I feel the outcross was rushed. As you said, we were only at F1 / F2 off the NAIB line, and we had time to see how this played out before jumping into an outcross.

Perhaps cobalts is a bad example. In the spirit of a continued debate, what if we use Robertus as an example. Here's a gradient I put together from the highly variable 2014 Robertus SAS import:
robertus.001.png


If I look at the picture of the second and third animal from the left in isolation, I'm pretty sure I could have called them a TS, not Robertus. All of my Robertus were mid to high yellow, and they seem to [so far] yield high yellow individuals. I don't know what happened with the low yellow animals, but now all this has me questioning how we should handle Robertus. Do we trust the importer who labeled them all Robertus, or do we look at them across the spectrum, sort, and rename? Do we mix high yellow and low yellow? Do we take the animals that looked like TS from this import and use them as another source of TS genetics to strengthen the six 2012 pairs and 1 90's pair?

Again not trying to be difficult. This is an interesting discussion.
Jim from Austin please contact me if you are willing to trade offspring from:
lorenzo - schwinn line|NAIB true sips|fantastica nominant
http://www.oneillscrossing.com/dart-frogs/

Gope
Posts: 51
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2015 12:21 pm
Location: Bellingham, WA

Re: D tinctorius True Sipaliwini lines and management

Postby Gope » Sun Apr 03, 2016 10:35 am

Interesting reading for a newby. The question I have, coming from a tropical fish background, is there no DNA work being done with frogs? This discussion parallels so many I've read about rainbowfish sp. But without DNA evidence, or a direct trail to one of those who physically brought them back from PNG, they're just "fish shop" rainbows.

User avatar
Philsuma
Site Owner
Posts: 10495
Joined: Mon Oct 13, 2008 2:10 am
Location: Harrisburg, PA
Contact:

Re: D tinctorius True Sipaliwini lines and management

Postby Philsuma » Sun Apr 03, 2016 12:46 pm

"trust the importers"

Geez, I hate to always keep bringing up the bad/scary/depressing stuff...but...

The importers that I know and of aware of are 100% of the Commercial variety, and as such, are strictly (see what I did there?) concerned with profit margin. They NEED to sell all the animals collected - pass them on the consumers. I just gotta think that they are somewhat less committed to 'lines' and identification and that's being nice.

I'm pretty sure that they refer to the imported animals as 'pieces'.

All that said - all things being equal, I personally would include 'phenotype' (color and pattern and other physical descriptors) and place that aspect of management in the forefront of my programe.

User avatar
joneill809
Site Admin
Posts: 1644
Joined: Fri Feb 24, 2012 10:18 pm
Location: Austin TX
Contact:

Re: D tinctorius True Sipaliwini lines and management

Postby joneill809 » Sun Apr 03, 2016 1:45 pm

Ok "trust" was the wrong phrase :). My keeping true sips separate (for now) was because I don't trust the importers. But do you see my question? We have three distinct imports of similar looking frogs. One by an institution, and two others by importers that resemble the first (I'm tossing low yellow Robertus into the argument). If SAS had broken off the low yellow Robertus and offered them as True Sips, would we integrate them too? Should we integrate them?

Is there just no hope with tinctorius imports and anything that comes in should be sorted by phenotype and labeled accordingly? With that approach you may have a shot at aggregating the numbers of animals we need to manage a captive population which takes us back to Zachs point.
Jim from Austin please contact me if you are willing to trade offspring from:
lorenzo - schwinn line|NAIB true sips|fantastica nominant
http://www.oneillscrossing.com/dart-frogs/

User avatar
joneill809
Site Admin
Posts: 1644
Joined: Fri Feb 24, 2012 10:18 pm
Location: Austin TX
Contact:

Re: D tinctorius True Sipaliwini lines and management

Postby joneill809 » Tue Apr 19, 2016 12:16 am

I've been giving more thought to the 2014 Robertus animals offered by SAS and SNDF. If we take a look at low yellow animals, visual identification would put them squarely as "True Sips" if we ignore the exporter / importer collection information. First, here's an F2 NAIB True Sipaliwini juvenile:
naib-ts-P1060940.jpg


Here are a few examples of low yellow Robertus - some shots from SNDF:
robertus01.png
robertus01.png (508.13 KiB) Viewed 1669 times

robertus02.png
robertus02.png (531.92 KiB) Viewed 1669 times

robertus03.png
robertus03.png (345.29 KiB) Viewed 1669 times

robertus04.png
robertus04.png (559.45 KiB) Viewed 1669 times


Here's a hobbyist's shot of another Robertus that looks a lot like a True Sip:
IMG_2610_zps5d2218fa-robertus.jpg


I suspect anyone that did not have the population identifier attached by the importer / SAS / SNDF would not have called some of these animals Robertus; they could easily be labeled a True Sip. Interestingly, this was labeled as a True Sip by a hobbyist:
IMG_2617_zps29e7f242truesip.jpg
IMG_2617_zps29e7f242truesip.jpg (34.36 KiB) Viewed 1669 times


IMO that animal is pretty far from the True Sip standard we had accepted for years, but it does look like quite a few Robertus. Back to the 2012 imports. Here were the first images we had of them. Notice the yellow on the sides of these animals. To me, they are more like Robertus than the original true sips we saw:
2012ts3.jpg
These are the first photos of the 2012 True Sips. The animal in the lower left looks nothing like an NAIB line true sip. Note the yellow on it's back - something NAIB animals do not show. Same goes for the hints of yellow on the belly - another trait not exhibited by the NAIB line.
2012ts3.jpg (42.98 KiB) Viewed 1669 times

2012ts4.jpg
Different view of the same animal from the previous photo.
2012ts4.jpg (37.09 KiB) Viewed 1669 times



In my opinion, the 2012 True Sips look far more like low yellow 2014 SAS Robertus than NAIB True Sips. This is hindsight now, but perhaps the 2012 True Sips were a precursor to the wider import of Robertus that came in during 2014. I don't think that can be ruled out. We see a broader range of coloration in the 2014 Robertus import, but if you sort by phenotype, you can certainly make the case that low yellow Robertus = 2012 True Sips.

So what to do? If we are managing tincs by phenotype, do we combine the low yellow Robertus with the 2012 True Sips and NAIB animals? That might get us closer to a viable captive population, but it certainly doesn't feel right to me. I would like to see more rigorous debate on this topic before more people commit what limited NAIB animals we have to outcrossing projects. I still have F1's from Sean. I'm sure there are still some other F1's out there too. Can we not manage the F1's and F2's better and maintain a separate NAIB line, since, IMO, we should be questioning the validity of the 2012 renaming?
Jim from Austin please contact me if you are willing to trade offspring from:
lorenzo - schwinn line|NAIB true sips|fantastica nominant
http://www.oneillscrossing.com/dart-frogs/

User avatar
joneill809
Site Admin
Posts: 1644
Joined: Fri Feb 24, 2012 10:18 pm
Location: Austin TX
Contact:

Re: D tinctorius True Sipaliwini lines and management

Postby joneill809 » Wed Apr 27, 2016 9:09 pm

Well I am probably beating a dead horse (or frog) but this is an interesting topic that is important (to me). I pulled my Robertus offspring today from their grow outs. I have high yellow WC animals. Most of the offspring I have are lower on the yellow range which was surprising to me. They included this animal:
image.jpeg


This is an example of what concerns me with an outcross of the 2012 animals with NAIB true sips - we have Robertus now throwing animals that look an awful lot like the 6 pair from 2012. This Robertus import seems pretty variable even with "like to like" high yellow F0's throwing low yellow offspring. Is it not possible that the 2012 animals sans locale data are just an example of low yellow Robertus?

Perhaps all these posts are for naught at this point but it raises interesting line management discussions. I still have a concern with phenotypic sorts of tincs given the variability we are with these morphs. I'll get a better catalog of images going of Robertus variability but in the meantime, do I call this little guy a true sip? ;)
Jim from Austin please contact me if you are willing to trade offspring from:
lorenzo - schwinn line|NAIB true sips|fantastica nominant
http://www.oneillscrossing.com/dart-frogs/

User avatar
Philsuma
Site Owner
Posts: 10495
Joined: Mon Oct 13, 2008 2:10 am
Location: Harrisburg, PA
Contact:

Re: D tinctorius True Sipaliwini lines and management

Postby Philsuma » Wed Apr 27, 2016 10:24 pm

I'll give you a pm/call on all this Jim. Nothing terribly pressing or "secret" , just too much to type.


Return to “Dendrobates Genus”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 11 guests