Breeding for attitude rather than morph..

One of the issues with trying to breed for temperment in snakes is their reptilian brain. Basically you've got what you've got to work with that way. The reptilian brain does not have a developed forebrain where emotions, memory, (language in humans), bonding/pack behaviour, etc. is developed in mammals.

Without a reasonable amount of forebrain it's pretty unlikely you can breed for things that are specific to that part of the brain.

We've been selective breeding canines since about the 16th century and recent studies are showing that they have a very unique brain and genetic profile that is quite elastic and responsive to those changes. Snakes, crocs and other reptiles just aren't like this, being less hardwired to accept change through evolution or human intervention. Simply put, I don't think it's possible to breed for temperment in a creature with the brain structure of a snake.

It took thousands of years to domesticate dogs, some would aruge that cats aren't entirely domesticated, they revert very easily back to their wild instincts when not tamed (feral).


Snakes are not puppies or kittens, they're snakes. Why can't people just appreciate them for being exactly what they are?

Ball pythons have been bred in captivity for just a matter of decades, not thousands of years. One of the reasons they are so popular are for the very traits you say you want to try to breed, so I still don't see how much more improvement you think you'll get.

Of course babies are going to be less tame - you're a predator in their reptilian brain for goodness sakes! I've got snakes in my collection that were very defensive as babies, and at 2 years old are calm, "personable" and relaxed.

Sounds like throwing the baby out with the bath water if they show the least bit of aggression as a baby and you don't plan to hold them back the ones that act like a frightened snake should.

You hold back the ones that show less defensiveness than their siblings, that's all. There's no point in being so aggressive in your criteria, not until you've been working at it for a while. Of course you aren't going to produce affectionate snakes. What you aim to produce are less defensive, calmer snakes.

Snakes ARE individuals. They do have different personalities. Much of personality is genetic, even in humans, let alone in something with a brain as primitive as a snake's. A snake's less complex brain is why it should be even more effective to breed for temperment, because its experiences are likely to have less impact on its personality than its genetics.

In the long run, it's in the best interests of the snakes if they are NOT nervous, frightened, or overly defensive. Read up on the domestication of foxes done as an experiment in Russia. It takes remarkably few generations to completely change an animal's typical behavior.

Of course, as it turns out, humans didn't actually domesticate dogs in the first place--it happened through natural selection processes that humans happened to be part of through their reactions, rather than deliberate actions. Dogs evolved to be our companions because that niche was open--a scavenger that can safely live among us, and even parasitize us through our emotions. Said in the kindest possible way, as I do like dogs. :) They're INCREDIBLY well-adapted animals...absolutely ingenius. They instinctively know how to make us go 'awww' and feed them. There's an illusion that 'stray dogs' are unfortunate escaped pets, when in reality they live in virtually every human community on the planet...feral dogs aren't strays, they're living in their natural environment. They evolved to be right there, eating our garbage. I have a lot of respect for dogs, they have most people fooled. <lol>

It's far too late to plea for snakes being left as they are--the color and pattern morphs prove that people aren't inclined to do that at all. Why not make captivity more pleasant for them by breeding them to adapt to it more readily--and making them into more pleasant pets for people?

Take problem feeders, for example. How many folks do you think have a hatchling that refuses to feed, and winds up having to be assist-fed. Later, it starts eating on its own fine...and then winds up in a breeding program?

I think it's particularly difficult for people to give up a female ball python, no matter what her temperment or background is.

Why should we pass on genes from a snake that is miserable in captivity? All of it descendents will be captives, too, after all. It has far less to do with making them more pleasant pets than it does with making them healthier captives with lower stress levels, more consistant feeding habits, and more consistant breeding habits.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by WingedWolfPsion

You hold back the ones that show less defensiveness than their siblings, that's all. There's no point in being so aggressive in your criteria, not until you've been working at it for a while. Of course you aren't going to produce affectionate snakes. What you aim to produce are less defensive, calmer snakes.

Snakes ARE individuals. They do have different personalities. Much of personality is genetic, even in humans, let alone in something with a brain as primitive as a snake's. A snake's less complex brain is why it should be even more effective to breed for temperment, because its experiences are likely to have less impact on its personality than its genetics.

In the long run, it's in the best interests of the snakes if they are NOT nervous, frightened, or overly defensive. Read up on the domestication of foxes done as an experiment in Russia. It takes remarkably few generations to completely change an animal's typical behavior.

Of course, as it turns out, humans didn't actually domesticate dogs in the first place--it happened through natural selection processes that humans happened to be part of through their reactions, rather than deliberate actions. Dogs evolved to be our companions because that niche was open--a scavenger that can safely live among us, and even parasitize us through our emotions. Said in the kindest possible way, as I do like dogs. :) They're INCREDIBLY well-adapted animals...absolutely ingenius. They instinctively know how to make us go 'awww' and feed them. There's an illusion that 'stray dogs' are unfortunate escaped pets, when in reality they live in virtually every human community on the planet...feral dogs aren't strays, they're living in their natural environment. They evolved to be right there, eating our garbage. I have a lot of respect for dogs, they have most people fooled. <lol>

It's far too late to plea for snakes being left as they are--the color and pattern morphs prove that people aren't inclined to do that at all. Why not make captivity more pleasant for them by breeding them to adapt to it more readily--and making them into more pleasant pets for people?

Take problem feeders, for example. How many folks do you think have a hatchling that refuses to feed, and winds up having to be assist-fed. Later, it starts eating on its own fine...and then winds up in a breeding program?

I think it's particularly difficult for people to give up a female ball python, no matter what her temperment or background is.

Why should we pass on genes from a snake that is miserable in captivity? All of it descendents will be captives, too, after all. It has far less to do with making them more pleasant pets than it does with making them healthier captives with lower stress levels, more consistant feeding habits, and more consistant breeding habits.

---

What?!?!?!


I really do not understand anything you say...you seem to talk in circles alot.

:confused:

It seems rather selfish to continue allowing these reptiles to be wild in genealogy. Virtually every animal that we eat or keep as pets is domesticated. Chickens are domesticated. If a chicken can be domesticated, a snake sure as hell can.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domestic_animal

Saying "why can't we just accept them as they are?" is a contradiction in itself. If we accepted them as they were, they'd be in the wild, living more freely and NATURALLY as they were meant to be. But being as we are keeping them for domestic purposes, it seems only fair to the snake that they be domesticated..

Also taken from wiki...



According to evolutionary biologist Jared Diamond, animal species must meet six criteria in order to be considered for domestication:

1. Flexible diet — Creatures that are willing to consume a wide variety of food sources and can live off less cumulative food from the food pyramid (such as corn or wheat) are less expensive to keep in captivity. Most carnivores can only be fed meat, which requires the expenditure of many herbivores.

2. Reasonably fast growth rate — Fast maturity rate compared to the human life span allows breeding intervention and makes the animal useful within an acceptable duration of caretaking. Large animals such as elephants require many years before they reach a useful size.

3. Ability to be bred in captivity — Creatures that are reluctant to breed when kept in captivity do not produce useful offspring, and instead are limited to capture in their wild state. Creatures such as the panda and cheetah are difficult to breed in captivity.

4. Pleasant disposition — Large creatures that are aggressive toward humans are dangerous to keep in captivity. The African buffalo has an unpredictable nature and is highly dangerous to humans. Although similar to domesticated pigs in many ways, American peccaries and Africa's warthogs and bushpigs are also dangerous in captivity.

5. Temperament which makes it unlikely to panic — A creature with a nervous disposition is difficult to keep in captivity as they will attempt to flee whenever they are startled. The gazelle is very flighty and it has a powerful leap that allows it to escape an enclosed pen.

6. Modifiable social hierarchy — Social creatures that recognize a hierarchy of dominance can be raised to recognize a human as its pack leader. Bighorn sheep cannot be herded because they lack a dominance hierarchy, whilst antelopes and giant forest hogs are territorial when breeding and cannot be maintained in crowded enclosures in captivity.

Well I got off track I suppose. Someone mentioned domestication, and I went along with it before reading in between the lines. It goes back to the OP, can they be breed for personality traits? I believe that although the stress issues can be breed out of these wonderful snakes, that basically everything else will remain the same.

I still don't see the arguments making much sense. It's a SNAKE! Let it be a snake! It will never be a pack animal. If you want an pet to act like a puppy, get a puppy.


And Wolf, you cannot compare domestication of mammals to domestication of reptiles.

Quote:

---

Why should we pass on genes from a snake that is miserable in captivity? All of it descendents will be captives, too, after all. It has far less to do with making them more pleasant pets than it does with making them healthier captives with lower stress levels, more consistant feeding habits, and more consistant breeding habits.

---

How exactly do you determine if it's miserable in captivity? I'd even be so bold as to say that 90% of ball pythons in captivity that are "problem" feeders are problem feeders because of poor husbandry.

I've got four in my collection right now that were surrended to the pet store, because they were problem feeders. They eat every single week for me.

All of my captive hatched snakes eat every week without fail. Would you say that these "wild" animals are any more miserable than those that are bred in captivity?

Who's going to set the criteria for this new "breed" of friendly ball pythons? What's the standard?

Quote:

---

Who's going to set the criteria for this new "breed" of friendly ball pythons? What's the standard?

---

Wagging his tail maybe :8: