that wierd "morph"?

What ever happened to that weird looking "morph" found in Africa? It looked like it had no scales or heat pits. Does anyone one know what i'm talking about? If not then have a nice summer.

The Derma Ball.

As far as I know it's still around.

It was an import?? I thought it was produced here in the states....

Yes SPJ, I think thats the name, thanks alot!

Didn't VPI produce that?

I would like a pic or link to a pic if anyone has one. It sounds really interesting.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sputnik

Didn't VPI produce that?

---

No, it was collected with it's litter mates and mother from the wild.

-adam

Here's the link to a fauna classified. There's a lot of debate around this snake because the guy who has it is planning on breeding it and selling the offspring as hets. Many people feel that breeding the snake is wrong... that it's a mutation that shouldn't be spread throughout the population.

http://www.faunaclassifieds.com/pp_c...ct=7347&cat=10

That poor snake! How will it even survive without scales? Won't it just dry up?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by erinisnice

That poor snake! How will it even survive without scales? Won't it just dry up?

---

No. The purpose of scales is not to hold in moisture ... think of them more like hair on a mammal.

There are several species of reptiles that have shown a scale-less condition in whole or in part as a reproducible trait ... some even found as adults thriving in the wild.

-adam

Wow, that's pretty wild. I would imagine that there are a lot of misconceptions about that condition; but it seems to be that the snake looks fine. I do know that hairless animals (rats, in my experieice) are more vulnerable to outside temperature factors and such, and I would wonder if that condition would make it harder for the snake to retain body heat absorbed by the environment. I know of people who have put little sweaters on their hairless rats; would this little guy need a "snakey sweater?" :)

I don't think people should complain about him breeding it and "spreading" the mutation.... its not like they are going to be reducing these back in the wild, anyone who produces a snake like that should be able to meet its needs.

wow thats a crazy lookin snake... very cool. i think they should breed it.

I agree, I really like it ... I want one ... I have to have hairless pets due to my aweful allergies, it would fit in with my cat and dog :P:D

Im not on the other hand alergic to reptiles LOL

Who breeds it?

That guy is trying to pass them off as hets, when they are nothing more than a flaw. I dont think the guy will get what he wants for it, $$$ wise. But maybe he will.

As said before, theres ALOT of debate on it. I dont think it should be spread as some "Cool morph", but as what it is, a flaw.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pslsnakes

That guy is trying to pass them off as hets, when they are nothing more than a flaw. I dont think the guy will get what he wants for it, $$$ wise. But maybe he will.

As said before, theres ALOT of debate on it. I dont think it should be spread as some "Cool morph", but as what it is, a flaw.

---

I think it's a matter of opinion, for sure. Some people might consider the pure white scales of a pied "flawed"...while most of us consider it beautiful. I don't care for the look of the derma-ball myself...not the least bit interested in owning one or even seeing one in person. However, I don't care if someone else gets excited about it. That's their business and more power to 'em.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pslsnakes

That guy is trying to pass them off as hets, when they are nothing more than a flaw.

---

In other species of reptiles that have exhibited the scale-less condition the trait has proven to be genetically inheritable as simple recessive ... which "would" make Justins offspring "hets". Why do you feel that the scale-less condition in p. regius wouldn't work the same as it does in every other species of reptile that it has been reproduced in?

-adam

Exactly. Every one has an opinion, and always sees something different than the next person.

I wouldnt look to own one, but wouldnt mind having it at the same time. Im just saying...Im NOT spending 30K on a snake that is nothing but a flaw, trying to be passed off as a "cool, new morph"

I see it different with like said before a Pied is a type of flaw. Yes it may be, but perse a visual flaw. That Derma Ball has little, to no scales. Who know what'll happen if its bred and the next generation of it turns out to have 3 eyes or something wierd like that?

do you know what i mean?

Adam, Yes I know what you mean, but...

I think it said something about those Derma's being Het Pieds? Im not sure though. Im just saying, hes trying to pass them as het for a visual morh, but i know what yopu mean when the Derma ball could be a het of a Scale-less animal, not a scale-less animal thats het for a visual morph (Pied, clown, albino)

Sorry for being so confusing...lol

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pslsnakes

I think it said something about those Derma's being Het Pieds?

---

That would be because he bred the derma to a visible morph ... make sense?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pslsnakes

Im not sure though. Im just saying, hes trying to pass them as het for a visual morh, but i know what yopu mean when the Derma ball could be a het of a Scale-less animal, not a scale-less animal thats het for a visual morph (Pied, clown, albino)

---

Well, "if" the derma is genetic (just like it is in every other species of reptile that has a scale-less reproducible mutation) and "if" the derma was bred to a female morph (like a pied, clown, or albino) ... "then" those babies would be "het" for the scale-less trait "as well as" het for the visible mutation that laid the clutch ... make sense?

If you have a good grip on genetics and reptiles in general I would hope that it's clear that Justin isn't trying to "pass off" anything.

For what it's worth, I'm personally not a fan of the derma ... but I am a fan of the truth.

-adam

But how do you know the Derma IS genetic? When it was pretty much a flaw?

Just wondering.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pslsnakes

But how do you know the Derma IS genetic? When it was pretty much a flaw?

Just wondering.

---

A flaw? Like what? Albinism? Axanthism? What you see as a flaw, some people see as beauty ... There are some people that feel that being a teenager is a "flaw" ... how does that make you feel? Why would you call it a “flaw” … have you even seen the animal in person?

The derma hasn't been proven to be genetic yet, but there is “precedent” (go ahead, look it up, I'll wait ;) ) in other reptile species with scale-less specimens proving to be genetic ... so there is NO REASON to believe that the same won't hold true for the derma.

Just like when Bob Clark got in the first albino ball python ... he invested a lot of time and energy in proving it out because he had a strong feeling that it would be genetic ... that strong feeling was based on the fact that there was already albino corn snakes and albino burmese pythons that had proven to be genetic ... it's called precedent and it's a corner stone of scientific theory.

Just like the people that bought het pieds before Pete proved pieds to be genetic, people that buy het dermas are taking a chance ... but I know a couple of those original het pied customers of Petes personally and I'll tell you one thing ... They walk around with smiles from ear to ear ... I suspect that the first derma het customers will do the same one day.

-adam

For me personally, I'll weigh in on the derma ball issue with some time. I'm all for reproducing desireable traits that do not affect the overall well-being of the animal. So if the derma ball leads a normal life....I can't wait to see some scale-less killer bees!

I'm thinking it's going to be all good. People have been breeding scaleless snakes since before I was born, so we'll see what the future holds for that mutation!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JLC

I think it's a matter of opinion, for sure. Some people might consider the pure white scales of a pied "flawed"...while most of us consider it beautiful. I don't care for the look of the derma-ball myself...not the least bit interested in owning one or even seeing one in person. However, I don't care if someone else gets excited about it. That's their business and more power to 'em.

---

HEAR HEAR!! :D Totally agree.

Wow, that's surreal... I think I'd have to experience one of those in person, I can't even imagine what it feels like or even would look like in motion just looking at the pic.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pslsnakes

But how do you know the Derma IS genetic? When it was pretty much a flaw?

Just wondering.

---

I won't touch on the subject of genetics; Adam seems to have covered that quite well. However, your use of the word "flaw" is confusing...what exactly do you mean? You seem to be implying that there's something inherently wrong with the Derma simply because it lacks scales. As long as the snake is healthy, capable of hunting, shedding and reproducing, there's nothing "wrong" with it, however unattractive it may seem to anyone.

The idea that there's something 'wrong' with any given individual is rooted in "typological thinking" -- the view that there's a canonical individual of a species from which 'real' individuals differ to a greater or lesser extent. Biology no longer approaches issues from that viewpoint; for some time now, we've been working from "population thinking", which focuses on the variation in any given population of individuals, recognizing that "normal" is merely a statistical abstraction.

An analogy to the Derma might be red hair in humans, which is the result of a recessive mutation which disables a receptor molecule on the surface of pigment cells; in addition to causing red hair, it also leads to many of the characteristics we associate with redheads (lighter skin, freckles, suburns easily), as well as an increased sensitivity to UV light and (perhaps) a higher risk of melanoma. Are redheads "flawed"?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by engywook

An analogy to the Derma might be red hair in humans, which is the result of a recessive mutation which disables a receptor molecule on the surface of pigment cells; in addition to causing red hair, it also leads to many of the characteristics we associate with redheads (lighter skin, freckles, suburns easily), as well as an increased sensitivity to UV light and (perhaps) a higher risk of melanoma. Are redheads "flawed"?

---

I disagree with your analogy. The gene that enabled redheads developed in a region with very little sun and obviously the "flaw" wasn't enough to prevent the spread of that gene. Reptilian scales developed over millions of years and they serve an important purpose in the survival of all reptiles. Just because a couple have been found in nature doesn't necessarily mean they "thrive" or aren't needed for continuing survival. Two headed snakes have been found in nature as well as other genetic flaws that will probably hinder that individuals ability to survive for an extended period or at the very least prevent very many generations from perpetuating that gene. Nobody knows for certain, but I would be willing to bet that for every scaleless snake found in nature, there were dozens, hundreds, or even thousands that have perished.

As far as Justin and his Derma, I feel he is being dishonest by selling them as "hets" without first proving them. Sure, there might be a 99% chance that they are genetic, but until they are 100% proven, they shouldn't be labled as such. I find it interesting that many people were bashing the WC leucistic ball a couple months ago because it wasn't "proven", yet the Derma seems to be even more of a stretch genetically than that Leucistic. I have no problem with people gambling on these genetics, but they should keep their advertising honest. :soapbx:

I think that more studying needs to be done on this. Is it similar to hairless rats; I know that, across the board with rat breeders, it is well known that it's nearly impossible to breed hairlesses. They always either seem to eat the babies, or just not breed.
It reminds me of "rex" rats; they have some patches of hair but are largely hairless. True "hairlessness" this is not; the snake does have some scales. I am sorry, but it just seems like the owner is trying to create a bunch of hype and make money off of hets, when it hasn't been proven that this is genetic; what if it were somehow caused by unrest while developing in the egg, or a chemical exposure; who knows?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ginevive

I am sorry, but it just seems like the owner is trying to create a bunch of hype and make money off of hets, when it hasn't been proven that this is genetic;

---

Yup. Just like every single other ball python mutation that was discovered and later proved out.

If you've been around long enough, you know that this is nothing new. If you think that this is something that hasn't been done before over and over again, you haven't been around long enough. ;)

-adam

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by xdeus

Reptilian scales developed over millions of years and they serve an important purpose in the survival of all reptiles. Just because a couple have been found in nature doesn't necessarily mean they "thrive" or aren't needed for continuing survival.

---

How can you say that the scale-less condition isn't just the next evolutionary step for snakes ... maybe "scales" are a "flaw" on the road to a better form?

Not an argument, just a thought. ;) :D

-adam

Thats how a lot of people go about selling snakes... oh this looks like a ____ or it looks brand new and might be a new morph.... but I think in the case of the derma, with multiple babies being like that.... man, that is just something different. if it isnt genetic, Id like to know how it happend heh

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Adam_Wysocki

How can you say that the scale-less condition isn't just the next evolutionary step for snakes ... maybe "scales" are a "flaw" on the road to a better form?

Not an argument, just a thought. ;) :D

---

Nah, if that were the case there would be at least one snake species that didn't have scales. Snakes developed in almost every continent in almost every climate, so if scales were useless or a hinderance you would think that there would be at least one species that would have done away with them. I wonder how many have been found in nature and how old those individuals were? Considering the protection they provide and the benefit towards mobility, I wouldn't think it would be very easy for those individuals to survive very long.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SnakeySnakeSnake

but I think in the case of the derma, with multiple babies being like that.... man, that is just something different. if it isnt genetic, Id like to know how it happend heh

---

Actually he only has one Derma, the normal looking mother, and three of the sibs that he's selling as 66% Hets. I don't have a problem with people trying to make as much as possible on a new morph, but just prove them out first before slapping a Het label on them. However, at least he's guaranteeing them to prove out. BTW, does anyone know if he ever sold them? That ad is almost a year old.

Yeah, that ad/thread is almost a y.o. and one of the loudest gripers is "Chris@TSE"...Did y'all catch that one? :rolleyes:


Beauty may be in the eyes and all that, but I wouldn't invest any sort of "big bucks" until there's something a little more of the "proven" to the story............. Even if he breeds back and gets more & that proves the trait, then there's more of a bang there...more babies and now it's a proven trait (therefore) a higher price.

Personally? I wouldn't buy it. There are reasons why some traits are fatal & some aren't............................Just my :twocents:

R.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by xdeus

Nah, if that were the case there would be at least one snake species that didn't have scales.

---

Maybe a million years from now there will be??

Evolution doesn't have a calendar ... maybe "scales" are just a "blip" on a much bigger timeline for snakes in their transition from lizards to "?????" .... If you look at snakes from an evolutionary standpoint of "not finished yet" ... who could possibly say what they will looking like in 3 million years?

Think bigger than the now. ;)

-adam

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by xdeus

I don't have a problem with people trying to make as much as possible on a new morph, but just prove them out first before slapping a Het label on them.

---

You do realize that Bob sold "het albinos" and "het stripes" before producing a single albino or stripe? And that Pete sold "het pieds" before producing a single pied as well? I could go on with other examples within ball pythons, boas, and other species where it's been done as well.

Same problem when the "big guys" do it? Or are you just uncomfortable because Justin isn't "known" to the ball python community outside of the higher circles?

-adam

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sweety314

There are reasons why some traits are fatal

---

Fatal? In ball pythons? Which traits?

FWIW, the derma is a VERY healthy little snake.

-adam

Interesting thread! And great points Adam...I think alot of us forget that these critters aren't quite done evolving, and maybe this is the direction they're heading???

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Adam_Wysocki

Maybe a million years from now there will be??

Evolution doesn't have a calendar ... maybe "scales" are just a "blip" on a much bigger timeline for snakes in their transition from lizards to "?????" .... If you look at snakes from an evolutionary standpoint of "not finished yet" ... who could possibly say what they will looking like in 3 million years?

---

I never look at evolution as being "finished" or "not finished". It's a dynamic process that is constantly changing. It's quite possible that one day there may be scaleless snakes or other reptiles, but there would have to be a need that would benefit the species. Even then, scales are such a huge part of the reptilian evolutionary process that I doubt if they would ever be eliminated. Look at mammals; every mammal on this planet has hair of some sort. There have been a few that got rid of most of them through evolution, but that pesky hair still lingers around. The only mammals that don't have hair are ones that have a genetic or physiological disorder.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Adam_Wysocki

You do realize that Bob sold "het albinos" and "het stripes" before producing a single albino or stripe? And that Pete sold "het pieds" before producing a single pied as well? I could go on with other examples within ball pythons, boas, and other species where it's been done as well.

---

Honestly, I don't care who it is. I believe anyone should be as accurate as possible when trying to sell something, especially for the amount of money that is being asked. However, I can see why the big breeders sold hets before proving out their particular lines: there were probably albinos, stripes, and pieds out there when they sold their snakes. Not only with Balls, but with other snakes that were proven to be genetic. I still don't agree with their labeling, but I suppose it's more excusable. With the Derma, however, it's the only one in existence. I have seen the other scaleless snakes, and the ones I've seen pictures of were completely scaleless. The Derma, however, has a number of scales that may indicate it was not a genetic anamoly that prevented scales from forming but perhaps a developmental problem that affected the production of scales. That fact alone should be enough to not label it genetic without proof. :2cent:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by xdeus

I disagree with your analogy. The gene that enabled redheads developed in a region with very little sun and obviously the "flaw" wasn't enough to prevent the spread of that gene.

---

Perhaps I could have chosen a better analogy...but I think you missed my point -- I wasn't claiming that being red-headed is a flaw. As far as redheadedness developing in a region with very little sun: the same selective pressures also led to a general lightening of hair/skin without the associated "problems" of redheadedness. However, as you say, obviously the cost of the redhead mutation (ie, the "flawed" part of it) was not sufficient to prevent its spread. My question, though: if you had just met the very first redhead, could you have made that call?

That's why I don't like the description of a trait/individual as "flawed". Apparently, the Derma is a healthy snake and labelling it as 'flawed' seems to be the result of the idea that snakes "should" be scaled. One also can't claim that scales are "best" for snakes simply because it seems as though most of them are scaled -- if the mutation for scalelessness occurs rarely and is recessive, it's not surprising that we don't see it often. If it's sufficiently rare, we might even expect that selection would take a very long time to act on it (either in a positive or negative direction).

As for a lack of scaleless reptiles in nature....in fact, quite a few reptiles have lost their scales; not only have they thrived, they've radiated onto every continent and most of the islands on the planet. We call them birds.

Are we overlooking the fact that almost no one would pay several 10's of thousands of dollars for a het unless it is proven? Do you really think these people shelling out big bucks for hets of "new unproven" morphs don't realize that these are in fact, new and unproven?

If I were a big snake breeder, and wanted in on the ground floor of the next big thing, it might be worth the risk to try to get my hands on anything and everything new. Do you think those people paying XX thousand dollars for "new" stuff in africa to be shipped over have any guarantee that it is genetic?

I think some people are getting hung up on the whole "but it isnt proven!" when the entire point is, they ARENT proven, and everyone knows it.... sure labeling an unproven snake a het is misleading to someone new, but it all comes down to education. If you dont do the background work to recognize that these are unproven morph hets, then you shouldnt be dropping big bucks on them anyway.

Unless there is another unambiguous way of labeling "unproven morph hets" without confusing them with % possible hets, etc, then I think it is perfectly acceptable to list them as het for derma, as that is what they are genetically unless they dont prove out. (and like Adam said, there is agood chance they will prove to be genetic)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by engywook

As for a lack of scaleless reptiles in nature....in fact, quite a few reptiles have lost their scales; not only have they thrived, they've radiated onto every continent and most of the islands on the planet. We call them birds.

---

That isn't the lack of scales, that's a scale mutation. Until someone finds a colony of scaleless snakes that are thriving in any environment, I will consider them as flawed individuals. The same goes for a two headed snake or one born without eyes. It's not a simple color mutation that changes the appearance, but rather a phyisical difference that could prevent the animal from having the proper protection or hindering its mobility. Honestly, I don't really care about the Derma. I see it like any other mutant that people propagate such as a hairless dog or even the modern turkey that is physically unable to mate.

Oh, and I was thinking a little more about what Adam had said about evolution not being finished yet. In a sense, every organism on this planet is "finished" evolving for their particular environment, and being that environments are constantly changing, no animal is trully finished evolving as well. Some can get by with very little change for millions of years like the crocodile or shark, and others need to change very rapidly in order at adapt. As far as scales on a reptile, obviously they have their purpose seeing how thousands of reptile species have kept them for millions of years and every reptile still has them. Until the particular environment changes so much that the animal no longer needs scales or they become a liability, I can't see scales being eliminated until that organism is no longer considered a reptile.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SnakeySnakeSnake

Unless there is another unambiguous way of labeling "unproven morph hets" without confusing them with % possible hets, etc, then I think it is perfectly acceptable to list them as het for derma, as that is what they are genetically unless they dont prove out.

---

I disagree. That's not what they are genetically UNTIL it is proven that it's genetic. Why is it then that so many people jump on people that claim they have a new morph? The standard response I hear is "Prove it out, until you do it's just a normal". Why is it that the Derma gets preferential treatment? If I found an eyeless snake or a two-headed snake, would people be okay with me selling the sibs as Hets? I don't think enough is known about scaleless snakes and their genetics to definitely say if it is genetic or not.

If the scaleless snake was in the wild, what would protect its belly from rocks, sticks, etc?
It looks like it could be injured much more easily than a scaled snake.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by xdeus

I disagree. That's not what they are genetically UNTIL it is proven that it's genetic.

---

I think everyone knows that, that is the point... everyone knows it isn't proven, I think this spirals back to the whole, how explicitly defined does everything have to get to prevent misunderstandings.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by xdeus

Why is it then that so many people jump on people that claim they have a new morph? The standard response I hear is "Prove it out, until you do it's just a normal".

---

I think people are still saying "prove it out" about the derma, but the derma is so radically different, and this condition has proven genetic before (see Adam's comment, im basing it off of this), so they are given the benefit of the doubt. Way more would be shocked to find it ISNT genetic, than would be shocked to find that it IS genetic.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by xdeus

Why is it that the Derma gets preferential treatment?

---

See above

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by xdeus

If I found an eyeless snake or a two-headed snake, would people be okay with me selling the sibs as Hets?

---

If eyelessness or two-headedness had been proven to be genetic in other animals, then yes people might be ok with it, assuming it didnt affect their health (and even if it did some would still be ok with it)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by xdeus

I don't think enough is known about scaleless snakes and their genetics to definitely say if it is genetic or not.

---

I think everyone agrees that we do not know 100% right now... we are talking about probabilities not sureties. If the options are, list het dermas as "100% het for Derma if derma is in fact genetic if its not then its not a het at all" or "100% het for Derma", I will take the latter. I know enough about the situation to realize that it isn't proven yet....

NOW I will take your side if someone TRIES to prove out dermas, over and over, and it never works, and someone CONTINUES to try to sell them as hets, then that would definitely be misleading...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SnakeySnakeSnake

If the options are, list het dermas as "100% het for Derma if derma is in fact genetic if its not then its not a het at all" or "100% het for Derma", I will take the latter.

---

Why do those have to be the only two options? What about "Derma Sibs"?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by xdeus

Why do those have to be the only two options? What about "Derma Sibs"?

---

That seems like it would be inaccurate as well.

I've heard of "Pastel sibs" which are obviously not pastels, and contain no genetic information for Pastel

"Derma Sibs" would imply to me, that Derma is a co-dom or dom trait, and that these sibs are genetically identical to a normal.

Ive never heard of "Albino Sibs" Because it being a recessive trait means there is a chance that they are hets. Do people even refer to recessive morphs sibs in such a manner?

I'm assuming Derma is supposed to be recessive if he is trying to sell possible hets?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SnakeySnakeSnake

I'm assuming Derma is supposed to be recessive if he is trying to sell possible hets?

---

The point is that the genetics are completely unknown at this time so the only accurate description would be Derma Sibs. It might be het for Derma and it might not; there is no way of knowing until it is proven. You said that it would imply that it was a normal of a co-dom or dom trait, but doesn't het imply that it is in known to be genetically recessive?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by xdeus

The point is that the genetics are completely unknown at this time so the only accurate description would be Derma Sibs. It might be het for Derma and it might not; there is no way of knowing until it is proven. You said that it would imply that it was a normal of a co-dom or dom trait, but doesn't het imply that it is in known to be genetically recessive?

---

I have 2 Het for Super Pastels upstairs :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by xdeus

The point is that the genetics are completely unknown at this time so the only accurate description would be Derma Sibs. It might be het for Derma and it might not; there is no way of knowing until it is proven.

---

I agree completely. Calling them "Derma Sibs" is fine; "possible Derma hets" would also be acceptable, though less accurate. To actually label them with a specific chance of being a het, though, is somewhere between misleading and dishonest. True, anyone planning on paying $30,000 for a snake should actually have enough background to know what they're getting anyway, but it's still bad practice to mislabel like that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by xdeus

Oh, and I was thinking a little more about what Adam had said about evolution not being finished yet. In a sense, every organism on this planet is "finished" evolving for their particular environment, and being that environments are constantly changing, no animal is trully finished evolving as well.

---

Well put. We actually have a name for that: the "Red Queen hypothesis". The name comes from the Red Queen in Through the Looking Glass, who says to Alice "it takes all the running you can do to stay in the same place." The basic idea is that a species doesn't actually get any better at surviving over time, similar to an arms race or aiming for a moving target -- there's activity and things change, but you never really 'get anywhere'. It's actually a bit broader than that and has more implications (offering, for example, a possible explanation of the advantage (and therefore origin) of sex), but that's not particularly relevant to this discussion. An excellent (and very readable) book on the subject is The Red Queen, by Matt Ridley. (If you don't want to invest the time & money involved in reading a book, Wikipedia also has an article on the Red Queen.)

Cheers.