» Site Navigation
1 members and 3,323 guests
Most users ever online was 6,337, 01-24-2020 at 04:30 AM.
» Today's Birthdays
» Stats
Members: 75,093
Threads: 248,533
Posts: 2,568,700
Top Poster: JLC (31,651)
|
-
Registered User
Re: Breeding for size?
Originally Posted by Deborah
Volta localities are considered "giant" can be found every now and then, after that it's all about genetic not all animals are designed to be 3000 or 4000 grams, I have 1st, 2nd and now 3 generations of pied and het pieds traced back to my founder female (which was over 4000 grams) that consistently reach those sizes and lay 8 to 12 eggs clutches without issue, producing babies that are 90/95 grams out of the egg.
So it’s safe to assume a 95g hatchling will be 5-6 feet adult?
-
-
Re: Breeding for size?
Originally Posted by Scooda954
So it’s safe to assume a 95g hatchling will be 5-6 feet adult?
No fluke happen because it's 95 grams when hatching does not mean it will be 4000 grams and 5 to 6 feet just like because it hatches at 45 grams doesn't mean it won't be huge.
It's not about the size of the hatchling it more the size of the parents
-
The Following User Says Thank You to Stewart_Reptiles For This Useful Post:
-
Re: Breeding for size?
Originally Posted by Deborah
Economically doing so would make no sense for a BP breeder, not like BP are big to start with (if you want small just get a male) breeding for small size in BP would mean small animals, small clutches (not like the clutches are big already 6 eggs on average), small babies.
Now if you want small there are dwarf and super dwarf retics and dwarf boas and dwarf burms but does went from very large to perfect size for a keeper and breeding wise they were already producing large amount of eggs to start with.
True the clutches would be small, but I think the novelty of a BP that only got the size of a milk snake would have people lining up to buy them. For some reason people love any animal that has “mini”, “tea cup” or “pocket” in front of it.
By the way, I’m in no way saying that I would consider doing this. Just making conversation.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
-
Re: Breeding for size?
Originally Posted by Jbabycsx
True the clutches would be small, but I think the novelty of a BP that only got the size of a milk snake would have people lining up to buy them. For some reason people love any animal that has “mini”, “tea cup” or “pocket” in front of it.
By the way, I’m in no way saying that I would consider doing this. Just making conversation.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
The only thing is - "mini" dogs and "dwarf" cats have a ton of health issues from not being the correct size. Small breed dogs have luxating knee-caps, retain baby teeth / have dental problems, malformed livers and hearts, the dwarf cats have joint issues as well. Not that snakes have to worry about limb malformation....but any time you breed for something the species was not meant for you get issues. Our morphs are all crazy in appearance when compared to natural wild-type pythons, but they are still recognizable pythons in shape and mobility. I think if you tried to "shrink" a ball to less than 'small male size' you'd probably increase things like spinal kinks, egg binding, possibly infertility as well as organ issues.
And, yeah - even with the problems people would want them for the novelty of the animal without considering health.
No cage is too large - nature is the best template - a snoot can't be booped too much
-
The Following User Says Thank You to Crowfingers For This Useful Post:
-
Re: Breeding for size?
Originally Posted by Crowfingers
The only thing is - "mini" dogs and "dwarf" cats have a ton of health issues from not being the correct size. Small breed dogs have luxating knee-caps, retain baby teeth / have dental problems, malformed livers and hearts, the dwarf cats have joint issues as well. Not that snakes have to worry about limb malformation....but any time you breed for something the species was not meant for you get issues. Our morphs are all crazy in appearance when compared to natural wild-type pythons, but they are still recognizable pythons in shape and mobility. I think if you tried to "shrink" a ball to less than 'small male size' you'd probably increase things like spinal kinks, egg binding, possibly infertility as well as organ issues.
And, yeah - even with the problems people would want them for the novelty of the animal without considering health.
Sadly, this is true.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
-
Milk snakes still are a good size snake depending on the species tho.... Up to 6 feet. Now a ball python bred to be more compact and that skinny would just look emaciated and sad.
Also keep in mind that in some animals (dogs and cats or lion/tiger crossbreeds) you get issues with going too large as well. Heart problems or different types of bone deformities than going mini can lead to. Or shortened lifespans.
A 5 pound chihuahua? 12-20 years... vs 8-10 on a great dane
Reptiles are a weird spot tho as they technically continue growing throughout their life, just slow down greatly with age. Obviously selective breeding as mentioned before is key.
though the founding leopard gecko for the giant line died unexpectedly at only age 6. So who knows if you would end up with similar issues on snakes.
Last edited by Armiyana; 11-29-2018 at 09:30 PM.
-
The Following User Says Thank You to Armiyana For This Useful Post:
Posting Permissions
- You may not post new threads
- You may not post replies
- You may not post attachments
- You may not edit your posts
-
Forum Rules
|