The Giant Debate???

[Paco]

Ok I know this has been brought up in a few other threads but since there is so many questions I have I want to put a few more things out there.

Now with all this current debate what I want to know is, Can the Giant be refined to become a true Morph? Or is it even a Morph?

I mean with all the current facts we have about the Giants and some people thinking that size is coming from a Sub species. Couldn't we assume that since that Most of the Leos we have in the Trade are most Likely not a pure Species but a combo of many Sub Species( I know there are some pure lines out there).

So if this is the case The Sub Species that was use to create the First "Giant" should be well ingrained in the gene pool and should be showing up all over the place.

Is this one of the reasons we are starting to see so many "Large" leos which would qualify as "Giants" starting to pop up? If this is the case could we then assume that these other "Large" Leos have the same Sub species genes somewhere in their genetic make up?

Looking back at how the "Giant" came about, It makes me think that a lot of the Sub species genes were allready in the collection and there is know way he could have know and good number of these animals were released to the public not knowing the genetics they possessed. I mean just because it does not show all the characteristics does not mean that that the Sub species Genetics are not present, they just are not seen physically.

So my next question would be then. Is a Giant a "Morph" or is it a Hybrid Sub Species? Is there a Difference? Why would you consider it a "Morph"?

What is going to need to be done to refine the Giants? Should there be standards we use to determine what will make a "Giant" a True Giant. Or are we just going to start seeing BAL's( BIG A$$ LEOS) and thats just what they will be. BIG A$$ Leos?

 

[Halley]

What is going to need to be done to refine the Giants? Should there be standards we use to determine what will make a "Giant" a True Giant. Or are we just going to start seeing BAL's( BIG A$$ LEOS) and thats just what they will be. BIG A$$ Leos?

Now with all this current debate what I want to know is, Can the Giant be refined to become a true Morph? Or is it even a Morph?

I think this depends. I think a Morph is any variation from the norm. So a larger than average gecko would technically be a morph, just as a jungle, or tangerine would be. It’d be a morph rather polygenetic (tangerine) or simple genetic (tremper albino). The question comes to be what do we define as larger than normal. Is a 60 gram female really a giant? Not to me! Does it matter what line the gecko comes from? Perhaps, I’ve read on several occasions, how the geckos from the “giant line” pass on their size more readily than larger geckos from other lines, which contain larger geckos. So should any line that can pass on its size with a predictable outcome, be consider a “giant line”? Sure, works for me! We have more than one line of tangerines, and boldstrips, so why not more than one line of giants?

I mean with all the current facts we have about the Giants and some people thinking that size is coming from a Sub species. Couldn't we assume that since that Most of the Leos we have in the Trade are most Likely not a pure Species but a combo of many Sub Species( I know there are some pure lines out there).

I’m not sure I get what you’re asking 100%. But, I’d say it’s safe to say the majority of leopard geckos in the hobby today, carry some percentage of a random mix of different sub-species.

So if this is the case The Sub Species that was use to create the First "Giant" should be well ingrained in the gene pool and should be showing up all over the place.

Depends on what sub-species you believe it is, if you do believe it’s a sub-species.

Is this one of the reasons we are starting to see so many "Large" leos which would qualify as "Giants" starting to pop up? If this is the case could we then assume that these other "Large" Leos have the same Sub species genes somewhere in their genetic make up?

A genetic difference doesn’t necessarily always have to be because of origin, it can also be an effect of human intervention such as line-breeding. Some geckos are most likely line-breed to be larger, while others are just naturally or randomly larger. I’d have a few human examples to point out, but I don’t want them to be taken the wrong way. So basically I think my above comment would have to still stand here, that if lines where proven out, that they could technically become their own giant line.

Looking back at how the "Giant" came about, It makes me think that a lot of the Sub species genes were already in the collection and there is no way he could have know and good number of these animals were released to the public not knowing the genetics they possessed. I mean just because it does not show all the characteristics does not mean that that the Sub species Genetics are not present, they just are not seen physically.

1) It’s possible that he didn’t know the exact make-up of his geckos.
2) We will never know for sure if a sub was actually used to make the first giant. I can guarantee the founder of the morph isn’t going to tell.

So my next question would be then. Is a Giant a "Morph" or is it a Hybrid Sub Species? Is there a Difference? Why would you consider it a "Morph"?

Read above.

What is going to need to be done to refine the Giants? Should there be standards we use to determine what will make a "Giant" a True Giant. Or are we just going to start seeing BAL's( BIG A$$ LEOS) and that’s just what they will be. BIG A$$ Leos?

Read above.

Hope that answers your questions the way I see them.

 

[Golden Gate Geckos]

I am very skeptical that the "Giant" is a legitimate morph.

 

[Paco]

I am very skeptical that the "Giant" is a legitimate morph.

Why is this Marcia? And what do you think the Giant is if it is not a morph? Because as stated as above others feel its a morph. I still don't know what I think yet?:main_huh:

I am trying to gather as much info as I can to educate myself and I learn from every ones input. I may not agree with it all the time but I all ways learn.

 

[Paco]

Halley... All good input and points.

I will have to disagree on your def. of a morph. Just because a Animal is Bigger I would not consider it a Morph, Just a Bigger or "Giant" Version. Leos come in all sizes and shapes. A 40 Gram Normal is No Different than a 100 Gram Normal, besides the size of the animal.JMO

But the reason I think the Giants breed out different and create bigger leos more easily, is because of the Sub species involved. There are other factors as well but I think this is the main factor.

I think the "Giant" is a Sub Species. Which one I am not to sure but I was talking to one of my importers a while back about finding me some PURE Leo Sub Species, which I am still hunting for, he told me he remembered getting a sub species of leos in years ago that were HUGE allmost twice the size of the standard Leos. So this also is one of the reasons I believe its a sub species involved in this.JMO

But this is all speculation at this point until a bit more is known about some of the Sub species that are out there. There is very little info on some of them.

 

[Nigel4less]

I will have to disagree on your def. of a morph. Just because a Animal is Bigger I would not consider it a Morph, Just a Bigger or "Giant" Version. Leos come in all sizes and shapes. A 40 Gram Normal is No Different than a 100 Gram Normal, besides the size of the animal.JMO

If this was so a 4000 Gram Imported Ball python would be a seperate morph. :main_rolleyes:

 

[Nigel4less]

I am very skeptical that the "Giant" is a legitimate morph.

As am I Marcia, as am I...

 

[Paco]

If this was so a 4000 Gram Imported Ball python would be a seperate morph. :main_rolleyes:

Nigel... Not true I have been in the Ball market for Several Years and No one sells Large Ball pythons as a morph. I see imported females of that size every so often and they are not advertised as a morph. I think I saw a 3500 gram female for sale the other day and it was not advertised as a morph.

I was going to make a statement about the Ball market and how NO one calls a Very Large Ball python a Morph nor do they call small Ball's morphs.

So that is another reason I would not consider the " Giant" to be a Morph.

 

[Nigel4less]

Nigel... Not true I have been in the Ball market for Several Years and No one sells Large Ball pythons as a morph. I see imported females of that size every so often and they are not advertised as a morph. I think I saw a 3500 gram female for sale the other day and it was not advertised as a morph.

I was going to make a statement about the Ball market and how NO one calls a Very Large Ball python a Morph nor do they call small Ball's morphs.

So that is another reason I would not consider the " Giant" to be a Morph.

No I was just using Nick's theory and applying it to another Species. I mean if that was so then I could sell my Big Geckos as Giants or Super Giants. Which simply isn't ethical in my opinion. I just don't think size is a legitimate mutation, since it is so variable.

 

[SaSobek]

If it is a subspecies its this one Eublepharis angramainyu, im not saying it is but IF it is it would be this one.

http://www.geckosunlimited.com/community/leopard-geckos-other-eublepharis/31896-whoohoo-angramainyu.html

http://www.geckosunlimited.com/community/leopard-geckos-other-eublepharis/33411-angramainyu-hatchlings.html

 

[David Loftin]

I have purchased Super Giants and Giants a few years back.. And I never really hatched out anything that got big. There were some that were lanky as hatchlings.. that grew into their frame as they got older.. But nothing over 80 grams.

Another good question would be does non 'Giant' line big gecko + non 'Giant' big gecko = all big geckos.. Couldn't you just line breed for bigger geckos and end then eventually end up getting the results a lot more consistently..

Something else I have noticed over the years.. When you breed a gecko doesn't that drastically slow [even stop in some cases] its growth? So, really if you wanted to see if a 'Super Giant' was indeed a 'Super Giant'... wouldn't you have to wait a couple years for it to get bigger? Another thing.... What if you were not to feed the 'Super Giant' Mealworms? Just crickets or Roaches instead.. Would it get to the same size as if it was getting fed just Mealworms?

 

[Paco]

No I was just using Nick's theory and applying it to another Species. I mean if that was so then I could sell my Big Geckos as Giants or Super Giants. Which simply isn't ethical in my opinion. I just don't think size is a legitimate mutation, since it is so variable.

Ok I see. I thought you were trying to be sarcastic but it's so hard to tell what someone is really saying sometimes on the computer.

Well the "Giants" in question seem somewhat Variable but the outcomes have been fairly stable. Most who work with claim the ability to tell them apart very easily as well.

Paul's Example was he hatched out all big Leos but 2, from his giant projects last year. So I would have to say thats pretty consistent outcomes. It is Not consistent with what the genetics are supposed to do, but with outcomes like those I would have to say the Line is Breeding out like it should. These outcomes would just lead me to Believe that the the Giant Gene is Not Co-dom like originally thought. BUt there is something going on with them, the outcomes show this.

As for size being so Variable, it just needs to be worked with and refined. We know you can make animals in Large and small size's with selective breeding. This variable size will eventually go away and the size will become more stable, I don't think 100% or anything close is possible, but size issue would become less Variable for sure. If worked with long enough.

If you have a Big Leo you should be able to call it a Giant, if it is Big. All a Giant is a Larger than normal Version. But this is where we need to come up with industry standards to help clear up the confusion. That's why I am going to call my "Giants", Big A$$ Leos. Because that is what they will be.

Again I think the Giants are Big due to a Sub Species and so do a few other well known breeders in the trade. I think it's being a Mutation is very questionable but you never know.

 

[Paco]

If it is a subspecies its this one Eublepharis angramainyu, im not saying it is but IF it is it would be this one.

http://www.geckosunlimited.com/community/leopard-geckos-other-eublepharis/31896-whoohoo-angramainyu.html

http://www.geckosunlimited.com/community/leopard-geckos-other-eublepharis/33411-angramainyu-hatchlings.html

I would have to say those are some "Giant" Leos in those threads.:main_lipsrsealed: Just backs up my thinking even more.

 

[nevinm]

my only argument to this entire thing, and im sure there will be a rebuttle, is there is so much regularety and not much veriance. this is all ofcourse coming from my own experiance. and this is also strictly speaking about the hatchlings and i think if there is a standerd it needs to be on the hatchlings. if i breed a so called giant to a giant, the babies are very regular in size and accually seem to fallow what is stated on trempers page. i get about 25% coming out at about 6-8 grams. half of them come out at about 4-5 grams, and the rest are only the normal size babies being about 2 grams. it was kind of wierd last year, that at the begining of the year i paniced because i forgot what a normal size hatchling looked like and when it came out for a second i thought it was going to die! when you talk about getting big babies from big leopards, well with this done you get a large viriety of sizes with no averages. you can breed a 110g male to a 100g female, and you will still get a large amount of normal sized babie with a couple of over sized babies.

If this was so a 4000 Gram Imported Ball python would be a seperate morph. :main_rolleyes:

as for this, well there is a subspecies from africa that gets 5-6000 grams. they push nearly 8ft long. they are huge. the problem is they are all WC lay one clutch of eggs and die. unfortionatly thats how alot of WC snakes are. theyre so unprolific that no one realy bothers to import them any more. also all the eggs from them kept dieing. i have a 4000 gram ball python but she is about 10 years old.

just my 2 cents

nev

 

[phalanx]

I do no longer give much importance to so called giants.

I have leos wich are 100% non giant, with a weight and size much bigger than the so called giants in my collection.

for example my mack snow rainwater patternles albino female had - after laying last clutch - a weight of 117 grams. I think she is now back at 125 grams. She is non-giant, not fat, just big. some of my 'so called' giants do not exceed a weight of 80 grams.

The same with the offspring: some juveniles from non-giant parents sometimes just get bigger than those of (super)giants.

It's just so difficult to say: "that's a giant" , even if you know the background of the leo.
This toghether with some unclear definitions found on the web it gets nearly impossible to be sure.

If I had to believe te definition of Mr T... about giants, my entire collection should be giant... which is definitely not the case.

Because of that I don't give much importance anymore.

 

[Paco]

Nevin... Thanks for the input. This is the type of data and comments I am looking for. From someone who has experience with the morph.

Also I think every one forgets we are working with genetics and genetics don't allways follow the rules.

 

[nevinm]

well paco, to be honest as it was brought up fridaynight, and brought up now, i am going to keep as much data as i can this year. last year i just kept track of what animals were born at what wieght and when compaired to others. this year i will do the same but with much more detail. i wish i had done so over the past year, but i didnt see any of this coming. honestly i dont care for the man that came up with the giants, or what he did and the ppl he srewed up over selling het giants. but what ive seen with my own eyes i have to beleave. this isnt a case of me just looking for what i want, because im not. im the kind of person that loves to dissprove things just as much as prove them. to be honest, im not even going to keep groups togeather this year, everysingle female will have her own enclosure, every egg will have they lay date, hatch date, and growth rate on record. for the 09-10 breeding seasons

ps. your welcome, and glad i can add my thoughts

 

[Paco]

I do no longer give much importance to so called giants.

I have leos wich are 100% non giant, with a weight and size much bigger than the so called giants in my collection.

for example my mack snow rainwater patternles albino female had - after laying last clutch - a weight of 117 grams. I think she is now back at 125 grams. She is non-giant, not fat, just big. some of my 'so called' giants do not exceed a weight of 80 grams.

The same with the offspring: some juveniles from non-giant parents sometimes just get bigger than those of (super)giants.

It's just so difficult to say: "that's a giant" , even if you know the background of the leo.
This toghether with some unclear definitions found on the web it gets nearly impossible to be sure.

If I had to believe te definition of Mr T... about giants, my entire collection should be giant... which is definitely not the case.

Because of that I don't give much importance anymore.

Sam Like I stated earlier, with all the Mutts that are in the Leo world I am sure the genetics that were used for the Giants is out there for sure. You do not have any confirmed Giants but it does not mean the genetic pool that was used to create the Giants is not in your leos genetics. Especially if it is a Sub species involved. Take a look the post Matt left and Look at the threads. You will see where the Giants come from, JMO. and that those genetics are most likely spread through out the gene pool. That is why we are seeing so many Big leos these days.IMO


Also as Nevin pointed out there are pretty consistent out comes with the giants and when Just breeding Big leos it seems to be much more Variable.

 

[phalanx]

I agree with you paco, but ever since I started breeding with giants I started to get my own opinion.

right now we are cataloging leos on a genetic trait that is not always visible.
Some giants are smaller than other. So we could get confused with a big non-giant leo and a smaller sized giant leo.

take the dark side of the hobby in consideration and you get an extra factor:
Some of this confusion is accidentaly, some is made on purpose... As I see that cetain people define there hatchlings as (super)giant and put them up for sale at an age of 2 weeks old... I start to ask myself some questions.

Another thing that makes it hard is that some people are line-breeding for bigger leos.

If I think about all this we can never be 100% sure

Off course I also ask myself how the giant-gene has come. And as already mentionned, the possibility of a subspecies being used to get there is for sure an explanation.

 

[paulnj]

Sorry, but I am not touching this thread because I don't have enough proof either way.