Interbreeding
- Thread starter psyconiko
- Start date
Help Support Mantidforum:
mantidfromhell
Active member
i remember reading somewhere that the nymphs were born really weak and never made it to adult hood. still needs verification though
Ryan.M
Well-known member
Nikkko, I'm confused when you say "same genus". In taxonomy, genus denotes a family of closely related species. I'm assuming you mean interbreeding between offspring. Maybe it's a language thing 
If there was no "language thing" and you really did mean mating closely related species of the same genus, that would be almost impossible as most species are defined from one another by thier inability to mate with anything other than their own species.
Anyways if you're referring to interbreeding between offspring, there is a higher chance that recessive mutations may occur in the next generation, which could lead to developmental problems, but it doesn't mean that the majority of the next generation can't be healthy individuals.
In my opinion you might have a couple less (if any) nymphs maturing to adulthood, but most should be fairly healthy. It's always a good idea to shuffle the gene pool when you can so you get a fresh set of healthy genes, so don't interbreed for more than a few generations.
Cheers!
Edit: maybe i am the one with the language problem, i just realized this says interbreeding, not inbreeding :lol:
If there was no "language thing" and you really did mean mating closely related species of the same genus, that would be almost impossible as most species are defined from one another by thier inability to mate with anything other than their own species.
Anyways if you're referring to interbreeding between offspring, there is a higher chance that recessive mutations may occur in the next generation, which could lead to developmental problems, but it doesn't mean that the majority of the next generation can't be healthy individuals.
In my opinion you might have a couple less (if any) nymphs maturing to adulthood, but most should be fairly healthy. It's always a good idea to shuffle the gene pool when you can so you get a fresh set of healthy genes, so don't interbreed for more than a few generations.
Cheers!
Edit: maybe i am the one with the language problem, i just realized this says interbreeding, not inbreeding :lol:
Last edited by a moderator:
Please do a search on this topic. It has been discussed many times. For the most part breeding two different mantid species will not work. I have heard that it can be possible to get offspring from two closely related species in the same genus but that the offspring are few and very weak and most likely infertile.
psyconiko
Well-known member
- Joined
- Feb 5, 2011
- Messages
- 798
- Reaction score
- 49
Thank you.Yes I have read a lot about it(hybrids and interbreeding).In the wild there is more interbreeding than we think(thats what I have heard from biologists) and it is not that unusual.The only problem would be to make them(2 differents subspecies) meet and mate as they are not supposed to live together in the exact same inhabitat.
Yes nymphs from interbreeding may be weak but some of them should be viable.
I will try these days and keep you informed.
Yes nymphs from interbreeding may be weak but some of them should be viable.
I will try these days and keep you informed.
Keep in mind it is generally frowned upon to do such experiments.Thank you.Yes I have read a lot about it(hybrids and interbreeding).In the wild there is more interbreeding than we think(thats what I have heard from biologists) and it is not that unusual.The only problem would be to make them(2 differents subspecies) meet and mate as they are not supposed to live together in the exact same inhabitat.
Yes nymphs from interbreeding may be weak but some of them should be viable.
I will try these days and keep you informed.
MantidLord
Well-known member
Go for it dude. And keep us up to date on how it goes. Make sure you do a lot of documentation.
PhilinYuma
Well-known member
As Rick says, and the reason for that is that if you should manage to create a fertile hybrid, you stand to contaminate two existing species. Everyone says, "Oh I wouldn't allow that to happen", but so far as i can see, anyone irresponsible enough to make such a cross in the first place is unlikely to be able to prevent further cross breeding and the introduction into the hobby of freaks that are neither quite one species or the other. I agree with those who believe that this is the most harmful thing that anyone can do in the hobby. For everyone's sake, including yours, I hope that the mantids do not cooperate with you! .
.
It is an interesting question that does not get discussed much. There is only one species of Popa (Popa spurca)(so the offspring will be fertile etc) and you are talking of breeding geographically distinct lines of the same species that would not naturally come into contact.
We use the IGM numbers to help with this on UKMF as then you can distinguish the different lines. It is considered best to keep the strains seperate but not always done at all. Do you know where yours are from? If possible try to keep geographically distict lines seperate/pure.
psyconiko
Well-known member
- Joined
- Feb 5, 2011
- Messages
- 798
- Reaction score
- 49
I see 3 different IGM numbers regarding Popa spurca.I guess mine are coming from the most recent stock(got them from Germany last year).I am anyway breeding them(I have males and females).
I also have these Popa sp(undata,undulata?).You can see them for sale on a UK webstore.
They are darker than spurca with a more cryptic shape.
I only have 2 remaining adult females from this sp.So once my males spurca have mated,I will try to mate the other sp.
I also have these Popa sp(undata,undulata?).You can see them for sale on a UK webstore.
They are darker than spurca with a more cryptic shape.
I only have 2 remaining adult females from this sp.So once my males spurca have mated,I will try to mate the other sp.
Last edited by a moderator:
Popa spurca undulata is still Popa spurca I think as I think there is only one species. I'd like to know if that is wrong.
It might be worth asking if the undulata seller knows the IGM
It might be worth asking if the undulata seller knows the IGM
Last edited by a moderator:
PhilinYuma
Well-known member
Yes, we have a lot of confusion here. I think, Nikko, that his might be a language issue.
Setting aside things like the "biological species concept' we can say that a species breeds true and has a binomial designation, e.g. Popa spurca. A sub species of a species is usually geographically isolated from the type species, will interbreed with the type species, but differs from it in minor morphological aspects It bears a trinomial ("Popa spurca spurca", which i just invented). It also exists entirely in the imagination of the systematist that named it. Some systematists are "lumpers" and will describe few if ay subspecies, "Splitters" will base a subspecies on the slightest difference. These "scientists" may never see a live specimen of the species that thy name and know nothing of its ecology, but that is a rant for another day. Note, though, that while mammalian subspecies are common, insect subspecies are rare.
Popa undulata is a separate species from Popa spurca, if it is indeed still valid (does anyone have a copy of Ehrmann handy?). Frey offered this species, or what she believed to be this species, when she first started trading here,but there are a number of mantis strains (reflected by different IGM numbers, but the site is down again) in culture whose identity is suspect e.g. the recent Polish mantid identified as C.sassuri .
If you cross two different races (different IGM numbers) of P. spurca, or if you successfully cross breed P. spurca and what you believe to be P. undulata (much more difficult and unlikely), you will simply confuse the situation further. Why would you want to produce this freak? What will you call it? Do you feel competent, by scientific training, to call it anything at all?
You mention that hybtidization takes place in nature, Nikko, and I don't dispute that, but clearly, the offspring of such hybrids do not flourish, or hybrid mantids would be widespread in nature, which they are not. Those biologists who mentioned the occurrence of such wild hybrids will also, i am sure, caution you against producing artificial hybrids and suggest that any accidental hybrids so produced should be destroyed.
Setting aside things like the "biological species concept' we can say that a species breeds true and has a binomial designation, e.g. Popa spurca. A sub species of a species is usually geographically isolated from the type species, will interbreed with the type species, but differs from it in minor morphological aspects It bears a trinomial ("Popa spurca spurca", which i just invented). It also exists entirely in the imagination of the systematist that named it. Some systematists are "lumpers" and will describe few if ay subspecies, "Splitters" will base a subspecies on the slightest difference. These "scientists" may never see a live specimen of the species that thy name and know nothing of its ecology, but that is a rant for another day. Note, though, that while mammalian subspecies are common, insect subspecies are rare.
Popa undulata is a separate species from Popa spurca, if it is indeed still valid (does anyone have a copy of Ehrmann handy?). Frey offered this species, or what she believed to be this species, when she first started trading here,but there are a number of mantis strains (reflected by different IGM numbers, but the site is down again) in culture whose identity is suspect e.g. the recent Polish mantid identified as C.sassuri .
If you cross two different races (different IGM numbers) of P. spurca, or if you successfully cross breed P. spurca and what you believe to be P. undulata (much more difficult and unlikely), you will simply confuse the situation further. Why would you want to produce this freak? What will you call it? Do you feel competent, by scientific training, to call it anything at all?
You mention that hybtidization takes place in nature, Nikko, and I don't dispute that, but clearly, the offspring of such hybrids do not flourish, or hybrid mantids would be widespread in nature, which they are not. Those biologists who mentioned the occurrence of such wild hybrids will also, i am sure, caution you against producing artificial hybrids and suggest that any accidental hybrids so produced should be destroyed.
MantidLord
Well-known member
I disagree Philly ol buddy. It's not impossible to control any products of hybridization. If he keeps it in a controlled area and either eliminates the offspring after he proves it's possible, then problem solved. Second, if the offspring are infertile, then "controlling" isn't a problem at all. Go for it Nikko. Make sure it's extremely controlled. Well documented. And well thought out and planned out. Have a plan for even the worst case scenario (escapees). I'm not going to discourage you from doing something that may provide a lot of information on mantids. Although so far it isn't as well documented (if it were, threads like this wouldn't exist), you may be able to provide some valid results. And by valid, I don't mean successfull hybridization. I mean conclusive evidence that species X can/can't hybridize with species Y. Go for it.
Not entirely true... Especially with lepidopterans, some coleoptera(Lucanidae comes to mind immediately), and other groups where subspecies are exceedingly common. There are subspecies based upon things such as behavioral differences, host plant choice, distribution, coloration, etc and just because a subspecies is described does not mean that it will be held to be valid. Other entomologists have to hold others work to be valid for it to actually matter, unless there are significant reasons for not learning of the animal's ecology(limited specimens, cryptic behavior, unknown habitat) most works that attempt to describe species or subspecies will not be accepted or will be considered to be dubious until that information is known.
If you cross two different "races" of the same species well...you just bred a species? If they are of different and established "lines" then they should be marked as a crossing of lines, not that hard, not a doomsday scenario, not a problem. Please stop your intentionally obtuse behavior.
Hybrid zones in nature, aka intergrade zones, may simply have not been sampled as the "scientists"(entomologists) you were talking about earlier typically try to avoid them when describing a species but still do their due diligence and mention that such zones to exist. IF hybrids created in captivity that suffer from a lack of fitness should be culled, this is obvious, but healthy individuals should be backcrossed to its siblings or one of the original strains in an attempt to stabilize it. Again, no doomsday scenario and only a small amount of responsibility is needed. I highly doubt ANY scientist of any kind would recommend the destruction of hybrids because they are hybrids, in fact they would encourage you to write a scientific paper on the matter, anyone with doubts I am happy to find my Latrodectus and Saturniid hybrid experiment papers where in at least one the author encourages others to attempt hybrids and document them. A scientist may discourage you from releasing such hybrids into the environment, but that should be done with ANY captive invertebrate to reduce the chances of introducing new pests and parasites to the ecosystem.
psyconiko
Well-known member
- Joined
- Feb 5, 2011
- Messages
- 798
- Reaction score
- 49
Thank you for your support and advice Mantidlord!
Thanks to Phil,Gill,What and all the other members for your wise answers.
Your different points of view are very interesting.I believe I have to be extremely careful.
So to sum up:
Fertile offspring would mean:1. these Popas(both parents) were in fact of the same genus
OR
2. hybrids,and I have a "new" species?
Unfertile offspring would mean: These Popas are not supposed to meet and therefore the offspring has no mean to exist
and these mutants should be destroyed because they could weaken the original Popa strain?
Lombardo F. (1995) A review of the genus Popa Stil1856 (Insecta Mantodea). Tropical Zoology, 8(2) 257-267.
"It is suggested that Mantis undata Fabricius, 1793 does not belong to the genus Popa Stil 1856 as believed until now, but to the Indian genus Ambivia StAl, 1877 (n. comb.). The systematic position of the species of Popa is re-examined and a single species, Popa spurca StAl, 1856 (= P. undata auct. nec Fabricius) is recognised. The species is differentiated into two subspecies, one being Popa spurca spurca Stil, 1856 (= P. stuhlmanni Rehn 1914, P. batesi Saussure & Zehntner 1895) (n. syn.) widespread throughout all Africa south of the Sahara, except in the east which is populated by the other subspecies, P. spurca crassa (Giglio-Tos 1917)."
"It is suggested that Mantis undata Fabricius, 1793 does not belong to the genus Popa Stil 1856 as believed until now, but to the Indian genus Ambivia StAl, 1877 (n. comb.). The systematic position of the species of Popa is re-examined and a single species, Popa spurca StAl, 1856 (= P. undata auct. nec Fabricius) is recognised. The species is differentiated into two subspecies, one being Popa spurca spurca Stil, 1856 (= P. stuhlmanni Rehn 1914, P. batesi Saussure & Zehntner 1895) (n. syn.) widespread throughout all Africa south of the Sahara, except in the east which is populated by the other subspecies, P. spurca crassa (Giglio-Tos 1917)."
Last edited by a moderator:
PhilinYuma
Well-known member
If you cross two different "races" of the same species well...you just bred a species? If they are of different and established "lines" then they should be marked as a crossing of lines, not that hard, not a doomsday scenario, not a problem. Please stop your intentionally obtuse behavior.
@ what: Throughout your interesting post, your English seems to be seriously challenged. Is it s a second language for you? If so, you do remarkably well, but I am at a loss to see where some of your problems are entomological or etymological. Certainly, though, a sentence like "Please stop your intentionally obtuse behavior" makes no sense whatsoever.
You seem to be confusing subspecies, which bear a trinomial, and races, throughout. Let me make the situation more direct and simple by asking you to select a genus of Mantodea and name its subspecies. The problem with crossbreeding lines that carry an IGM number is that that number no longer applies. Isn't that obvious? If IGM numbers have value, then producing a non IGM strain from two IGM strains robs them of a lot of useful information.
"Not entirely true". There, i can agree completely. Few things are!
"A scientist may discourage you from releasing such hybrids into the environment, but that should be done with ANY captive invertebrate to reduce the chances of introducing new pests and parasites to the ecosystem." You miss the point entirely. A scientist (entomologist!) would discourage you from maintaining the hybrid, especially if it is capable, as most surely are, of a back cross.
@ what: Throughout your interesting post, your English seems to be seriously challenged. Is it s a second language for you? If so, you do remarkably well, but I am at a loss to see where some of your problems are entomological or etymological. Certainly, though, a sentence like "Please stop your intentionally obtuse behavior" makes no sense whatsoever.
You seem to be confusing subspecies, which bear a trinomial, and races, throughout. Let me make the situation more direct and simple by asking you to select a genus of Mantodea and name its subspecies. The problem with crossbreeding lines that carry an IGM number is that that number no longer applies. Isn't that obvious? If IGM numbers have value, then producing a non IGM strain from two IGM strains robs them of a lot of useful information.
"Not entirely true". There, i can agree completely. Few things are!
"A scientist may discourage you from releasing such hybrids into the environment, but that should be done with ANY captive invertebrate to reduce the chances of introducing new pests and parasites to the ecosystem." You miss the point entirely. A scientist (entomologist!) would discourage you from maintaining the hybrid, especially if it is capable, as most surely are, of a back cross.
