Cross breeding, need help.

[ConcinusMan]

Aha! I second that. For some reason, I just now understood that.

[Steven@HumboldtHerps]

I deem it important that anyone who is concerned about the ethics or implications of "hybridizing" take the time to learn more biology. If you can't find the time to learn the big words (no offense, science lingo isn't for everybody), don't go messing with Mother Nature on your own. Please take the educated advice that has been so often repeated in this thread alone. Don't "hybridize" or intergrade.

Just simple cladistics like:

[Steven@HumboldtHerps]

...where A,B,C,D, and E are monophyleic groups (upper left), where A,C, D, and E are paraphyletic groups (upper right), and C and D are polyphyletic groups. Every taxonomist is happy when he or she narrows it down to a monophyletic group (all descendents and common ancestors are addressed)
We are not happy with the para and the poly, but Thamnophis apparently still has us in turmoil with this.

Let's play pretend, and postulate what factors might explain the theory that elegans and ordinoides may share a more immediate common ancestor. We will also assume that there have been rare hybrids between the two. We will call the common ancestor of all "A". Let geographical area "X" (home to A) geologically split into areas "Y" and "Z" (assume habitat and dietary changes). After a period of isolation, let us assume that the divergence creates 2 new species, neither of which we will yet officially call ordinoides or elegans. They do not meet due to geographical barriers that now exist. Use the nodes that precede B and C, D and E; let's call the left node (B's and C's) the ordinoides line and the right (D's and E's) the elegans line.

Important (for this to make sense). Do not assume that the two separate lines break into their subsequent letters on the same geological time scale.

For that matter, imagine that the lines split into B and C, D and E pretty early on. Now let's say B is the ordinoides we know of today, and C is assumed a modern ordinoides, but still has some marginal genetic traits (possibly dormant) reminiscent of its old ancestor A... and we have not yet observed it! We will still call both B and C ordinoides because we know no better! Now, let's do the same for the elegans line; let's say that E is the modern elegans and D is an elegans with reminiscent traits of A (and we don't see it). If we change the geography again as does happen over time, let's say C and D meet, and they make babies!!! Yay! They had enough genetics in common to... ARE YOU GOING TO CALL IT A HYBRID???

I know this example was kind of silly, but it may be one of many that illustrates how variably inheritance plays itself out. We also can't discount the likelihood of convergent evolution among garters. Two separate species might look very similar due to a specific habitat and diet they both share. They might not be able to breed, but that might not stop them from looking alike.

Stefan originally turned me on to this study by Brownikowski and Arnold. I am not going to go into detail, but it really helps put the elegans world into perspective. You seriously begin to think about multiple migrations when you look at the map.

[Stefan-A]

We also can't discount the likelihood of convergent evolution among garters. Two separate species might look very similar due to a specific habitat and diet they both share. They might not be able to breed, but that might not stop them from looking alike.

You can probably guess what went through my mind when I saw this picture in your other thread:

Coast Garter (T. e. terrestris) [inland brown variant close to terrestris and elegans intergrade zone] Bald Hills, RNP, Humboldt Co. (June 15, 2009)

It looks remarkably like some of my vagrans, the main difference being the much more well-defined dorsal stripe. There are also some other differences, like the amount of brown, but that's still well within what I would consider normal variation for vagrans.

[ConcinusMan]

Not much different that these two:

Most of us on the forum know the typical features of individual species and ssp. The following pics (I may have posted some before) are of more anomalous specimens. Would love to hear you input.

This one has some infernalis traits

I am pretty sure this is a terrestris, but I have never seen such light lateral/ventrals on this ssp. before...

Oh really? are you sure you haven't see it before?

[Steven@HumboldtHerps]

Not much different that these two:

Oh really? are you sure you haven't see it before?

What exactly are you referring to...?

[ConcinusMan]

You said "I am pretty sure this is a terrestris, but I have never seen such light lateral/ventrals on this ssp. before..."

and then someone quoted you from another thread, showing a different terrestris and the latteral stripes/ventrals in that pic are very light too.

[Steven@HumboldtHerps]

Okay, I get it... But if you look at that last terrestris pic, the laterals on that snake are a much lighter (almost white) color than the others. It's a trait, which in my area, I have only seen in T. s. infernalis; these snakes often have laterals which look like the colors of the lateral stripe have fused with the color of the ventrals (no division by darker pigmentation / no color change). The previous terrestris pic, the brown (cream striped) one from the Bald Hills, shows pigmented division between the colors of the lateral stripe and the ventrals. I'll try to be more specific in my comparisons next time.

The mystery continues. I won't completely assume that the local infernalis and terrestris are genetically exchanging appearances; it could just be convergence. Still, the possibilities are limitless. Humboldt, Mendocino, and Del Norte County are a melting pot for countless variants. And of course, if the definition of a species is indeed blurred here, and all of these "races" are actually just one or two or three species (instead of the local total of four), that wouldn't be a problem then regarding so-called hybrids; we would then only be dealing with a whole new onslaught of ssp. intergrades.

[Steven@HumboldtHerps]

I'd rather just say we'd be dealing with various population/locality morphotypes... Can everyone say phenotypic plasticity?

[ConcinusMan]

I can say it, I just don't think I'm flexible enough. Just kidding. I'm trying. I'm trying very hard. Umm.. I mean... well, you get it.