Mudpuppy vs Axolotl

[Azhael]

Oh, now you are just making me feel bad xD

Why would you think the genetic introgression with tiger salamanders would make captive axolotls more adapted?(that might seem mean, but that´s not my intention, i´m just curious) If anything, they are being selected to be more adapted to captivity, which unfortunately means that they are consistently becoming less fit than their wild counterparts. Domestication, because of the fact that life in captivity is easy, means that deleterious genes can be accumulated because they are not selected against. Genes that would cause an individual to be unfit in the wild, may have no effect in captivity (ex: albinism or mild deformities). This is made even worse by people actively selecting for specific mutations, not realizing that this doesn´t only select for that single gene. Genetic variation is lost in the process and deleterious genes are inadvertedly fixed in bloodlines.

This phenomenon is what eventually produces things like poodles, pugs and bulldogs. Creatures that may even depend on humans to give birth or breathe. The genes survive because captivity allows it, but they wouldn´t otherwise.
While there aren´t any colour mutation linked disorders (although this depends on where you set the bar for what constitutes a disorder) in axolotls, like there are in many other species, there are clearly deleterious mutations like lethal genes and genes for dwarfism and eyelessness. It´s only a matter of time before colour mutations with associated disorders appear, though, if the trend continues, and it will, it´s bound to happen.

I hope you didn´t take my previous post as an attack or anyting, because that wasn´t my intention, i just wanted to make a couple of points and in particular comment on why captive axolotls have no value for reintroductions in the wild, which is something that is occassionally said but is, unfortunately, not true.
There may be some specific bloodlines in research facilities or perhaps even zoos that could potentially have some value for wild populations, but the vast majority, and certainly all of the bloodlines that we think of as "pet axolotls", have nothing to contribute to their wild relatives. You have touched on the reason why this is the case: nobody is carefully considering the fitness of the captive gene pool. Pairings are either random or with the clear purpose of producing aberrant phenotypes.

I don´t know that i am suitable for compiling such a list, sorry, it wouldn´t be very jolly...

 

[Niels D]

I can understand that axolotls are very popular as a pet, though many other newts and salamanders have the same traits. It's probably the fact that an axolotl has the look of an alien in combination that it's ridiculously easy to breed. We have a lot of aquaria, but only one stands in our living room and it's the one with our 4 axolotls.

 

[Petersgirl]

Your argument is, of course, valid. Much as our breeding of dogs has resulted in dangerous or detrimental genes being distributed amongst the breeding population, our inbreeding of axolotls will be doing the same - I also noticed that I mentioned previously that albino individuals would not survive long in the wild, which sounds like a contradiction given I was arguing the possible use of captive populations for breeding, so I had to mention very careful breeding to avoid detrimental genes such as albinism. I felt that breeding in genes from species other than ambystoma mexicanum would essentially be widening the gene pool - what I failed to consider is the long term effect of an inbreeding, genetically bottlenecked population. I made an assumption based on a kind of pseudo common sense without thinking about all possible outcomes - which may explain my poor A Level Biology mark!

I was specifically thinking of breeds of dog such as pugs and bulldogs - while it is difficult to argue that they are not phenogenetically attractive to their legions of fans, both breeds have difficulty breathing and I know bulldogs cannot mate, let alone give birth, on their own. I was also shocked to realise that all Basset Hounds have dwarfism, or that the giant size of the Great Dane almost halves their livespan compared to standard or medium breeds. I do agree that the chances of seeing these disorders in our bottlenecked and sometimes inbred populations is much higher but those offspring with lethal genes generally die before they can breed - although eyeless individuals can and do breed. I completely understand your arguments for the welfare of these animals - I was, truthfully, very interested to see if you knew of any colour-linked disorders as I have never heard of any before. I am also immensely interested in genetics (although, as you have seen, I sometimes fail to do my research) and so was very interested in what you had to say!

I was not offended in the least. I made generalisations and wrote half-truths; you pointed out why they may not be true. That isn't an attack - it is simply writing what you feel to be more accurate. I don't take offense to someone pointing out I am incorrect - as I always say to my St John Cadets, there is absolutely no shame in learning from your mistakes! I am happy to have learned. This is how knowledge spreads, and knowledge, as we know, is power. In this case, the power to consider before we act.

I also think one of the biggest issues with pet populations is that the recessive genes - usually some of the more troublesome ones - are basically 'invisible' until we have a homozygous pairing. Which means we may not realise we are breeding potentially dangerous pairs until further down the line. Unfortunately, there is no pre-breeding fitness test for axolotls, as there is for dogs.

Your concern is for the animals' welfare, and that is completely commendable. I am glad to know the truth rather than think vaguely, 'well, I'm sure we have a viable population of pet axolotls...'
It's a bit like the argument for reintroducing silver foxes, no?

 

[Petersgirl]

Axolotls also seem to be much easier to breed than other species. For example, I was just reading on a forum about a Mudpuppy breeding in the UK - was that really the first breeding we have ever had in the UK? This year? Gosh. We routinely have axolotls breeding on the axxie forums!

They are also very interesting looking, it must be said. I just hope that new owners fall in love enough to do their research - I must admit, I have fears if my two ever breed about finding them appropriate homes. I see so many on Preloved and other sites, with the reason for sale simply being, 'I got bored.' It breaks my heart!

I hope you've remembered all the cool things about your axolotl, Blue Spotted Don't get me wrong, Mudpuppies are cool, but the idea of depleting a wild population and not knowing where my pet has come from would really put me off one, I must admit. Ultimately, though, it's your choice - and I am very biased after all!

 

[Blue Spotted]

Yeah, Axolotls seem pretty cool. But I just realized I could keep both Axolotl and Mudpuppy if I wanted. Problem solved.

 

[Quentari]

It's not that I'm bored of my Axolotl, I love him, and think he's awesome. I'm just not a huge fan of exotic and colorful animals, this is why I like mudpuppies slightly more. However, it does not mean I don't like axolotls, they are probably the coolest exotic animals. I would just like to have a mud puppy too, does anyone know places in Illinois where you can catch mud puppies?

I would say that mudpuppies are MORE exotic than axolotls... although that's mainly because you can't get them in Australia

Plus you can get axies in 'plainer' colours. Wild-types and melanoids can be pretty bland (especialy where I live, hardly any gold iridiphores on our wilds!)

 

[Azhael]

I felt that breeding in genes from species other than ambystoma mexicanum would essentially be widening the gene pool

Ah, i see your point now. The confussion came from the use of the word "adapted" rather than "adaptable". Seems trivial, i know, but it is a very significant distinction. Adding variation to a gene pool increases its adaptability (its potential to respond to varying selective pressures), whereas adaptation can and usually does mean the opposite (as in specialization).

I was, truthfully, very interested to see if you knew of any colour-linked disorders as I have never heard of any before.

The closest thing that has been documented in axolotls so far are the effects on colouration that the gene for eyelessness produces, but it´s a weird one. Eyeless seems to affect other patterned phenotypes (wild-type, golden albino, copper...) producing strange and unusual results.

I don't take offense to someone pointing out I am incorrect - as I always say to my St John Cadets, there is absolutely no shame in learning from your mistakes! I am happy to have learned. This is how knowledge spreads, and knowledge, as we know, is power.

You are my kind of person, i couldn´t agree more with those sentences.

I also think one of the biggest issues with pet populations is that the recessive genes - usually some of the more troublesome ones - are basically 'invisible' until we have a homozygous pairing. Which means we may not realise we are breeding potentially dangerous pairs until further down the line.

Not only that, but people are more than happy to ignore or actively select for genes that produce deleterious effects in favour of producing rare phenotypes, just like what we discussed about bulldogs and pugs. The welfare and fitness of the animal becomes second place, or even fails to be at all considered, in favour of the desired traits. It becomes all about looks and rarity as you can even see in some of the posts in this very thread.

It's a bit like the argument for reintroducing silver foxes, no?

I´m not sure which case you are referring to, but i´m very curious, please let me know by PM.

 

[layna]

Yeah, Axolotls seem pretty cool. But I just realized I could keep both Axolotl and Mudpuppy if I wanted. Problem solved.

I dont think its a good idea to keep them together, I hope you meant in separate tanks lol

 

[pondweed]

Ah, well, the phrase "an entire forum" did make me assume it was the site in general, and that made a vein pop in my forehead

The reason why axolotls have many colour mutations but Necturus spp. so far have none, is that axolotls have been bred in captivity for a long time and almost since day 1 they have been subjected to intensive artificial selection. Every mutant, every odd looking individual has been selected for and the genes have been purposefully spread in large numbers.
You are indeed correct that the same could potentially happen to not just most, but to any species and is in fact happening to some, which is very unfortunate because while people go "ooh, look at the perdy colours", the genetic fitness of the captive populations goes down the drain and they become more and more domesticated and derived until they become the equivalent of what poodles are to wolves.

Blue spotted, as long as it is legal (this would be the FIRST thing to check), you can do what you like, but i would encourage you to not take animals from the wild to satisfy your whim. It´s not doing wild populations any favours...and as animal enthusiasts i would think that should be our primary concern.

I follow a couple of blogs on Tumblr that specialise in snakes (I have no particular desire to own snakes; I admire them, but they don't have the same pull on me) and I'm always amazed by the number of morphs. And in dogs. I'm afraid my scientific knowledge is that of a more-than-usually-curious layperson, so I don't feel qualified. I also tend to hang back because I take things to heart easily, although I try to see fair criticism and correction for what it is and let myself learn accordingly. (You won't learn if you don't put yourself out there and make mistakes, and have people point them out!)

It's nice to know my suspicion of axolotl diversity as part of their being readily bred and selectively bred in captivity was accurate.

I personally... don't sense the appeal in unusual morphs. I like stunning animals, but stunning animals that are the way they are due to evolution have more of an appeal than a pretty and unusual mutation with a high price tag. Though this may be because I'm looking for the experience of looking after something.

(That said, I find goldfish types interesting, if a little disturbing due to what we've done to them. I also fawn hopelessly over Andersonis because their markings are so pretty, but I wouldn't get one even if I had the money because there are people so much more experienced who could care for them better. I'm also questioning whether I can commit to axolotls for 15 years when I don't know what my home situation is going to be, or whether I'll want to travel abroad for a long time. I couldn't move my axolotl to NZ with me without a lot of fuss and bother. I couldn't foist feeding worms on my family, so I'm looking at other options. I wish these things had occurred to me earlier, but responsible pet owner mode is on go!)

There was a post on Tumblr the other day about colour morphs and axolotls as "wild breeding stock" so people shouldn't have them as pets, and I had to wonder about the crossbreeding with tiger sals, and how the pet stock may as well just continue because the damage of selective and introduction of other genes is already done~ I'd expect the only way you could have a captive breeding program for reintroduction to the wild would be to go fish out the few remaining axolotls in Lake Xochimilco and take care of them in captivity until their wild environment has been brought up to a state where it can sustain them (otherwise what would be the use?) I understand Saint Louis Zoo is doing this with Ozark Hellbenders... But there are probably things I'm overlooking otherwise they might have done this with wild axolotls already.

I'm curious what you mean about silver foxes, Petersgirl! Are we talking something other than the Russian experiment in domestication for the fur trade started by Belyaev? I love reading about that. That the traits for tameness they bred for seemed to be linked to phenotype genes as well - floppy ears, erect tails, piebald coats! - was just fascinating.

Or are they trying to reintroduce the silver fox colour morph in the UK?

 

[Blue Spotted]

I dont think its a good idea to keep them together, I hope you meant in separate tanks lol

I did mean separate tanks, I know not to mix species, my Leopard Frog once ate a baby bullfrog.... :kill:

 

[Petersgirl]

I know exactly what you mean, Blue Spotted - Toothless shared a home with goldfish before I rescued her. I'm pretty sure the goldfish came off worse but I would still never keep them with anything other than axolotls again.


I know exactly what you mean about the morphs and rare colours, Pondweed. I won't lie that when I see an Andersoni or Andersoni Cross, I can't help but think they are very beautiful, as well as some of the rarer axolotl morphs, but it's in a 'I can appreciate it without owning it,' kind of feeling. I don't know much about Andersoni, granted, but with the rarer colour morphs, I do wonder what kind of damage we are doing by forcing these changes, perhaps without even knowing it. Don't worry about your scientific knowledge - I am no authority either. I failed A Level Chemistry and narrowly passed Biology and Physics - it was my Extended Project in Selective Breeding in Dogs that saved me. I am very much thinking of the Russian fur breeding programme - and you are so right. I couldn't believe that genes for tameness were actually linked to phenogenetic traits! I have not actually heard of any plans to release them into the wild (miscommunication again, sorry), but sooner or later, these genes might well make it into the wild (a fox given as a 'pet' runs away, etc) and, of course, those genes are not suited at all to the wild. If the animal survives to breed, those genes are essentially a thorn in any offspring's side. I have not heard of any plans to reintroduce the gene in the UK as we have a thriving fox population - our issue is that they are becoming increasingly urban and reliant on human waste (by which I mean discarded food, of course!) much like racoons in some American towns. Also, I know what you mean about the few remaining wild ones - I feel concerned that at this rate the only axolotls will be pet ones. But if there are so few left, how can we prevent a bottleneck without using either lab raised or pet individuals? We would want a healthy population that can survive the cooler winters and hunt...but we also don't want the same genes, with the same potentially lethal defects, as the only option for the gene pool...on the other hand, a few will die as larvae regardless. It's why they lay so many eggs. Does anyone know of any programmes designed to help the wild population increase, etc?

It's fascinating to read what you have written, Azhael! I see now why my lack of clarity may have caused confusion. I should have thought more clearly about what I wanted to write >.< Perhaps the gene for eyelessness is to do with the patterning...is it somehow linked to the gene that produces iridophores or similar? Like a gene linked to freckles in humans? Or perhaps it is linked to one specific colour - say gold or paler shades - which is apparent in both solid coloured individuals and those with 'freckles' or patterns in the same colour? I can't say for sure, of course. But there may be something there. The issue with dog breeding is similar - anyone remember Pedigree Dogs Exposed? (It is probably still available on Youtube, but be aware that some of the material is very disturbing. It includes a Cavalier King Charles having a severe seizure and other conditions, but the seizure is very difficult to watch). The problem is that dog breeding is sometimes seen as easy money - hence puppy mills - and also that some breeds have massive fan clubs which may not be aware of, or do not care about, the animals' welfare. Pedigree Dogs Exposed actually showed that in some previous Kennel Club and Crufts shows, the dogs' health was not always considered - examples included a Pekingnese who was a champion despite having to sit on a cushion because its legs actually overheated because of its small size. The Kennel Club and Crufts have since taken measures to assure the public that they do take health seriously - weirdly, the year I did my project was the same year that BBC refused to air Crufts in the UK. This isn't to say there aren't responsible breeders or people who do care, but the breeding we have done is very hard to rectify. Outbreeding - crossing breeds with a relatively healthy, less specialised breed, such as a dalmatian - hasn't received much interest within the breeding community, although it does seem a sensible option, given we can find healthy individuals, which is itself a tricky business.

It got me thinking that it's a shame you can't spay or neuter axolotls if you think they might not be good to breed...I guess separation during the breeding time is the only way, huh?