Too much caffeine this morning Mark ? You only need to ask me a question once to get a direct truthful answer.

I have only bred what Patrick has labeled as Regina. Never mixed the different lines of big yellow frogs, but as I have said, and you agree, there should be no issue with mixing any of these yellow monsters. As long as there have not been other tinc locales also mixed in along the way...

As Aaron alluded to, I'm sure the 'lines' have been mixed along the way. Sean S. has flipped what he has called them so many times over the past ten years I don't know how it would be possible the 'lines' could be separate.

And you can also call me Richie (no 't') if you like Markie.

Funny how they both call them the opposite, I think the only thing that would throw these frogs together is if one name were elminated. As long as there are 2 names likely many will keep them seperate, would you agree Risshard (are you French?). Actually not caffeine, fever I have been freezing/burning up/aching p all day .

Wrong person, this is Aaron.
I was saying that patrick and sean call g/o and regina opposite of each other. Meaning Patrick's regina is Seans GO and vice versa. Meaning someone buying g/o from both Patrick and Sean would be crossing the 2.

This happened to me Aaron. Years ago I purchased 4 Regina and 4 Giant Orange from various breeders in hopes of getting a pair of each. I ended up with 2 Giant Orange and 6 Regina because two different breeders said they were using Patrick Nabors definition of Regina (which is what I have always used), but when I got them they were Patricks definition of GO. I had done my research and knew the difference between the two and didn't cross them because they were so different from each other, but I can see how someone with little experience could confuse the two. It seems as if the crossing of the two was inevitable since they are believed to be one and the same. In doing this, I agree with Mark that they should be given a seperate name (Giant Regina is a good one that Richard had). Those who want to keep, buy, or sell any one of the three will be clear on what they have...Regina, GO, or Giant Regina.

Regina, GO, Giant Regina? Idea sounds good, however adding more confusion?
I recently obtained some F3 GO froglets. The seller originally obtained his WC or F1's from Europe 20 or so years ago. I will inquire as to where they originated (Europe or US) and why the name GO as opposed to Regina.

Jason

Hey Jason, would you mind posting some pics? I would love to see what the wc parents look like. My GO are completely different from my Regina. Do your F1s look like a mix of the two, or are they clearly more one than the other?

I have a few thoughts and questions regarding this issue:

1. Are the benefits of mixing these morphs worth the cost of potentially losing two naturally separate “morphs”? If it turns out we are wrong about them being the same morph we could effectively eliminate both morphs from the hobby. Once we mix the genetic makeup of the species/sup-species/unique population can, effectively, not be restored. Would it not be prudent to wait a little longer for confirmation from Mark based on observations from his friend in the field (mentioned earlier in this thread)? Does anyone know the reasons for mixing this instant other than a desire by some to do so? Are there presently any genetic problems in the U.S. stock driving hurried action? I know that inbreeding is generally considered a “bad thing” but it is quite common in nature.

2. If you look at the frogs regardless of whose definition (Nabors or Stewarts) you use they can, with a fair amount of accuracy, be separated into two groups based on appearance. This could be due line breeding or it could be due natural differentiation between “morphs”. It is also worth considering that frogs from the same area may be reproductively isolated from each other even if there is very little or no distance separating them. In captivity whatever barriers may be preventing reproduction in the wild are lost when we stick the animals in a glass box with an artificial light and no natural environmental cues.

3. The giant orange I currently work with were imported directly by an individual (Mr. Nishishiru) and are not from the same U.S sources as most of the giant orange available in the states. These are called giant orange and came in directly from Europe to the states. Should these frogs be treated differently? Based on second or third hand info. (a quote given by a member of DB, in 2007, from Mr. Nishishiru) Mr. Nishishiru was told by his importer that his GO were collected from an area south of the Regina morph. I can provide the link to this thread if anyone cares to read it.

4. It also seems with O. pumilio there is strong support to err on the side of caution when it comes to crossing frogs that look the same and may be from the same general area. Should we not apply the same very cautious and hesitant nature to D. tinctorus morphs as well? Is a D. tinctorus “morph” any less important than an O. pumilio “morph”. Given the risks to the environment within the native ranges of many species of dart frogs if we lose them in captivity we may lose them forever.