Although I think some of the newer morphs are beautiful, I think it really all comes down to this.Drache613":ab11e said:No matter what, the needs of the animals should always override our desires to breed what we think would be cool. It absolutely has to be that way or we risk losing the reason why we are even keeping them.
Drache613":733d4 said:at it. I agree with Barbara & with Donna in the fact that I highly doubt that leatherbacks & silkbacks are found in the wild. I believe that this gene came about due to a gradual weakening of the genes of this particular species. If it would have always been there breeders like Chris Allen or Bert Langerwerf (bless him) would have seen this gene a long time ago popping up in their colonies. However, I know for sure that those 2 individuals did not practice inbreeding. Bert in particular, got his stock from overseas & was extremely picky about his stock & he did alot of breeding for alot of years before he recently passed away. He never had that gene crop up, ever.
I think that it will take alot more research & keeping
Drache613":733d4 said:However, in a dragon with reduced scales lacks the protection of their skin from the UVB's & may need to be limited to their basking time under UVB. They need a certain amount of uWcm2 to maintain their bone strength yearly. If they are unable to be exposed to strong UVB will they suffer from metabolic bone disease later on in life, or will their offspring have calcium problems? They are designed to be able to withstand natural sunlight & strong UVB emissions so by eliminating their armor we are taking that privilege away from them & possibly weakening them.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?