found another odd lookin tegu

[tupinambis]

Unfortunately, this forum does not have the means to upload photos nor do I know of a site that will accurately and graphically depict what it is I think you are looking for. I have photos of what I can guarantee are T.quadrilineatus, but otherwise I can only tell you to look up the two articles describing the species (Colli, Peres & da Cunha, 1998; Manzani & Abe, 1997).

Secondly, my going rate as an instructor is $50/hr, as a TA is $25/hr, if you want free instruction the library and internet are wide open for your self education. I can point you in the direction of a few books if you'd like.

 

[PuffDragon]

tupinambis you can email me the pictures and I will host them for you. I think everyone would appreciate that.

Secondly, my going rate as an instructor is $50/hr, as a TA is $25/hr, if you want free instruction the library and internet are wide open for your self education. I can point you in the direction of a few books if you'd like.

Your going rates have nothing to do with this forum. They will be better suited when applying for grants. People come here at free will to discuss and hopefully share information. No where in the description of TeguTalk do rates apply for sharing of knowledge. No matter how acredited a person is.

What tupinambis is referring to when stating the authors Colli, Peres & da Cunha, 1998; Manzani & Abe, 1997, are primarily Scientific Journal entries that have been submitted and approved by peer review. There a number of free journal sites across the web if you are interested in trying to find some. The really good ones are private and require access through educational facilities. Without a scientific background it may also seem to be a bunch of jibberish, but with some analytical thinking you can determine what is being said.

I would be interested in the books you speak of. What are they?

 

[Beazer]

Well, all the tegus are gorgeous. As for the bickering. Tup, I will say that people on these forums range in all ages, have less or more of an education in zoology/biology. If you are giving a description on a species to argue your point and people want to understand it you dont have to charge to educate just putting a simple description in parenthesis like (scale below eyeball) would be enough. Also, I believe if you are apart of the scientific community you should educate. Disproving is a very important part of science and arguing your point is too. But you also have to watch how cocky you get and how you go about it and that you may be wrong as well.

As for what you are saying about not being able to identify a species just off coloration (though some subspecies it is possible). You are correct. Theres a lot more to identifying a species besides color. Though some subspecies maybe identifiable using coloration(like some animals are even classified as a subspecies because of different coloration in salivary glands) color (sometimes size and shape too) may just resemble the animals geographic location (area it comes from, locality) though maybe the same species still. I believe that would be called a race? Though also it could be variablitiy within the species. Kind of like how you could breed 2 garden phase tree boas together and get a clutch with red babies, organe babies, halloweens, etc. all in the same clutch. Theres lots of good examples of how coloration doesnt matter and does support what you are saying to people who arent very scientific. Also, mind you taxonomy is almost always revised/changing and it could even be a new species, or subspecies even, that hasnt been described.

And yes, in a way science can be another language so a brief interpretation would be nice and then people wouldnt really need pictures to know what you are talking about. If you (not just you but anybody) are here just to argue and disprove people so you think you are right and holier than thou, that will not be tollerated. This forum was made to be peaceful and to be unbias to any tegu keeper of any knowledge. So please, if you are going to argue your point, use laymen terms so others can know what you are talking about. You can argue you're point however watch how you go about it and if you feel it will cause an argument, just let it go. Though, I do agree with you that you cannot judge by color, I do not know much about tegus at all. Pictures do help but yes you would need one from several angles. Mind you, sometimes the only way to positively ID an animal is through DNA. Just remember use it in laymen terms. It will help everybody understand and get along.

-Jon DeLong

 

[tupinambis]

Your going rates have nothing to do with this forum. They will be better suited when applying for grants. People come here at free will to discuss and hopefully share information. No where in the description of TeguTalk do rates apply for sharing of knowledge. No matter how acredited a person is.

PuffDragon, you are completely correct, people do come here to discuss and share information freely. That is exactly what I did, I shared the information freely. I was then basically requested to instruct on what that information means. The time it took me to write that description was significant enough, if someone wants further expansion into what it all means, they are asking for instruction that frankly goes beyond the simple conveyance of knowledge. I shared the knowledge freely, understanding comes from effort.

Currently, some of the better books to get good graphical identification of the names of scales would be found in "field guides", particularly some of the older ones. Stebbins' 1966 "A Field Guide to Western Reptiles and Amphibians" was particularly informative for some of those criteria. Arnold & Ovenden's 2002 "Reptiles and Amphibians of Europe" is also quite excellent. Savage's 2002 "The Amphibians and Reptiles of Costa Rica" has a few helpful cartoons. Unfortunately, there isn't a good complete resource for South America that I'm aware of.

I've sent a collage of T.quadrilineatus photos to that email address.

 

[PuffDragon]

Gotta head to class, very cool photos though. Thank you for sharing.