Inbreeding in humans or animals is the same, there's actually pros and cons but imho the best way is to go from inbreeding to outcross and then it's all linebreeding. Unfortunately it isn't exactly as easy as it is when it comes to applying it in practical as we can only guess the genetic traits and not able to fully identify them. That is why scientists are always going on with the theory of going outcross is always better than inbreeding.

You can actually sustain up to 3rd generation at most. After that, chances of getting defected younglings will definitely occur. Some may not be visible, some will be visible. Some aren't even worth mentioning but some can cause damage.

But our question here has possibly no relation at all towards outcross/linebreed/inbreed because we are as a matter of fact only looking at Hottentotta Hottentotta at the very moment.

From what I know, genetic attributed defects comes in many ways especially when one proceeds to heavy inbreeding. But to define what are the specific defects will be super hard as not all defects are noticeable with the naked eye. Some can be seen if dissected by a true researcher but yet there are still some that can't be seen at all.

Out-cross breeding somehow would reduce the risk because it has a much more stable and easier to predict probability where as compared to inbreeding, basically from the first generation to the number-god-knows-what generation, the risk of getting higher number of genetic attributed defects will get higher and higher.

That in a way kinda explains that it is definitely good for us to trade scorpions from different broods to sustain a colony rather that using one single brood to maintain a colony. Trust me, it will die off in time, in theory, it will take roughly about 4 generations to show damage, it's a long way to go but yes, at the end of the day, genetically defected specimens will be circulating around the world some how if everyone does it.

That is just one set of theory set aside to explain the unexplainable deaths that occur among our scorpions. To put it simpler, genetic defects exist in any specimen regardless of where it came from. However, through out-crossing, you are actually able to eliminate the chances of getting generations that have high percentage of genetic attributed defects where as through inbreeding, the chance for genetic attributed defects will definitely increase.

I have to agree with you Rafiq, I think keeping any inverts or even animals, it is definitely important and crucial to provide an environment that replicates the wild. However, I also do believe that after replicating, then it comes to improving. Through improving, I believe we'll be able to ensure higher survivability rate in captivity. Take tortoises for example, we don't usually just replicate, but we improvise and results have shown that they do have a higher survivability rate.

Now that is the reason why I said that the theory of genetics might not really apply well here. But if you were to look deep in to parthenogenesis, yes I will have to say that parthenogenic species are pretty much doomed to the same inevitable end. Like how all other asexual reproductive animals, there are both pros and cons. The pros is reproduction without the need for a male where as the con is low genetic diversity.

Low genetic diversity alone will definitely cause generations that have high percentage of defected offsprings. But don't worry, low genetic diversity doesn't mean that you will definitely be getting bad broods, it's just higher chance compared to sexual production(having both male & female). It's just lower chance to get offsprings that are have high quality genes, not an inevitable doom and plus, most of the time, you get broods after broods, that's how you even up the difference.

It's not to say that Parthenogenic species will have difficulties to adapt to newer environments. It's just that if you are unlucky and you get the one with a bad genetic, you'll probably be facing the same problem for a couple of broods. But do bear in mind, no matter how bad in genetic terms, at the end of the day, there will still be recessive and dominant genetics and it's really all about probability so yes, Rafiq may have had the best in terms of his luck.

Genetic probability can never be calculated and predicted in a 100% manner. They are all chances, what we can do is to only narrow down a little, it's too complex unless if u want to go deep in to studying genetic engineering then probably yes, you will be able to calculate the probability in a much more deeper depth.

For now, just remember. If you plan to culture broods of scorpions, with your current knowledge of genetic, try your best to always encourage out-cross breeding in between broods where as if you are planning to go to the point of keeping a certain genetic trait(like how alex would want to keep his ultra-big Heterometrus Spinifer lineage), there is actually a formula to convert it in to line breeding.

This requires a little outcross-breeding, you probably need at least 2 to 3 different broods.

Let's put it in XY and xy as a variable genetic trait but having XY as the dominant trait and xy as the recessive trait. After that, let's assume that there is 3 pairs from different broods, Pair A, Pair B, and Pair C.

Pair A

Male(xX) + Female(Xy)

Pair B

Male(XY) + Female(xY)

Pair C

Male(Yy) + Female(XY)

After identifying the genetic traits that you wish to have in your future broods, you can basically start planning from here.

Here are the probability of genetic traits in the first broods)

Pair A = (xX), (XX), (xy), (Xy)

Pair B = (XY), (Xx), (YY), (xY)

Pair C = (Yy), (YY), (Xy), (XY)

From here, you can basically choose a few specimens with all the dominant genetic traits, (XY), (YY), (XX)

From Pair A = (XX)
From Pair B = (YY), (XY)
From Pair C = (YY), (XY)

Assuming you have perfect matches when it comes to the gender, whether or not if you are out crossing(Pair A[XX] + Pair B[YY]) or inbreeding(Pair A[XX] + Pair A[XX]) at this point, the whole breeding process basically turns in to linebreeding which will then ensure a long lineage of specimens that will be having the dominant genetics that you wish to have.

But then again, as I said, this will be able to increase the probability but it won't be able to guarantee 100% that every brood that comes out will have only dominant genetic traits as we aren't exactly true researchers where we are able to dissect the genetics in our scorpions.

Even in cases where there are scorpions that have dominant genetic traits, to put in example, Alex's XL Heterometrus Spinifer, they are still bound to have recessive genetic traits within themselves. It may not be showing, but they are still carrying it and hence some of the scorpions in Alex's XL broods did not turn out to be as big as expected.

I don't really understand your question. But if you are asking whether will the current brood's survivability rate/high quality genetic decrease in comparison to the previous brood that managed to have high survivability/high quality genetic, I would say chances are, 50/50. As I said before, even if the dominant genetic trait is obvious to us, that still doesn't mean that within the specimen itself, there isn't any recessive trait.

There will still be, and like us humans, these recessive trait sometimes skips a generation or more. For parthenogenesis, the only downfall is that you probably won't have the high genetic diversity in comparison to non-parthenogenesis. The genetic diversity is able to improve in terms of adaptivity, survivability and of course, quality. They probably require longer time to adapt, lesser survivability and probably high fluctuations in terms of quality.

Exactly my point, akagidemon!

Parthenogenesis will evolve and adapt too, it's just that it takes a longer time and is bound to have more failures than success due to the fact that they aren't anywhere close to being versatile in terms of genetic.

Bisexual reproduction on the other hand is more versatile and hence shuffles up the probability of success.

However, due to the nature of Parthenogenesis not requiring a mate, most of the time, there will be many broods and hence evens up with bisexual reproduction that will only have broods when there is a mate.

In this case, Parthenogenesis may be able to evolve faster than bisexual reproduction if searching for a mate is that hard. But if searching for a mate isn't a problem, bisexual reproduction is definitely much more superior than parthenogenesis.

aros,

Of course genes alone will not be the one and only factor that will determine the survival of a certain species. It's just part of what we're discussing at the moment since Rafiq highlighted it again when I mentioned it earlier. Like I said, evolution will definitely occur but it's all about narrowing down a little more.

And even so, there are still other factors governing the survivability of a certain species. Such as which are the ones that you have highlighted. I would actually say that if we are really serious about improving the survivability of the specimens that we're keeping and we have the budget to actually research, it will be good if we were to look down in to the tiny details, perhaps that would actually help in great detail.