well my guess on the sp would be an LA.

tried comparing it to the Chaerilus Celebensis but a few things were not found in the picture to support the id of Chaerilus Celebensis.

without more info on where u got it and the size of the thing its hard to id the sp and please give a nicer clearer picture. and since there is no positive id still and if it is a Chaerilus Celebensis plz handle it with care.

hmmm ... looks like a l.a to me ... dun reali look the same as my Chaerilus Celebensis ,



Attached thumbnail(s)

To me it looks like an L.A the tail is rather 'kontot'.. and its body color is diff..
unless if u can get a clearer pic that would b helpfull

First thing 1st, where u found it?
How small is it?
It looks like Liocheles to me, could be a different species or sub species
Can u take a clearer pic in another angle?

ok,i will post it on here tommorow,
and its a WC specimen from Gunung Angsi ,Negeri Sembilan (not seremban)
my friend found it on the floor and asked me to catch it,
do i need to provide any more clear information?@_@

How big is it....

1 inch + i would say

wow I really have to get some help from my dictionary for some words. lol

btw I like this .. But Scorpion King's case is unique. Defies Science .. haha

And it will always looks nice when there are green in the tank, I like the mountain moss effect, used to put it in my croc skink last time .. cantik ~

ya, undeniable, looks more natural. But what make me headache is those pest inside. I hate those. will try isaac's method to see the result

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.

Wanna knw the seller's hot hot brood of the same mother.If the previous brood mostly survive then can genetic "quality" decrease these dramatically?

tc;dr (Too complex; din read)
Sleeping now, 2molo analyse it
This have gone way beyond my knowledge regarding genetic issue
Have to restudy the topic to understand

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.

Thanks man for the compliment. I too worry about mites, ants, nematodes and other pest in the mountain moss but till now. Sterilizing by the method i mentioned doesn't clean the moss 100% but i did the best i could.


But here's a guide to disinfect plants (for aquarium used) but i figured we can apply them too. (Bleach also kills the plant but hey, they been using it to DISINFECT AQUARIUM PLANTS)



to summarise read the following




Terms: dechlorinator is the one we use for aquarium water/

If one new strain of virus/parasite/bacteria forms and new diseases develops for parthenogenic species , it will be easier to wipe them out.

alrite, so means,
1. desert sp can mist frequently as long as no mold??
2. parthenogenesis sp hardly able to adapt to a new environment if compare with bisexual sp?
3. out-cross breeding able to reduce chances of getting genetic disorder (recessive trait)? How abt parthenogenesis sp? They dun mate.

parthogenesis and bisexual mating each have their own weakness and strengths.

i believe(this is not a confirm data,just a hypothesis) that pathogenesis species carry all the genes in them yet the genes are only activated when a certain condition or situation demand that particular genes characteristic. such as a scorpion that is introduce in a drier climate then it use too will cause the gene that are responsible for water retention to be activated in the next offspring brood. it may take a couple off broods or generations but i do believe this process is possible.

what is confirm is bisexual species will also display this trait of gene activations but not from a single mother but as a combination of genes from various partners and generations. it is a more difficult and long process but the effects of gene activation is more easily seen in bisexual species. hence the lovely genetic chart that Kar has provided us above is in use. for bisexual species it is possible to control certain traits that we need or want. but for pathogenesis species it is almost impossible and will happen naturally.

i hope i didn't add more confusion.

actually you did.. im more confused then ever... or mayb my brain already karat...

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.

kar:

if only I could add up to the discussion that the survival of a species does not just rely on a gene. whereby the definition of gene itself is just a hereditary unit residing on a specific location in the chromosome. this sequence can be changed by mutation. however there are going to need more than one mutation to change the amino acid sequence hence to derived a new function for the cell, tissue etc. let me suggest a word that all of us can look up for: polygenic.

But why complicate this already tangled issue,

Lets just go back to the basic theory of variation due to the exchange of gene during meiosis; chiasmata etc.

Well let me suggest another words to look up for.

Natural selection. Environmental condition. Selective pressure. Sexual advantage. Frequency of genes. physical characteristics>>> speciation.

Long story make short: survival of the fittest or in some occasion, foetus.

lol.

---

Added on October 30, 2009, 12:16 pmif you guys are more interested in this.

k-related species. r-related species.

species fluctuation graph to study how the flow goes.

it will take every tiny thing into account. reproductive effort. life span. survival strategy. bla bla bla

This post has been edited by aros: Oct 30 2009, 12:16 PM

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.