Selective Breeding/ Home Page / Nestling Attributes/ Combination Mutations / Colony Breeding /Hybridization/ Excess Birds/ Primary Mutations /

An article for you Parrot:


For those poor people that do not take hybridism seriously
 refuse to see the extent for the birds;
refuse to deal with hybridism
take a position against hybridism

perhaps because they see / know so very well and how very much is
a result of hybridism or an inbreeding strategy?

  • Occurs in Nature
  • Range of fertility results
  • Enables new adaptation to evolving niches
  • Natural adaptive mechanism ?
  • Sterility / infertility
  • physical chromosomal alterations
  • moral objections
  • anthropomorphism
  • testing preconceived classifications
  • new color variety and form types
  • challenging breeding efforts
  • improve understanding and education about impacts
  • clearly define position based on best available science, versus fears and misconceptions
  • Indiscriminate breeding
  • lack of education / knowledge 
  • fear of discussion & identifying responses to activities
  • inadvertent inclusion of bird in "pure stock"
  • Pollution of "pure population"
  • hybrid characteristics so desirable people ignore "threat" of gene mixing
  • loss of pure stock
  • Acceptable form: "Natural" vs A.I. or biotech.
  • seek sterility of hybrids or encourage diversity
  • is classification system erroneous if fertile offspring produced (any offspring)
  • is hybridism precursor to speciation and adaptation
  • natural advantage exploits niche 
  • hybrid replaces endemic species
  • hybrid success based on natural adaptation
  • increases diversity of cellular organisms without destroying "gene pool"
  • hybrids unable to adapt - mortality
  • caged population may require domesticated feed elements to survive (specialty adaptation)
  • poor hybrid immune system response
  • loss of instinctual response mechanisms
  • depressed flight, fright, endurance characteristics
  • too rapid growth of chicks in poor feed conditions
  • anomalies in down, feather, temperature response and other minor (unidentified) factors leading to poor survival
  • abysmal social and aggression responses
  • eliminated by by flock
  • easy prey for predators
  • not developed for specific niches
  • Hybrid vigor introduced into dwindling, wild stock
  • Hybrid vigor introduces "unknown" element that might restore wild population's ability to reproduce, and optimize niche or multiple niche utilization
  • hybrid gene benefits either express or are absorbed into evolving wild species' adaptation success
  • certain extirpation turned around by introduction of hybridized gene structure
  • pure or wild genes captured and ensured through hybridization with wild stock: prevents certain, total loss.
  • untimely extirpation of endemic species or founding population (s)
  • substantive hybrid mortality due to poor "natural" adaptive benefits
  • poor hybrid survival traits in existing "system"
  • more harm than good to "natural population"
  • spread of hybrid genes
  • multiple hybrid  adaptations to multiple niches, where niches have interdependency on production / survival success - wholesale destruction
  • introduction of damaging new bacteria or viruses to wild populations
  • destruction of or competition for limited food source
  • general hybrid adaptation consumes specialized niche in generalized forage
  • Hybridizers perceived as trying to improve on biblical development (species)
  • survival based on additive gene alterations ? If so  so, is hybridism a survival characteristic.
  • How many extirpated species are known to have hybridized successfully in the wild - Were they pure species that died out before, or because, a chromosomal mutation failed to occur ?
  • Is hybrid survival in the wild (nature), in endemic species surroundings, the litmus test for hybrid adaptability
  • will hybrids be able to forage for themselves in the wild
  • how successful does initial hybrid fertility need to be in order to determine future success of an adaptation
  • higher degree of precision in gene transfer - though still questionable
  • high degree of unknowns still present in final outcome
  • greater degree of testing and analysis possible
  • Opportunity to cross compatible genomes where physical exchange possibility is severely curtailed (behavior or physical anomalies exist)
  • Engineered or repeatable hybrid production methodologies
  • moral and ethical questions
  • acceptability by general public
  • slow change through selective breeding leading to gradual acceptance
  • rapid change through biotech engineering perceived as "god-like" interference - inculcation / recognition factor
  • Intent, reasoning and methodology, of both, generally poorly understood
  • knowledge in the hands of a few
  • Old questions of skewed perceptions: science versus religion and education versus ignorance
  • fundamentally, a question of utilization and application
  • founded on technocrat use of knowledge and science to transcend and hasten practical breeding results
  • dependent on understanding, risk assessment and results
  • Sometimes easier to make things ( open the barn door) than to repair harm instigated by such actions
  • easily translatable into exiting fundamentals or aesthetic results: food & construction material production; flowers, trees and pets
  • tremendous opportunity for understanding, and unraveling complex DNA role and interactions
  • rapid advances enable opportunities to save threatened species
  • potential for inserting sterility in hybrids, versus guess work in selection
  • Misuse of either technology
  • failure to identify or control results of experimentation
  • escapees occur before procedural practices are fulfilled or completed
  • time delays in determining fertility or sterility (maturation) or species
  • Rapidity of biotech finds more likely to require containment or unearth undesirable elements / behaviors
  • developing and releasing something that will negatively impact not only intended target population or species, but also other species
  • Often challenge in comprehending, identifying, conceptualizing inextricable links associated with single factor  (or polygenic) alterations on environment / ecosystem.. practical breeding less problematic
  • Is cloning a bird a  more acceptable practice than hybridizing one
  • what is an acceptable level of cellular manipulation
  • Why is practical breeding ( dogs, cats, hogs, beef, horses, finch, pigeons) more accepted than parrot hybridism or inbreeding
  • Do you eat hybrid animal renderings or vegetable and  fruit hybrids or perhaps the new and less controversial produce "crosses"
  • establishes a genetic relationship between species, if offspring produced
  • is targeted at improving certain characteristics or resilience in target species
  • multiple crosses may provide greater opportunity for valuable (and non valuable) gene combinations to occur
  • allows for uniformity in F1 offspring and greater range or variation in F2 offspring from an F1 cross
  • hybrid- may be more talkative, brilliant color; larger; smaller, etc..
  • tremendous educational benefit and learning mechanism
  • hybrids often fertile with each other or in backcross to parental stock
  • Inter specific hybrids: often made clear by the absence, rarity or sterility of the heterogametic sex (hen [ZW] in parrots), 
  • need for different species similarity and fertile sex chromosome combinations
  • frowned upon in pet species, but not, necessarily, food species
  • duration of time and percent bird discards
  • requirement for meticulous notes and specific objectives
  • need to understand the objective or goal of the crosses
  • general anger at difficulty in identifying backgrounds
  • purity an issue until bird hybrid is breeding true
  • increased variety and combinations
  • altered behavior, sound and preferences (good and bad)
  • greater initial heterozygosity in crosses, if that is sought
  • greater analysis of gene interaction and implications
  • broader understanding of impacts of hybridism of pure species, where no alternative exists
  • reveals the range of change and impacts of various alleles among related species lines.  important in understanding how flexible and adaptable nature and "species" are
  • clearly delineates evolutionary linkages between varied "species" and allows for molecular analysis among "species":  measuring the "real" differences between genomes and the finite range at which separation or speciation may occur: if other than infertility imparted by physical chromosome alterations (preventing compatibility)
  • crosses replace endemic species: manufactured better than the real thing: i.e.; synthetic food stuffs or materials
  • reduced longevity
  • highly dependent on factors selected or targeted for
  • selected factors not consistent with survival in the wild
  • perceived as wasting a limited gene pool
  • lack of information flow around hybridism or inbreeding studies and practical breeding
  • activities conducted in silence and only finished product placed on market: perhaps as a new mutation: depending on back crosses to select parent
  • jumble of genes, no clear or decipherable morph or type generated
  • morph has little in value to substantiate effort or alterations so minuscule as not to warrant effort
  • possibility of lethal gene combinations or autosomal recessives: enforces perception of crosses inevitably leading to mortality or chromosomal aberrations
  • cross may diverge widely from parent populations: unrecognizable as offspring of any: "purification issues"
  • threat to pure species
  • are multiple hybrid crosses required
  • if species can cross, is it still hybridizing (as we define it) or are we doing something else
  • what constitutes a hybrid: sterile offspring? one or both sexes?
  • if crosses between multiple species from different continents plausible / proven: what is hybridism
  • are hybrid crosses more serious among long live or short lived species and why is there a difference, if any at all
  • is education infallible and hidebound or open to change of interpretation when facts present themselves, which challenge written expectations or beliefs
  • if crossing a lab, wolfhound and an irish setter is not hybridism, because all of the breeds fit under a species designation (& are fertile), where does specie designation end?
  • If eye rings are fertile among themselves, why are they not one species and a number of breeds ( remember that our definition of breed is that it cannot survive without human intervention)  yet the eye-ring species or "breeds" developed and sustained themselves without human intervention
  • if you could not hybridize, there would be no hybrids.  If hybrids were infertile /sterile, there would be no concern over polluting the gene pool.  If we can cross, but are not supposed to be able to, we still do not have any hybrids.  Does it make any sense
  • hybrids were once defined as animals that were different at a single allele, i.e.; a color mutant
  • Hybridism, by definition, should not be able to impact pure population gene pools
  • A hybrid is a sterile creature that results from the crossing of two different species
  • What is the fertile creature produced by two different species called
  • Transmutation = hybrid
  • Hybridism is not a threat if hybrids cannot transmit their genes
  • F1 hybrids tend to be fairly uniform, unless there is significant disparity between parent stocks
  • problems occur when definitions break down
  • hybrid fertility appears inexplicable, and  so, is an enigma to classifiers
  • definitions change over time, and we need to keep abreast. To fail to do so leads to utter confusion
  • Some individuals rely on definitions to the exclusion of all else, including what is common knowledge
  • if the topic is unpalatable, people will prefer not to discuss it, preferring  confusion and concern to clarity ,and evidence contrary to their  own beliefs
  • Dissemination of new information depends on the interest in any given location.  Lack of interest means that important information can be overlooked.  If people don't understand, they can continue to propagate the falsehoods of earlier dogma or prevent awareness due to their personal distaste of a particular activity
  • Definition clarity can assist with introduction of new concepts and alternatives positions
  • review of activities and definitions enables a broader understanding and knowledge of  where early analysis may have erred for lack of information
  • An opportunity to inform people of how and why certain practices came into disrepute, despite evidence to the contrary
  • To educate parrot and other avian fanciers of he benefits and challenges with new techniques
  • To inform people of the danger of  believing that all hybrids are infertile, and the issue this raises with "pure populations"
  • to educate people to the dangers of crossing apparently similar birds species or types, that are in fact transmutations or hybrids.  This will lead to introduction of hybrid genes into the wilds stud population.
  • To question how many people really understand the extent of hybridization in the eye rings and that they do not, in many cases, simply have a color mutation
  • hybrids are covered under euphemisms like transmutation
  • A color mutation is perceived as a color mutation, when in fact it is the result of a hybrid act
  • How do we in the lovebird community ensure that novices or pet owners are fully knowledgeable about what they are buying.
  • Would people buy a bird if it was call ed a hybrid "color" mutation.  Of course not ! 
  • hiding or ignoring the presence of hybrids in our lovebird species is highly questionable
  • how many people do you hear talking about a hybrid fisheri or personatus on the front of a color cover? None - Why ?
  • How many will complain if they see a fisheri / roseicollis on the cover (lots) - Why?
  • Are our own twisted perceptions of what constitutes a hybrid the real threat to our purity?
  • What  real and measurable threat is there to the questionable "purity" of lovebird stock ?  How many can identify a pure fischeri, nigrigensis, personatus or nyasa ?  The birds have been so crossed in captivity that all we seem able to do is try and clean up the hybridism, through inbreeding ( both detested activities)
  • do those breeding and producing color mutants believe they are practicing hybridism
  • is there such a thing as pure stock, and is pure a term we really want to use?
  • where is your pure fischer, black-cheeked; black-masked or nyasa.  In a small population, even if you begin with a "pure" specimen, by the time you finish with your inbreeding and selection program, you have a new variety (homozygous), not the heterozygous population of the "naturalized species".
  • Why is there such a peculiar desire to reject such activities / definitions as hybridism and inbreeding when it is so evidently practiced everywhere. 
  • people cannot be so truly unaware of the state of breeding that they believe that inbreeding and hybridism has not impacted their own birds- Can they ??
  • no discussion on hybridism would be complete without reference to inbreeding
  • inbreeding is the methodology applied to ensure the maintenance of a hybrid color or form. To practice uncontrolled breeding with a hybrid is to ensure that your discards rise exponentially
  • Inbreeding is a cleaning or purifying mechanism, which helps discard the undesirable recessive lethals or genes that prevent a certain form or color being created
  • the ability of people to use its moral implications to overshadow its practical necessity and true worth
  • the inability or unwillingness to ask questions and research a practical methodology, because of the questionable attitude and understanding by those who are supposed to be knowledgeable or expert
  • failure to address mechanisms that could improve stock health
  • simple: to educate those who refuse to see
  • mediocrity and a loss of interest in our birds, except for the occasional new mutation.  however, that will not be a novelty if the bird is unable to be displayed in the optimum form, health and structure, because of the reluctance to question and try new / old methods
  • who is telling you that is hybridism and inbreeding is bad
  • have you done your own research, or do you simply put your faith in others words
  • what do you want
  • have you had success without inbreeding
  • Do you believe a hybrid to be a bird that is the result of crossing species, or the result of changing the heterozygous nature of the wild population.


Disclaimer of Liability: All information contained in this web site is provided in good faith. While I have attempted to make the information in this and associated documents as accurate as possible, I give no guarantee as to the accuracy or currency of any information provided through this service or found as a consequence of this service nor for any loss or damage resulting from any such information. Furthermore, I do not assume any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness or usefulness of any information contained within.

Reference herein to any specific commercial products, process, or service by trade name , trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise, does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation or favoring by me.

Please e-mail any questions or responses you might have.