BLUE TONGUE SKINKS

I'm no expert to skinks, but I was browsing the KS classifieds and came across this. I thought most skinks had orangish eyes, and remember reading somewhere that green eyes were a rarity? I'm not sure though, maybe a certain subspecies of BTS always have green/blue eyes? Anyway, enough of my ranting...here's the pics:





And here's the link to the ad: http://market.kingsnake.com/detail.php?cat=34&de=581927

Those eyes look grey to me,Its got northern markings,I'm sure someone will be along soon to confirm it right or wrong.

Interesting eyes, very skinny northern.

(s)he is northern, kind of skinny and has very unusual eye colours..

f.C

Looks like the one Andrew got from Edward....(the eyes that is)...

Very cool..

cool looking northern a bit thin

Why are the front legs patterned? Is it not pure?

Fatal_S wrote:Why are the front legs patterned? Is it not pure?

If I remember correctly, I was talking with Andrew about that and he mentioned that the "older" bloodlines in the US had a tendency to have patterned front legs.

I could just be imagining that he talked about that, but I am pretty sure its true.

Kimberlies have marks on the front legs.

Here's a pic of another Northern with marked front legs.



If you think about the differences between the Kimberly northerns and the classic northerns, it's not hard to come to the conclusion that it is possible that some Northerns (depending on the area they inhabit) would have speckled front legs. Maybe in America it's different, but when's it not? America has limited stock, and who knows how many people are selling intergrades as full blooded northerns or easterns - depending of course on how they turn out to be. (babies) Also, When people such as Andrew are selective with what animals they breed - you get certain traits. Sunset northerns are a perfect example of this. They aren't exactly your run of the mill northern - but according to Andrews records they are all pure. (not questioning Andrew there at all - so I don't want anyone to try to twist it that way).

No, okay, makes sense. I always get so confused with some types, and other types I'm great with. It's a neat looking animal though.

That picture looks so good, omg!

f.C

First off Funda, what's with the," OMG!" kick you're on suddenly?

Second why is the ad no longer up I wonder?

did you take advantage of the ad Ren?

I wish. Would be neat to have a odd eyed skink. But I never even got to see the ad. It was down before I even saw the pictures.

Also, there are just some scincoides who have marked forelegs...either because of total mystery, there are traces of IJ from generations past, or the animal is just so heavily marked that some of it scatters to the front legs. Same with IJ's...some have 100% clean front legs. Not common, but we do see animals that break the "rules" from time to time.

could it all be linked back, to when the islands were all still part of the mainland of Australia?

Leigh wrote:could it all be linked back, to when the islands were all still part of the mainland of Australia?

Could be - but as i said, Kimberlies have markings on their front legs too, and as we all know - they are northerns

Also, if you look at the variations of easterns, it's not hard to imagine the same thing happening with Northerns.

Vic easterns are green, NSW are grey & black, QLD are grey & cream.
Vic and NSW have eye bands, QLD's don't.

I just think it is a small variation that happens due to location or even just coz.

This a very interesting topic.

I've often wrestled with it myself. I have a few old bloodlines that have a bit of speckling - these old breeders are the decendants of original stock (18 years old) that Ray is also very familar with.

It's not a hard fast rule that ALL Northerns here in the US should have clear front limbs but it's something we tend to lean on as a "pure" Northern to exclude the potential of intergrade/hybrid influences.

One might automatically say that that particular Northern listed is an intergrade because of the speckling. What is also intersting in that skink is that it has the "fade" to black that Easterns often have.

Glenn Shea has told me that it is unwise to distinguish Easterns and Northerns in clear categories as he knows of areas of overlap and potential for natural intergration.

Still taking the most distinctive Northerns and Easterns, one can say by examining their morphology that there is no overlap between these two skinks and should keep them distinct without intergration.

I feel that it's better to avoid skinks such as the one listed without confirmed backgrounds if one wished to integrate it into their breeding groups.

Best regards,

Andrew

AndrewSeike wrote: Glenn Shea has told me that it is unwise to distinguish Easterns and Northerns in clear categories as he knows of areas of overlap and potential for natural intergration.

I've brought up the natural intergrade zone a few times in the past and it's been discarded as nonsense or to small to really pay attention to.

One must ask themselves why Easterns all through Australia have eye bands - yet the easterns close to and in the intergrade zone lack them.

I think it's extremely likely that the loss of eye bands in QLD easterns is due to Both northerns and easterns breeding.

As I said in a previous post - with the range northerns cover, you can't rule out PURE northerns having speckled legs - especially when compared to the variations in Easterns. Why would Easterns have such dramatic differences yet northerns be so uniform?

Even Blotchies vary! Look at the differences in Alpines to lowlands! Colouration, Body size, Tail size and shape, Even head size.

Also - you could bring up the IJ's too. If you know what I mean.