Vote for BP.Net for the 2013 Forum of the Year! Click here for more info.

» Site Navigation

» Home
 > FAQ

» Online Users: 2,335

1 members and 2,334 guests
Most users ever online was 9,191, 03-09-2025 at 12:17 PM.

» Today's Birthdays

None

» Stats

Members: 75,870
Threads: 249,065
Posts: 2,571,960
Top Poster: JLC (31,651)
Welcome to our newest member, EMJAY
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 20
  1. #1
    BPnet Veteran Izzys Keeper's Avatar
    Join Date
    09-21-2009
    Posts
    525
    Thanks
    2
    Thanked 190 Times in 116 Posts

    Butter x spider = 25% normal?

    I ran this combo through the genetics wizard and it came out as follows : 25% butterbee, 25% butter, 25% spider, and 25% normal? I ran it multiple times with same results.

    Is this right? Could i be missing something here? Why would i get normals ?

    Sent from my SGH-T959V using Tapatalk 2

  2. #2
    BPnet Lifer Annarose15's Avatar
    Join Date
    06-25-2010
    Location
    Gainesville, GA
    Posts
    3,632
    Thanks
    1,537
    Thanked 1,708 Times in 1,206 Posts

    Re: Butter x spider = 25% normal?

    Because neither parent is the super (homozygous) form of the gene. They can each contribute EITHER the morph gene or the wildtype/normal gene. If both parents contribute the normal gene, then you have a normal.
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~



  3. The Following User Says Thank You to Annarose15 For This Useful Post:

    KatStoverReptiles (05-03-2012)

  4. #3
    Registered User
    Join Date
    03-18-2012
    Location
    Philadelphia PA
    Posts
    114
    Thanks
    72
    Thanked 6 Times in 6 Posts
    Both of those snakes are het not homo. so the punnett square would look like
    s and b are normal phenotypes
    B b (normal)

    S BS Sb

    s Bs bs

    That is your normal

    this could be wrong but this is how i see it.(that normal is not het for spider or butter)

  5. #4
    Ball Python Aficionado Adam Chandler's Avatar
    Join Date
    03-12-2010
    Location
    Washington DC
    Posts
    1,829
    Thanks
    763
    Thanked 611 Times in 480 Posts
    Images: 73
    As Annarose said both parents only have 1 codom gene (out of 2, if they had 2 they would be supers), so there is a 25% chance per egg that both parents will not pass the morph gene, resulting in a normal BP.

    For more info on BP genetics I recommend checking out this helpful article by Judy: http://ball-pythons.net/forums/showt...Basic-Genetics
    "We are artists using locus and alleles as our paint; the ball python as our canvas" - Colin Weaver


    Check out my Photoblog!

  6. The Following User Says Thank You to Adam Chandler For This Useful Post:

    Annarose15 (05-03-2012)

  7. #5
    BPnet Royalty Mike41793's Avatar
    Join Date
    12-15-2011
    Posts
    16,925
    Thanks
    6,667
    Thanked 7,981 Times in 5,584 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Annarose15 View Post
    Because neither parent is the super (homozygous) form of the gene. They can each contribute EITHER the morph gene or the wildtype/normal gene. If both parents contribute the normal gene, then you have a normal.
    x2 exactly
    N n
    N. NN. Nn

    n. Nn. nn

    If both snaks are codominant then you can either be lucky and get NN, a butterbee, or be unlucky and get nn, a normal. And Nn and Nn are spiders and butters.
    1.0 normal bp

  8. #6
    BPnet Royalty Mike41793's Avatar
    Join Date
    12-15-2011
    Posts
    16,925
    Thanks
    6,667
    Thanked 7,981 Times in 5,584 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by masonhall View Post
    Both of those snakes are het not homo. so the punnett square would look like
    s and b are normal phenotypes
    B b (normal)

    S BS Sb

    s Bs bs

    That is your normal

    this could be wrong but this is how i see it.(that normal is not het for spider or butter)
    I hate hatching bs out of eggs.
    1.0 normal bp

  9. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Mike41793 For This Useful Post:

    decensored (05-03-2012),jben (05-05-2012),moonlightgdess (05-06-2012),snakesRkewl (05-03-2012)

  10. #7
    BPnet Lifer decensored's Avatar
    Join Date
    08-04-2011
    Location
    Durham, ON
    Posts
    2,916
    Thanks
    2,823
    Thanked 916 Times in 707 Posts
    Images: 102
    co-doms carry wildtype genes.

  11. #8
    BPnet Veteran Izzys Keeper's Avatar
    Join Date
    09-21-2009
    Posts
    525
    Thanks
    2
    Thanked 190 Times in 116 Posts
    Ok it makes sense. Its been a while since i crammed all this genetic stuff into my overwhelmed head. So many hobbies, so many things to keep track of. for some reason i was thinking visible morphs would pass only the morph gene. Thanks for the clarity guys!

    Sent from my SGH-T959V using Tapatalk 2

  12. The Following User Says Thank You to Izzys Keeper For This Useful Post:

    decensored (05-03-2012)

  13. #9
    BPnet Veteran KingPythons's Avatar
    Join Date
    06-06-2010
    Location
    Aurora, Colorado
    Posts
    974
    Thanks
    422
    Thanked 265 Times in 198 Posts
    Images: 6

    Re: Butter x spider = 25% normal?

    Also to add, there's always the possibility of producing all normals .
    I don't wish that on anyone though.
    0.1 Leopard Pied
    0.1 VPI Axanthic Het Pied
    1.0 VPI Axanthic Pied

  14. #10
    BPnet Veteran dart's Avatar
    Join Date
    10-26-2011
    Location
    Lancaster, CA
    Posts
    307
    Thanks
    82
    Thanked 140 Times in 92 Posts

    Re: Butter x spider = 25% normal?

    Quote Originally Posted by masonhall View Post
    Both of those snakes are het not homo. so the punnett square would look like
    s and b are normal phenotypes
    B b (normal)

    S BS Sb

    s Bs bs

    That is your normal

    this could be wrong but this is how i see it.(that normal is not het for spider or butter)
    Damn that heterozygous Spider gene. Grrrrrrr

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v4.2.1