morph genetic flaws?

also, how could you tell the difference from a regular sickly hatchling and a genetically sick hatchling? Maybe the hatchling just looked sickly...how can you prove the sickly look to be related to the genetics of the animal? It seems to me that there is no way to directly prove that being sickly is related to genetics.

Adam,

Quote:

---

Why would you assume that they aren't already aware of the possibility? Believe it or not, there are some pretty intelligent people out there that actually own and produce spiders, and every year they are getting closer to an answer to this question.

---

I believe you are very intelligent but my take on your opinion (quite possibly incorrect - correct me if I'm wrong) is that it's irresponsible to even speculate on the possibility that spider is homozygous lethal. If intelligent people don’t agree that the chance that spider is homozygous lethal is even worth talking about there are probably lots of people who would have never even thought of the possibility. It's to the point now that there are MANY spider owners and even when there was only a few big spenders with spiders I don't think we could make assumptions about what they knew or didn't know or happened to think about.

My opinion is that the more public discussion and information the better. From one of Stone's posts it sounded to me like he didn't even know about the spinning thing until he hatched some spinning spiders of his own.

Quote:

---

So how many sickly potential super spiders have you documented?

---

When I first saw the post asking about the spinning thing on Kingsnake I almost fired back that it had to be an untrue rumor because if it where true we would surely have heard of it by now. I hadn’t really even thought of the possibility before that post (maybe someone should have speculated about it on the forums to help me think outside the box on that one). I've not heard of ANY sickly potential super spiders but at this point I've become cynical enough that I would no longer assume that we would have heard of them if they existed.


Daniel,

Quote:

---

how could you tell the difference from a regular sickly hatchling and a genetically sick hatchling? Maybe the hatchling just looked sickly...how can you prove the sickly look to be related to the genetics of the animal? It seems to me that there is no way to directly prove that being sickly is related to genetics.

---

That is a tough one. In the case of the Woma and Pearl we are just guessing due to the lack of a reported healthy Pearl (presumed homozygous Woma) from the original line. However, now there is a report of a healthy adult that looks like a pearl so maybe the guess was wrong (too small of a sample size?) or maybe the new line is different from the original.

While not “sickly” animals the cases of kinked caramels and spinning spiders illustrate the way I think about determining if an oddity is related to the mutant gene or not. It’s sounding to me that both caramel kinking and spider spinning may well be inherent to those respective mutant genes. This is based on reports of many caramels being kinked but no reports of their het and possible het caramel siblings being kinked. If the kinking was due to a separate gene not tightly linked to caramel it should show up in the non-caramel siblings which are every bit as inbred as the caramel ones. With spider I’m reading similar reports of no spinning in the non-spider siblings but a significant occurrence of this condition in the spiders in spite of being perhaps the most outbred morph in existence.

too small of a sample size.....

i think that is one of the main points here. The other is that within that small sample size the availability of information is very slim. If ALL breeders could communicate their opinions and data maybe something could be resolved....but what are the chances of that happening? Like it has been said, ball python breeding is kinda new on the scene compared to everything else....maybe this is one of those things that only time will tell.

I have a question. What if the case of homozygous lethal, spinning spiders, and kinked caramels is DEFINATELY determined to be genetics problem...What would that do to them as far as value?

Maybe someone knows the answers to the genetic questions and is just afraid that prices will drop if those problems are true. Just speculation....but i see that as a possibility for not distributing info too fast.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RandyRemington

Adam,



I believe you are very intelligent

---

Well, there's your first mistake ... I'm just your average shmoe. ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RandyRemington

but my take on your opinion (quite possibly incorrect - correct me if I'm wrong) is that it's irresponsible to even speculate on the possibility that spider is homozygous lethal.

---

That is totally incorrect. My opinion is that it is irresponsible to speculate in a manner that can be misconstrued as fact. Many people just coming into this hobby thinking about investing in an animal like a spider often struggle with the basic principles of Mendelian theory. There is so much for them to learn and so much bad information on the internet that it's hard for them to figure out what is right and wrong, truth and bull$hit. Then, they stumble across one of your very long, extremely articulate posts speculating about homozygous lethal alleles in spiders and mistakenly are led to the conclusion that the spider they were thinking about buying may end up dying one day because it posses "lethal" genetics. I've spoken to people that had already decided against getting a spider after reading your posts about the possibility of super spiders being homozygous lethal because they didn't understand what the real implications of that possibility were. I’m all about promoting ball pythons in a positive way and feel that the constant barrage of posts speculating about genetic defects and lethal alleles unintentionally turns into fear mongering that frightens new people away from extremely awesome projects that even if they had some degree of genetic complications would still be extremely bountiful financially over the long term.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RandyRemington

My opinion is that the more public discussion and information the better.

---

I'm all for that as well, but I'd like to see more hard data with that discussion and less "lets dream up a scenario". How can you openly speculate about the lack of an actual super spider without at least guesstimating how many spider x spider offspring have been produced? Or talk about kinked caramel without talking about the ratio of non-kinked to kinked animals? I know you don't breed any of these morphs yourself, but if you'd like to actually do some research by talking with breeders that do and present some kind of findings, then lets discuss until we're blue in the face. Without that, sitting back in an Ez Chair and deciding that super spiders are probably homozygous lethal is about as responsible as saying that Elvis is running around kidnapping them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RandyRemington

From one of Stone's posts it sounded to me like he didn't even know about the spinning thing until he hatched some spinning spiders of his own.

---

That's too bad for Jeremy. With each project that I've invested in, I've always either been educated by the breeder or educated myself as to the projects entire history and idiosyncrasies that go along with it. The information is out there if you take the time to look, and if you're actually spending the money, the information will find you.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RandyRemington

When I first saw the post asking about the spinning thing on Kingsnake I almost fired back that it had to be an untrue rumor because if it where true we would surely have heard of it by now. I hadn’t really even thought of the possibility before that post (maybe someone should have speculated about it on the forums to help me think outside the box on that one). I've not heard of ANY sickly potential super spiders but at this point I've become cynical enough that I would no longer assume that we would have heard of them if they existed.

---

I don't feel that it's anyone duty to go out on the internet and disclose anything. Buy an animal from a reputable breeder and if there is a history to the morph, you will hear about it. The problem is that with most of the issues out there in the ball python world right now, there are no real answers. No one can say for sure what causes spinners or how frequently they happen. No one can give you any real information about kinking frequencies in caramels. Etc, Etc .... Breeders are working very hard to gather data and find answers to these questions, but it's really going to take some time. In the mean time, what purpose does it serve to go on a public forum and say "Hey, I think I know about a problem, but don't ask me any questions, because I don't know anything yet." .... I mean, who really wants to do that?

The information will come out, and there will be hard data to back it up. If the answers aren't coming fast enough for you, then drop the big coin and answer them for yourself.

-adam

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by daniel1983

I have a question. What if the case of homozygous lethal, spinning spiders, and kinked caramels is DEFINATELY determined to be genetics problem...What would that do to them as far as value?

Maybe someone knows the answers to the genetic questions and is just afraid that prices will drop if those problems are true. Just speculation....but i see that as a possibility for not distributing info too fast.

---

No one knows the answers Daniel ... Contrary to popular belief, there are no great ball python conspiracies out there. The big guys in the game, while at each others throats from time to time, really do love these animals.

As far as price, I don't think it makes one difference. I knew about all of the rumors before I bought my animals and I laid down the big bucks anyway. Why? Because spiders KICK A$$!!! and Caramels are AMAZING!! It is possible to produce non-spinning spiders and non-kinked caramels, so why wouldn't they be a great investment if they are a morph you want to work with!!!

As far as homozygous lethal spiders ... if one day it proves to be true, in all likelihood, all it will mean is that a super spider dies in utero. It doesn't mean that spiders will one day start dying because they have some kind of "lethal" genetics.

Be careful what you read on the internet ... whether it's posted by me, a big breeder, or anyone ... always do your own research and make your own conclusions.

-adam

sorry, I was not accusing anyone. I dont have the pleasure of knowing alot of those bigger breeders, so It just seemed like an idea to me. I will cross that one off my bp conspiracy list. Thanks. :)

If you think about it, most of the public discussion about this stuff takes place on online message boards. Many breeders no longer participate on such boards due to all of the drama & BS that usually comes with many public forums. Not a conspiracy...more like a "victim of circumstance." ;)

Just my $.02

K~

wow, i miss a few days and come back to see such a long list of replies. i didn't mean to start a conflict over the whole "lethal" spider thing; i guess it was a bad example to use (since it looks like it's wrong). the thread i saw mentioned the spider spinning and caramel kinking, also the possibility of the spider situation. i wasn't sure about any of them, and just wanted to find out some more info on it. wasn't trying to represent the "i saw it on the internet, i know it's true" state of mind. but i am glad for the clarification on that issue.

really, the spider spinning and caramel kinking were more along the lines of what i was looking for (wish i had remembered those as examples). just wanted to know if anything was commonly noticed in any morph in particular, like the way dog breeds often have specific common health problems (also due to inbreeding). oh, and by the way, what exactly are spinning and kinking, while we're on the subject?

thanks

It's hard to guess what other people will understand. On the one hand perhaps I underestimated the average spider breeder in thinking they wouldn't have even considered the possibility of a homozygous lethal morph. On the other hand, it never occurred to me that there would be readers who wouldn't understand the theory and think that it indicated that heterozygous spiders where likely to drop dead. I've never represented the theory that the lack of a proven homozygous spider so far might be explained by the morph being homozygous lethal as fact and I expected the readers to understand that as well as the only implication of the theory is that it would be a waste of time to breed spider X spider if the theory is eventually substantiated.

As far as the number of potential homozygous spiders (spiders from spider X spider breedings) that have been bred so far there are very few people who could make a very good estimate. If that information is going to be given out I figure a public forum and a thread like this is the place for it. I'd rather not gather such information from a private e-mail and then not know if I should share it or not. I did hear of two male potential homozygous spiders that initially (early clutches) looked like they might prove homozygous last year but then proved to be only heterozygous spider (by producing some normals in later clutches). Based on how long spiders have been available and the unlikelihood that the only two potential homozygous breeding males wouldn't both just happen to produce all spiders their first clutch and be in the hands of breeders who would discuss the situation publicly I suspect that there may have been perhaps several more potential homozygous spiders that have failed to prove by now. After this breeding season hopefully there will be enough public data to assign a probability that homozygous spider exists and just hasn't been bred yet (i.e. there is a 99.97% chance against 20 random potential homozygous spiders in a row all failing to prove homozygous if the expected 1/3 of the spiders from spider X spider are homozygous - when we know of at least 20 potential homozygous spiders failing to prove and none proving then we might start to take the homozygous lethal theory seriously, even though it can technically never be proven).

For what it's worth (or not) spider is the highest morph on my want list (i.e. morphs I want that I think I might be able to afford soon). The reports that some young spiders tend to roll their heads back when they are excited (the "spinning") sounds like a harmless, if not totally desirable, condition to me. Even if it turns out to be impossible to produce a homozygous spider the heterozygous spider and it's combinations with other morphs are stunning, I just probably won't bother to breed spider X spider if there has been enough evidence that homozygous spider isn't possible by the time I have an adult pair of spiders.

I'm also working with possible het caramels. However, now that I know that a large percentage of caramels have visible kinks in their spines (one estimate I read was 50% of the imported ones, also a local breeder to me I believe had 100% kinking of the 2 or 3 caramels he produced and 0% kinking of their possible het siblings) I will be on the look out for any information on any possible countermeasures (incubation temps, humidity, vitamins).