New Morphs ??

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shewter325

If we are saying that line breeding with a normal can change a morph distinctively enough then why don't we call that normal a morph? If it passes desirable genetic traits to its offspring then theoretically it's a morph right?

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 2

---

we agree on most things, but here we have a misunderstanding: with line breeding a morph to change it i mean.... you take a codom, lets say a pastel, and you breed it to a light-colored and reduced pattern normal, selected for that property. then you keep the lightest most reduced-patterned offspring that also hit pastel. you buy more normals, again reduced pattern light colored, but still normals, and breed to your pastels. since you ramped up the number of breeding pairs in the second generations and have two generations of selectively tinkering with the gene, you will have some awesome-looking stuff.

a different breeder might take pastels and line-breed them completely differently. exactly the same method, breeding to normals, but he wants pastels that are darker and higher contrast for whatever reason.

people just do it, everyone that wants a morph to look more like it should look does it.

but its not different genetic morphs. Make supers, or combine with other genes, and it all gets lost, because you select many genes at once from the "normal" gene pool, select from its diversity. if you take your pastel and breed it into a clown, with making hets and over 2 generations as is needed for a recessive, statistically 75% of what you did with the pastel earlier is erased, its in the end 75% from the clown genome and 25% from your quality pastel line.

these are not genetic morphs, but, how are they called, polygenetic varieties or something like that. anyway, thats why pastels can look so differently and why people complain that when they breed a 3-gene animal with pastel in it to a normal, they can get really shabby pastels that darken out a lot. no surprise, really, because the really perfect looking pastels may just be polygenetic, with the properties spread across many places in the genome, and that gets lost when you go for a 3-gene combo. pastel still stays pastel.

By the way.... i have a question to ask about lemon pastel and citrus pastel, just deduce my question from my post :)


EDIT: i dont want to make anyone angry.... If a breeder wants to take a morph and make it more awesome, why not? you can make a morph more beautiful without adding other morphs, just by careful selection of normals. and as long as you do your own stuff carefully you can also produce more awesome examples of multi-gene combos. Yes they will look better, nothing wrong with that, its just.... not genetic, because when you buy different morphs from different breeders and get going, most of it will go away, depending on the combinations.