lesserbee X bumblebee?

predicted offspring?

please???

Normal
Pastel
Lesser
Spider
Lesser Bee
Bumblebee
Queenbee (lesser x pastel x spider)
I believe that's all.

No idea on percentages - There's a link to a site floating around that'll work all that out for you.

Hi,

Don't ask me to do the percentages but;

Normals
Lessers
Spiders
Pastels
Bumblebees
Pastel lessers
Lesserbees
Queenbees ( blatantly nicked from Dalishars post as I had forgotten the name )

I think that's all of them. :weirdface


dr del

You could get lessers, pastels, spiders, normals, bumble bees, lesser bees,and queen bees. If your luck is really crappy, the whole clutch could be normals! LOL

Yep---pastel lessers too!

Ha, I forgot about pastel lessers. Derrrrh. :rolleye2:

1/16 normal
1/16 pastel
2/16 spider
2/16 bumblebee
1/16 lesser
1/16 pastel, lesser
2/16 lesser bee
2/16 queen bee
1/16 homozygous spider
1/16 pastel, homozygous spider
1/16 lesser, homozygous spider
1/16 pastel, lesser, homozygous spider

* A homozygous spider will not likely survive.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by marct

* A homozygous spider will not likely survive.

---

I see this written quite often, but has ANYONE ever proven this to be the case? If so could you please post a name? I would really like to hear more about this topic.

don't forget killerbee

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bads15

don't forget killerbee

---

you wouldnt get a killer bee. Killers are super pastel spiders and there is only one pastel gene available with this combo.

from my genetic calculator\\Male = Lesser, Spider
Female = Bumblebee

Offspring predicted as:

---------------------------------------------------
6.25% Normal
6.25% Lesser
12.50% Spider
12.50% Lesser, Spider
6.25% Pastel
6.25% Pastel, Lesser
12.50% Bumblebee
12.50% Queenbee
6.25% Homozygous Spider
6.25% Lesser, Homozygous Spider
6.25% Pastel, Homozygous Spider
6.25% Pastel, Lesser, Homozygous Spider


no killers:(

I thought some guy had a super spider male that he has bred off a few dozen times ith all offspring being bees...

Hi,

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Oxylepy

I thought some guy had a super spider male that he has bred off a few dozen times ith all offspring being bees...

---

Not that I remember reading about off hand (not that this means anything you understand :P ).

Could you be thinking about Brian from BHB having a possibly homozygous pinstripe?


dr del

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pfan151

I see this written quite often, but has ANYONE ever proven this to be the case? If so could you please post a name? I would really like to hear more about this topic.

---

its not the fact than anyone proved it, its the fact that spiders have been around for 10 years now, and still not 1 homozygous spider

Quote:

---

you wouldnt get a killer bee. Killers are super pastel spiders and there is only one pastel gene available with this combo.

---

your right. i forgot that there was no pastel in lesser bee. ha,ha. my bad.

Since a Spider is dominant, I think that homozygous Spider is just your regular Spider. I forgot where I read that there were Super Spiders, but they didn't survive in the egg?? Sometime in the future I'm going to do Spider x Spider and see what happens (I think I'll just get 75% Spiders and 25% normals).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CoolioTiffany

Since a Spider is dominant, I think that homozygous Spider is just your regular Spider. I forgot where I read that there were Super Spiders, but they didn't survive in the egg?? Sometime in the future I'm going to do Spider x Spider and see what happens (I think I'll just get 75% Spiders and 25% normals).

---

A spider to spider would result in no normals.

Hi,

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by joepythons

A spider to spider would result in no normals.

---

Not sure I'm following you here?

I agree that a homozygous spider to ... well, frankly, anything... would result in no normals.

But with nobody so far having owned up to having a homozygous spider most people reading spider to spider in a breeding question would give the same answer Tif did by assuming both spiders were only heterozygous.

Where it gets intresting is that, if homozygous spiders do die before hatching, then even those results would be innaccurate and the real ratio of hatchlings from fertile eggs would be;

66.6% spider (heterozygous )
33.3% normal wild type

And to be honest I think finding those ratios in a statistically large sample and using ultrasound to compare number of unfertilized follicles and comparing it to the number of fertile eggs laid will be the only way we ever find out if homozygous spider is lethal or not.

I just wish I owned some to be able to try it for myself. :please:


dr del

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dr del

Hi,



Not sure I'm following you here?

I agree that a homozygous spider to ... well, frankly, anything... would result in no normals.

But with nobody so far having owned up to having a homozygous spider most people reading spider to spider in a breeding question would give the same answer Tif did by assuming both spiders were only heterozygous.

Where it gets intresting is that, if homozygous spiders do die before hatching, then even those results would be innaccurate and the real ratio of hatchlings from fertile eggs would be;

66.6% spider (heterozygous )
33.3% normal wild type

And to be honest I think finding those ratios in a statistically large sample and using ultrasound to compare number of unfertilized follicles and comparing it to the number of fertile eggs laid will be the only way we ever find out if homozygous spider is lethal or not.

I just wish I owned some to be able to try it for myself. :please:


dr del

---

To me a normal is a plain old normal like those sold in pet stores :gj:

Has anyone on here ever personally tried the spider x spider project?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by marct

Has anyone on here ever personally tried the spider x spider project?

---

IF they have no one is talking about it much.So far its been just talking with no confirmations as far as i know.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by joepythons

A spider to spider would result in no normals.

---

May I ask on what you are basing this assumption?

... Because ... Before yesterday I would probably have challenged you on the genetics and said nope, Tiffany is right; spider acts as if it's dominant, so spider x spider (assuming both were heterozygous spiders from spider x non-spider breedings) should produce 75% spiders, 25% normals. (With either no way to tell if the spiders were homo or heterozygous, or with 25% of those spiders dying in the egg and being reasorbed, making the actual hatch ratio closer to 66/33, as Dr. Del pointed out.)

However ... I had a conversation yesterday with a very experienced breeder who claimed to have done spider x spider multiple times, and indeed, gotten all spider babies every time. He said, however, that none of the spider babies produced ALL spider offspring (all only 50/50).

This makes no sense whatsoever genetically (at least I couldn't figure it out; sex linkage almost works, but I feel like someone would've noticed that by now). However, I trust this person to have been telling the truth, and if he says this is the outcome he got, I believe him. I just wonder if it means there really is something yet more confusing about the spider gene ... Or if what he saw was a statistical fluke.

(Which is why I'm curious if you've heard the same story ...? :confused:)

breeders name? this is news to me

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Serpent_Nirvana

May I ask on what you are basing this assumption?

... Because ... Before yesterday I would probably have challenged you on the genetics and said nope, Tiffany is right; spider acts as if it's dominant, so spider x spider (assuming both were heterozygous spiders from spider x non-spider breedings) should produce 75% spiders, 25% normals. (With either no way to tell if the spiders were homo or heterozygous, or with 25% of those spiders dying in the egg and being reasorbed, making the actual hatch ratio closer to 66/33, as Dr. Del pointed out.)

However ... I had a conversation yesterday with a very experienced breeder who claimed to have done spider x spider multiple times, and indeed, gotten all spider babies every time. He said, however, that none of the spider babies produced ALL spider offspring (all only 50/50).

This makes no sense whatsoever genetically (at least I couldn't figure it out; sex linkage almost works, but I feel like someone would've noticed that by now). However, I trust this person to have been telling the truth, and if he says this is the outcome he got, I believe him. I just wonder if it means there really is something yet more confusing about the spider gene ... Or if what he saw was a statistical fluke.

(Which is why I'm curious if you've heard the same story ...? :confused:)

---

Well in my opinion a spider to a spider should not result in just a every day normal looking baby.It would be nice to hear more from this person though.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by joepythons

Well in my opinion a spider to a spider should not result in just a every day normal looking baby.It would be nice to hear more from this person though.

---

If spider is just a simple, cut-and-dried autosomal dominant mutation, spider x spider (again, assuming both spiders are out of spider x normal breedings and are therefore heterozygous for the spider mutation) should produce, in theory, 75% spiders and 25% normals. Since in this hypothetical situation the spider gene is not at all present in those normal babies, it should have no influence on those normal babies' appearance.

If spider is a simple, cut-and-dried autosomal dominant mutation with a homozygous lethal form, spider x spider should produce 50% spiders, 25% normals and 25% dead babies. Since I've never once heard of babies out of a spider x spider clutch being found dead in the egg or dying shortly after like the pearls do, those 25% dead babies would probably be getting reabsorbed by mamma in this theoretical scenario.

If spider is sex-linked ... Ohhh, then things could get funky. I don't think that's likely, though ... Eh.

As far as my conversation with this breeder went -- I don't know if I want to drop names as this person is now pretty much entirely out of the industry and I don't know if it is appropriate to tag his name to this thread. However, he was one of the first people working with the spider mutation several years ago.

This was entirely news to me, too ... That's why I was wondering if you had heard it before (since you said spider x spider should not produce normals).

It's entirely possible that I misunderstood him ... I also didn't ask how many times he bred spider x spider, so again, it's also entirely possible that it's a statistical fluke.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Serpent_Nirvana

If spider is just a simple, cut-and-dried autosomal dominant mutation, spider x spider (again, assuming both spiders are out of spider x normal breedings and are therefore heterozygous for the spider mutation) should produce, in theory, 75% spiders and 25% normals. Since in this hypothetical situation the spider gene is not at all present in those normal babies, it should have no influence on those normal babies' appearance.

If spider is a simple, cut-and-dried autosomal dominant mutation with a homozygous lethal form, spider x spider should produce 50% spiders, 25% normals and 25% dead babies. Since I've never once heard of babies out of a spider x spider clutch being found dead in the egg or dying shortly after like the pearls do, those 25% dead babies would probably be getting reabsorbed by mamma in this theoretical scenario.

If spider is sex-linked ... Ohhh, then things could get funky. I don't think that's likely, though ... Eh.

As far as my conversation with this breeder went -- I don't know if I want to drop names as this person is now pretty much entirely out of the industry and I don't know if it is appropriate to tag his name to this thread. However, he was one of the first people working with the spider mutation several years ago.

This was entirely news to me, too ... That's why I was wondering if you had heard it before (since you said spider x spider should not produce normals).

It's entirely possible that I misunderstood him ... I also didn't ask how many times he bred spider x spider, so again, it's also entirely possible that it's a statistical fluke.

---

Well then since thier is no proof then everything is just hear say ;).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by joepythons

Well then since thier is no proof then everything is just hear say ;).

---

A-yup :)

Although, now having heard that it makes me really really curious to try out a spider x spider breeding myself ... Maybe in the way distant future :P

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Serpent_Nirvana

As far as my conversation with this breeder went -- I don't know if I want to drop names as this person is now pretty much entirely out of the industry and I don't know if it is appropriate to tag his name to this thread. However, he was one of the first people working with the spider mutation several years ago. Eh.

This was entirely news to me, too ... That's why I was wondering if you had heard it before (since you said spider x spider should not produce normals).

It's entirely possible that I misunderstood him ... I also didn't ask how many times he bred spider x spider, so again, it's also entirely possible that it's a statistical fluke.

---

who said spider x spider should not produce normals? it should.

any way you can email him and get some more info?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OhhWatALoser

who said spider x spider should not produce normals? it should.

any way you can email him and get some more info?

---

We talked about it at length; he didn't know why, but that was what he said his results were from the breedings he had done. I hypothesized that maybe it was sex-linked and he said he'd thought something similar -- though at the same time, that doesn't quite make sense either if you do out the punnet squares.

He said he thought there was a lot more going on with the spider gene than just being simple autosomal dominant. He was pretty adamant that he did NOT believe that it was homozygous lethal, however; he said that all of the clutches had the full, expected number of eggs, and that all hatched fine. (And were all spiders.)

What I failed to ask him is how many breedings he did of spider x spider. If it was only three or four ... Well, it's entirely possible that it's a statistical fluke, and I might even imagine that it was.

I also didn't ask him how many of those spider offspring out of those clutches he tried breeding to normals to come to the conclusion that there were no homozygous spiders.

I dunno -- I was going to pick up some more racks from him later on (that's why I was there in the first place), so I'll ask him some more about it when I see him next.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Serpent_Nirvana

We talked about it at length; he didn't know why, but that was what he said his results were from the breedings he had done. I hypothesized that maybe it was sex-linked and he said he'd thought something similar -- though at the same time, that doesn't quite make sense either if you do out the punnet squares.

He said he thought there was a lot more going on with the spider gene than just being simple autosomal dominant. He was pretty adamant that he did NOT believe that it was homozygous lethal, however; he said that all of the clutches had the full, expected number of eggs, and that all hatched fine. (And were all spiders.)

What I failed to ask him is how many breedings he did of spider x spider. If it was only three or four ... Well, it's entirely possible that it's a statistical fluke, and I might even imagine that it was.

I also didn't ask him how many of those spider offspring out of those clutches he tried breeding to normals to come to the conclusion that there were no homozygous spiders.

I dunno -- I was going to pick up some more racks from him later on (that's why I was there in the first place), so I'll ask him some more about it when I see him next.

---

ask him to post his results so its not hear-say

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OhhWatALoser

ask him to post his results so its not hear-say

---

As I said previously -- he's out of the game. Sold the vast majority of his 900+ BPs and is converting his snake room to a rec room.

Plus, he never posted on forums AFAIK. I don't think he was a big fan of the concept.

So, sorry, but it's gonna have to stay "hearsay" until someone here repeats the breeding (a few times) and posts their results.

(Only reason I brought it up in the first place was 'cos I thought that someone else had heard the same rumor ...)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Serpent_Nirvana

As I said previously -- he's out of the game. Sold the vast majority of his 900+ BPs and is converting his snake room to a rec room.

Plus, he never posted on forums AFAIK. I don't think he was a big fan of the concept.

So, sorry, but it's gonna have to stay "hearsay" until someone here repeats the breeding (a few times) and posts their results.

(Only reason I brought it up in the first place was 'cos I thought that someone else had heard the same rumor ...)

---

being out of the game has nothing to do with posting data he has already collected, and i've seen bubblebee to bubblebee breedings and they did not result in all bee/spider pattern, there was some normal patterns.

so it not all spiders, thats why im intrested in what he came up with and if it was a small enough number say 10 eggs were it could be a stastical fluke even tho it would still be a 5% chance. or if it was 30 eggs which would be such a low chance it might be worth investigating a homozygous spider, mayb the spider gene only resides on the X chromozone and he had a homozygous female. but a male can't be homozygous.... and when he tired to prove it out, the males obviously wern't homozygous and the females only have a 50/50 chance. so it possible.

this isn't just me, the whole ball python forum would like to know this information

:hijackd:

EDIT: its just such an adorabe little emote <3.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by h00blah

:hijackd:

EDIT: its just such an adorabe little emote <3.

---

not entirely, homo spider was an outcome and this the are talking about it, were just re-using the thread after the OP got his answers :)

I'm going to start a new thread... This topic is very appealing to me....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OhhWatALoser

i've seen bubblebee to bubblebee breedings and they did not result in all bee/spider pattern, there was some normal patterns.

---

In that case -- if you have firsthand information to the contrary -- my guess would be that the results this other breeder got were probably a fluke.

I had posted only because I misinterpreted someone else's post as meaning that he had seen or heard the same results. I shouldn't have posted anything. Sorry guys!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Serpent_Nirvana

In that case -- if you have firsthand information to the contrary -- my guess would be that the results this other breeder got were probably a fluke.

I had posted only because I misinterpreted someone else's post as meaning that he had seen or heard the same results. I shouldn't have posted anything. Sorry guys!

---

No problem. This is the only way, without actually breeding them ourselves, that we are going to find out.