Line/Inbreeding

I kinda started this topic in another thread, but feel that it is such an important issue it needed its own thread.
Inbreeding/line breeding- When is it ok, when do breeders take it too far, and what damage has been caused by continual inbreeding/line breeding of various morphs.
Wikipedia does a good job of defining the two terms:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inbreeding (line breeding is linked there)
In spiders we have the wobble, in caramels we have kinks, there's the duckbills in super cinnamon and I think in a few other morphs as as well, right? What other genetic flaws are out there? How many of these flaws have been able to be corrected by responsible breeders who patiently out-cross generations of flawed snakes to healthy snakes to correct the damage? Many kudos and thanks to these breeders!
As a general rule, inbreeding or line breeding for a generation or two will not cause any harm. After about the third generation, you start getting retarded and deformed babies. If you see deformities showing up early, OUT-CROSS to unrelated animals! Then breed those babies together. Yes it takes longer to get the results you want, but you will have a stronger, healthier animal for future generations. What good is a pink snake if it crawls sideways and has a square head?
Here's an example of how serious this can get. In cockatiels, inbreeding was so prevalent that not only were there mutations like a bald spot on the head, thin, curled or missing feathers, and splayed legs, but the life expectancy dropped from 20 to 30 years down to around 5. It was such a serious problem that special arrangements were finally made with Australia to import a number of wild birds to save our captive population.
Genetic diversity is essential to a species' survival! So please, let's breed responsibly!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Delilah

In spiders we have the wobble, in caramels we have kinks, there's the duckbills in super cinnamon and I think in a few other morphs as as well, right? What other genetic flaws are out there? How many of these flaws have been able to be corrected by responsible breeders who patiently out-cross generations of flawed snakes to healthy snakes to correct the damage? Many kudos and thanks to these breeders!

---

None - It's in there..no matter how hard you try to rationalize it morph are mutants, genetic and physiological freak. Your going to have some things that just might not be what you'd see in a "wild type". But why would you compare a genetic freak to a perfectly normal animal. You can't it's apples to oranges.

As Freakie_frog said, none. These phenotypes (morphs) are the result of genetic MUTATIONS. These mutations will carry certain flaws with them on occasion (the wobble in spiders). It just goes with the territory. You will not successfully breed the wobble out of the spider. The wobble is attached to the spider gene. If the spider gene is present, the wobble is there. Kinks can happen with any morph due to environmental factors but they are also linked with certain genetic mutations.

You cannot teach a gene how to behave! A gene is like an instruction manual for a certain trait. When a snake inherits the spider gene that gene tells it to display a certain pattern and color AND it will cause the wobbling affect. You can't escape it. Sure there are varying degrees of the wobble, but that is not affected by the gene itself. It is random. A high wobble spider can produce low wobble offspring and the other way around.

Inbreeding is a useful tool to produce desired traits in snakes. You will not cause defects from breeding related animals. It CAN AND WILL happen if you line breed which is continuously breeding closer and closer related animals, but occasional inbreeding is not a problem and doesn't need to be avoided. Yes, genetic diversity is good but that does not mean no one should inbreed their snakes. Many breeders on here will say they inbreed their snakes but will not line breed. This does not make them bad breeders.

I think there are several things to take into account. First, isn't it typically the case that more developed species are more susceptible to inbreeding than less developed species? I.e. humans versus ball pythons.

Second, I believe susceptibility to the negative aspects of inbreeding is related to how far a species typically travels after birth. Those species that wander far to find a mate are more likely to find less closely related mates than those that only travel a few miles. That being said, is there any data on how far ball pythons travel from the place they were hatched? If it is not very far, then one could expect a great deal of inbreeding in the wild, and so ball pythons would be adapted to deal with this.

JonV

NOOOOO!!!!! *falls over* *cries*:frustrate:slamhead:
This situation is worse than I thought! I may not know huge amounts about ball pythons yet as I am just getting into the industry, but I do know a LOT about genetics! If what I am hearing so far is the going opinion of snake breeders then your industry is going to be short lived! Read some books on genetics people! If careless breeding continues, more and more flaws are going to pop up!
Now, about the spider gene. Just because "all spiders wobble" does not mean that "the wobble is connected to the spider gene". This is faulty causal reasoning! The faulty gene that causes wobbling may be closely linked to the spider gene, but "spider" is a color gene and "wobble" would have to be something connected to the nervous system. So I can assure you, they are not the "same gene". Same will be true of kinks in caramels. "Caramel" is a color gene, "kinks" are apparently a flaw in spinal development. Again I assure you, from a scientific standpoint, these genes have NOTHING in common.
The problem with these flaws is that they are not just simple mutations. They do not behave as a basic dominant, co-dominant, or recessive gene would behave. They are far more complex. It is exactly like lines of computer code. Genes in the 'base code' are harder to change. The genes that define what and where eyes go, or how many vertebrae make up a spine are an example of base code. But there are other genes that are variables. These are built in to allow adaptation. COLOR and PATTERN are great examples of these variable genes. These are easily changed to allow for changes in the environment. The problem with repeated line or inbreeding is that it causes 'copy errors' in the base code. In spiders, the pattern is a variable gene, but the wobble is a copy error in the base code.
With responsible breeding to snakes that have correct base code, the error can be fixed while retaining the variable pattern gene. Same for caramels. With proper breeding, the kinks can be bred out while retaining the color morph. -This is of course being done. There are more and more kinkless caramels out there being bred by responsible out-crossing. And there ARE spiders out there that do not wobble.

Spiders are one of the most out bred morph and the wobbling has nothing to do with inbreeding.

Wobbling cannot be bred out, spiders all spin to different degrees, in some it is hardly noticeable especially to people who do not know what to look for, while some other spiders are serious train wrecks.

A spider can spin severely as hatching and barely exhibit the problem full grown and vice versa.

Use the search function to find spider threads.

Quote:

---

As a general rule, inbreeding or line breeding for a generation or two will not cause any harm. After about the third generation, you start getting retarded and deformed babies.

---

And this is based on? Do you have an articles or know any specific breeder that will confirm this.

Have you bred yourself and notice a higher rate of deformed hatchlings after 3 generations? If so what was the percentage?

Do you know that line breeding in corns has been done for way more than just 3 generations without any problem?

Do you know that the same is done with Leos and other reptiles?

Remember that line breeding / inbreeding cold blooded creatures is very different from line breeding / cross breeding other animals.

Does that mean you should never add new blood of course not you should whenever you have the opportunity to however line breeding is not the evil you think it is. ;)

Hi,

I kind of have to say prove it at this point. :(

Every large breeder who breeds spiders say all spiders wobble - the people who don't and claim their spiders don't wobble can generally be placed in one of two groups, a few people who may not be able to recognise it and some outright crooks.

Spider is a colour and pattern gene - I freely admit to knowing very little about genetics but I do know pattern is developed fairly early in the egg compared to colour.

Also the wobble could be balance related or vision related as well as neurological couldn't it?

The problem with declaring a snake a non-wobbler is that it is already known that the severe, more noticeable, symptoms can start (apparently randomly ) in a snake that has shown no sign of them for years and suddenly stop in a snake that has shown them for years. So, once you snake has lived a full lifespan of 20-30 years you could say it never wobbled but not before.

This makes seperating the potentialy different traits a very longterm endeavour that would demand extremely accurate recording of lineages and breedings.

And this has held true for every combo morph produced that has spider as part of the make up - and that is a lot of outbreeding that has been done over the years.

Does that make sense?

**edit**

Just to clarify something;

I thought copy errors were the result of breeding full stop?

The problem with line/ in breeding is not that it increases the errors in the process but reduces the chances of a "correct" version of the code being involved in the pairing and therefore increases the chance of the error being fixed in later generations isn't it?

Or have I totally misunderstood?

**end edit**


dr del

Genetics and how genetics works varies from species to species. You freely admit you do not know a lot about ball pythons. So, you may know a lot about mammal genetics but the genetics of a ball python may be vastly different than that of a mammal. Unless you have SCIENTIFIC proof that you can breed the wobble out of a spider, I'm not going to believe you. I am a responsible breeder and out in the wild, inbreeding happens, especially in organisms that do not travel far to seek mates (ball pythons don't roam Africa far and wide looking for a mate.)

And to insinuate that we are irresponsible breeders because we inbreed (to a degree. I will personally NEVER line breed my animals) is really rude and is not founded in FACT. Bring me a spider that has NO wobble what so ever, not just a breeder saying the spider does not wobble. Bring me a spider that is 20+ years old that has never wobbled and I might believe you. ALL spiders wobble to some degree at SOME point in their life. The spider gene has not been around long enough in captivity to prove that there is NO wobble in spiders.

And genes can have more than one effect on an organism. The spider gene clearly shows it affects color AND pattern, so a single gene can affect more than one thing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Delilah

NOOOOO!!!!! *falls over* *cries*:frustrate:slamhead:
Now, about the spider gene. Just because "all spiders wobble" does not mean that "the wobble is connected to the spider gene".

---

I lost if all spiders wobble and the normal offspring don't how is it not tied to the gene.

Quote:

---

This is faulty causal reasoning! The faulty gene that causes wobbling may be closely linked to the spider gene, but "spider" is a color gene and "wobble" would have to be something connected to the nervous system.

---

To my knowledge no gene sequencing has been done to prove that the mutation that causes the "spider" variation effect no other system in the body. So there is a chance that the gene does effect other things. Untill proved others wise both sides are merely speculating

Quote:

---

Same will be true of kinks in caramels. "Caramel" is a color gene, "kinks" are apparently a flaw in spinal development. Again I assure you, from a scientific standpoint, these genes have NOTHING in common.

---

'Caramel" a name given to describe a complex genetic mutation in a reptile. Again no study's have been done to prove that the mutation that cause's the skin color change doesn't effect any other system in the body. If the mutation cause the body to not produce a certain pigment it's also possible that the mutation also hinders the body's ability to properly develop bone structures. We know this more than likely the truth because Het caramels don't run the same risk of kinking. Only the homozygous form of the mutation.

Quote:

---

With responsible breeding to snakes that have correct base code, the error can be fixed while retaining the variable pattern gene.

---

Your thinking is flawed..there is no way short of gene splicing to do this..we simply don't have that kind of control over the animals genetics through simple breeding..

Quote:

---

Same for caramels. With proper breeding, the kinks can be bred out while retaining the color morph.

---

It has long been a hope but after almost 15 years and thousands of offspring that statement is looking bleak.

Quote:

---

This is of course being done. There are more and more kinkless caramels out there being bred by responsible out-crossing.

---

Since you seem to have some inside track on loads of info, and can state such things with absolute certainty. What then is the total number of caramels hatched in 2009 and of those what is the ratio of kinked caramels hatched in 2009 to the number of non kinked. Please also present this same info since Caramels first showed up on the scene. This way we can also know that there are more and more kinkless being produced.

Or please hook us up with the info you do have that proves this fact..

One final note I know for a fact that there are issues atributed to certain genes that when expressed alter other systems or development..Pearl's come to mind..

Isn't a pearl a lethal morph? They don't survive long past hatching right, or is that a different morph I'm thinking about?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jay_Bunny

Isn't a pearl a lethal morph? They don't survive long past hatching right, or is that a different morph I'm thinking about?

---

Nope your right..

Are there any pictures out there of a pearl? I tried googling it and could only find the lesser pearl, which apparently survives even though it is a pearl.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jay_Bunny

Are there any pictures out there of a pearl? I tried googling it and could only find the lesser pearl, which apparently survives even though it is a pearl.

---

I've got a Pearl pic..I'll see if I can find it..and no the Lesser Pearl also dies. :D

There is no known Pearl that is living.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Delilah

NOOOOO!!!!! *falls over* *cries*:frustrate:slamhead:
This situation is worse than I thought! I may not know huge amounts about ball pythons yet as I am just getting into the industry, but I do know a LOT about genetics! If what I am hearing so far is the going opinion of snake breeders then your industry is going to be short lived! Read some books on genetics people! If careless breeding continues, more and more flaws are going to pop up!

---

Explain how I am about 6 generation down the line of constant inbreeding in my rats. females are still making lots of babies, everyone is still healthy, im still waiting for it to catch up to me, or the breeder I got the rats from in the first place, which he has been inbreeding the same rats for way longer than I have. he estimates hes about 15 generation down the line now. he started inbreeding just to prove a point to everyone who claims what your claiming.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Delilah

Now, about the spider gene. Just because "all spiders wobble" does not mean that "the wobble is connected to the spider gene". This is faulty causal reasoning! The faulty gene that causes wobbling may be closely linked to the spider gene, but "spider" is a color gene and "wobble" would have to be something connected to the nervous system. So I can assure you, they are not the "same gene". Same will be true of kinks in caramels. "Caramel" is a color gene, "kinks" are apparently a flaw in spinal development. Again I assure you, from a scientific standpoint, these genes have NOTHING in common.

---

Any ball python breeder could prove you wrong, when 100% of your spiders wobble and 100% of the normals in the same clutch don't for the past 10 years.... whats that say to you?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Delilah

The problem with these flaws is that they are not just simple mutations. They do not behave as a basic dominant, co-dominant, or recessive gene would behave. They are far more complex. It is exactly like lines of computer code. Genes in the 'base code' are harder to change. The genes that define what and where eyes go, or how many vertebrae make up a spine are an example of base code. But there are other genes that are variables. These are built in to allow adaptation. COLOR and PATTERN are great examples of these variable genes. These are easily changed to allow for changes in the environment. The problem with repeated line or inbreeding is that it causes 'copy errors' in the base code. In spiders, the pattern is a variable gene, but the wobble is a copy error in the base code.
With responsible breeding to snakes that have correct base code, the error can be fixed while retaining the variable pattern gene. Same for caramels. With proper breeding, the kinks can be bred out while retaining the color morph. -This is of course being done. There are more and more kinkless caramels out there being bred by responsible out-crossing.

---

I have yet to see proof of kinks being bred out other than luck of the draw. out-crossing has nothing to do with it. feel free to find info to prove me wrong, I wish outcrossing was the answer.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Delilah

And there ARE spiders out there that do not wobble.

---

Sure there are, I own one, now I do not know if it wobbled as a baby because I got her around 400 grams. and for all the people going to jump on me for that statement, YES i can identify a wobble, I've seen more than enough examples, I know how normals snakes act, I own a jag carpet and she has a wobble, im not joking this spider shows nothing.

problem is everyone thats had a wobbleless spider, the offspring have it. I expect my spider to throw wobbling offspring. people have been trying for a long time to bred it out of them, I mean its a dominant morph, just because of that fact it get outcrossed alot. Now add the fact that you can't make a homozygous form. People almost never inbreed the spiders. It gets outcrossed by design.

IMO the spider gene is proof of everything your saying is wrong.

Wow, that sucks because that is one beautiful morph (lesser pearl).

genetically, reptiles are much less complicated than mammals. I recall reading corn snakes have been line or inbreed for 11 generations and they have yet to see an issue related to that. With ball pythons i want to say its more like 6 generations.

While you can apply general genetic information to all living things, you can't apply mammalian genetics to reptilian genetics.

Spiders: they are one of THE most out bred morphs because there is no visible super. People aren't breeding spider to spider, or even spider sib to spider sib because they want multi gene animals (bees, spinners, lesserbees, etc).

The failure to thrive of the super jaguar carpet python (leucistic carpet) is thought to be a genetic issue. you CANT solve all genetic problems by out breeding. Like freaky frog said, all spiders wobble. Spider sibs dont wobble. how do you explain that? The wobble and the spider gene are linked.

Just because a gene influences something we see (color/pattern/etc) doesn't mean its not influencing things we dont see. Genetics is not NEARLY that simple. I've taken genetics courses. There are a thousand ways things can happen. I mean look at eye color in humans, there are at LEAST 4 different genes that are linked to assigning eye color and other things. Greated that is mammalian, and we're taking reptilian.

There have been no studies on the genealogy of ball pythons.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jay_Bunny

Inbreeding is a useful tool to produce desired traits in snakes. You will not cause defects from breeding related animals. It CAN AND WILL happen if you line breed which is continuously breeding closer and closer related animals, but occasional inbreeding is not a problem and doesn't need to be avoided. Yes, genetic diversity is good but that does not mean no one should inbreed their snakes. Many breeders on here will say they inbreed their snakes but will not line breed. This does not make them bad breeders.

---

I think you have the definition of linebreeding and inbreeding reversed:

Quote:

---

Inbreeding is a breeding technique which pairs closely related animals, such as father-daughter, brother-sister, or cousins. However, the strict scientific definition of inbreeding counts all relationships that are duplicated on both sides of the pedigree. Animal breeders by tradion consider distantly related crosses to be linebreeding rather than inbreeding, but the scientific basis of this concept is not obvious. Linebreeding is in essence a moderate form of inbreeding.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Delilah

I kinda started this topic in another thread, but feel that it is such an important issue it needed its own thread.
Inbreeding/line breeding- When is it ok, when do breeders take it too far, and what damage has been caused by continual inbreeding/line breeding of various morphs.
Wikipedia does a good job of defining the two terms:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inbreeding (line breeding is linked there)
In spiders we have the wobble, in caramels we have kinks, there's the duckbills in super cinnamon and I think in a few other morphs as as well, right? What other genetic flaws are out there? How many of these flaws have been able to be corrected by responsible breeders who patiently out-cross generations of flawed snakes to healthy snakes to correct the damage? Many kudos and thanks to these breeders!
As a general rule, inbreeding or line breeding for a generation or two will not cause any harm. After about the third generation, you start getting retarded and deformed babies. If you see deformities showing up early, OUT-CROSS to unrelated animals! Then breed those babies together. Yes it takes longer to get the results you want, but you will have a stronger, healthier animal for future generations. What good is a pink snake if it crawls sideways and has a square head?
Here's an example of how serious this can get. In cockatiels, inbreeding was so prevalent that not only were there mutations like a bald spot on the head, thin, curled or missing feathers, and splayed legs, but the life expectancy dropped from 20 to 30 years down to around 5. It was such a serious problem that special arrangements were finally made with Australia to import a number of wild birds to save our captive population.
Genetic diversity is essential to a species' survival! So please, let's breed responsibly!

---

First of all line breeding and inbreeding are NOT the same thing. You can not LINE BREED for a generation or two. Line breeding involves continuously breeding down the line of related animals while in breeding can be as simple as breeding two distantly or closely related animals once or for a generation or two. Line breeding will certainly give you defects but simple inbreeding will not.

Secondly, I would like to see your PROOF that by the THIRD generation, you WILL begin to see defects. I want recorded proof from several different sources.

Thirdly, you CAN NOT compare avian genetics, mammalian genetics, amphibian genetics, to reptile genetics. Every species is different in how genes interact with an organism.

Fourthly, I do not take kindly to the fact you are pretty much saying any breeder who breeds related individuals (pretty much the MAJORITY of reptile breeders) are not responsible breeders and do not care about the health and quality of their animals.

You need to back up what you are saying with proof and not just "This breeder told me the spider doesn't wobble". Even kinks can be so slight they are almost undetectable but they are still there. I bred two unrelated snakes and either due to incubation problems or genetic problems (we are not sure yet) I lost all of the babies of that clutch, some during incubation, one right before hatching and one after hatching. The one that died right before hatching had SEVERE kinking and was missing an eye. The one that survived a while after hatching had slight kinks (some we didn't even notice were there until later) but did not thrive (could not eat). That was breeding two UNRELATED animals.

My spider wobbles. Will I breed him? You bet! To two females this season actually. Will any spider's he throws wobble? Yes they will. All spiders wobble and you will never be able to breed it out. Spiders have not been around very long and so there is no way you can say there are spiders that do not and will never wobble. Some spiders may not begin wobbling until they are 20 years old! But it is clear that the spider gene is linked to the wobble and if the spider gene is present, you WILL have an animal that wobbles.

I've always viewed line breeding as breeding down the line of related animals. Breed father to daughter, breed those offspring together or to a relative, then breed those offspring to a relative, all in order to strengthen or duplicate a desired trait.

I apologize profusely for my passion on this subject. I did not intend to be rude or offend anyone. I do admit again that I need to learn more about reptile genetics, but I will not go back on anything I have said about genetics in general or the fact that kinks and wobbles can (and have) been bred out. (Unless these reputable breeders are all lying and I doubt that is the case)
My spider does not wobble. So perhaps I will just hold my tongue on the subject and get back to it again in a few years after kinkless and wobbleless snakes are more well known. I can clearly see that this is an utterly pointless discussion. I think I will return to lurking for the time being. :(

I'm not meaning to pick a side, so please don't take it that way, but I'm pretty sure it has been proven that Spiders with severe wobble can come from outcrossing a "wobble-less" Spider with any other morph, and vice versa. I mean we don't really know what kind of mutation causes the Spider phenotype to be produced. A frameshift mutation will effect the translation of more than one protein at once, and it very well could be that the proteins being effected involve both the pattern and color of the Spider and the dreaded wobble. If this is the case you would have to pray for a random missense mutation on the base pair that causes the wobble, leaving alone the pattern and color of the morph. I think this would be very unlikely, and even if it were to happen, you wouldn't necessarily catch it. As others have said sometimes the wobble is so subtle it's virtually nonexistent. It would take a great deal of luck in this case to identify the true, "wobble-less" Spider from a "seems to be wobble-less" Spider, and then breed it out over several generations to prove it out. It's obviously not a mutation on just one base pair though, as the wobble and pattern both are so apparent, even after much outcrossing. Hoping for a mutation on a mutation seems like a fools game, especially as most Spiders seem perfectly happy and functional even with wobble present. All that being said I really wouldn't want you to fall back into the shadows over this, I'm sure there is no animosity over this. Differences of opinion happen everywhere, and not one of us will go uncorrected here. Heck, haha, I'm likely to have said something off here that is in need of clarification. If you think you can identify and eliminate the "wobble gene" apart from the pattern, I'm sure we'd all be happy to be proven wrong. I will warn you though that wobblers can and most likely will come from non wobblers, so don't be discouraged if it doesn't work out. People just get touchy when you mention that they are contributing to the downfall of what they love most, unless there is solid evidence behind the statement. Having an apparently wobble-less Spider does not prove that the wobble can be line-bred out, it's just not enough. I wish you the best though, and hope you don't feel discouraged by everyones reactions, it's only natural.

Cheers,
-Matt

how many chromosomes do ball pythons have?
line breeding and inbreeding do have their uses when breeding for specific traits in any species. Dogs are a great example of that, but they have a lot more chromosomes then people, hence why there are less problems when they are inbred.

I have not been in this for long enough to really know much!! Just want to make that point early on!! However hasn't it already been proven that a spider with a little to no visible wobble can and have had babies with lots of wobbles and vice versa. It is what it is!! They still live normal lives...eat..poo...hunt and crawl around normal.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Delilah

I apologize profusely for my passion on this subject. I did not intend to be rude or offend anyone. I do admit again that I need to learn more about reptile genetics, but I will not go back on anything I have said about genetics in general or the fact that kinks and wobbles can (and have) been bred out. (Unless these reputable breeders are all lying and I doubt that is the case)
My spider does not wobble. So perhaps I will just hold my tongue on the subject and get back to it again in a few years after kinkless and wobbleless snakes are more well known. I can clearly see that this is an utterly pointless discussion. I think I will return to lurking for the time being. :(

---

Please don't go back to lurk mode. We're all passionate about these animals, many of us have been working with them for quite some time, and have discussed this with the industry leaders time and time again. Your claims are NOT what the industry leaders are saying, and so of course, people want to know how you came to your conclusions.

I'm personally unaware of any reputable breeder who will claim that they have spiders (or know of spiders) where the wobble has been bred out. And spiders have been around for quite some time. As I mentioned in the other thread, Kevin McCurley of NERD has stated that all spiders spin, Ralph Davis has pubically stated that all spiders wobble/spin/ are tweaked. These guys have been working with ball pythons for a LONG time, and they've seen far more spiders than you and I have, and know far more people in the business than you and I do - and they still say all spiders spin (or wobble).

I'm also unaware of any reputable breeder that claims that they have a line (other than the Crider aka Ultramel) caramel albino's that don't kink, but then the Crider/Ultramel are considered a completely different morph than the traditional caramel albino. I do know that there's a lot of theory that caramel albino eggs need to be incubated a little cooler and a little drier than most clutches to reduce the incidence of kinking, but that has little to do with line breeding or in-breeding.

I had one of my spiders out last night after this topic was started to see if I could see his wobble. At first I couldn't see it at all, and then ever so slightly, even wondering if it was my hand shaking, I could see the slightest "tremor" in his head. I put him down on a stable surface to rule out my hand movement, and it was there.

I guess what frustrates me personally is that the spider is an awesome mutation, with a condition that "I" believe is genetically linked to the spider (only the spiders, not the normal siblings, spin/wobble). And so many people think that it's such a taboo thing that their spider might also spin/wobble. But those of us who keep spiders and have seen hundreds of spiders, know and believe without a doubt in our minds that all spiders are "tweaked" to varying degrees.

Spiders - you either love them, or you hate/fear them and their wobble. I personally LOVE my four and their uniquely spider personalities. I embrace them for what they are - spiders who wobble. I will never sell any of my spider offspring as "non wobblers" because I don't believe that to be true of any spider. I will take the time to educate my customers who may be new to ball pythons about spiders and what I know about them.

Please know, Delilah, I'm not mad or upset with you - nor taking any of this out on you - I think it's a great discussion - one that I'm passionate about as well.

You do have to recognize though, that mammalian genetics and reptile genetics are somewhat different when it comes to line/in breeding.

Long time dog breeders have pretty much followed the rule of 2 line breedings and then go out for 1. By out I mean, doing an outcross. The botton line is EVENTUALLY all that concentration of genes will start to make itself evident in shortened life spans, spins, duck bills, kinks, lowered disease resistance, yada yada yada. In purebred dogs we are seeing a huge increase in auto immune diseases. Some feel that it is linked to the prevalence of shots. The problem is that the weakness is there genetically. The shots just push the immune system over the edge. I don't know for sure but I think that certain snakes BP's, corns ,hogs, etc. will eventually start to have problems as well, its just a matter of how long. For that reason alone we should be keeping detailed breeding records of lineage and if you are bringing in new blood from Africa, know area of origin if possible. Easier said than done I fear! What is interesting is that the same genetic problems that affect a breed of dog here in the states, show up in other parts of the world in (supposedly) unrelated blood lines. My point is selective breeding continually concentrates genes, which might happen in the wild but the weak ones are eaten, killed, can't keep up etc.. We do the same thing in snakes.
Sorry so long and maybe a little off the original post, but hopefully helpful.
Mike Kelly

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Delilah

the fact that kinks and wobbles can (and have) been bred out. (Unless these reputable breeders are all lying and I doubt that is the case) (

---

who?

Yes, I would like to know who these "reputable" breeders are that are claiming they have bred the wobble out of spiders and kink out of the caramels.

Heres my 2 cents for what its worth,
Hampsters are long said to be derived from VERY few founding animals,
Are there large scale defects in hampsters ? not to my knowledge..
The King ranch inbred/ linebred both their quarter horses and santa gertrudis cattle..The Horses were all in/linebred for high concentrations of "old sorrel" and they produced outstanding sorrel horses with little white..Genetic defects again not to my knowledge..Two frame type overo horses can be TOTALLY unrelated and produce a lethal white foal..The jaguar gene in carpet pythons is a co'dominant so it appears in the first generation..There has been no excessive inbreeding with them and they also stand a good chance of wobbling..Be it snakes,dogs or horses every organism has defective
properties which on occassion rears it head..We like to think we know alot, but "compared" to what there is to know, we know nothing..:rofl:
What I do know,,is I always have an opinion or question...:rolleye2:

I also believe that the wobbles and kinking are just another tendency of the respective mutations just like the color and in the case of spider also pattern.

However, I have seen a posts by large breeders (at least one of whom I trust) of large number of caramels with no kinks and a smaller breeder with a good run of non kinked caramels started.

While I think the tendency to kink is part of the mutation I think there must be some environmental factor that is reducing the chances of the kinks actually showing up in these collections (I’ve not heard of their customers having any better than average luck with kinking). Not much of a sample size but both of those breeders I'm told feed rats that are fed Mazuri 6F. Perhaps the caramel mutation causes ball pythons to need or not tolerate a nutrient non caramel ball pythons don't need or can tolerate.

It would be interesting to know if the caramels in these no kinking collections are more normal colored at hatching as if the Mazuri compensates for the caramel defect that causes kinking then perhaps it also compensates for the caramel defect that causes the caramel color. Maybe you would want to feed your breeders one diet and then switch the for sale babies to another to maximize color after you are past the spinal development stage.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RandyRemington

I also believe that the wobbles and kinking are just another tendency of the respective mutations just like the color and in the case of spider also pattern.

However, I have seen a posts by large breeders (at least one of whom I trust) of large number of caramels with no kinks and a smaller breeder with a good run of non kinked caramels started.

While I think the tendency to kink is part of the mutation I think there must be some environmental factor that is reducing the chances of the kinks actually showing up in these collections (I’ve not heard of their customers having any better than average luck with kinking). Not much of a sample size but both of those breeders I'm told feed rats that are fed Mazuri 6F. Perhaps the caramel mutation causes ball pythons to need or not tolerate a nutrient non caramel ball pythons don't need or can tolerate.

It would be interesting to know if the caramels in these no kinking collections are more normal colored at hatching as if the Mazuri compensates for the caramel defect that causes kinking then perhaps it also compensates for the caramel defect that causes the caramel color. Maybe you would want to feed your breeders one diet and then switch the for sale babies to another to maximize color after you are past the spinal development stage.

---

Fascinating.. I wonder then if simply adding some supplement to the parents diet would lessen the chance of kinking.

Great point Randy..

Definitely something to ponder and experiment with. (an excuse to get me some caramels....:rolleyes:). I wonder then if maybe the Spider's wobble could be some kind of deficient nutrient.

Certainly a possibility..Our rodent chow has added copper and a warning not to feed to sheep..Good thinking..:gj:

Tim, what brand of feed is that?

A disclaimer here, this is a WILD theory with very little evidence. I know almost nothing about nutrition and even less about organic chemistry. From links like the following I pick out words like tyrosinase and organic copper and think they may have something to do with Tyrosine (the T in T+/- albinos).

http://www.soulpurposechiropractic.c...r/vitaminc.htm

I don't even know if that website is a reliable source much less the implications of what they are saying.

Anyway, if I eventually try to produce caramels (I have three daughters of the first possible het caramel I saw for sale but no male to breed them to) I'll probably try the Mazuri JUST IN CASE since it's all the same to me and that is actually the brand easiest for me to get. However, just this weekend I was talking to someone who hatched 4 caramels with a 50% kink rate and they would have to actually do something to try the Mazuri (switch wire size on rat feeders) so maybe not worth the effort as unsure as it is to help.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RandyRemington

A disclaimer here, this is a WILD theory with very little evidence. I know almost nothing about nutrition and even less about organic chemistry. From links like the following I pick out words like tyrosinase and organic copper and think they may have something to do with Tyrosine (the T in T+/- albinos).

---

Tyrosinase is the enzyme which catalyses tyrosine. It contains copper in its active site, so it is plausible that there is connection between the amount of copper intake and the production of tyrosinase. However, that would only account for differences in pigment production. On another note, tyrosinase is responsible for the catalysis of other proteins including melanin. I am not certain, though, if there is any connection between this particular enzyme and something akin to a calcium deficiency or otherwise, which would result in kinking.

Thought about it a bit more, and wanted to add this bit of information. If a tyrosinase deficiency is responsible for the kinking in caramel albino ball pythons, I have no explanation as to why regular albinos do not have kinking to a far worse extent than caramel albinos, as typical albinism is caused by a tyrosinase deficiency (no tyrosinase = no catalysis of melanin). The difference in caramels is that the tyrosinase is present, but that a mutation causes it to be unable to catalyze melanin. Just some food for thought.

Ahh, I was thinking about this more and I may have an explanation for my prior statement about regular albinos not having kinking. Suppose the caramel albino's mutated gene translates to a mutation in tyrosinase. The primary affect of this mutation is the obvious failure to produce melanin. On another hand, this mutation could occasionally cause the tyrosinase enzyme to react with another protein that directly impacts the skeletal development in the embryo, resulting in spinal deformities. Though, if this is the case, if you are still to assume copper content in diet has anything to do with the production of tyrosinase, then it may not be the best idea to feed high-copper diet rats to caramel albinos at all if you are attempting to avoid kinking. Now everything stated here is just speculation, but I think it might be important to take into consideration if trying an experiment as such.

Anyway, my apologies for completely derailing the thread and turning it into a cellular biology conversation with myself. I am just completely fascinated with these ideas, to the point that it's been keeping me awake tonight.

Russ and Randy, :gj: although speculation, it is active brain matter and thats
definitly to be commended..Whats been stated "could be right"..
We feed an off brand manufactured for Bob Clark, Its said to be dupped from another rat chow..Russ, snake thoughts keep us awake regularly..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RandyRemington

However, I have seen a posts by large breeders (at least one of whom I trust) of large number of caramels with no kinks and a smaller breeder with a good run of non kinked caramels started.

---

can we stop saying "breeders" and drop some names people

who?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OhhWatALoser

can we stop saying "breeders" and drop some names people

who?

---

Dunno who others are (not) mentioning, but Greg Graziani comes to mind. Although from what he was saying on Reptile Radio, it sounds like he believes his success comes more from incubation technique than genetic diversity.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OhhWatALoser

can we stop saying "breeders" and drop some names people

who?

---

The smaller breeder would be... me. ;)

7 for 7 -- 5 Caramel Mojaves and 2 Caramels in 2009. :D

Yes Bill, I was thinking of you. Probably shouldn't have characterized you as a small breeder as I have no idea how many snakes you have produced but just not a huge number of caramels, yet...

The big breeder was Marcus Jane from this thread:

http://www.reptileradio.net/reptiler...t=12137&page=3

where Mr. Mandic reports producing 60+ caramels with no kinks.

I wasn't aware of Greg Gaziani's report. What did he say? Anyone know if his rats eat Mazuri 6F like the other two?

I also remember Morph King Reptiles from several years ago report to produce a large number of not kinked caramels. Interesting that even the people producing them have a lot of different theories on why but maybe with enough information sharing we can find the common link and find a workaround to revive this really cool morph. Otherwise I'm afraid caramel might get replaced by ultramel even though the look really isn't quite the same (nothing against ultramel, just would love to also see lots of healthy unkinked caramels available).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RandyRemington

Yes Bill, I was thinking of you. Probably shouldn't have characterized you as a small breeder as I have no idea how many snakes you have produced but just not a huge number of caramels, yet...

The big breeder was Marcus Jane from this thread:

http://www.reptileradio.net/reptiler...t=12137&page=3

where Mr. Mandic reports producing 60+ caramels with no kinks.

I wasn't aware of Greg Gaziani's report. What did he say? Anyone know if his rats eat Mazuri 6F like the other two?

I also remember Morph King Reptiles from several years ago report to produce a large number of not kinked caramels. Interesting that even the people producing them have a lot of different theories on why but maybe with enough information sharing we can find the common link and find a workaround to revive this really cool morph. Otherwise I'm afraid caramel might get replaced by ultramel even though the look really isn't quite the same (nothing against ultramel, just would love to also see lots of healthy unkinked caramels available).

---

Small breeder for sure Randy -- and still a novice as well really.

Greg was not specific about number/% of kinking. He did incubate a lower temps -- 86 I think.

There are indeed many theories. I know I will continue to do what I have done thus far: outcross as much as possible, feed Mazuri to feeders, cook at 87 and WET, and be open to anything that will aide in making healthy Caramels.

There are a few small breeders friends, and a larger one, who believe the Mojave gene could be lending a hand in prohibiting kinking. Mojaves are widely agreed to be a robust gene that feeds well, grows fast, and breeds early. Could it also "water down" the inclination for the Caramel gene to kink?

I agree that sharing information and looking for trends is the best course at this point. I will hopefully be producing/releasing some Caramel Mojaves and combo Caramel Hets this year -- and look forward to the success of others with the gene -- a VISUALLY UNIQUE gene. :gj:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bill Buchman

Small breeder for sure Randy -- and still a novice as well really.

Greg was not specific about number/% of kinking. He did incubate a lower temps -- 86 I think.

There are indeed many theories. I know I will continue to do what I have done thus far: outcross as much as possible, feed Mazuri to feeders, cook at 87 and WET, and be open to anything that will aide in making healthy Caramels.

There are a few small breeders friends, and a larger one, who believe the Mojave gene could be lending a hand in prohibiting kinking. Mojaves are widely agreed to be a robust gene that feeds well, grows fast, and breeds early. Could it also "water down" the inclination for the Caramel gene to kink?

I agree that sharing information and looking for trends is the best course at this point. I will hopefully be producing/releasing some Caramel Mojaves and combo Caramel Hets this year -- and look forward to the success of others with the gene -- a VISUALLY UNIQUE gene. :gj:

---

Well if Mazuri 6F is what will keep me from hatching kinked caramels, I have nothing to worry about when I end up getting some, haha! It may not be a specific ingredient, just the quality overall. I've noticed the last several times I've been to my local pet store, the rats there just don't look as healthy as mine. They tend to be skinnier and ones around the same age there are always smaller than similar-aged ones I have (their small rats are around the same size as my weaned rats). Now I have no idea what their rodent supplier feeds, but I'd venture a guess to say it's likely not 6F.

As far as the mojave gene having an affect on kinking, I don't really think enough caramel mojaves have been hatched by enough people to draw any decisive conclusions. If the mojave mutation translates to a mutation of tyrosinase (or any other protein that may be involved in the kinking) in and of its own though, it is plausible there could be some affect. If that is the case, you could expect something similar in other members of the BEL complex when crossed with caramels. I doubt just being good feeders, fast growers, and early breeders would do much. In fact, I could see the fast growth contributing more to deformities.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Russ Lawson

Well if Mazuri 6F is what will keep me from hatching kinked caramels, I have nothing to worry about when I end up getting some, haha! It may not be a specific ingredient, just the quality overall. I've noticed the last several times I've been to my local pet store, the rats there just don't look as healthy as mine. They tend to be skinnier and ones around the same age there are always smaller than similar-aged ones I have (their small rats are around the same size as my weaned rats). Now I have no idea what their rodent supplier feeds, but I'd venture a guess to say it's likely not 6F.

As far as the mojave gene having an affect on kinking, I don't really think enough caramel mojaves have been hatched by enough people to draw any decisive conclusions. If the mojave mutation translates to a mutation of tyrosinase (or any other protein that may be involved in the kinking) in and of its own though, it is plausible there could be some affect. If that is the case, you could expect something similar in other members of the BEL complex when crossed with caramels. I doubt just being good feeders, fast growers, and early breeders would do much. In fact, I could see the fast growth contributing more to deformities.

---

Good insights Russ. We may never know if any of the kinking factors that we are analyzing are connected to kinking/reduced kinking?? I am a "scoreboard" guy at the end of the day. I ultimately don't need to "know" why my Caramel stock/production has a much lower kinking % -- as long it does. :rofl:

If I produce 50 Caramels and Caramel combos over the next 3-4 years and fewer than 10 are kinked, I will have proven to be a HIGHLY successful Caramel producer based on prior reported numbers -- regardless of the reasons. The numbers are what counts -- SCOREBOARD.

Would I like to know the answer(s)"kinking mystery"? YES!!! But I don't need to. Kinking is clearly genetic, and it is my job as a breeder to NOT LET IT HAPPEN. :gj:

I am busy doing more research on ball python genetics. One thing I should mention so far is this. It has been said that ball pythons in the wild inbreed naturally because they can't go far from where they were born. Well, I googled around some articles on wild ball pythons. One fascinating statistic is the shear numbers and population density of wild balls- though in some cases, the population is dwendling due to overharvesting. From what I have read, there would be plenty of oportunity for balls to find unrelated or distantly related partners in their area. And check this out!
http://www.stevegorzulapresents.com/
I'm soooo going to get a copy!
Off to do more research! :)
Later!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Delilah

I am busy doing more research on ball python genetics. One thing I should mention so far is this. It has been said that ball pythons in the wild inbreed naturally because they can't go far from where they were born. Well, I googled around some articles on wild ball pythons. One fascinating statistic is the shear numbers and population density of wild balls- though in some cases, the population is dwendling due to overharvesting. From what I have read, there would be plenty of oportunity for balls to find unrelated or distantly related partners in their area. And check this out!
http://www.stevegorzulapresents.com/
I'm soooo going to get a copy!
Off to do more research! :)
Later!

---

Take some Dramamine before you watch that! :P

It's an older DVD, with a LOT of shaking that some people have said makes them motion sick! LOL