What do we know about breeding Bananas?

This is not a topic that I am all that familiar with, and I would be happy to know more. I understand that there is a remarkably high ratio of female-to-males hatched out with the banana morph?

Are NO males being hatched out? Or just very few? I've read speculation that incubation temps may have something to do with it? Or is it something else?

I'm open to hearing speculation, but would really be interested in first hand experience either from those who have seen banana clutches hatch. Does the same ratio appear in the combos, too?

This is NOT a place to speculate about what the breeders know or don't know...what they're willing or not willing to share. This is not a court and it does more harm than good to the community as a whole to cause such distrust of reputable breeders with vague, random accusations.

If a member of this site has a SPECIFIC charge to bring against a specific individual or business, this must be done properly in the Inquiry Forum. Full names must be disclosed and all known evidence laid out thoroughly so the issue may be properly addressed, rebutted and defended.

We will no longer tolerate these sorts of insinuations an innuendos and doing so may earn very serious infraction points.

SO....educate me about breeding bananas! :P

dudette* i thought bananas came from trees..... weird XD

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alex.B

dudette* XD

---

Nice! I get so tired of being called "dude"! (My daughter does it all the time! :taz: )

:P

Assuming coral glows and bananas are the same, this is what I herd from a reliable source.

At least the coral glows, when a female coral glow lays eggs, you get the expected 50/50 ratio you would expect to get from a heterozygous animal and getting the expected 50/50 ratio of male to female.

The problem comes when breeding male coral glows. When you breed a male coral glow to something, it appears all females are coral glows and all non coral glows are males. This could easily be explained by a sex linked trait, since males are assumed to be the same chromosome animal (unlike humans which the female is)

The problem that kills the theory is that very rarely, the male coral glow will make another male coral glow. The ratio is so low, it doesn't really seem to make much sense with what we know right now.

so thats all I know and we're stuck at "we don't have a clue whats going on" Unless someone has more info?

That doesn't eliminate the possibility that it is sex-linked. Linked genes do become unlinked, albeit in low percentages.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OhhWatALoser

The problem that kills the theory is that very rarely, the male coral glow will make another male coral glow. The ratio is so low, it doesn't really seem to make much sense with what we know right now.

---

males are being produced but in low numbers most of the time, though someone on BLBC produced 3.1

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OhhWatALoser

Assuming coral glows and bananas are the same, this is what I herd from a reliable source.

At least the coral glows, when a female coral glow lays eggs, you get the expected 50/50 ratio you would expect to get from a heterozygous animal and getting the expected 50/50 ratio of male to female.

The problem comes when breeding male coral glows. When you breed a male coral glow to something, it appears all females are coral glows and all non coral glows are males. This could easily be explained by a sex linked trait, since males are assumed to be the same chromosome animal (unlike humans which the female is)

The problem that kills the theory is that very rarely, the male coral glow will make another male coral glow. The ratio is so low, it doesn't really seem to make much sense with what we know right now.

so thats all I know and we're stuck at "we don't have a clue whats going on" Unless someone has more info?

---

I have heard the same things, males do pop up from male bananas but it is very rare. The female bananas on the other hand produce normal ratios of male and female.

Either way they are just an awesome morph:snake:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OhhWatALoser

Assuming coral glows and bananas are the same, this is what I herd from a reliable source.

At least the coral glows, when a female coral glow lays eggs, you get the expected 50/50 ratio you would expect to get from a heterozygous animal and getting the expected 50/50 ratio of male to female.

The problem comes when breeding male coral glows. When you breed a male coral glow to something, it appears all females are coral glows and all non coral glows are males. This could easily be explained by a sex linked trait, since males are assumed to be the same chromosome animal (unlike humans which the female is)

The problem that kills the theory is that very rarely, the male coral glow will make another male coral glow. The ratio is so low, it doesn't really seem to make much sense with what we know right now.

so thats all I know and we're stuck at "we don't have a clue whats going on" Unless someone has more info?

---

This is what I've been told as well.

Yes.....BG would really like to know what everyone here knows. Great thread Judy. :gj: Let's see if any of the "big dogs" chime in.

In sex link genes there are "mistakes". Like calico cats, which are all female, there will be the rare male calico born. Many have issues that cause them to be sterile, which would make sense seeing as there is a genetic hiccup to make a sex link come unlinked to allow the gene to work in the wrong sex.

Then you also have the very rare calico male cat that is fertile. Perhaps the same is true of these possibly sex-linked snake genes also?

The disruptive post has been removed and sent to the Quarantine Room. If you do not have access to QT and would like to see what's in there, then simply PM any admin (names in red) and ask to be let in.

THIS thread is for the specific discussion of banana breeding. It will not be allowed to turn into a soap box or a circus ring.

I've been confused about this for awhile. Bananas and coral glows are the same or different? Just two names for one morph or two different morphs that are compatible? Or no one knows? Maybe this is common knowledge that I just missed. :oops:

Thanks for bringing up this subject. I may be interested in breeding Bananas some day so I'm glad to hear about it. Hope there's more info to come! :)

i know there has been produced 1.1 bananas and the male is 50 k

I don't want to chime out the sex-link rule. In humans We have transgenders or more estrogen women. I think the male snakes were simple just more feminine and had the gender assigned till the last minute. :rofl:

also, I would like to add for the sex link thing to be true, males would be the only ones that could be homozygous. assuming it doesn't jump over to the other chromosome

its interesting to hear there are "mistakes" in other animals, seems to fit with what is public right now.

would be nice to have some community statistics. Like are the few homozygous animals male and how often does a male produce a male?

To my knowledge, no one has proven banana and coral glow compatible. Its just the genes are so damn similar, even down to the mystery males, its just suspected they are.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OhhWatALoser

also, I would like to add for the sex link thing to be true, males would be the only ones that could be homozygous. assuming it doesn't jump over to the other chromosome

its interesting to hear there are "mistakes" in other animals, seems to fit with what is public right now.

would be nice to have some community statistics. Like are the few homozygous animals male and how often does a male produce a male?

To my knowledge, no one has proven banana and coral glow compatible. Its just the genes are so damn similar, even down to the mystery males, its just suspected they are.

---

Surely if it was on the Z chromosome itself then you would have a higher chance of the males in the clutch being bananas than the females?

Isn't it more likely to be tied to the Z chromosome - and it neededn't be in the sex chromosome directly but in DNA that gets passed along with it?

They have found satellite DNA in the more advanced snake species already and some was common to both the Z and W chromosomes and some was specific to the W chromosome.

Say it was tied into one of the ones that was thought to be common to both but altered it slightly so it isn't.

so while both the Z and W have A version that can be passed along they are not the same version?

What I'm groping towards is the possibility it might be recessive in males and needs both sections of satellite DNA of the two Z chromosomes to be the altered version but, since females only have one copy anyway there is no unaltered version to over rule it and it is dominant or co-dominant.

Or is that just horribly complicating the whole thing? It could be completely wrong in any case of course. :rofl:


dr del

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dr del

Surely if it was on the Z chromosome then you would have a higher chance of the males in the clutch being bananas than the females?

Isn't it more likely to be tied to the W chromosome - and it neededn't be in the sex chromosome directly but in DNA that gets passed along with it?

They have found satellite DNA in the more advanced snake species already and some was common to both the Z and W chromosomes and some was specific to the W chromosome.

Say it was tied into one of the ones that was thought to be common to both but altered it slightly so it isn't.

so while both the Z and W have A version that can be passed along they are not the same version?

Or is that just horribly complicating the whole thing? It could be completely wrong in any case of course. :rofl:


dr del

---

well I guess with what we know right now, it can't just stay on one Z, because we would be seeing a ratio 25% coral glow female, 25% coral glow male, 25% normal female, 25% normal male. so something else has to be going on. it can't just be a "simple" sex link trait at all.

But atleast what we are told is their usually seeing 50% female coral glow, 50% male normal, then the ever so rare male coral. it sounds like the male corals never make a normal females. ....... again real statistics would help us make better theories.

I think I understand what your saying, I'm curious how the hell do you prove it or disprove it lol. Maybe with more generations and some good record keeping we might be able to see how this gene jumps around. might be something like If male/female Generation 2 snake came from male female generation 1 snake with the gene, then generation 3 predicted offspring will be XXX.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dr del

What I'm groping towards is the possibility it might be recessive in males and needs both sections of satellite DNA of the two Z chromosomes to be the altered version but, since females only have one copy anyway there is no unaltered version to over rule it and it is dominant or co-dominant.

---

How does this explain males coming males though?

Sounds like we need to breed male deserts to female coral glows. *grins*

Problem solved!

Heh,

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OhhWatALoser

How does this explain males coming males though?

---

Now there you have me.

The only thing I can think of would be a snake with extra sex genes ( so a male could be ZZW or ZZZ and a female WWZ ). I know that can happen in other animals but I have zero clue on how rare it would be or if that would resemble the probability of a male banana in a clutch.


dr del

Hmm.. The only thing I remember reading about those sorts of things was about females with WW chromosomes. There was a boa who gave birth on her own(no male) and all of the babies born were WW instead of WZ. Of course the testing wasn't really done that well, the snake was still bred during the time, but the babies all only carried her genes and the recessive morph despite the males not carrying the recessive trait. Still would be nice to see if she does it again without males present.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases...1103111210.htm

random, but sort of related. Chromosomes do weird things.

Okay from what I have heard I do not believe that bananas are a sexlinked trait. It would be like colorblindness in humans except opposite. Basically it would be like a recessive trait in males with male bananas only being produced from the breeding of male banana to female banana. With females only needing one copy of the mutated gene to be a banana. This theory is blown out of the water since males have been produced from females bred to mutations other than banana.

Also I am doing a research project on the effects of incubation temps on balls. One incubator is at 86 degrees the other 91 degrees. I am getting 43% males at 86F and 54% males at 91F. So unless they are incubating at some crazy temp I can't see it being temp either. I just think it was "bad" odds for the past few years in the case of bananas. From what I have heard there have been quite a few banana males produced this year.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kellysballs

From what I have heard there have been quite a few banana males produced this year.

---

from females

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OhhWatALoser

from females

---

So why were the other years different ? Where were all the males the other years ?

Maybe someone figured out how to make them/stumbled upon it by dumb luck?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Thesnakepitt

So why were the other years different ? Where were all the males the other years ?

---

Females take time to grow up and one male can bred multiple females.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Thesnakepitt

So why were the other years different ?

---

Probably because there were a few more females of reproductive age this year.

Could we be glossing over the greed factor in humans? I touched on it on another forum. By keeping males in low supply would keep the value on males high. At one time a male emu( large flightless bird) was 20 times the price of females. The reason why is because the main breeder of emu in the US was culling most males. This could explain low male numbers and the price tag as well.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Royal Morphz

Could we be glossing over the greed factor in humans? I touched on it on another forum. By keeping males in low supply would keep the value on males high. At one time a male emu( large flightless bird) was 20 times the price of females. The reason why is because the main breeder of emu in the US was culling most males. This could explain low male numbers and the price tag as well.

---

I think there too many people working with the morph now to keep that a possibility. Only if people start breeding males and getting the expected 50/50 all of a sudden would I see that a possibility. It would be a lot of people lying at this point.

Let me say that I made a generalized comment on a morph that so few people are working with that my post may be interpreted as a accusation to one or all people working with it. I want to say that is not the reason I posted at all. I know that were it not for those breeders we wouldn't have such cool combos coming out of that morph.

Next the staff would like to emphasize that this is not a forum that will tolerate bashing of anyone and this includes the staff.

Everyone needs to be super careful about what kinds of speculations we throw out to the general public. Implying that breeders may be intentionally culling males in order to artificially inflate prices is a VERY serious allegation. To just throw something like that out onto the table without any specifics leads to a general mistrust of ALL breeders, and goodness knows its hard enough for people to build truly trustworthy reputations in this business. To make such serious allegations without giving any details or naming names casts dispersion on a LOT of innocent people.

I really don't think these sorts of speculations should be made, unless one has concrete evidence to prove a specific individual or business is engaged in the act. And then, such an accusation needs to be made through the proper channels and not tossed out in a general discussion about a morph.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OhhWatALoser

from females

---

If it is truly sex linked you would need both male and female to produce the male. Is the argument I was making.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Royal Morphz

Could we be glossing over the greed factor in humans? I touched on it on another forum. By keeping males in low supply would keep the value on males high. At one time a male emu( large flightless bird) was 20 times the price of females. The reason why is because the main breeder of emu in the US was culling most males. This could explain low male numbers and the price tag as well.

---

Agreed 100%. There's some speculation that's the issue currently with some other "big names" hatching normal ratios of males. The next season should be very interesting to see if this trend continues.

Regards,

B

This may have been answered in other threads.

What about the siblings to these guys? Anyone think that maybe the "normal" sibling females are what you would have to hold back to breed into the male bananas to get more male bananas? Just a thought.

Okay, wellll, I had been debating what if anything to post on this as I am not really sure what is appropriate and not appropriate for me to say. I quite recently had a conversation about this topic with someone who is very "in the know," but while it wasn't explicitly stated to me that the information I was given is proprietary and not to be shared, I still wasn't sure that I felt comfortable posting it on a public forum after a private conversation.

I do feel compelled to speak up, though, and say that I highly, highly doubt that culling or even any real "conspiracy" is the answer, and I cannot imagine any breeders doing this. Hoarding males, maybe. :rolleyes: Culling males, no, I don't think so. I can't speak for everyone but I just find that difficult to imagine.

... I can say with relative certainty, based on what I know, that because of however the heck this gene is inherited (and no, I don't know that part -- and to my knowledge NOBODY really does), there are currently a LOT more females than males out there, so I reckon anybody who produces a male keeps him. So, I imagine that would be more likely to explain the lack of available males than a deliberate attempt to keep their numbers artificially low.

I will also say that to my knowledge, everything that OWAL posted -- the fact that CG females produce 50/50 male and female CGs, like a regular dominant, and the fact that male CGs from those female CG dams produce almost exclusively CG female and non-CG male offspring is correct from what I know.

... There is also a third part to the story, however, that as far as I can tell from skimming the Internet hasn't yet been revealed, and that seems to be the "key" to consistently making a bunch of male CGs. ... If you're lucky enough to stumble upon it. ... I don't know if that's all that appropriate to share at this time or not so for now I'll just leave it at that. (Sorry, I'm not trying to play the "neener neener I know more" game -- just don't want to blab someone else's information.) I really don't think there's any conspiracy though.

(PS. I will also say that it doesn't seem to be sex-linked recessive -- that was one of my first thoughts, too :) )

I suppose it's good to know that whatever the key is, it's not a genetic deficiency or abnormality. however, independent of the entire trade secret debate, I'm still unclear as to whether or not bananas and coral glows are the same morph/phenotype. perhaps I missed it, but would someone be able to clarify?

thanks.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wwmjkd

I suppose it's good to know that whatever the key is, it's not a genetic deficiency or abnormality. however, independent of the entire trade secret debate, I'm still unclear as to whether or not bananas and coral glows are the same morph/phenotype. perhaps I missed it, but would someone be able to clarify?

thanks.

---

The Evil Morph God himself said they are the same mutation like different lines of pastel. Noting the similarities in appearance of both in photos of bananas and coral glows of all sizes, and considering it seems to be somewhat difficult to get males in both examples, the most logical explanation is that they are indeed the same mutation.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by purplemuffin

Hmm.. The only thing I remember reading about those sorts of things was about females with WW chromosomes. There was a boa who gave birth on her own(no male) and all of the babies born were WW instead of WZ. Of course the testing wasn't really done that well, the snake was still bred during the time, but the babies all only carried her genes and the recessive morph despite the males not carrying the recessive trait. Still would be nice to see if she does it again without males present.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases...1103111210.htm

random, but sort of related. Chromosomes do weird things.

---

... Now I'll be eying my RTB's tub every day to see if there are any surprise eggs in there. :O

This is pretty interesting, the whole Banana/Coral Glow mystery thing. I didn't know that there were specific morphs that would only produce males or females. And adding to a post I saw earlier, what would breeding a female Coral Glow to a male Desert prove?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by xFenrir

... Now I'll be eying my RTB's tub every day to see if there are any surprise eggs in there. :O

---

Now that WOULD be a surprise!! :weirdface (RTB's don't lay eggs. :P )

[QUOTE=xFenrir;1641337 And adding to a post I saw earlier, what would breeding a female Coral Glow to a male Desert prove?[/QUOTE]

I was being tongue-in-cheek about one not producing males and one not producing fertile females. Add both issues together and it would even out. Just joking. Sorry.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Serpent_Nirvana

... There is also a third part to the story, however, that as far as I can tell from skimming the Internet hasn't yet been revealed, and that seems to be the "key" to consistently making a bunch of male CGs. ... If you're lucky enough to stumble upon it. ... I don't know if that's all that appropriate to share at this time or not so for now I'll just leave it at that. (Sorry, I'm not trying to play the "neener neener I know more" game -- just don't want to blab someone else's information.) I really don't think there's any conspiracy though.

(PS. I will also say that it doesn't seem to be sex-linked recessive -- that was one of my first thoughts, too :) )

---

The trick isn't breeding normal looking sons of banana/coral glow females back to the banana/coral glow females? Because that's the sex linked recessive in males and dominant in females theory we came up with years ago and got shot down with the information that was shared at the time.

What if you breed the normal female daughters to the male bananas? Would you get more male bananas?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RandyRemington

The trick isn't breeding normal looking sons of banana/coral glow females back to the banana/coral glow females? Because that's the sex linked recessive in males and dominant in females theory we came up with years ago and got shot down with the information that was shared at the time.

---

Nope, that's not it. I asked in no uncertain terms if there could be some recessive thing at work here, and was told that that positively does not seem to be the case.

... Really, the thing of it is that unless there's a piece of the puzzle that I wasn't given, there really is no "trick" to it as far as what to breed to what. It's either luck -- and knowing what to hold back if you hit on that luck -- or knowing what to buy if you don't ....... If you can find one for sale.

(Again, assuming there isn't some additional thing that I don't know, which is never outside the realm of possibility :P)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JLC

Now that WOULD be a surprise!! :weirdface (RTB's don't lay eggs. :P )

---

Whoops, just realized my mistake! I was thinking of my BP at the time, I got them mixed up. :P I said it right on Facebook! :D If any surprise eggs end up in my boa's tub, I'll be sure to freak out on here first though.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Serpent_Nirvana

Nope, that's not it. I asked in no uncertain terms if there could be some recessive thing at work here, and was told that that positively does not seem to be the case.

... Really, the thing of it is that unless there's a piece of the puzzle that I wasn't given, there really is no "trick" to it as far as what to breed to what. It's either luck -- and knowing what to hold back if you hit on that luck -- or knowing what to buy if you don't ....... If you can find one for sale.

(Again, assuming there isn't some additional thing that I don't know, which is never outside the realm of possibility :P)

---

not to stir the pot, and I do not intend to sound accusatory in any way, but doesn't that vitiate your post from yesterday about there being a third 'piece' that hasn't been released to the public? it seemed like you were alluding to information that isn't being disseminated at the moment (and that's definitely what Niel was implying last week). no conspiracy theories certainly, but something that breeders are considering to be essentially a trade secret? if luck or banana-specific breeding expertise alone is the key, this discussion seems rather moot.

if I'm off base or out of line, I do apologize.

I remember now from the old thread why a standard sex linked Z mutation didn't work, because the original female banana produced at least some banana daughters first breeding. I don't remember if we found a reason it couldn't be sex influenced (a mutation NOT on the gender chromosome but which behaves differently in males and females). In that theory it's still recessive in males and dominant in females. Not sure if in the old thread we could get enough breeding results to confirm or refute that theory. Whatever it is I think we have to have lots of good reliable breeding results info to figure it out. I wouldn't necessarily trust the characterization that it's not a recessive thing just because this would be such a different variation of non sex influenced recessive that the breeder could just disagree with the terminology (sort of like the term "lethal" in spider discussions). Eventually we'll get a banana or coral glow breeder who will answer specific questions about what was bred and what the outcome was and then we'll all know how it works.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RandyRemington

I remember now from the old thread why a standard sex linked Z mutation didn't work, because the original female banana produced at least some banana daughters first breeding. I don't remember if we found a reason it couldn't be sex influenced (a mutation NOT on the gender chromosome but which behaves differently in males and females). In that theory it's still recessive in males and dominant in females. Not sure if in the old thread we could get enough breeding results to confirm or refute that theory. Whatever it is I think we have to have lots of good reliable breeding results info to figure it out. I wouldn't necessarily trust the characterization that it's not a recessive thing just because this would be such a different variation of non sex influenced recessive that the breeder could just disagree with the terminology (sort of like the term "lethal" in spider discussions). Eventually we'll get a banana or coral glow breeder who will answer specific questions about what was bred and what the outcome was and then we'll all know how it works.

---

There also has to be room in the theory for the homozygous banana, since albinos unlimited made one (would be nice to know if it was male or female). I believe with what your saying with your theory would mean only females could be the "super" but males have to be homozygous? if i'm understanding correctly? also do we know how many males have produced males? is it the same males doing it, or was it like a 1 or 2 time thing?

http://ball-pythons.net/forums/showt...7-Super-Banana

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wwmjkd

not to stir the pot, and I do not intend to sound accusatory in any way, but doesn't that vitiate your post from yesterday about there being a third 'piece' that hasn't been released to the public? it seemed like you were alluding to information that isn't being disseminated at the moment (and that's definitely what Niel was implying last week). no conspiracy theories certainly, but something that breeders are considering to be essentially a trade secret? if luck or banana-specific breeding expertise alone is the key, this discussion seems rather moot.

if I'm off base or out of line, I do apologize.

---

I can see what you're saying -- but yeah, what I was getting at is that as far as I know there's no "collusion" of any kind -- breeders aren't all getting together and agreeing not to sell males or anything of that nature, and certainly aren't killing them. That was the original reason I made my post knowing that it might be ill-perceived as being another "neener neener I know more than you but I'm not telling" -- because I do feel strongly that this isn't a collusion or conspiracy as has been implied. I honestly think it's just a danged confusing mode of inheritance.

In fact, I don't even know if any breeders have explicitly agreed not to disseminate the information that I was given. I'm just trying to err on the side of caution, because I would rather not say something that I could have said rather than say something inappropriately and violate someone's trust. Y'know?

There is one more piece of the puzzle (that I'm aware of), but frankly I don't think it will be a secret for very long. My impression of the situation is that this piece is a fairly new development -- or at least, seeing it in high enough numbers to be statistically significant -- and since I really don't think there's a conspiracy, I think it will be revealed soon.

... At any rate, there is a bit of a clue on NERD's website ...

Randy, one thing I can say is that I've tried and tried to come up with a theory for inheritance of this gene and simply can't do it. In fact, in my mind the last piece of information just makes it that much more confusing. ... I think that it may point to some sort of sex-linked inheritance with occasional crossing-over ... I just don't know. :O

that is the single most clarifying and consice post I can recall on this subject. thanks.

since my only vested interest in this is idle curiosity, I suppose I can afford to wait it out and see what happens.