50% het?

Can somebody please explain what "50% het" means? Is it correct to say a animal is other than just plain het?

It means there is a 50% chance the animal is het for a gene, as there's no way to tell what animal carries it unless it's visual or it's 100% het.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LGray23

It means there is a 50% chance the animal is het for a gene, as there's no way to tell what animal carries it unless it's visual or it's 100% het.

---

Thanks. What other percentages are often used to describe the chance of the animal being het and in what cases would we use them?

66% chance from het to Het breeding 50% chance from het to normal 100% het from homozygous to anything.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jason79

66% chance from het to Het breeding 50% chance from het to normal 100% het from homozygous to anything.

---

Can you please explain how you arrive at these probabilities? i'm a little confused. Thanks

Het to normal half the babies statistically should be hets. Het to het 2 out of 3 should be hets. So thats where the 50% and 66% come from. all the hets look normal so there is no way to tell which are and which aren't so they call them 50% or 66% hets meaning that there is statistically a certain percent chance they will be hets, but there is also a chance they are not.

Het x het breeding
Genetic Wizard 3.0 calculations by
http://www.worldofballpythons.com/gfx/logo.png
In this you can't tell between the hets and the normals, therefore they are 66% het instead of selling a normal as a het, since there is an equal chance of being het.

Het x normal
Genetic Wizard 3.0 calculations by
http://www.worldofballpythons.com/gfx/logo.png
In this breeding, only 50% because it's literally split in half.

Homo x normal
Genetic Wizard 3.0 calculations by
http://www.worldofballpythons.com/gfx/logo.png
All are het, therfore they are 100% het even though they all look normal.

An offspring is either het or he he is not in other way he carries the gene for the recesive morth or he does not.

When a homozygous animal is paired to a normal there is obviously no question that all the offsprings will carrry the recessive gene and therefore they are reffered to as het or 100% het, now the tricky part is when a het is paired to a normal or a het.

In both cases if you pair a het to a het or a het to a normal not all the normal looking offsprings will carry the gene for the recessive Morph, some will and some won't, however since it is impossible to distinguish which ones do and which one don't, all the normal looking offsprings are referred to as possible het either 66% or 50% depending on the original pairing.

This mean if you purchase a possible het from a het x het it has 66% chances to be a het and the only way to find out whether the animal you bought is a het or whether it is a normal will be by breeding the animal and proving or disproving him.

Same goes for 50% het.

I agree with the above statements, and I see it like so:

Seems that people are dropping the percentage a lot nowadays and just list listing the animal as PH (possible het). I think that the percentage chance is good to know if you are choosing between two animals and all other things are equal.

The odds are per animal, not per clutch really, so the clutch could be all hets or zero hets. Each animal has the percentage chance of carrying the gene. I think some confusion arrises because we drop a word and say 66% het versus the full 66% possible het.

Really, the animal itself is het or not het, but knowing the odds can help in decision making during purchase as hets do not have 100% reliable markers for the gene.

I don't breed and I'm not a genetics guy, but can I assume that clutches with multiple possible sires complicate the Het math?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Slim

I don't breed and I'm not a genetics guy, but can I assume that clutches with multiple possible sires complicate the Het math?

---

well say you have a het albino and pastel hypo breed to a female het albino.

you know all albinos are obviously albino
you know all pastels are het hypo 50% pos het albino
the rest of the clutch you can't be sure, your basically left telling the customer what you bred and they can decide for themselves. but i would assume your just going to be selling them as 50% pos het albino, only thing you can say that snake is.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Slim

I don't breed and I'm not a genetics guy, but can I assume that clutches with multiple possible sires complicate the Het math?

---

Personally, I would likely avoid using multiple sires when hets are involved without weeding out any issues.

Example: Albino female bred to a het Albino and say a Super Mojo. They you would know any normals are het Albino as well as any Mojos being het Albino, and the Super lets you figure out who is the sire. So here you could get Albinos, WT het Albino and Mojo het Albino. Lineage would be clear for each offspring.

OR if both of your sires are in the same boat het-wise (ex. both 100% het for the same thing) but maybe with different codom (inc dom) visual morphs

ex. Female Albino (or het Albino) to both a Black Pastel het Albino male and a Enchi het Albino male. All of your non-albino offspring would have the same percentage possible het Albino and it really matters not who the sire is on the WT ones (but they would be het, or poss het Albino).

Now add double recessive hets and it gets a bit complicated....

I think the main point people get confused about, is that 50% het is not half het. It may be het, or it may not be. It's only going to be one or the other. If it is het--it carries the morph gene. If it's not, then it doesn't.
Regardless of what we know, an animal is either het (100% het), or it isn't.

The percentages only refer to what we know--the ODDS that the animal is, or is not, het, based on what was bred. The morph gene isn't passed on every time when you breed a het animal.

This is because het animals carry 1 copy of the morph gene, and one copy of the normal gene, and only pass one of them on to each offspring they produce.

Once an animal is proven--it's been bred to other animals carrying that gene, and has produced visual morph offspring, then it's no longer '50% het'--it becomes 100% het, or a proven het. If it never produces visual offspring, then after a while, and a number of breedings, people assume that it is not het.

Some animals may called 'possible het' for a long time, because the point at which different people give up will vary. There have been some het snakes that have rolled the dice the right way so many times in a row, that they were assumed to not be carrying the morph gene...but then later, were proven to have it after all. :)

I hope that helped, if there was any confusion remaining.

If I may interject, some morphs have a visible het. Though some may argue, pieds have a visible het and it is even more pronounced when combined with some codoms. At least with the line I have been working with, I can pick out hets from 50% and 66% clutches. So far my picks have proven in all cases.

I do agree the percentage of possibility should be fully disclosed. I think the use of 50% het and 66% het is only because of the assumption of common knowledge of the terms and meanings.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Brandon Osborne

If I may interject, some morphs have a visible het. Though some may argue, pieds have a visible het and it is even more pronounced when combined with some codoms.

---

How can you distinguish het pieds from normals?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LGray23

Het x het breeding

In this you can't tell between the hets and the normals, therefore they are 66% het instead of selling a normal as a het, since there is an equal chance of being het.

---

I admit i am still very confused. When we say 66% het what are we really saying?

a) this individual, normal looking snake, from het x het parents has 66% chances to be het

b) 66% of the normal looking snakes in a clutch from het x het parents are het

c) none of the above

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CH2O2

I admit i am still very confused. When we say 66% het what are we really saying?

a) this individual, normal looking snake, from het x het parents has 66% chances to be het

b) 66% of the normal looking snakes in a clutch from het x het parents are het

c) none of the above

---

There are markers, but not all het pieds have them. Also, not all normals don't have them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jinx667

a) this individual, normal looking snake, from het x het parents has 66% chances to be het

---

OK. So lets imagine a het x het generates a clutch of 5 snakes. One snake shows the morph (not het) and the remaining 4 snakes are normal looking. What chance does one of the normal looking snakes have of being het?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CH2O2

OK. So lets imagine a het x het generates a clutch of 5 snakes. One snake shows the morph (not het) and the remaining 4 snakes are normal looking. What chance does one of the normal looking snakes have of being het?

---

66%

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dave Green

66%

---

hmmm.... how did you calculate that? I dont understand.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CH2O2

hmmm.... how did you calculate that? I dont understand.

---

If you breed het x het each normal looking hatchling will have a 66% of being a het and a 33% chance of being a normal. It doesn't matter if there is one normal looking hatchling or four normal looking hatchlings each one has a 66% chance of carrying the recessive gene.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dave Green

If you breed het x het each normal looking hatchling will have a 66% of being a het and a 33% chance of being a normal. It doesn't matter if there is one normal looking hatchling or four normal looking hatchlings each one has a 66% chance of carrying the recessive gene.

---

I don't understand how that can be. Can you show me the mathematical calculation you make to arrive at the number 66%? I understand that would be the case if you have 3 normal looking snakes and 2 of them are het. 2 out of 3 is 66%. But how do you arrive at 66% when you have a clutch of 4 normal looking snakes from a het x het?

It doesn't matter how many eggs are in the clutch the % is per egg. It could be just one egg, that egg has a 66% chance of being het, it could be 2 eggs and each egg's individual chance of being het is 66% in that case. Someone needs to find the math, I'm sure its been posted before somewhere.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CH2O2

I don't understand how that can be. Can you show me the mathematical calculation you make to arrive at the number 66%? I understand that would be the case if you have 3 normal looking snakes and 2 of them are het. 2 out of 3 is 66%. But how do you arrive at 66% when you have a clutch of 4 normal looking snakes from a het x het?

---

It doesn't matter how many you have, each one has a 66% chance of carrying the recessive gene...

Ok I will give it a whirl.

Het Albino x Het Albino (5 Eggs) offspring result in 1 Albino and 4 66% Possible Het Albinos

The odds are per egg so there are 3 possibilities per egg: Albino, Het Albino, Normal

We know the normal offspring are not albino but they can be het albino or normal. So out of the 3 possibilities in this breeding they can only be 2 out of the 3.

2/3=.666667*100=66.67% or 66% Possible Het Albino

So out the the 4 normal looking offspring each has a 66% chance of being Het Albino.

The same would work for a Het Albino x Normal pairing showing the 50% possible Het Albino.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CH2O2

I don't understand how that can be. Can you show me the mathematical calculation you make to arrive at the number 66%? I understand that would be the case if you have 3 normal looking snakes and 2 of them are het. 2 out of 3 is 66%. But how do you arrive at 66% when you have a clutch of 4 normal looking snakes from a het x het?

---

parent one has one recessive allele and one normal allele
parent two has one recessive allele and one normal allele
egg #1 has 4 possibilities
1. to receive both recessive alleles
2. to receive recessive allele from parent one and normal allele from parent two
3. to receive normal allele from parent one and recessive allele from parent two
4. both normal alleles

If the egg gets both recessive alleles it is easily identified.
If the egg gets only 1 recessive allele or both normal alleles, they cannot be distinguished form each other.
you have 3 options
1. to receive recessive allele from parent one and normal allele from parent two
2. to receive normal allele from parent one and recessive allele from parent two
3. both normal alleles

so the chance of the egg getting a recessive allele is 2/3 or 66%
repeat the above for each other egg in the clutch.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OhhWatALoser

parent one has one recessive allele and one normal allele
parent two has one recessive allele and one normal allele
egg #1 has 4 possibilities
1. to receive both recessive alleles
2. to receive recessive allele from parent one and normal allele from parent two
3. to receive normal allele from parent one and recessive allele from parent two
4. both normal alleles

If the egg gets both recessive alleles it is easily identified.
If the egg gets only 1 recessive allele or both normal alleles, they cannot be distinguished form each other.
you have 3 options
1. to receive recessive allele from parent one and normal allele from parent two
2. to receive normal allele from parent one and recessive allele from parent two
3. both normal alleles

so the chance of the egg getting a recessive allele is 2/3 or 66%
repeat the above for each other egg in the clutch.

---

Thanks seems your way is much more accurate than mine. :gj:

I will stay out of these conversations. LOL

You can also draw out the Punnett square to get a visual of what is going on.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CH2O2

How can you distinguish het pieds from normals?

---

There are subtle clues. For instance, most have markers on the rear third of the belly in the form of thick black lines along the sides. I can only speak for my line of pieds. Not only do mine have the "tracks", they also have yellow-orange smudges on the belly.

When combining pied with other co-dom morphs, sometimes the pied gene will alter the look of the co-Dom gene. I have seen this in pewters, cinnies, sterlings, and possibly super pewters and silver bullets. I have some animals that I should prove out this season....and maybe even hatch more unseen stuff.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OhhWatALoser

parent one has one recessive allele and one normal allele
parent two has one recessive allele and one normal allele
egg #1 has 4 possibilities
1. to receive both recessive alleles
2. to receive recessive allele from parent one and normal allele from parent two
3. to receive normal allele from parent one and recessive allele from parent two
4. both normal alleles

If the egg gets both recessive alleles it is easily identified.
If the egg gets only 1 recessive allele or both normal alleles, they cannot be distinguished form each other.
you have 3 options
1. to receive recessive allele from parent one and normal allele from parent two
2. to receive normal allele from parent one and recessive allele from parent two
3. both normal alleles

so the chance of the egg getting a recessive allele is 2/3 or 66%
repeat the above for each other egg in the clutch.

---

Now i understand. Thanks

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CH2O2

Now i understand. Thanks

---

Hey CH202...I thought you were a genetic junkie? Are you just trying to see if people actually know how they come up with the 66% number or something? For you to go off and explain that a Pastel is an incomplete dominant in another thread and then post a thread like this has me wondering. Just curious.

You might occasionally run into 33% or 25% chance hets. These where never well accepted terms and now that hets in general are more reasonable don't usually even get mentioned. They are the respective offspring of an untested 66% or 50% chance het to a normal. If you had a large number of such offspring from a large number of different 66% or 50% chance hets you would expect about 33% or 25% respectively to be hets. But for each clutch they are either near 0% or 50% depending on if the possible het parent hit their chance or not. The uncertainty of even having a chance due to this extra generation of removal from a know het is what makes naming 33% and 25% chance hets controversial.

I produced 5 pieds this last year from two 25% chance het pied girls bred to a 66% chance het male. However, since pied has co-dominant tendencies this wasn't nearly as lucky as it sounds (I would have been very surprised if any of these well markered possible hets hadn't proven).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by twistedtails

Hey CH202...I thought you were a genetic junkie? Are you just trying to see if people actually know how they come up with the 66% number or something? For you to go off and explain that a Pastel is an incomplete dominant in another thread and then post a thread like this has me wondering. Just curious.

---

X2
It didn't make much sense to me either. How can someone come here "ripping" our community for using improper terminology related to genetics, but at the same time they don't even understand how they actually work?:confused:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by twistedtails

Hey CH202...I thought you were a genetic junkie? Are you just trying to see if people actually know how they come up with the 66% number or something? For you to go off and explain that a Pastel is an incomplete dominant in another thread and then post a thread like this has me wondering. Just curious.

---

I'm not good at math.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by C&H Exotic Morphs

X2
It didn't make much sense to me either. How can someone come here "ripping" our community for using improper terminology related to genetics, but at the same time they don't even understand how they actually work?:confused:

---

Why would you be confused? Math and biology are 2 different things. I did not know were the 66% came from. Some people took the time to explain. Now i understand.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RandyRemington

You might occasionally run into 33% or 25% chance hets. These where never well accepted terms and now that hets in general are more reasonable don't usually even get mentioned. They are the respective offspring of an untested 66% or 50% chance het to a normal. If you had a large number of such offspring from a large number of different 66% or 50% chance hets you would expect about 33% or 25% respectively to be hets. But for each clutch they are either near 0% or 50% depending on if the possible het parent hit their chance or not. The uncertainty of even having a chance due to this extra generation of removal from a know het is what makes naming 33% and 25% chance hets controversial.

I produced 5 pieds this last year from two 25% chance het pied girls bred to a 66% chance het male. However, since pied has co-dominant tendencies this wasn't nearly as lucky as it sounds (I would have been very surprised if any of these well markered possible hets hadn't proven).

---

Yes, i see why the 33% or 25% are controversial. Did you ever encounter the argument that all unproven het snakes are 50% het?