Where do you fall on the homozygous spider spectrum?

Most recent debate on the topic can be seen here: Proving Dominant Traits


I want to know where everybody falls on the topic of trying to 'prove out' perceived dominant traits, and more specifically, proving out a homozygous spider. I am more interested in the poll results, and less interested in any discussion that may follow on this thread, unless a comment is specifically to clarify a poll result, or answer. If people would like to contribute to the debate, they can add on to the thread above, or other existing threads that I'm sure are bound to come up in the future on the same topic.

As I don't have any spiders at the moment I can't actively do anything with the project, but because of the lack of information I'd be interested in trying it out in the future. Just curiosity I suppose, and I'm very tired of people saying it's one way or another, when we really don't know.

Sub category ... with those of you who answered that your focus is on other morphs, is this due to fears of a lethal homozygous spider, the wobble in heterozygous spider, limitations with money, or due to simply having little interest in the Morph on general? Is the lack of spider in your projects a conscious effort, or just how things worked out? If related specifically to money, do you plan on adding spider in the future?

I answered the "focus on other morphs". I had a pair of spiders for a while and due to interest in this debate (I might have been the first to post about the possibility spider is lethal many years ago) had planned to breed them together but eventually decided to sell the male. I needed the cage space and just wasn't that interested in producing lots of spiders due to the possibility of producing a severely wobbling baby. I did finally get my first clutch from the spider female this year (bred to a pastel yb that might also be chocolate) so should hatch my first spider next week. I don't really plan on adding more spiders in the future. I think they are a cool morph but with so many other cool morphs out there and my limited space/time/money I don't see expanding my spider collection (now watch me hatch one I just can't stand not to keep, lol). I've been meaning to add pinstripe for years but even without knowing of any pinstripe issues to hold me back I still haven't done that for the same space/time/money limitations but will probably do pinstripe before embarking on a project to satisfy my curiosity as to if spider is really homozygous lethal.

I am avoiding breeding spider to spider to focus on other spider combos, until actual evidence gives or takes away merit from the lethal theory. In other words I'm letting someone else figure it out for me, due to my lack of resources to help the project. If the theory is true, I don't lose out. If it is false, then I will have a higher end combo to start the project with.

What OhhWat said--I wouldn't say I would never breed spider to spider, but unless there is some truly compelling reason to do it, I would avoid it, because of the chance that I would lose 25% of the clutch before it hatched. It's a chance that seems silly to take if it's not necessary.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Anatopism

Sub category ... with those of you who answered that your focus is on other morphs, is this due to fears of a lethal homozygous spider, the wobble in heterozygous spider, limitations with money, or due to simply having little interest in the Morph on general? Is the lack of spider in your projects a conscious effort, or just how things worked out? If related specifically to money, do you plan on adding spider in the future?

---

I have a hard time understanding why so many rally behind the 'lethal homozygous' banner without anything to back it up. that is honestly the least of my concerns.

but to your point, I have deliberately chosen to focus on other morphs and avoid purchasing any spiders due to the wobble and the fact that there are simply other mutations that appeal to me more. many people have very valid opinions about the merits and spiders and why they prefer them (in fact I keep reading posts by one of our moderators, Emilio, about the merits of spiders when it comes to feeding and breeding and it does cause me to vacillate a bit in my own opinion). I can't say that I won't ever incorporate the gene into my collection, but for the foreseeable future the wobble, as well as the allocation of money for other morphs that I like more, means spiders won't be showing up on my doorstep.

unless the flatline and/or asystole can't be produced without the spider gene. in that case, strike all of the above.

As with with any other scientific question it comes down to statistics, period. It is all about the probabilities.

Until someone breeds and keeps records of spiderXspider pairings and then attempts to prove out the offspring, no one will be able to form an educated opinion. If people have kept these records as some suggest (and I'm sure some people have) then I would like to see them so that I could interpret them for myself. If somone could compile the data with a sample size (n) of 200 or more, and the probability (p) of producing a homozygous spider of <0.05 or lower, then I would be inclined to belive that it is improbable that any homozygous spiders exist.

Whether they exist or not, no one has proven that the responsible gene is homozygous lethal, at least not as far as I know. There could be other things that have prevented a homozygous form from being produced yet, and there could be some out there that aren't being bred or haven't been "discovered." Maybe they are sterile and can't reproduce? Is sterility common among 33% of spiders that result from a spiderXspider pairing? Short of seperating egg and sperm, taking one each with the spider gene and fertilizing the egg in vitro to see what happens, we won't know for sure.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RandyRemington

...I don't really plan on adding more spiders in the future. I think they are a cool morph but with so many other cool morphs out there and my limited space/time/money I don't see expanding my spider collection (now watch me hatch one I just can't stand not to keep, lol)...

---

I had to laugh when I got back to my incubator a few hours after posting the above and found my first spider gene baby ever had hatched:

http://snakemorphs.com/images/201206...blebelly01.jpg

I think she is a pastel spider yellow belly (has some dark speckling at the edge of the belly that doesn't show in this pic). Both her grandmothers have produced 14 egg clutches and reached over 4,500 grams. How can I not keep her, lol. At least I guess I can sell off her just spider mom to free up a slot for her. The last egg of the clutch seems to have something similar, maybe even with chocolate. Watch it be a male I also just can't stand not to keep and I'll end up totally eating my words and raising up a PAIR of spiders gene animals ... That’s what I get for shooting off my mouth.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RandyRemington

http://snakemorphs.com/images/201206...blebelly01.jpg

---

If I were you I'd be more than happy to eat my words! Congrats on a beautiful baby!

personally i will not make an effort to, nor will i make and effort to avoid breeding spider x spider. while i like the spider gene and have a pair of them, and will have more in the future, it is not a gene i will be focusing on as a main stand point. "wobble" unless it is severe i do not concern myself with it, "Lethal" unless i know 100% for a fact that This x That is lethal, i will not avoid anything in the future. I think the majority will not set out to prove what your asking about, just financially a bust option in my opinion. if it happens it happens, but i think it will be proven by accident, but i seriously doubt it will be a game changer in the Spider Gene aspect if it ever proves otherwise.

Personally I avoid the spider gene because of the wobble. It just doesn't sit well with me to be breeding that. If I were to find a female spider for very cheap or was given one my plans might change, as I do like many spider combos, but for now I am avoiding spider altogether.

I am not breeding spider to spider just like I am not breeding pin to pin or any dom to each other for that mater, reason is: I am looking forward to produce combos not more of the same, just like I could not care less about producing a super that would look no different than any other animals in the clutch.

Note: I do not believe Spider to Spider is lethal.

I am not involved in any spider projects at this time. If I was, I would mate spider x spider intentionally.

My personal theory is that yes, a homozygous spider is possible and worth proving out. No I dont think two straight up spiders could do it. We've seen so many failed clutches and slugs from Spider x Spider. Maybe we just need to add another X gene to the mix that will create the spiders homozygous form without linking it to the nervous system(or at least making it not quite so bad)

I plan on breeding spiders, but I want that to be on the back burner. My other prjects wil involve spider genes, and if we keep adding new and different patterns and genetic information, eventually it may be able to hatch out.

I could be completely wrong, but at the very least this is what I would like to believe.

What about the "I'm trying to cut back on spider gene mutations as they are overdone!"

The spider gene is no longer really interesting to me. We have 4 animals that carry the spider gene right now a breeder spider Female, a Female Bumble bee Proven breeder, a Female Queen bee that should be ready next season, and a male spider PH VPI Axanthic. I really want to get into a full blown genetic banded mutation project. I had to restart the proving of my own line this year due to the lose of a key animal in the project during our move from Ohio to Michigan last year.

I don't have the money and I already have a fairly long wish list complete with what I want to eventually create... none have the spider gene in them. The biggest reasons are that quite honestly the spider gene is used so much already that I don't see the point in breeding my own since they are readily available if I really see the need. Also, wobble isn't something I want to play around with. Watching a baby grow up and it's wobble grow with it would make me sad :tears: I'm a big softie when it comes to snakes.

I am currently incubating 7 eggs from a bee x bee. They are a friends eggs. I would not do this combo for reasons of no genetic gain with the spider gene. So I guess I will know in a month alot about the affects! Ill keep y'all posted. So far so good?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by snake8myelbo

I am currently incubating 7 eggs from a bee x bee. They are a friends eggs. I would not do this combo for reasons of no genetic gain with the spider gene. So I guess I will know in a month alot about the affects! Ill keep y'all posted. So far so good?

---

Definitely let us know how they develop, and if any die before hatching, etc.

I have heard several stories of people breeding spider to a normal and only getting spiders. Good odds, or supers... I suppose the only way to know would be to do it year after year and see.

Personally I hope a super form is never found.
The market is pretty well flooded with spiders and spider combo's, if there were super spiders then spiders might be worth what a normal is and combo's would plummet in price.

No?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by snakesRkewl

Personally I hope a super form is never found.
The market is pretty well flooded with spiders and spider combo's, if there were super spiders then spiders might be worth what a normal is and combo's would plummet in price.

No?

---

I would think the opposite, if we found out there it wasn't homozygous lethal, there might be new interest in them. I mean there's already a proven pinstripe, daddy gene, and congo and you don't see them going for normal prices.

so does anyone have a picture of a super pinstripe?

I'm not a big fan of spiders and my focus is on other projects. Some of their combos are visually appealing animals but with the neuro issues and the overabundance of the base morph on the market, I don't have any interest in working with them or trying to prove anything regarding their genetics. Each to their own and if the spider genetics are in the Flatline, welllllll...it won't be the first or the last time I'll eat crow if that's the case, lol!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OhhWatALoser

I would think the opposite, if we found out there it wasn't homozygous lethal, there might be new interest in them. I mean there's already a proven pinstripe, daddy gene, and congo and you don't see them going for normal prices.

---

Please show us where some proof of these homozygous dominate snakes are, you know just like anything else, pictures or it didn't happen.
Call me a skeptic until actual real proof is shown, Has Brian shown pictures of multiple clutches of eggs with all pinstripes in them, or are we still hiding the evidence and expecting people to believe it on his word?

My statement on the price of spiders and pins was based on the fact that if any of these mutations actually gets spread into the hobby the amount of spiders/pinstripes would be so great as to plummet their prices.
Oh wait, that's already being done...and we don't have any homozygous dominate trait in the hobby "that we know of".
Supply is already outstripping demand, how would making all spiders in a clutch or all pinstripes in a clutch help the hobby?

Quote:

---

Rickys_Reptiles
I have heard several stories of people breeding spider to a normal and only getting spiders. Good odds, or supers

---

Not good odds or supers, just rumors until someone actually shows proof.
No pics, just rumors, that's all it ever is.

I'm open to the idea that any of these homozygous mutations might exist BUT SHOW ME THE PROOF :rolleye2:

I'm working with pieds, and the spider gene simply isn't my favorite pied combo. I admit, I do also feel pretty terrible every time I see a spider wobble. BUT... I might be lending out my axanthic female to a zebra bee project this year. That'll be my first foray into working with spiders.

I'm still pretty unlikely to ever breed for homozygous spiders. I've already got a lot going on with the pied projects, and I'd much rather sit and wait until we have more information about the health of the homozygous babies.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by snakesRkewl

Please show us where some proof of these homozygous dominate snakes are, you know just like anything else, pictures or it didn't happen.

---

They do look just like heterozygous pinstripes...so you might have seen photos already, lol.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by snakesRkewl

Supply is already outstripping demand, how would making all spiders in a clutch or all pinstripes in a clutch help the hobby?

---

On what planet is supply outstripping demand for spiders? I have no problems selling any spider I put up for sale, quickly. The morph is still extremely popular, and it's a favorite among beginning breeders, since it's affordable.

When you can't sell a morph for the price of a normal, then you can say supply is outstripping demand.

Even the supply of normal ball pythons is NOT outstripping the demand for them. In spite of the thousands of captive-hatch babies imported from Africa, I still have 0 problems selling out my normals every year, and I actually sell them out before I sell out my morphs. I've never had a year where I had left over normals.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by snakesRkewl

Please show us where some proof of these homozygous dominate snakes are, you know just like anything else, pictures or it didn't happen.
Call me a skeptic until actual real proof is shown, Has Brian shown pictures of multiple clutches of eggs with all pinstripes in them, or are we still hiding the evidence and expecting people to believe it on his word?

I'm open to the idea that any of these homozygous mutations might exist BUT SHOW ME THE PROOF :rolleye2:

---

Proof? here you go http://www.bhbreptiles.com/main.aspx?Page=contact get it straight him. what he will tell you is is he breed a pin to a pin, got a male from that, that male ended up fathering 27 eggs, all of them pinstripe. chances of a heterozygous animal doing that are 1 in 134,217,728. He never thought to take pictures it looked like any other pinstripe, or if he has them he doesn't know if it is the homozygous or not, the hobby wasn't like it is now back then. Besides what would be the point of taking pictures of clutches? want to play conspiracy theorist? he can just take out the normals and take picture of pins, or take multiple clutches and put all the pins in one picture. really doesn't "prove" a whole lot when you want to call someone a liar, you are always going to find a way to pick something apart. Brian never announced homozygous pinstripe exists. all he did is tell people his results to people who asked him directly. We took his results and made a conclusion.

and here is a no doubt 100% proven homozygous dominant trait, http://www.ralphdavisreptiles.com/bi...thons_8_07.asp clutch 76. pictures and everything for you. unless RD is a liar also.

and i was going to send you a link to vin russos results with the congo gene, but he apparently has changed his site. guess ill do this crazy thing and email him about it :O

If the proof isn't good enough for you, sorry your out of luck.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by WingedWolfPsion

In spite of the thousands of captive-hatch babies imported from Africa, I still have 0 problems selling out my normals every year, and I actually sell them out before I sell out my morphs. I've never had a year where I had left over normals.

---

This exactly, I used to wonder why it always seems to work this way. I think most people buying a ball python as a pet really don't care that much about the morphs at first, that interest comes later. Initially I think they're more interested in the price and normals are always the least expensive.

so the search continues for actual proof....I will not ask Brian to prove anything.
As a breeder who take pictures of everything, why wouldn't Brian take pictures of his clutches, especially something like this where a pinstripe produces nothing but pinstripes?
I guess we only have his word for it, the search for proof continues...

Quote:

---

and here is a no doubt 100% proven homozygous dominant trait, http://www.ralphdavisreptiles.com/bi...thons_8_07.asp clutch 76. pictures and everything for you. unless RD is a liar also.

---

RDR produced 1 animal from a 4 egg clutch platty X platty and that somehow proves something??
Please explain how 1 baby snake proves a homozygous dominate trait?
Did I miss something there?

The supply is larger than the demand which is why pinstripes and spiders are so inexpensive. Supply and demand always dictates price, bring on the homozygous spiders and pins and those morphs will most likely be sold at the same price as normals, or very close.

Quote:

---

If the proof isn't good enough for you, sorry your out of luck.

---

I just ask for evidence, not words, actual proof.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by snakesRkewl

RDR produced 1 animal from a 4 egg clutch platty X platty and that somehow proves something??
Please explain how 1 baby snake proves a homozygous dominate trait?
Did I miss something there?

---

Male:	Platinum
Female:	Platinum
Percent	Fraction	Traits
25%	1/4	Super Daddy Gene
50%	1/2	Platinum
25%	1/4	Blue Eye'd Leucistic
View Results Page

Well that animal is not a BEL, nor is it a Platty..... what's left? All it takes is one animal.

as for brian, he proved it out well before snakebytes or his internet fame. again times were different back then, whats amazing about an animal that looks exactly like the heterozygous? all it does it make more heterozygous. Fast forward a few years, now i guess it is something special. but you can either believe he actually hit the 134 mil chance with a heterozygous or think he's a liar. I don't see how random clutch pictures prove anything who thinks either of those two. Sounds like you're going to have to prove it out yourself, I don't know what else would satisfy you.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Anatopism

Most recent debate on the topic can be seen here: Proving Dominant Traits
I want to know where everybody falls on the topic of trying to 'prove out' perceived dominant traits, and more specifically, proving out a homozygous spider. I am more interested in the poll results, and less interested in any discussion that may follow on this thread, unless a comment is specifically to clarify a poll result, or answer. If people would like to contribute to the debate, they can add on to the thread above, or other existing threads that I'm sure are bound to come up in the future on the same topic.

---

you may get more accurate poll results if there weren't rumors still flying around homozygous lethal "facts" and there being no such thing as other homozygous dominant traits. but still I think the poll results are pretty clear