Het Piebald, 100%? 50%?

Hi folks!

So I recently bought my first ball python at a reptile expo, and bought a little male Het Piebald. I never really thought about whether he was 50% or 100% or 66% or anything, because honestly, I've never considered breeding. I'm just a "bit" of a science nerd, and maybe because its 1:15am, I have myself a little confused :)

The little container he came in did not specify "percentage" of het piebald. I clearly remember him talking about how one of the snakes he bred was piebald, and he got no piebald offspring, and they were all male so he was really trying to sell them. Now, if one parent was Piebald, this would make the offspring 100% het, correct? Where as if both parents were Het, he could possibly only be 50%?

My little guy has the "black stripe" marker if you buy into that, and like I said, it's more a curiosity thing to me than a genuine "did I get what I paid for" type of thing. Just wanted to see if I had my thoughts in order, assuming that he is 100% Het for Piebald because one of his parents was Piebald.

Thanks for reading my ramblings!
--Kourtney

you can always try contacting the breeder

visual to normal= babbies 100% het (all look normal but carry the gene)
het to het=babbies 66% het (often times if no visual is produced seller sells them as 50% het if one snake is not proven before)
het to normal= 50% het (out of all the normal babbies half should carry the gene)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kourtneyhk

Hi folks!

So I recently bought my first ball python at a reptile expo, and bought a little male Het Piebald. I never really thought about whether he was 50% or 100% or 66% or anything, because honestly, I've never considered breeding. I'm just a "bit" of a science nerd, and maybe because its 1:15am, I have myself a little confused :)

The little container he came in did not specify "percentage" of het piebald. I clearly remember him talking about how one of the snakes he bred was piebald, and he got no piebald offspring, and they were all male so he was really trying to sell them. Now, if one parent was Piebald, this would make the offspring 100% het, correct? Where as if both parents were Het, he could possibly only be 50%?

My little guy has the "black stripe" marker if you buy into that, and like I said, it's more a curiosity thing to me than a genuine "did I get what I paid for" type of thing. Just wanted to see if I had my thoughts in order, assuming that he is 100% Het for Piebald because one of his parents was Piebald.

Thanks for reading my ramblings!
--Kourtney

---

Usually when they sell a het pied its 100%, otherwise they say possible het pied. If you remember the name of the breeder you can email and ask...

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I997 using Tapatalk 2

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by irishanaconda

het to normal= 50% het (out of all the normal babbies half should carry the gene)

---

I don't believe this is an accurate statement. Het to normal would allow every off spring to have a 50/50 chance of carrying the gene. But in this type of pairing, all, none, or some, of the hatchlings could have the recessive gene present.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rlditmars

I don't believe this is an accurate statement. Het to normal would allow every off spring to have a 50/50 chance of carrying the gene. But in this type of pairing, all, none, or some, of the hatchlings could have the recessive gene present.

---

"should", not "will"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OhhWatALoser

"should", not "will"

---

Agreed - but the distinction is also important. Many new keepers THINK "will", not "should"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rabernet

Agreed - but the distinction is also important. Many new keepers THINK "will", not "should"

---

Not to bust chops, but I think the distinction should actually be "could", not "should". No? I think "should" implies that eventually it has to. When the truth is, the probability always exists, but never does have to manifest.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rlditmars

Not to bust chops, but I think the distinction should actually be "could", not "should". No? I think "should" implies that eventually it has to. When the truth is, the probability always exists, but never does have to manifest.

---

No need to confuse the newbie. Simple question = simple answer

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rlditmars

Not to bust chops, but I think the distinction should actually be "could", not "should". No? I think "should" implies that eventually it has to. When the truth is, the probability always exists, but never does have to manifest.

---

I can agree with that. And you're not busting my chops - I was actually agreeing with you. ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zombie

Usually when they sell a het pied its 100%, otherwise they say possible het pied. If you remember the name of the breeder you can email and ask...

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I997 using Tapatalk 2

---

Yep, it should have said ph if it was less than 100%

Sent from my Samsung Aviator

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rlditmars

Not to bust chops, but I think the distinction should actually be "could", not "should". No? I think "should" implies that eventually it has to. When the truth is, the probability always exists, but never does have to manifest.

---

im still going with should. Could leaves open any possibility. They could all be het, they all could not be.

Should is most likely, not saying it has to manifest. It should, since that's the most likely outcome. Thats my take on it.

but yea to the OP, as said above, if it was pos het, it should of said pos het with a %.

If it is het, it is het, no % needed.

I like to think of it this way: In a Het x Normal pairing, each baby has a 50% chance of being a het. In a Het x Het pairing, each baby has a 66% chance of being a het.

I think that every time a breeder or seller or whoever posts an animal as "50% het" or "66% het" or what have you without including the words "possible" or "chance" (or even the letter "P!!") they should be fined fifty cents per infarction by the Accuracy Police. They can donate the money to the reptile-related cause of their choosing.

:rolleyes::P

That confuses new people so bloody much! :rage:

Haha, awesome! Thanks folks :) I was just thinking about it and decided to ask.

--Kourtney