Leopard : Not Allelic?

Despite the trend of people proving out their leopards to be het pied and still I have yet to hear of someone proving one not to be het pied. Looks like a lot of people got lucky. http://forums.kingsnake.com/view.php?id=2017839,2017839

Quote:

---

In 2013 we bred a Spider Piebald (from a Leopard x Spider Leopard breeding theorizing that is was a Super Leopard) to 3 females for a total of 23 eggs. None of the offspring were Leopard. We are now convinced that the Leopard gene and the Piebald gene can be separated.

To further support our theory we have been made aware of 2 other Super Leopards that were not Piebalds. One of which is owned by Markus Jayne and was proven after producing 5 clutches with 100% of the offspring displaying the Leopard trait.

---

Looks like it is just another dominant trait. Kinda interesting how that pied gene stuck along those leopards for so long. Also he brought up the value of them at the end of the post. I wonder do you think Leopard het pieds will increase in value or just the regular leopards will decrease with this new info? Leopard no doubt does some pretty cool things regardless.

how if it produced a super is it not an incomplete dominant trait?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by snakesRkewl

how if it produced a super is it not an incomplete dominant trait?

---

The heterozygous and homozygous forms look the same, that is the definition of dominant.

Besides being sexed linked on the w chromosome or something actually preventing the snakes from reproducing, such as desert females fertility issues or homozgyous lethal animals, everything should have a super form.

Dominant, Inc-dom, Co-dom, recessive are just classifcation based off how the animal looks in heterozgyous/homozygous form. Genetics still works the same no matter what you call it.

I would like to see these two side by side, has greg released any pics showing they look the same?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by snakesRkewl

I would like to see these two side by side, has greg released any pics showing they look the same?

---

not that I know of, I would be interested also.

Interesting that not much has been said about this?

hmmm... Brian from BHB had a "super pinstripe" that produced nothing but pins long enough to convince him it was homozygous. turned out not to be. just crazy odds. interesting though. in the writing he keeps mentioning "separating" the leopard gene from the piebald. i was under the impression that the leopard gene WAS a piebald gene. just a more visual het form of one.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TheSnakeGeek

hmmm... Brian from BHB had a "super pinstripe" that produced nothing but pins long enough to convince him it was homozygous. turned out not to be. just crazy odds. interesting though. in the writing he keeps mentioning "separating" the leopard gene from the piebald. i was under the impression that the leopard gene WAS a piebald gene. just a more visual het form of one.

---

where'd ya hear that, because I've never heard that from Brian.

Some people don't get heavily into the genetics stuff, for some reason linked genes seem to be easier to understand than allelic genes, they function the same for the conversation most people have so it works I guess. Just the odds and some mechanics are the problem, but most people don't get into that far.

I did said greg and email also, hopefully he gets back to me

take it with a grain of salt, because part of it is hearsay. lol but i kept hearing rumors all over the place that brian had a super pinstripe. not sure if people were just repeating what they read someone else say on forums or if there was any truth to it. then someone eventually told me there was an old interview with brian about it. not sure if it was on herp herp hooray or where. i searched for it for a while but never found it. supposedly on the interview brian said he had a pinstripe that produced some crazy number of nothing but pins over the years and he believed it to be a "super." i was kinda skeptical, so i asked brian about it and he said there was no "super pin." so IF the rumors were true and there was an interview with brian saying this, then he murdered some odds and later found out it wasn't a super.

it's interesting though. i was planning on doing some leopard x pied breedings eventually. i guess time will tell. lol

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TheSnakeGeek

so i asked brian about it and he said there was no "super pin."

---

Very interesting, I have also asked Brian the same thing and was told the opposite. The story right form his mouth was 23 eggs all pins and that he no longer had the animal. Whether it died or was sold I have no idea. He even showed me some females that he said were possible super pins.

I think my female pin reabsorbed, I was disappointed. But ill be trying the same pairing next year, hopefully I can try to prove out some super pins eventually.

oh.

actually it sounds like bad news for me. i think its just super cool and awesome that all leopards are het pied; and now its no longer true because someone managed to split the two things apart.

i guess the classic pied-maker leopards will now be the premium version, with the isolated leopards being more of a curiosity.

BTW the mechanism how this can happen is quite clear. if different genes are on different chromosomes they just get randomly distributed during reproduction. if two genes are on the same chromosome, but far apart within that chromosome, its still pretty much random because crossovers that can combine both onto the same cromosome or that can split them up again are likely to occur between those two locations. crossovers happen frequently, and if there is lots of space where crossovers can happen between the two genes, it will happen basically all the time.

if two genes are on the same chromosome and closer together, chances of a crossover happening between the two genes drop down. the closer they are together, the harder it is to combine them, and when they combine, they will stick together to a degree.

if two genes are incredibly close together on the same chromosome, basically almost allelic, then to split them you need a crossover to happen at exactly the right location. which is very unlikely. so you can work with your pied-maker leopards for years without such a split happening in your breeding operation.

that might be whats going on here. so leopard and pied are almost perfectly allelic but still have some base pairs of distance between them.

Regarding the homozygous pin, maybe the problem is the definition of the herper genetic slang "super". Perhaps if Brian said there was no super pin he meant there was no visually different looking homozygous pinstripe (that is, pinstripe was proven NOT to be co-dominant). Perhaps he was just confirming his reptileradio.net interview giving the evidence that pinstripe is dominant via his proven homozygous pin male.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RandyRemington

Regarding the homozygous pin, maybe the problem is the definition of the herper genetic slang "super". Perhaps if Brian said there was no super pin he meant there was no visually different looking homozygous pinstripe (that is, pinstripe was proven NOT to be co-dominant). Perhaps he was just confirming his reptileradio.net interview giving the evidence that pinstripe is dominant via his proven homozygous pin male.

---

very well could be the case, I mean I know what he told me and everything we discussed but me typing it makes it 2nd hand to everyone else. Either way I'll be trying to prove out some homozygous pins eventually. My pin female is the start of a dinker project. Gave me some interesting babies, so I'll breeding her lemonblast son back to her. So I want to see if I can get anything to come from the dinker side and also I'll be making some possible super pins. I know of 2 other people that already have possible super pins, so hopefully in the next few years someone can come forth with some data and pictures of a proven super.

maybe you could tackle the super pin question statistically?

if it is mysteriously absent, pin to pin would give you 66% pinstripes. if it exists and is just hiding really well, pin to pin would result in 75% pins.

now 66% and 75% are rather close together, but with enough clutches and enough eggs your actual results will get closer and closer to one of these two numbers. and with some potential super pins involved in some of the breedings, the number will even be above 75%. with good record keeping, you can also add older pin to pin clutches from the past into the statistics. just make sure you remove any split sire clutches and "whos your daddy" clutches.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pythonfriend

maybe you could tackle the super pin question statistically?

if it is mysteriously absent, pin to pin would give you 66% pinstripes. if it exists and is just hiding really well, pin to pin would result in 75% pins.

now 66% and 75% are rather close together, but with enough clutches and enough eggs your actual results will get closer and closer to one of these two numbers. and with some potential super pins involved in some of the breedings, the number will even be above 75%. with good record keeping, you can also add older pin to pin clutches from the past into the statistics. just make sure you remove any split sire clutches and "whos your daddy" clutches.

---

I think it would be quicker just to attempt to prove out some possible super pins. After X amount of failed attempts, might start to question whats going on.