Breeding daughters to fathers

So lets say you want to make a albino pied. So when you breed a pied and a albino, you get Dh albino pieds. My question is, if you hold back 2 females from the clutch and breed them to the father, would that be safe? No harm Involved?

Correct. Perfectly fine.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by danielwilu2525

So lets say you want to make a albino pied. So when you breed a pied and a albino, you get Dh albino pieds. My question is, if you hold back 2 females from the clutch and breed them to the father, would that be safe? No harm Involved?

---

If you want to make an Albino Pied why would you breed the DH back to the sire?

If you want to make an Albino pied you want to holdback 1.2 and breed them together.

Sent from my SM-T320 using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Deborah

If you want to make an Albino Pied why would you breed the DH back to the sire?

If you want to make an Albino pied you want to holdback 1.2 and breed them together.

Sent from my SM-T320 using Tapatalk

---

What Deborah says

to give you an example,

I did breed a Clown to a Orange Ghost,

If I would keep 2 females and breed to my Clown male the best I would get are Clowns that are possible het. Orange Ghost. So you really want to keep 1 male too so you can do double het X double het.

depending on the sex ratio of that clutch I'll be keeping 1.2 or 1.3

It's safe to breed clutch mates? I recently read a couple of threads on here that state that It can be really bad. Using dogs Inbreeding as an example. Sorry If I'm not seeing the point here.

Actually even in dogs you can double or triple up depending what traits you are breeding for.
Reptiles are completly different.

Always matters to get 2nd opinions. Thanks!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by danielwilu2525

I recently read a couple of threads on here that state that It can be really bad.

---

I always like to use the "Frog Pond" example. Here in north central Florida, about 5 miles west of Newberry, there's a small pond in the middle of large cattle operation and it's the only full time body of water for at least 2 square miles. The pond's been there for as long as I can remember and the thing is chock full of frogs. I couldn't even begin to guess how many generations of inbred frogs have lived and died in that pond. I was over there about three weeks ago and didn't see a single frog with 3 eyes or 5 legs.

Like Pit said, reptiles are completely different.

Well that clears out any doubts for me, thanks man!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Slim

I always like to use the "Frog Pond" example. ... Like Pit said, reptiles are completely different.

---

And amphibians too. :)

Inbreeding depression happens in plants and insects. It's not just an issue with mammals.

I would imagine that if a high COI caused reproduction issues and failure to thrive in corn, fruit flies, and rats that it might be a good idea to keep that percentage down in snakes too.

The occasional line breeding is fine. A few sibling breedings here and there, breeding off spring back to its parent - it's not like you are going to have deformed clutches in one breeding season. Probably not even 2 or 3. Heck maybe not even more after that. But still, i think it might be best to avoid inbreeding generation after generation. Out crossing every so often for genetic diversity seems to be a good bet for most living things.

Inbreeding doesn't generally cause any issues. It can bring issues to light, IF there are issues in the genes of the family line. When the family has no issues, like most reptiles, then it's not going to spontaneously cause an issue to erupt.

Many labs that breed rodents in-house have had the same colony without any introduced blood for years and years. The rats are all fine. Those are even mammals. They simply had all the issues eliminated early on in the colony's life.

The frog pond is a great example also.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eric Alan

And amphibians too. :)

---

Thank you! I was typing in a hurry on my way out the door :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Slim

I always like to use the "Frog Pond" example. Here in north central Florida, about 5 miles west of Newberry, there's a small pond in the middle of large cattle operation and it's the only full time body of water for at least 2 square miles. The pond's been there for as long as I can remember and the thing is chock full of frogs. I couldn't even begin to guess how many generations of inbred frogs have lived and died in that pond. I was over there about three weeks ago and didn't see a single frog with 3 eyes or 5 legs.

Like Pit said, reptiles are completely different.

---

your logic is flawed, birds carry in frog eggs and what not. How do you think the frogs go there in the first place. Genetic diversity is always getting brought in.

Typically, line breeding parent to offspring is preferred to sibling-sibling pairing. as it still offers genetic diversity. say 50% gene match. Vs 100%. not really exact but good enough for demonstration.

If you do sibling-sibling it would be best to then bring back in diversity with unrelated snakes with the next generation

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by stretcharmy

Typically, line breeding parent to offspring is preferred to sibling-sibling pairing. as it still offers genetic diversity. say 50% gene match. Vs 100%. not really exact but good enough for demonstration.

If you do sibling-sibling it would be best to then bring back in diversity with unrelated snakes with the next generation

---

I agree with this for the most part if you are just breeding and want genetic diversity. However the op is asking if it's ok to breed back to the parent or sibling when breeding for a specific animal in this case albino pieds. Breeding back to the parent in this case or any case where the objective is to produce a specific mutation would be delayed or skewed. Because the sibling animal, as opposed to the parent, who is genetically more compatible in producing the desired outcome (morph).

Can't help but think of this with each and every reply that goes further and further down the rabbit hole:
http://s2.quickmeme.com/img/42/42552...2c9d1cd1e8.jpg

So how do the bigger breeders do this? Or are there collection so big it is not in play? I can see more parent/sibling breeding for the hobbyist. And from what I am reading it's ok to a point?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by stretcharmy

your logic is flawed, birds carry in frog eggs and what not. How do you think the frogs go there in the first place. Genetic diversity is always getting brought in.

---

Not sure that's enough to significantly turn over the batting order...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ceh23

So how do the bigger breeders do this? Or are there collection so big it is not in play? I can see more parent/sibling breeding for the hobbyist. And from what I am reading it's ok to a point?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

---

Take a look at how the morphs become established. If you are trying to prove out a mutation and there is only one animal to start with, regardless of how large your operation is you have to line breed.

People in general have a hard time wrapping their ethics around any sort of close breeding. Most humans have a social and maybe even inborn revulsion for it. There are many reasons genetic diversity is helpful in nature. It lessons the chance of a bad gene expressing itself and it can introduce new "better" genes.

That said if you as the breeder are trying to control outcomes line breeding is necessary. Many morphs started out with just one known animal. The only way to isolate the trait is to line breed it. Like Slim's frogs, if the population has good genes the offspring no matter how closely related will have good genes. Barring some horrible spontaneous mutation Slim's frogs can continually make healthy offspring. It is the breeder's responsibility to ascertain how healthy the gene pool is that he has to work with. If the breeder starts seeing negative things that are genetically linked then those combinations should not be attempted any longer.

A breeder that is intentionally trying to breed outside his resident gene pool, I think has a greater risk of introducing a bad gene than he has by line breeding his known healthy one.

Also in the case of dh's where the siblings are the genetic holders and the parents are the homozygous form. It's prudent to breed the siblings back to each other than to breed the single gene parent to the sibling. Unless of course the parent is het for the desired gene.

Think about the morphs we are all creating?
Almost none could or would exist in the wild, not for long at least.