A Breeder jumped down my throat at Tinley...

So, out of every vendor that I dealt with, it ended up being a breeder that was there with someone that is local to me that I see almost every other week at the Scott Smith's All Animal Expo. I was asking some questions about a new "morph" that he had available called "gold dust" and when the words "Co-Dominant" came out of my mouth he jumped down my throat and I got a rather lengthy lecture about ball python genetics that didn't sit well with me. If he is right, then I have been ignorant for too long, and if he's wrong, I need to know I am right.

Does anyone have any links to scientific papers that study the specific genetics of Ball Pythons?


The Crux of the lecture:

Ball Pythons do NOT have "Co-Domininat" morphs, they only have "Visual Recessives". He spouted off some names of people that TBH I didn't recognize, but I really need to find the truth here for my own sanity.

He spouted some things like having a Pastel F bred to a non-Pastel M and producing a Super Pastel through Parthenogenesis. He honestly hacked me off with his attitude so I wasn't giving him the time of day.

I did go back and tell the Vendor that his "buddy" drove me away from his stall with his lecture. I had planned to pickup my new gene from him, as I had been eyeballing one for a while, but I opted to spend money elsewhere after having to walk away.

I think it's semantics. Honestly, if someone gets "triggered" from something so trivial, you were right to avoid them.

Here is an explanation. And..he was rude! https://hobart.k12.in.us/jkousen/Biology/inccodom.htm

Personally I don't know or care what the right answer is/was, who needs a rude vendor? Hiss on him! :snake:

Yeah, some breeders like to pretend they are geneticists or something, but truth is that terminology isn't as important as knowing how the genes behave together.

Sometimes people just suck, plain and simple. Hope he didn’t ruin you day anymore then it was worth. Sorry you couldn’t just enjoy yourself at the show as planned. Vent it out, Peace. I used to go to Lee Watson’s all the time. Haven’t made it to Scott Smiths, got some serious health issues mornings aren’t fun. :)

Visual recessive is how I like to see it too, but every breeder knows that we use “co dominant” as the term for “visual recessive”. So it doesn’t really matter to us hobbyists, we know how it works!

Certainly a trivial nothing to get angry about! I know I wouldn’t talk to someone like that!

Sent from my iPhone using Crapatalk.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sunnieskys

Here is an explanation. And..he was rude! https://hobart.k12.in.us/jkousen/Biology/inccodom.htm

---

This is what I am looking for. No time now as I am mid-move and loading a trailer, but I'll read it when I get back to Texas.

In regards, the person who was renting the booth said breeder was sharing is a local to me and in general a nice guy to deal with. I think he's a little rougher with his snakes than I would be, but he's not a bad guy. I went back after said breeder was gone and let him know that I did not buy a new gene from him specifically because of the way that his breeder cohort treated me because I think he has the right to know.

No one upset me at all at NARBC to be honest, anyone that does I just zone them out and shake my head and smile until they shut up. Maybe that's a bad thing, but nobody is going to get my Fung out of Shui. lol.

Once we're settled in Texas I need to post some updated collection pictures. I'll do that too.

Thanks again everyone. I'm a man that makes my money off what I know and what can regurgitate accurately, so even thinking that my hobby knowledge was sub-par would have bothered me. 10/10 forum, would post again :D

Best regards,

Paul

Good luck with the move...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bogertophis

Good luck with the move...

---

Thank you sir! I'm 98% loaded, the last things to go are going into the cab of the truck with me and I'm pulling a 6x12 Uhaul trailer (the dual axle one).

(7) snakes are going into a bag and then into a shipping boxes, I've got newspaper prepared to make them all little nest slots so they don't jostle too much. Then I've got the large rat colony grow out tub and (2) nursing female rats going into the cab with the last of my stuff.

Leaving Buffalo Grove at 5pm and headed to Rockford to see a friend before hauling ass to Texas. I-39, to I-55, to I-44, to the backroads of Texas to home.

Here we go!

"See" you on the other side! :cool: (and I'm not a "sir" ;))

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bogertophis

"See" you on the other side! :cool: (and I'm not a "sir" ;))

---

My apologies. I honestly had no clue. No offense intended!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pbenner

My apologies. I honestly had no clue. No offense intended!

---

I know & none taken ;)...it's just that so many here seem to think I'm a guy that I'm considering a sex-change...:rofl:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bogertophis

I know & none taken ;)...it's just that so many here seem to think I'm a guy that I'm considering a sex-change...:rofl:

---

Isn't that called an addadictome? :D

I think we should be able to add 1.0 or 0.1 after our names to reduce confusion. :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dianne

I think we should be able to add 1.0 or 0.1 after our names to reduce confusion. :D

---

That's a great idea! :D

Maybe i shouldn't say this but based on what I've seen from the reptitubers a lot of partying and such goes on at tinley. You may have dealt with a guy that was not entirely in his right mind and caused him to act differently than he normally would have. Just a thought :)
Either way you acted fine and you weren't wrong so all is well! I wouldn't buy from anyone like that either.

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pbenner

If he is right, then I have been ignorant for too long, and if he's wrong, I need to know I am right.

---

Fairly certain I know who you are talking about and while I am not defending his behaviour I will just say that is his personality. Assuming it was who I think then I am guessing he quite likely butchered any explanation he has heard in the past, most of which he got from me (guessing my name may have been one of those he tossed out as well), again, because that is his personality.


To answer your question about co-dom... Give this a listen, it should help you :gj:


http://www.blogtalkradio.com/morelia...tic-roundtable

The correct term is incomplete dominant. But co-dominant was used for a very long time by many breeders and hobbyists to refer to morphs that followed that method of gene expression, and everyone knows that, so why he randomly decides to jump down your throat..... who knows.

Also, “visual recessive” may be the way he LIKES to think about it - but that’s not an actual thing, as far as I’m aware (but I’m no geneticist). By definition, a recessive gene is not visually expressed in heterozygous individuals. That is what makes something dominant - the fact that it affects the phenotype when only one copy of the gene is present.

So you were both wrong [emoji23] again, as far as I can surmise.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by asplundii

Fairly certain I know who you are talking about and while I am not defending his behaviour I will just say that is his personality. Assuming it was who I think then I am guessing he quite likely butchered any explanation he has heard in the past, most of which he got from me (guessing my name may have been one of those he tossed out as well), again, because that is his personality.


To answer your question about co-dom... Give this a listen, it should help you :gj:


http://www.blogtalkradio.com/morelia...tic-roundtable

---

I listened to this on the start of my ride down to Texas. Exactly what I was looking for. Thank you so much.

Paul

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pbenner

I listened to this on the start of my ride down to Texas. Exactly what I was looking for. Thank you so much.

Paul

---

Glad to be of help :gj:

As for parthenogenesis, a female will produce exact copies of herself, with the lack of male presence. If at any time a male was introduced to that female it is extremely unlikely the clutch would be a partho clutch unless all the babies were exact copies of the mother, which could still happen when bred normally.

It would not be possible for a pastel female to make super pastels by partho. The male was probably just low quality pastel or the female could have been a low quality super.

- - - Updated - - -

Also, what part of Texas are you moving to? I'm up in Wichita Falls.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eramyl

As for parthenogenesis, a female will produce exact copies of herself, with the lack of male presence. If at any time a male was introduced to that female it is extremely unlikely the clutch would be a partho clutch unless all the babies were exact copies of the mother, which could still happen when bred normally.

It would not be possible for a pastel female to make super pastels by partho. The male was probably just low quality pastel or the female could have been a low quality super.

- - - Updated - - -

Also, what part of Texas are you moving to? I'm up in Wichita Falls.

---

Well, based on information I have since gathered I am convinced that the guy in question didn't quite understand what he was trying to teach or discuss. Even if he did he couldn't put it into a cohesive structure.

I'm not going to get into a debate about something I barely have a toothpick to stand on. :D

In regards to where; I drove through Wichita Falls early this morning. I live in Brady now. I saw there was a show up there a while back, but opted not to go.

Best,

Paul

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pbenner

My apologies. I honestly had no clue. No offense intended!

---

Don't sweat it, Paul. You're not the 1st as I've done the exact same thing. I think if BogerChic would (cough) post a pic (cough) then maybe we wouldn't be so quick to say otherwise. ;)

I've been on both sides of genetics lectures, so I sympathize with both sides. :) Nevertheless, there is a time and place for them, and a reptile sale probably isn't either.

To answer the codominant question, here is a quote:
"In his law of dominance, Mendel did not accommodate different degrees of dominance. As such examples were discovered (Bateson 1913), various new terms were introduced. Within and between textbooks of genetics definitions are inconsistent. Various names have been used: partial dominance, incomplete dominance, codominance, lack or absence of dominance, intermediate dominance, imperfect dominance, egalitarian dominance, and transdominance. The definitions vary from text to text and depend on interpretation of allelic function, although an allele’s function is seldom known and often must be assumed. In all these usages there is one consistent aspect; each genotype has a distinguishable phenotype, and the genotype may be inferred from the phenotype. Perhaps none of the terms that have been used are all-inclusive, but some such term is desirable for teaching purposes. We have chosen the term codominance as simplest, shortest, and adequately inclusive. One can still use specialized sub-definitions for well-analyzed cases. In our more that 20 years of teaching this method has worked well."

From Miller, W. J. and Hollander, W. F., 1995, Three neglected advances in classical genetics, BioScience 45: 98-104. Available on Miller's web site, www.ringneckdove.com.

Any breeder would probably find the whole paper worth reading.

That was the first show we have had up here. The vendors had some cool stuff but not a lot pf people buying just yet. Saw a lot of curious kids and scared parents handling animals though. Hopefully it'll get things going up here. I'm glad your trip wasn't eventful.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eramyl

As for parthenogenesis, a female will produce exact copies of herself, with the lack of male presence. If at any time a male was introduced to that female it is extremely unlikely the clutch would be a partho clutch unless all the babies were exact copies of the mother, which could still happen when bred normally.

It would not be possible for a pastel female to make super pastels by partho. The male was probably just low quality pastel or the female could have been a low quality super..

---

That is not correct Eramyl. In parthenogenesis the female produces half-clones of herself so a female Pastel that threw a partho clutch would produce only SuperPastels and normals.

And it is also very possible for females to throw partho clutches when exposed to males. I have an animal that has done it at least twice and Warren Booth has documented a slew of cases

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by asplundii

That is not correct Eramyl. In parthenogenesis the female produces half-clones of herself so a female Pastel that threw a partho clutch would produce only SuperPastels and normals.

And it is also very possible for females to throw partho clutches when exposed to males. I have an animal that has done it at least twice and Warren Booth has documented a slew of cases

---

I thought that this was the case as well, but like I said, I am not far enough along in my understanding to try to stand up in this argument.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pbenner

I listened to this on the start of my ride down to Texas. Exactly what I was looking for. Thank you so much.

Paul

---

What part of Texas? I am south of Houston. If close enough we should have a herping day where we share the love of our animals.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Skyrivers

What part of Texas? I am south of Houston. If close enough we should have a herping day where we share the love of our animals.

---

I'm in Brady, Tx - I'll be headed to San Antonio for the show at the end of the month if you want to meet up on Saturday. I'll be doing quite a few others just to get out of a town of 5500 people on the regular. lol

Paul

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pbenner

Ball Pythons do NOT have "Co-Domininat" morphs, they only have "Visual Recessives". He spouted off some names of people that TBH I didn't recognize, but I really need to find the truth here for my own sanity.

---

Visual recessive is a hobby term for homozygous recessive, which the correct term would be just recessive. Doesn't describe co-dom/inc-dom

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pbenner

He spouted some things like having a Pastel F bred to a non-Pastel M and producing a Super Pastel through Parthenogenesis.

---

That has nothing to do with anything..... how did they prove it was parthenogenesis? There are other anomalies to cause that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dianne

I think we should be able to add 1.0 or 0.1 after our names to reduce confusion. :D

---

OWAL 0.0.1