Blue Eyed Leucistics - question regarding BluEL offspring

Hello

I have a quick question for those of you who have *adult* Blue-Eyed Leucistics that you have produced offspring from.

What morphs were your babies - and what were the "ingredients" in your BluEL?

I'm particularly interested to know if anyone has bred a Blue-eyed Leucistic to normals or other animals that do NOT produce BluEL offspring in any combination - and whether you ever hatched out normal offspring from that pairing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ssthisto

Hello

I have a quick question for those of you who have *adult* Blue-Eyed Leucistics that you have produced offspring from.

What morphs were your babies - and what were the "ingredients" in your BluEL?

I'm particularly interested to know if anyone has bred a Blue-eyed Leucistic to normals or other animals that do NOT produce BluEL offspring in any combination - and whether you ever hatched out normal offspring from that pairing.

---

Thats not possible. A blue-eyed leucistic is produced from (if I remember correctly) a pairing of lesser, mojave, or lemon. With lesser x lesser being the purest white. If you breed a blue-eyed leucistic to a normal you will get codominant offspring of the same kind used to make the BEL in the first place. So a lesser x lesser BEL will produce all lessers.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Egapal

Thats not possible. A blue-eyed leucistic is produced from (if I remember correctly) a pairing of lesser, mojave, or lemon. With lesser x lesser being the purest white. If you breed a blue-eyed leucistic to a normal you will get codominant offspring of the same kind used to make the BEL in the first place. So a lesser x lesser BEL will produce all lessers.

---

Just a minor correction. "..... a pairing of lesser, mojave, or lemon.." It is not a lemon. You probably meant butter. These produce BELs.

Any combination of those should produce BEL and whatever else you bred with it. If you breed a BEL to a normal you will just get lessers or Mojaves or Butters and no BEL.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Egapal

Thats not possible. A blue-eyed leucistic is produced from (if I remember correctly) a pairing of lesser, mojave, or lemon. With lesser x lesser being the purest white. If you breed a blue-eyed leucistic to a normal you will get codominant offspring of the same kind used to make the BEL in the first place. So a lesser x lesser BEL will produce all lessers.

---

That's what I had thought, but I would like people who have actually bred a BluEL to a non-"Whitesnake complex" morph to respond with the actual clutch tallies if possible.

Even one poster who hatched out a normal proves that at least the two genes that make up their BluEL are not allelic.

And Hyper Joe, aren't Russo het Leucistics also called "Russo Lemon Lines" ?

As far as I'm aware, the following appear to act allelic:

Lesser
Mojave
Butter
Phantom
Russo Lemon Line het Leucistic
"Mystery Dilute" (AKA "special", "crystal" or "hidden" depending on who you talk to)

You can't get normals though...the BEL is a super of the two parent snakes, be it Lesser x Lesser, Mojo x Mojo, Butter x Butter, or any mixture of the three. Since each parent snake gives off one gene a piece, from a BEL x Normal pair you will get (Lets say the BEL is Lesser x Lesser) all Lessers, because of the fact that the BEL is technically a Super Lesser and therefore can only give Lesser genes. And the Lesser morph is Codom so even one Lesser allele will throw visual offspring. If it were a Lesser x Mojo, half the offspring, statistically speaking, should be Lessers, the other half Mojaves. Same with Mojo x Butter. Same with Lesser x Butter, etc etc

So it's absolutely 100% no doubt about it PROVEN that Lesser, Mojave, Butter, Russo het Leucistic, Mystery Dilute and Phantom are all allelic?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hyper Joe

Just a minor correction. "..... a pairing of lesser, mojave, or lemon.." It is not a lemon. You probably meant butter. These produce BELs.

Any combination of those should produce BEL and whatever else you bred with it. If you breed a BEL to a normal you will just get lessers or Mojaves or Butters and no BEL.

---

Thanks, Yeah that was lazy of me. I could have easily looked it up. Thanks for the correction.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ssthisto

So it's absolutely 100% no doubt about it PROVEN that Lesser, Mojave, Butter, Russo het Leucistic, Mystery Dilute and Phantom are all allelic?

---

Yeah this is proven already.

A BEL is a super form, so it is impossible to produce normal offspring when bred to anything. It is possible to produce a BEL from any of the pairings or combo pairings of the following: lesser, butter, mojave, and Russo het Lucy. I do not know enough about the "special" or "crystal" morphs to say if they are compatible. I have never heard of a Russo Lemon het Lucy line. From what I understand the "Lemon" refers to N.E.R.D.'s lemon pastels. BTW, you do not have to breed these to understand the genetics. All of the above are Codoms, and it is a well known fact that a super form of a codom will yeild all Codom offspring when bred.

Hope this helps.

Interesting. There are high-end-morph breeders over here in the UK that swear blind that a visual Lesser can be a 50% possible het "Hidden"* and that a Blue-Eyed Leucistic can produce BluELs when bred to a normal** (I believe this discussion's been brought up once before, which is why I phrased it as "has anyone ever produced a normal out of a BluEL parent")... I disagreed, but was told that it's "just like a Bumblebee".

I'm glad to hear it's been proven that the traits are allelic and I'm not losing my marbles - has this been proven with ALL of the possible combinations, or is it just the Lesser / Mojave, Lesser / Phantom, Lesser / Hidden-mystery-dilute-special-daddy combinations, and everyone's extrapolating the rest?

* If the "hidden" gene that makes a Woma Lesser into a "Soul Sucker" is the same gene that makes a Lesser into a Platinum, it isn't possible for a Lesser to carry it invisibly - it's either a Lesser OR it's a Lesser / Hidden - AKA "Platty Daddy".

** I'd argued that Mojave and Lesser are allelic; they'd argued they're two separate morphs on two separate gene pairs.

It is possible to get normal's from a BEL breeding. If one of the BEL's parents was a normal carrying the lucy gene, which does happen, what do you think a Vin Russo Het Lucy is? They're really just normals that are Het BEL.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AaronP

It is possible to get normal's from a BEL breeding. If one of the BEL's parents was a normal carrying the lucy gene, which does happen, what do you think a Vin Russo Het Lucy is? They're really just normals that are Het BEL.

---

A BEL can not be a normal carrying the gene. A BEL is a super form. I think you may be referring at a lesser or Russo het Lucy, which is not a super form.

Interesting...

Here's another question... If you bred a Mojo to a Lesser and got a BEL, and then bred the BEL to a normal (no hidden genes involved), then would you get a clutch of Mojos and Lessers? Or is it not that simple? This is assuming that Mojo x Lesser can make BEL's.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by icygirl

Interesting...

Here's another question... If you bred a Mojo to a Lesser and got a BEL, and then bred the BEL to a normal (no hidden genes involved), then would you get a clutch of Mojos and Lessers? Or is it not that simple? This is assuming that Mojo x Lesser can make BEL's.

---

It is that simple.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wh00h0069

A BEL can not be a normal carrying the gene. A BEL is a super form. I think you may be referring at a lesser or Russo het Lucy, which is not a super form.

---

I didn't say a "Normal" is a BEL or could produce a BEL, I said that a BEL could produce Normals that are Het. Lucy.

Russo Het Lucy + Russo Het Lucy = Russo BEL

Russo BEL + Normal = Russo Het Lucys (Which Look like Normals)

People have produced BELs before from breeding Lessers, Mojaves, etc to "Normals" which turned out to be carrying the Lucy gene.

Mojave, Lessers, Russo het lucy/high yellow/lemon line, butters when combined with each other or with themselves can produce a super "lesser complex" blue eyed lucy.
A phantom combined with lesser has been proven to produce a BEL as well.
The homozygous form of the phantom is not a typical BEL.
The "hidden gene"/"Platty gene" plays no part in the creation of BELs.
No one knows for sure whether the woma hidden gene and lesser complex hidden gene have anything to do with each other yet, it is just a theory.
A BEL bred to any morph or normal will not produce normals because they pass one of their alleles down to the offspring making them at the least heterozygous for their respective trait.
A BEL or any super form is not the same as a bumblebee. You do not get any BELs in a clutch involving BEL X Normal, the bumblebee traits have the ability to produce themselves.
-Steven

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AaronP

I didn't say a "Normal" is a BEL or could produce a BEL, I said that a BEL could produce Normals that are Het. Lucy.

Russo Het Lucy + Russo Het Lucy = Russo BEL

Russo BEL + Normal = Russo Het Lucys (Which Look like Normals)

People have produced BELs before from breeding Lessers, Mojaves, etc to "Normals" which turned out to be carrying the Lucy gene.

---

Sorry to point out the false information you are attempting to pass on, BUT... a Russo het lucy is not a normal. They are distinguishable from normals making them a codom trait.
There are no "normal het lucies".
That is like saying that yellowbellies are normal het ivory. They are not normal looking.
-Steven

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by stevenkeogh

Sorry to point out the false information you are attempting to pass on, BUT... a Russo het lucy is not a normal. They are distinguishable from normals making them a codom trait.
There are no "normal het lucies".
That is like saying that yellowbellies are normal het ivory. They are not normal looking.
-Steven

---

*sigh*

I'll have to hunt down the RR show where a big breeder talked about "Surprises". I think it was a Barcyzk show but I'm not sure, at work right now.

And every Russo I've ever seen looked pretty darn normal to me, and a few breeders whom I've talked to about them. Just because you don't know about it doesn't mean I'm "spreading false information"

I'd also like to point out that I said they Look LIKE normals, but they aren't. It's a co-dominate trait because 50% of it's offspring will carry the lucy gene, well that applys to Het Albinos too you know, they look like normals but they carry the Albino gene with a 50% chance of passing on it's genes when bred to a normal. The homozygous form = Albino, no different for a Russo, except the Homozygous form = a BEL.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wh00h0069

It is that simple.

---

And..The lesser/mojave cross BEL produces a whiter head than the super mojave BEL.

I have a hard time telling normal's from Het lucy's, but the belly's give it away for me. They have a clear bell with no markings at all. Which I would say make them distinguishable and not like het for recessives

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AaronP

*sigh*

I'll have to hunt down the RR show where a big breeder talked about "Surprises". I think it was a Barcyzk show but I'm not sure, at work right now.

And every Russo I've ever seen looked pretty darn normal to me, and a few breeders whom I've talked to about them. Just because you don't know about it doesn't mean I'm "spreading false information"

I'd also like to point out that I said they Look LIKE normals, but they aren't. It's a co-dominate trait because 50% of it's offspring will carry the lucy gene, well that applys to Het Albinos too you know, they look like normals but they carry the Albino gene with a 50% chance of passing on it's genes when bred to a normal. The homozygous form = Albino, no different for a Russo, except the Homozygous form = a BEL.

---

straight from NERD... no they don't look normal, which is why its co-dom, you do know that albino is a recessive trait right?


Genetics
Co-dominant

The Russo het Leucistic is named for Vin Russo @ Cutting Edge Herp, who produced stunning, clean white Blue-Eyed Leucistics from breeding his "high yellow lemon" ball pythons together. To avoid confusion with other mutations sharing similar names, this particular bloodline has been dubbed the Russo het Leucistic. These are beautiful ball pythons, with bright pigmentation, white highlights & an unmarked belly. Russo het Leucistics often exhibit busy lateral patterns with a donut or "keyhole" shape. The resulting Blue-Eyed Leucistics from this line are extremely clean, bright white with minimal (if any) markings. Subsequent breedings have determined the Russo hets to be compatible with Mojaves in producing Blue-Eyed Leucies.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by stevenkeogh

Mojave, Lessers, Russo het lucy/high yellow/lemon line, butters when combined with each other or with themselves can produce a super "lesser complex" blue eyed lucy.
A phantom combined with lesser has been proven to produce a BEL as well.
The homozygous form of the phantom is not a typical BEL.
The "hidden gene"/"Platty gene" plays no part in the creation of BELs.

---

I'd personally argue that a homozygous Mojave isn't a BluEL either - almost but not quite. As for the Platty hidden gene, it certainly appears allelic to the rest based on the breeding results of Platties and Butter Daddies; just because it doesn't make a white snake when combined with the other alleles on the locus doesn't mean it's not the same gene :)

But then that's coming from a background in mouse colour genetics and seeing the different visual outputs from the six different traits on the Agouti locus (in order from most dominant to least: Dominant Viable Yellow, Dominant Lethal Yellow, Agouti, Tan, Self, Extreme Non-Agouti) - any of the six can be combined to get various visual outputs. A het-Tan / het-Extreme Non-Agouti looks totally different to a het-Agouti /het-Dominant Lethal Yellow.

As for normal-looking animals... I must admit that unless you catch him right after a shed, my Fire looks no different to a light, bright normal *unless you know the specific markers to look for* and my Pastel is not amazingly different to a CF baby we got from an import last year that is probably a light, bright normal too.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OhhWatALoser

straight from NERD... no they don't look normal, which is why its co-dom, you do know that albino is a recessive trait right?


Genetics
Co-dominant

The Russo het Leucistic is named for Vin Russo @ Cutting Edge Herp, who produced stunning, clean white Blue-Eyed Leucistics from breeding his "high yellow lemon" ball pythons together. To avoid confusion with other mutations sharing similar names, this particular bloodline has been dubbed the Russo het Leucistic. These are beautiful ball pythons, with bright pigmentation, white highlights & an unmarked belly. Russo het Leucistics often exhibit busy lateral patterns with a donut or "keyhole" shape. The resulting Blue-Eyed Leucistics from this line are extremely clean, bright white with minimal (if any) markings. Subsequent breedings have determined the Russo hets to be compatible with Mojaves in producing Blue-Eyed Leucies.

---

I am aware that Albino is a recessive Gene, but the principles of passing on the gene that makes the homozygous form is no different.

You Breed a Mojave to a Normal, 50% chance of getting Mojave.
You breed a Het Albino to a Normal, 50% Chance that one of the babies will be Het Albino.

The only difference is that Mojave is a Visual Het of it's Super Form, Albinos don't have a Visual Het.

What's does a Albino, Hypo, Piebald, BEL, Super Phantom, and Ivory have in common? They're all Homozygous forms of their Heterozygous counter parts. There is a reason why people say that Yellow Bellies are Het Ivory. There are "Normals" out there that are Het Luecistic, Vin Russo is just a poor example that I used. I'll dig up the RR show and cut out the clip for you guys to listen to when I get a chance tonight/tomorrow night.

But a Blue-Eyed Leucistic doesn't HAVE to be a homozygous animal.

It can be het Mojave, het Lesser - it's heterozygous for two different alleles, even if there's no "normal-wildtype" gene at the locus.

I would like to see a citation for a visual normal animal that is heterozygous for a gene that will produce Blue-eyed Leucistics... that sounds interesting!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ssthisto

But a Blue-Eyed Leucistic doesn't HAVE to be a homozygous animal.

---

Nope it doesn't. Which, like any combo, it's very important to know whom it's parents were. :)

There seems to be a whole spectrum of apperences for mutations in this allele complex paired with normal. From lesser to Vin Russo (which while subtle is reported to be an identifialbe morph) to RDR's hidden that makes Platy combined with lesser some are obvious morphs to anyone but it might be that only the hidden is compleatly normal looking. Marshall Van Thorre bred a girl he purchased as a normal and produced BEL but she had enough markers for him to suspect she was in the complex to pair for BEL in the first place. I know I'm pairing my ch clear belly/cyclops alien girls with my Mojave just in case.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AaronP

What's does a Albino, Hypo, Piebald, BEL, Super Phantom, and Ivory have in common? They're all Homozygous forms of their Heterozygous counter parts. There is a reason why people say that Yellow Bellies are Het Ivory. There are "Normals" out there that are Het Luecistic, Vin Russo is just a poor example that I used. I'll dig up the RR show and cut out the clip for you guys to listen to when I get a chance tonight/tomorrow night.

---

a BEL is not a homonzygous form of a heterozygous couter part. A BEL is a super form created from the presence of two co-domenant genes of the same allele. Some of those co-domenant animals look more like normals than others but non are visually normal and therefor they are not het but codom. Please explain to me how a BEL created from a lesser and mojava is homozygous.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ssthisto

Hello

I have a quick question for those of you who have *adult* Blue-Eyed Leucistics that you have produced offspring from.

What morphs were your babies - and what were the "ingredients" in your BluEL?

I'm particularly interested to know if anyone has bred a Blue-eyed Leucistic to normals or other animals that do NOT produce BluEL offspring in any combination - and whether you ever hatched out normal offspring from that pairing.

---

Getting back to the topic.
If you breed a normal to a BEL you should only get the codom morphs - Mojave, Lesser, Butter and Russo Line Het Leucistic, yellowbellies? do we want to include yellowbellies/ivories as another white snake just "dingier"(is that a word)? You should not get any BEL.

The key thing is you breed it to a normal BP. If the BP looks normal to the untrained eye but is actually a morph then you can get BEL.

Co-dominant/incomplete dominant is a visual phenotype. Meaning there is a visual difference in the snakes that carry the gene. Some are just not as obvious.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Egapal

a BEL is not a homonzygous form of a heterozygous couter part. A BEL is a super form created from the presence of two co-domenant genes of the same allele. Some of those co-domenant animals look more like normals than others but non are visually normal and therefor they are not het but codom. Please explain to me how a BEL created from a lesser and mojava is homozygous.

---

Super = Homozygous.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AaronP

Super = Homozygous.

---

Not necessarily. I know some people hate wikipedia but I see no fault here so I am stealing it.

The words homozygous, heterozygous, and hemizygous are used to describe the genotype of a diploid organism at a single locus on the DNA. Simply stated, homozygous describes a genotype consisting of two identical alleles at a given locus, heterozygous describes a genotype consisting of two different alleles at a locus

Now if you had a lesser x mojave BEL then the single locus responsible for the super form has one mojave gene and one lesser gene. This would be a double het at a single locus, not a homozygous. If you disagree please give me a reason not a simple "Super = Homozygous". Where as this is most commonly the case I think its a gross simplification when discussing the genetics of a BEL

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Egapal

Not necessarily. I know some people hate wikipedia but I see no fault here so I am stealing it.

The words homozygous, heterozygous, and hemizygous are used to describe the genotype of a diploid organism at a single locus on the DNA. Simply stated, homozygous describes a genotype consisting of two identical alleles at a given locus, heterozygous describes a genotype consisting of two different alleles at a locus

Now if you had a lesser x mojave BEL then the single locus responsible for the super form has one mojave gene and one lesser gene. This would be a double het at a single locus, not a homozygous. If you disagree please give me a reason not a simple "Super = Homozygous". Where as this is most commonly the case I think its a gross simplification when discussing the genetics of a BEL

---

When referring to a "Super" form a Super is the Homozygous form of a mutation.

Calling a BEL a Homozygous animal is only correct when both parents were the same mutation (Mojave to Mojave, Lesser to Lesser, etc etc).

A Mojave to a Lesser = BEL is simply a combo, unfortunately (to some) the combo results in a white snake. BEL is just a general name for a ball python that is lacking all pigment to the point where it is white and its eyes appear to be blue.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AaronP

When referring to a "Super" form a Super is the Homozygous form of a mutation.

Calling a BEL a Homozygous animal is only correct when both parents were the same mutation (Mojave to Mojave, Lesser to Lesser, etc etc).

A Mojave to a Lesser = BEL is simply a combo, unfortunately (to some) the combo results in a white snake. BEL is just a general name for a ball python that is lacking all pigment to the point where it is white and its eyes appear to be blue.

---

The problem with our disagreement is that there is no real definition for super form. Its not a genetics term so much as a herp term. The term was created to describe a visual difference in a homozygous form of a codominant animal for sure but I would argue that it could be correctly applied to a BEL. The animal definitely keeps with the spirit of the term by having an appearance that differs greatly from its parents. But regardless of whether you believe that or not I am going to need you to either concede my point or else take the BEL out of the list you provided in a previous post as quoted here

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AaronP

What's does a Albino, Hypo, Piebald, BEL, Super Phantom, and Ivory have in common? They're all Homozygous forms of their Heterozygous counter parts. There is a reason why people say that Yellow Bellies are Het Ivory. There are "Normals" out there that are Het Luecistic, Vin Russo is just a poor example that I used. I'll dig up the RR show and cut out the clip for you guys to listen to when I get a chance tonight/tomorrow night.

---

A BEL does not necessarily have anything in common with an Albino other than the fact that they look the way they do because of two genes at a particular locus. It could have two separate genes that express a phenotype that is very similar to the super form of either of those genes.

Oh yeah and still waiting for that example of a normal that's het for luecistic

When I was getting my Bel I talked to the breeder about some of the clutch odds he has sired just to know, I think he said out of 7 clutchs it was a fairly even mix of lessers and het russos, maybe one clutch favoring lessers and another het russos, but no where in this convo did he say that a bel ever poped up. Did I ask? No, because I know it does not work that way.

:2cent:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Egapal

The problem with our disagreement is that there is no real definition for super form. Its not a genetics term so much as a herp term. The term was created to describe a visual difference in a homozygous form of a codominant animal for sure but I would argue that it could be correctly applied to a BEL.

---

As far as I know, and I've not heard otherwise, a super form is a when two co-dominates are bred together and produce an animal that when bred to a "Normal" can produce 100% it's co-dominate form. Which, again, as far as I know is the same as Homozygous.

Quote:

---

The animal definitely keeps with the spirit of the term by having an appearance that differs greatly from its parents. But regardless of whether you believe that or not I am going to need you to either concede my point or else take the BEL out of the list you provided in a previous post as quoted here

---

Sorry, but it still Applies. As long as the Super form of a Lesser and a Mojave is a BEL, it will apply, but only to them, not the combo BELs. Again BEL is a general term for a specific appearance, and does not hint as to the genetics of the animal.

Quote:

---

A BEL does not necessarily have anything in common with an Albino other than the fact that they look the way they do because of two genes at a particular locus. It could have two separate genes that express a phenotype that is very similar to the super form of either of those genes.

Oh yeah and still waiting for that example of a normal that's het for luecistic

---

Not necessarily True. A Homozygous BEL (again Lesser x Lesser, etc) is very similar to a Albino, the only difference is that Albino is a recessive trait so it is only expressed in it's Homozygous form, unlike Lessers which can be easily identified.

As far as the "Normal" het for Lucy, Randy already mentioned one example, I'll try to dig it up tonight, fiance was in town for V-Day this past weekend so I barely even touched my computer so I wasn't able to look for it then.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wh00h0069

A BEL can not be a normal carrying the gene. A BEL is a super form. I think you may be referring at a lesser or Russo het Lucy, which is not a super form.

---

THats what he said. He said if one of the parents was a normal carrying the Bel gene IE a Russo Het lucy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AaronP

As far as I know, and I've not heard otherwise, a super form is a when two co-dominates are bred together and produce an animal that when bred to a "Normal" can produce 100% it's co-dominate form. Which, again, as far as I know is the same as Homozygous.

---

I will stipulate to your definition of the term super form.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AaronP

Sorry, but it still Applies. As long as the Super form of a Lesser and a Mojave is a BEL, it will apply, but only to them, not the combo BELs. Again BEL is a general term for a specific appearance, and does not hint as to the genetics of the animal.

---

Ok now you have lost me. So if you breed a lesser to a mojave and get a BEL, what is that animal homozygous for? Please do not make statements that are not always true without mentioning that its not always the case.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AaronP

Not necessarily True. A Homozygous BEL (again Lesser x Lesser, etc) is very similar to a Albino, the only difference is that Albino is a recessive trait so it is only expressed in it's Homozygous form, unlike Lessers which can be easily identified.

---

Yeah I understand how the genetics work. My point is this. Genetics is something that people struggle to understand. Comparing an albino to a BEL like you have is misleading and the fact that combo BEL's exist make it very misleading when you use the therm BEL and don't specify the breeding.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AaronP

As far as the "Normal" het for Lucy, Randy already mentioned one example, I'll try to dig it up tonight, fiance was in town for V-Day this past weekend so I barely even touched my computer so I wasn't able to look for it then.

---

The case that randy is referring to with Marshall Van Thorre doesn't sound like solid proof that a BEL can come from a normal. I have never heard of this case and regardless one case does not make for a proven line. This would need to be tested out and confirmed. From everything I have read BEL's come from the expression of genes that are codominant. Therefor having one of them would result in a visual morph.

Does anyone know anyone that has Leucistics available that are a decent price???

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tjones

Does anyone know anyone that has Leucistics available that are a decent price???

---

You may want to be a little more specific. I am sure that everyone who has a leucistic for sale believes their price to be decent.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Egapal

Ok now you have lost me. So if you breed a lesser to a mojave and get a BEL, what is that animal homozygous for? Please do not make statements that are not always true without mentioning that its not always the case.

---

How many times do I have to say that a True Homozygous BEL is a Lesser x Lesser or a Mojave x Mojave, or any other single co-dominate bred to itself that produces BELs.

Quote:

---

Yeah I understand how the genetics work. My point is this. Genetics is something that people struggle to understand. Comparing an albino to a BEL like you have is misleading and the fact that combo BEL's exist make it very misleading when you use the therm BEL and don't specify the breeding.

---

I'm not talking about Combo BELs, I'm talking about Homozygous BELs.

Quote:

---

The case that randy is referring to with Marshall Van Thorre doesn't sound like solid proof that a BEL can come from a normal. I have never heard of this case and regardless one case does not make for a proven line. This would need to be tested out and confirmed. From everything I have read BEL's come from the expression of genes that are codominant. Therefor having one of them would result in a visual morph.

---

You seem to be missing the punctuation marks [ " " ] because every time I've said Normal I've tried to put it in between quotations as to imply that they're not really normals, but that's what they resemble.

That Clip I mentioned before comes from episode:
http://www.blogtalkradio.com/reptile...00bnerd-vs-bhb

And here is a clip that I cut out of it that cuts to the point:
http://leon2ky.com/leon/rr_lucy_clip.mp3

If you're listening to the original MP3 from the episode, skip to about 22:30-23:00 minutes in.

A Small transcript for anyone who doesn't care to download the MP3:

Quote:

---

Larry: Hey uh, Brian and Kevin, it almost seems like now we have such a uh diverse captive breeding pool and captive breeders, it almost seems like all the new stuff is poping up right here out of our captive collections ya know.
And not coming out of Africa. Seems like this is the new Africa. All the normals that are being bred to the funny animal with the mustache lip that all of a sudden produced this fantastic new cross ya know.

Barcyzk: Well it's not surprising you know for the last ten years we picked, and when I say we I mean the entire United States mainly and even some of Europe have picked almost every cool animal out of Africa that they've offered. And they haven't held anything back ya know. They'll sell their last ball python in the continent to make a dollar. It's just a shear matter of numbers.

I'll give you an example; I bred a Fire Ball Python to a normal, ya know I've bred a number of ball pythons to fire males this year. And I had a couple of luecistics pop out of a clutch. Just a normal female obviously turned out to be a really ugly Fire or maybe another gene carrier or something like.

Ya know what I mean? I just think that when we're yanking all that stuff out of there it's inevitable. You hit it right on the head, we are the new Africa and it's really hard to get excited another new morph that's coming out unless it's something just so radically different. And I'll be honest I haven't seen that morph out of africa in at least 2-3 years. I don't even remember the last picture that I got that I was super impressed with. Yet I'm constantly impressed with pictures I see in US Forums.

Kevin M. I have to agree.

---

Now this was about Black Eyed Lucys (which is what Fires produce) but that lends some credibility to the possibility that there are "Normals" that may carry the Blue Eye Lucy genes, similar to the Russos.

I'm not saying I've got the entire Lucy thing figured out, if that was the case I'd be able to explain why a Lesser + Pied = a All white snake, or why a Phantom + Mojave/Lesser = BEL [aka Karma] but a Phantom + Phantom = Super Phantom

I guess it comes down to the difference between "normal" and normal. The animal that Marshall bred was subtle but he could see something in her. Frankly I didn't think her belly was white enough to be a white snake producer but Marshall saw it and I know he was hoping she was compatible long before the eggs hatched.

I try to avoid "super" because I'm never sure what exactly it means. Is there a special genetics term for a heterozygous animal like a lesser\\mojave BEL where neither copy is normal? It's a little different than how we normally use heterozygous (normal paired with a mutant copy) but technically I think it's just as much a het as a het albino and certainly not homozygous like a lesser\\lesser BEL.

Ok I don't want to argue. I know what you are saying. I just think that you need to be very very clear when talking about genetics. I think that saying "BEL" does not imply that its a homozygous as lots of BEL's out there are combos. The original question here was Regarding BluEL offspring. I think that you need to be very specific when you through out unrelated information. I personally think that anecdotal evidence about some Black Eyed Lucys to assert that a Blue Eyed could throw a normal or "normal" maybe possibly is a bit irresponsible. Until I see proof from a reputable source I have to stick with the answer to the original question of "The offspring of a BEL (with no other morph influences) will be 50% the morph of the male and 50% the morph of the female."