Fires and Leucies

I heard from an experienced keeper and breeder that NOT all fires are hets for Leucies.. I thought they were natural hets for leucies just like how yellow bellies are natural hets for ivories..

Im new and got lots to learn.. Can someone please tell me if what I heard is right?. Thank you.

All fires are het for Black eye lucys.

So the guy Im listening to is wrong.. I believe you because that's what I've always thought.. I hope to hear more from others to be sure about this.. How can the person I know tell me something like this?

I was talking to him about buying a female fire for my male fire to make leucies.. He said don't buy it if it's not proven het for leucies because not all fires are het for leucies.. huh????

if it isnt het for black eye lucy its not a fire!

Thanks Nixie. But if it's not Fire, Im not talking about it :D

I see now.. So the person I thought was an expert is wrong on this one..

Two Fires from two different breeders or line can still make Leucies right? As long they are Fires right?

I woner if your friend might be thinking it is the line of "fire" that is unproven/incompatible. Kind of like Fire x Fire makes BlkEL and Sulphur x Sulphur makes BlkEL but no one knows (yet) if Fire x Sulphur makes BlkEL...

Just tossing that out there as a possibility

I appreciate all inputs.

Im talking Fire X Fire.

I think what the breeder was trying to say was this:

1. A lot of fires look close to what a normal looks like.
2. You might not actually have a fire but just a normal
3. If you breed a normal to a fire you’ll get fires and normals (no BEL's).

Basically that you might have something you think is a fire, but don’t breed it to another fire unless it’s from a proven line, as if it’s not from a proven line you may not produce Black-Eye Leucistics.

Did you mention to the breeder where you got your fire?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by t-Roy

So the guy Im listening to is wrong.. I believe you because that's what I've always thought.. I hope to hear more from others to be sure about this.. How can the person I know tell me something like this?

I was talking to him about buying a female fire for my male fire to make leucies.. He said don't buy it if it's not proven het for leucies because not all fires are het for leucies.. huh????

---

What he may have been saying is dont buy from an unreputable source, because they might be scamming you into buying a normal that looks like a fire.

No No no guys.. Forget about what I have and where Im buying another one.. Im sorry I got you guys with that.

He and I were talking about the Fire morph. I was saying all Fires are het Leucies and he said no.. He said the Fire to make leucies must be proven het Leucies. So he's wrong. He said that not all FIRES are het leucies.. Well, I learned in this thread, if it's not het leucie, it's not a Fire!!

Fires being het for leucies is a confirmed fact right guys?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Beardedragon

What he may have been saying is dont buy from an unreputable source, because they might be scamming you into buying a normal that looks like a fire.

---

This is more along the lines of what I thought too. This is one of the reasons why you will read ads that say "from a proven BEL producing line."

Just do a quick search on this or any other forum and see the amount of people that picked up a nice ball at a petsore and believe they now have a morph of some kind. Fire, vanilla, spector, chocolate, etc. are really hard to pick from nice normals sometimes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by t-Roy

No No no guys.. Forget about what I have and where Im buying another one.. Im sorry I got you guys with that.

He and I were talking about the Fire morph. I was saying all Fires are het Leucies and he said no.. He said the Fire to make leucies must be proven het Leucies. So he's wrong. He said that not all FIRES are het leucies.. Well, I learned in this thread, if it's not het leucie, it's not a Fire!!

Fires being het for leucies is a confirmed fact right guys?

---

I think when he says it has to be proven het leucistic, he means it has to come from a proven line…

I understand now.. Thank you all for your inputs...

So it comes down to this: if it's not het for B.E.L., it's not a Fire.

Thank you thank you :salute:

Either it's a fire or it's not, it's as simple as that. If it is a fire, then it is indeed capable of producing bels. To say otherwise is like saying some pastels cannot produce super pastels or some lessers cannot produce bels.

Exactly. Fires are natural hets for leucies. So that is confirmed.

Thanks folks.

confirmed. :gj:

Confirmed

Thanks :gj: