Vote for BP.Net for the 2013 Forum of the Year! Click here for more info.

» Site Navigation

» Home
 > FAQ

» Online Users: 3,357

3 members and 3,354 guests
Most users ever online was 6,337, 01-24-2020 at 04:30 AM.

» Today's Birthdays

None

» Stats

Members: 75,102
Threads: 248,542
Posts: 2,568,765
Top Poster: JLC (31,651)
Welcome to our newest member, Geezy99
Page 2 of 13 FirstFirst 123456789101112 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 126
  1. #11
    BPnet Veteran
    Join Date
    04-08-2009
    Location
    Taylor, Mi
    Posts
    778
    Thanks
    186
    Thanked 290 Times in 186 Posts

    Re: Proof on the Spider gene. OWAL take a look

    Ok here are pics. First one is of mom and the other one is 3 of the babies. The babies are from left to right normal, bee, spider.






    please forgive me if the pics don't post I suck at posting pics.

    - - - Updated - - -

    As you can see she is a little bright and reduced pattern but nothing special.
    Last edited by T&C Exotics; 09-18-2012 at 01:10 AM.
    Knowledge is earned not learned.

  2. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to T&C Exotics For This Useful Post:

    Badgemash (09-21-2012),Danounet (08-01-2013),loonunit (09-18-2012)

  3. #12
    BPnet Veteran
    Join Date
    11-13-2003
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    1,555
    Thanks
    6
    Thanked 247 Times in 186 Posts
    Images: 28
    Thanks for the HUGE amount of work to raise up and breed that many animals.

    The only explanation I can think of is that there is something we don't understand about ball python reproduction such that the homozygous spiders never get matched up with a follicle. Even that would require you had really good odds to get 78% spiders rather than 66%. I don't know...

  4. #13
    BPnet Senior Member gsarchie's Avatar
    Join Date
    08-23-2009
    Location
    'Murrica!
    Posts
    1,625
    Thanks
    647
    Thanked 706 Times in 433 Posts
    Interesting. Did any of the spider X normal offspring produce clutches that were 100% spider? If not then there must be some prezygotic barrier between a spider sperm and egg, leaving the egg there waiting until a normal, or at least non-spider, sperm comes along and fertilizes it.
    Bruce
    Top Shelf Herps
    1.0 Pastel (Gypsos)
    1.0 VPI Axanthic Pinstripe (B-Dub)
    1.0 Sable het Hypo (Flat Top)
    1.0 Lesser Platinum (Sean2)
    1.1 Lemonback (Einstein.Elsa)
    0.1 Pied (unnamed)
    0.1 Pinstripe het Hypo (Chopper)
    0.1 het VPI Axanthic (Vanilla)
    0.1 Spider 50% het VPI Axanthic (Serine)
    0.1 Hypo (Bella)
    0.1 het Hypo (Hooker)
    0.1 Cinnamon (Nutmeg)
    0.1 Normal (Jane)

  5. The Following User Says Thank You to gsarchie For This Useful Post:

    decensored (09-21-2012)

  6. #14
    Registered User Riv's Avatar
    Join Date
    09-21-2011
    Location
    Maryland
    Posts
    384
    Thanks
    74
    Thanked 57 Times in 47 Posts
    Images: 10
    Ive been waiting for someone to put this much work into the Spider x Spider theories. Thanks for posting. Im not really great with genetics, so please be nice, but is it at all possible that the homozygous form of spider is simply not visual? or is that ridiculous?

    -Riveran

  7. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Riv For This Useful Post:

    decensored (09-21-2012),vankmen. (07-31-2013)

  8. #15
    BPnet Senior Member WingedWolfPsion's Avatar
    Join Date
    09-27-2007
    Location
    Plattsmouth, NE
    Posts
    5,168
    Thanks
    124
    Thanked 1,785 Times in 1,134 Posts
    Images: 1
    The most puzzling aspect of this is the 78% spider result from spider X spider breedings. It suggests that the Homozygous spiders are there--you would expect, 50% spider, 25% homo spider, and 25% normal, right? You get 78% spider, and you figure 1/3 of those must surely be homozygous. But, they didn't prove to be homozygous in breedings.

    How are what should be homozygous spiders winding up with a normal gene???

    It's almost as though there's no pair there--just either the spider gene is present, or the normal gene is present, but there's no second gene to make a pair. Is that possible?
    Last edited by WingedWolfPsion; 09-18-2012 at 02:42 AM.
    --Donna Fernstrom
    16.29 BPs in collection, 16.11 BP hatchlings
    Eclipse Exotics
    http://www.eclipseexotics.com/
    Author Website
    http://donnafernstrom.com
    Follow my Twitters: WingedWolfPsion, EclipseMeta, and EclipseExotics

  9. #16
    BPnet Veteran Seth702's Avatar
    Join Date
    06-14-2012
    Location
    Las Vegas, NV
    Posts
    267
    Thanks
    75
    Thanked 113 Times in 89 Posts
    Is it possible mom is a spider. The way her pattern looks you can almost see spider in between the banding. You can see it in the middle baby as well. The blushing seems like it make wider spider markings then usual, apearing much more normal like?

  10. #17
    BPnet Veteran
    Join Date
    04-08-2009
    Location
    Taylor, Mi
    Posts
    778
    Thanks
    186
    Thanked 290 Times in 186 Posts

    Re: Proof on the Spider gene. OWAL take a look

    My theory still stands that there is something going on with the spiders that only allows one spider gene to be present in one animal. There has to be some reason that no offspring from the spider x spider breedings produced 100% spiders. Maybe it is linked to the wobble... Think about it the wobble exists in every spider and that would have to be a genetic defect which is just on the surface. I am no genetics expert but maybe nothing can attach to the same locus as the spider gene leaving the gene incomplete. An example would be with the pastel, a pastel on the location in the DNA strand has one pastel gene and one normal gene, the spider may only have the one spider gene and no normal gene so in offspring it passes spider or nothing . It makes sense to me because of the wobble being present in all spiders which would indicate some sort of genetic fault that causes it. Just a thought I could be way off base and don't know if that is even possible. But one thing is for sure in my eyes there is no super spider at all and it is NOT lethal to do the breedings of spider x spider. Now can we put those 2 things to rest and cover possibilities of what could be going on with the spider gene that causes it to have the wobble and not have a super form? Also how do we classify this gene now? It can not be dominant, co-dominant, or recessive so what could it be now?

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Seth702 View Post
    Is it possible mom is a spider. The way her pattern looks you can almost see spider in between the banding. You can see it in the middle baby as well. The blushing seems like it make wider spider markings then usual, apearing much more normal like?
    The middle baby is a bee.................................. The mom is just a reduced pattern normal there are a ton of them all over this forum.............
    Knowledge is earned not learned.

  11. #18
    BPnet Senior Member WingedWolfPsion's Avatar
    Join Date
    09-27-2007
    Location
    Plattsmouth, NE
    Posts
    5,168
    Thanks
    124
    Thanked 1,785 Times in 1,134 Posts
    Images: 1
    If there is only one copy of the gene present in the snake's genome instead of 2, then the gene could still be called incomplete dominant, even though there's no way to create a super form, I would think.
    --Donna Fernstrom
    16.29 BPs in collection, 16.11 BP hatchlings
    Eclipse Exotics
    http://www.eclipseexotics.com/
    Author Website
    http://donnafernstrom.com
    Follow my Twitters: WingedWolfPsion, EclipseMeta, and EclipseExotics

  12. #19
    BPnet Veteran MisterKyte's Avatar
    Join Date
    01-08-2012
    Location
    California
    Posts
    656
    Thanks
    226
    Thanked 224 Times in 164 Posts
    I'm curious because I've always been told that spiderxspider breedings resulted in spiders that had severe head wobbles so my question to you is did you notice any offspring with really bad wobbles?

    As for that "Normal" that is producing spiders, I can't wait to see you reproduce that pairing! That sounds really amazing and is definately something to explore some more. It kind of reminds me of the Hidden gene Womas and the Hidden Gene Lessers that NERD produced way back when. Do you think this girl could be doing a similar thing but she just throws spiders instead? Have any plans to test the offspring as well?

  13. #20
    BPnet Lifer reptileexperts's Avatar
    Join Date
    03-26-2012
    Location
    Southeast Texas
    Posts
    2,334
    Thanks
    443
    Thanked 2,356 Times in 993 Posts
    Images: 1

    Re: Proof on the Spider gene. OWAL take a look

    Quote Originally Posted by meowmeowkazoo View Post
    Not possible. Spider is a dominant gene. A recessive gene can't dominate a dominant gene.
    Dominate just means that when two genes are present on the same Loci the dominate one will show the phenotype. . . if a recessive gene was at a different loci it could conceal a dominate gene / be expressed think albino spider . . . So yes a recessive gene CAN dominate a dominant gene at a differnet loci for a different phenotypic (visual) result.
    -------------------------------------------------------
    Retics are my passion. Just ask.

    www.wildimaging.net www.facebook.com/wildimaging

    "...That which we do not understand, we fear. That which we fear, we destroy. Thus eliminating the fear" ~Explains every killed snake"

  14. The Following User Says Thank You to reptileexperts For This Useful Post:

    OhhWatALoser (09-18-2012)

Page 2 of 13 FirstFirst 123456789101112 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v4.2.1