Best morph calculator

[Erie_herps]

Pinstripe is dominant, a super form exists but it isn't visually any different from a heterozygous form.

[nikkubus]

I was under the impression it is incomplete dominant but it's very difficult to ID and often needs proven out.

[Erie_herps]

I was under the impression it is incomplete dominant but it's very difficult to ID and often needs proven out.

There are multiple breeders that have tried/are trying to produce a super proven pinstripe but I haven't heard of many definitive ones. I believe BHB had a pinstripe that produced over 27 pinstripes without producing a normal. I've heard of an emperor pin that produced over 50 pinstripes without producing a normal. If pinstripe had a visually different homozygous form I think they would be a big combo and it would be very well known.

[paulh]

I went to WOBP and tried several matings.

Pinstripe x pinstripe. Both had a pinstripe mutant gene paired with a normal gene. IWOBP results were 1/4 normal, 1/4 pinstripe, and 1/2 pinstripe. The correct result is 1/4 normal (2 normal genes), 1/4 pinstripe (2 pinstripe genes), and 1/2 pinstripe (pinstripe mutant gene and normal gene).

I also tried a het albino x het albino mating. Results were 1/4 normal, 1/2 het albino and 1/4 albino. IMO, the correct results should have been 1/4 normal (2 normal genes), 1/2 het albino(normal-looking, albino mutant gene and normal gene) and 1/4 albino (2 albino genes).

IMO, there was no difficulty calculating hets. But there was considerable difficulty expressing the results. There was also the continuing belief that a heterozygous snake must look normal, which is false.

WOBP does not express heterozygote probabilities (66% probability het albino, 33% probability homozygous pinstripe). But that is okay. Doing it or not is a matter of choice.

I'm a bit confused by what you are saying. Top example should be 1/4 super pinstripe, which can be hard to ID but does look different, and the way you typed it here both sound exactly the same.

With albino example, those look exactly the same to me too. I guess what you are frustrated with is that it doesn't tell you which are phenotype? It's pretty much understood (with a few exceptions) when someone says "het X" it means its a visual normal or different morph, while being het for a recessive. Nobody calls a snake with one wild type one Pastel gene "het Pastel", it's just referred to as Pastel. The only exception I really see is acts-like-supers, I have seen people refer to Candino as het Albino het Candy, or in the case of incomplete dominants that are in the same complex and hard to tell apart like Asphalt/Yellowbelly, you might call the OS of a Freeway a "het Freeway" to express it's one or the other YB-complex morphs but you don't know which.

Good catch on the pastel x pastel mating results. WOBP results were 1/4 normal, 1/4 super pinstripe, and 1/2 pinstripe. And I should have written 1/4 super pinstripe (2 pinstripe genes) instead of 1/4 pinstripe (2 pinstripe genes). The difference between the WOBP and my results in both matings are that I included both genotypes and phenotypes rather than assuming that the reader would understand what was genotype and what was phenotype from the WOBP results.

[rant]
Yes, I am extremely frustrated that the WOBP calculator does not provide both genotype and phenotype.

I follow the standard genetics definition of "heterozygous" at https://www.genome.gov/genetics-glossary/heterozygous. That definition is "heterozygous refers to having inherited different forms of a particular gene from each parent. A heterozygous genotype stands in contrast to a homozygous genotype, where an individual inherits identical forms of a particular gene from each parent." So a heterozygous gene pair could be a normal gene and an albino mutant gene, a normal gene and a mojave mutant gene, a normal gene and a pinstripe mutant gene, or a mojave mutant gene and a lesser mutant gene. There is nothing in the standard definition about a heterozygote needing to look normal. I am so frustrated with the misunderstanding of "heterozygous" that I seldom use it on these forums. I just name the genes in a gene pair.

"Acts like super" BARF! Kevin of NERD coined that and then abandoned it for "compound heterozygous". Everyone else should abandon "acts like super", too.

As for candino, I'd write "a candy mutant gene paired with an albino mutant gene". If I thought readers would understand, I might use "het candy/albino" or "a candy/albino gene pair" or "candy/albino". I would not use "het Albino het Candy" because that gives the impression that two gene pairs are involved.
[/rant]

[nikkubus]

Good catch on the pastel x pastel mating results. WOBP results were 1/4 normal, 1/4 super pinstripe, and 1/2 pinstripe. And I should have written 1/4 super pinstripe (2 pinstripe genes) instead of 1/4 pinstripe (2 pinstripe genes). The difference between the WOBP and my results in both matings are that I included both genotypes and phenotypes rather than assuming that the reader would understand what was genotype and what was phenotype from the WOBP results.

[rant]
Yes, I am extremely frustrated that the WOBP calculator does not provide both genotype and phenotype.

I follow the standard genetics definition of "heterozygous" at https://www.genome.gov/genetics-glossary/heterozygous. That definition is "heterozygous refers to having inherited different forms of a particular gene from each parent. A heterozygous genotype stands in contrast to a homozygous genotype, where an individual inherits identical forms of a particular gene from each parent." So a heterozygous gene pair could be a normal gene and an albino mutant gene, a normal gene and a mojave mutant gene, a normal gene and a pinstripe mutant gene, or a mojave mutant gene and a lesser mutant gene. There is nothing in the standard definition about a heterozygote needing to look normal. I am so frustrated with the misunderstanding of "heterozygous" that I seldom use it on these forums. I just name the genes in a gene pair.

"Acts like super" BARF! Kevin of NERD coined that and then abandoned it for "compound heterozygous". Everyone else should abandon "acts like super", too.

As for candino, I'd write "a candy mutant gene paired with an albino mutant gene". If I thought readers would understand, I might use "het candy/albino" or "a candy/albino gene pair" or "candy/albino". I would not use "het Albino het Candy" because that gives the impression that two gene pairs are involved.
[/rant]

Yeah it sounds like you were introduced to genetics outside of BP breeding, and I was too and get the frustration but you have to learn to speak the language to communicate with people who have never learned the other way or try to totally revamp the entire communities way of speaking, and that is easier said than done. We STILL have people using the term "co-dominant" even though several major breeders have worked on correcting that to incomplete dominant for years. Even outside BP's though, you almost never hear about people talking about the genotype of incomplete dominant mutations. It's only ever recessives you get people talking about "het" or "carrying" the recessive mutation, where it's always assumed wild type is one of the hets in an incomplete dominant unless otherwise specified, and "super" or "double" is used to specify when its homozygous for the mutation.

[paulh]

My first major hands-on experience was in a university mouse genetics lab.

Herpers should understand standard genetics terms. Any who just understand the herper version will get a major shock in a general genetics high school or university course.

The URL of my favorite web genetics glossary is https://www.genome.gov/genetics-glossary. It defines "codominance" as "Codominance is a relationship between two versions of a gene. Individuals receive one version of a gene, called an allele, from each parent. If the alleles are different, the dominant allele usually will be expressed, while the effect of the other allele, called recessive, is masked. In codominance, however, neither allele is recessive and the phenotypes of both alleles are expressed." Two examples were provided: 1) red, pink and white flowers. 2) A, B, and AB human blood types.

I also looked for definitions of incomplete dominance, partial dominance, and semidominance. None were listed.

Red, pink and white flowers have been the traditional example of incomplete dominance. A, B, and AB human blood types have been the traditional example of codominance. Apparantly the pro geneticists have decided to take all terms involving degrees of dominance and lump them together under "codominance". Good idea, IMO. Three terms (dominant, recessive and codominant) are easier to teach than four terms (dominant, recessive, incomplete dominant and codominant).

[nikkubus]

Apparantly the pro geneticists have decided to take all terms involving degrees of dominance and lump them together under "codominance". Good idea, IMO. Three terms (dominant, recessive and codominant) are easier to teach than four terms (dominant, recessive, incomplete dominant and codominant).

Well they were in the community throwing a fit years back and some people switched over to incomplete and some never did. I agree with you that it's better to both share the same term regardless of if it's a blend of phenotype or split up pieces of the phenotype like spots or stripes, because in reality, there are probably underlying pattern genes controlling the pattern a lot of the time that are completely separate from colors and "co-dominant" would at least convey the inheritance pattern across the board. I didn't get deep enough into guppy genetics to fully understand things, but I'd imagine those guppy guys would agree, as different layers of the pigment are controlled separately as well as patterns being controlled separately. The standards often used were developed when our genetics technology was nothing like it is today.