Homozygous Spider Morph

[Domepiece]

Black pastels is co-dominant because the het and homo forms are different. If the homozygous Pin had issues, it would be different. To be dominant the trait has to be fully expressed in het and homo form. different homo = co-dom/inc. dom. black pastel it is not fully expressed, so it co-dom/inc. dom. Pin is fully expressed, so it is dominant.

Yes that what I'm saying with super pastels, I think other have explained this well enough for you.

Here the thing, I breed a pin x pin I have years of proving out before I even know ones homozygous. Pastel x pastel I know as soon as the clutch hatches, 3+ years down the road you finally prove out your homozygous pin, while the other guy has super pastel lesser black pastel. Then to get another gene with the homozygous pin more years of proving out From a pure business stand point I don't see it making sense to produce them. From a coolness factor however I would do it. Maybe I will.



Besides co-dom/inc dom I believe we are using the terms correctly.



If a single normal allele is stopping it from being lethal, that makes it inc dom (or what we call co-dom in the bp world) That fits exactly with mendel's definition, the phenotype is not fully expressed. While genetics may not be as simple as A+B=C, It's the best we can do right now and the statistics seems to follow. We still have a few weird unknowns, banana's sex linkish thing and the whiteout gene are two that come to mind. I do understand what your saying though, mendels system was pretty much made obsolete with new technology. Nothing is recessive anymore by his definition since everything is observable now with DNA analysis. But we don't have anyone working on the ball python genome that I know of, so we stick with old fashon mendel lol.



Guess you missed when I said the congo is another dominant gene according to vin russo, there are also many suspect ones, but again proving them out takes years and usually not worth the effort. Your statement would be more correct saying "all heterozygous morphs will have a statistical probability for 50% of their offspring to exhibit that heterozygous gene trait" because that how it works. Dominant co-dom are just classifications of the phenotypes in het and homo form. het and homo are where the statistics come from.


I feel as I need to repost this.

I did miss that. By exhibit I meant show visually and I was just trying to stay on codom/indom and dominant as to not add more confusion.

[OhhWatALoser]

Exactly this is what I have been saying. One problem though, there are no homo dominant traits in ball pythons and thats what I am talking about (except for the one pin is suppose) so statistially speaking they should pass on the dominant trait to all their offspring if they are dominant but they dont exist so they dont. Its all great in theory and it works out on a punnett square but in application there are no homo dominant balls in application, except the one pin apparently.

you've missed it twice now....

*edit* ah there we go

[Domepiece]

As I understand it:
Recessive means it takes both allele at the same locus to have the mutation before the trait will express itself.
Co-dominant means there will be an expression of the trait if one allele has the mutation and an enhanced version of the trait if both allele at the same locus have the mutation.
Dominant means if either or both of the allele at the same locus have the mutation at the same locus it will express the same trait.

Heterozygous means that one allele at the same locus has said mutation.
Homozygous means that both allele at the same locus have said mutation.

To me these definitions all make sense and work within the confines of my OP. My original question was whether anyone has seen or heard of a homo-spider, to which the answer seems to be no.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

And Bingo was his namo. But no Ive never heard of a homo spider but I wish I had some homo dominant snakes it would help making combos a little easier.

[Domepiece]

you've missed it twice now....

*edit* ah there we go

Lol, my bad.

[OhhWatALoser]

As I understand it:
Recessive means it takes both allele at the same locus to have the mutation before the trait will express itself.
Co-dominant means there will be an expression of the trait if one allele has the mutation and an enhanced version of the trait if both allele at the same locus have the mutation.
Dominant means if either or both of the allele at the same locus have the mutation at the same locus it will express the same trait.

Heterozygous means that one allele at the same locus has said mutation.
Homozygous means that both allele at the same locus have said mutation.

To me these definitions all make sense and work within the confines of my OP. My original question was whether anyone has seen or heard of a homo-spider, to which the answer seems to be no.

epic ending to the post lol

and you got it all spot on for the bp world.

[Domepiece]

you've missed it twice now....

*edit* ah there we go

Ok,ok, and congo.

[paulh]

Exactly this is what I have been saying. One problem though, there are no homo dominant traits in ball pythons and thats what I am talking about (except for the one pin is suppose) so statistially speaking they should pass on the dominant trait to all their offspring if they are dominant but they dont exist so they dont. Its all great in theory and it works out on a punnett square but in application there are no homo dominant balls in application, except the one pin apparently.

I differ with this post for the following reasons:

1. The existence of one homozygous pinstripe ball python means that more can be bred.

2. The lesser pastel mutant gene is codominant to its normal allele. The mojave mutant gene is codominant to its normal allele. The lesser pastel gene and the mojave gene are alleles.

A snake with two lesser mutant genes is a blue-eyed white. A snake with a lesser mutant gene paired with a mojave mutant gene is a blue-eyed white, like the homozygous lesser snake. A snake with two mojave mutant genes is mostly white but has some pigment on its head.

Therefore, the lesser platinum mutant gene is dominant to the mojave mutant gene, and the mojave mutant gene is recessive to the lesser platinum mutant gene.

Homozygous lesser x homozygous mojave -->
100% blue-eyed white (with a lesser platinum gene paired with a mojave gene)

By the way, the royal python genetics field is a tiny ghetto compared to fruit fly or mouse genetics. Both of those species have plenty of dominant mutant genes. Also, the salmon (AKA hypo) gene in boa constrictors and the stripe gene in California king snakes are dominants.

[paulh]

Besides co-dom/inc dom I believe we are using the terms correctly.

I have been impressed with how well people have been following the standard genetics definitions in this thread. But I see many terms with incorrect definitions on the herper genetics web sites.

As for codominant vs. incomplete dominant, even the textbooks do not agree on the definitions.

[Andreass]

As for codominant vs. incomplete dominant, even the textbooks do not agree on the definitions.

This is how I have learned it at University. Codominant means working together. Co= together. So for example a black mouse x white mouse would give a mouse who has black and white in his coat. Incomplete dominant means when you do black mouse x white mouse you would get a grey mouse. Black is not completely dominant over white so you will get grey.

[OhhWatALoser]

I have been impressed with how well people have been following the standard genetics definitions in this thread. But I see many terms with incorrect definitions on the herper genetics web sites.

As for codominant vs. incomplete dominant, even the textbooks do not agree on the definitions.

I've always seen it as co-dominant means both phenotypes showing and inc. dom means combination of phenotypes showing. as in the above example. where's the disagreement at?