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

» Site Navigation

» Home
 > FAQ

» Online Users: 1,775

1 members and 1,774 guests
Most users ever online was 47,180, 07-16-2025 at 05:30 PM.

» Today's Birthdays

None

» Stats

Members: 76,073
Threads: 249,220
Posts: 2,572,811
Top Poster: JLC (31,651)
Welcome to our newest member, LeonoraOrdonez5
Results 1 to 10 of 34

Hybrid View

  1. #1
    BPnet Veteran
    Join Date
    04-08-2009
    Location
    Taylor, Mi
    Posts
    778
    Thanks
    186
    Thanked 290 Times in 186 Posts

    Re: Breeding with only homozygous snakes.

    First I am going to say I have not read every post on this thread but I do have to state my mind here.

    The biggest reason why you should NOT only breed homo to homo is because that would lead very quickly to no out crossing which reults in huge amounts of kinked babies which results in them being put down if they are that bad.

    I totally disagree with only breeding homo to homo for those reasons as well as the simple fact that normals are what sell the easiest. I bring 1 pied and 10 normals to the local reptile shop and they will buy the normal and turn their nose up at the pied because their customers can not buy the pied. It is pretty simple really to figure out that normals will not go out of style ever.

  2. #2
    Steel Magnolia rabernet's Avatar
    Join Date
    07-12-2005
    Location
    In the Nest
    Posts
    29,196
    Thanks
    2,845
    Thanked 5,584 Times in 3,092 Posts
    Images: 46
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Breeding with only homozygous snakes.

    Quote Originally Posted by tattlife2001 View Post
    The biggest reason why you should NOT only breed homo to homo is because that would lead very quickly to no out crossing which reults in huge amounts of kinked babies which results in them being put down if they are that bad.
    OK - I'm a huge fan of normals, the normals in my collection are some of my favorites. But your theory makes no sense. If I have a mojave male from Breeder X and a mojave female from Breeder Y, I've just outcrossed the bloodline. Neither mojave shares common parentage.

    If I breed a pinstripe to a black pastel, I've just outcrossed the bloodline.

    Why would you assume that those breeding homozygous animals to homozygous aren't acquiring animals from different and diversified bloodlines?

    I would have to go look, but I believe someone once shared the statistic that cornsnakes have been line bred for up to 10 generations with no marked increase in genetic defects.

    Genetic defects like kinking in caramels or wobbling in spiders appear to be linked to certain morphs, not from line breeding.

  3. #3
    BPnet Veteran
    Join Date
    04-08-2009
    Location
    Taylor, Mi
    Posts
    778
    Thanks
    186
    Thanked 290 Times in 186 Posts

    Re: Breeding with only homozygous snakes.

    Quote Originally Posted by rabernet View Post
    OK - I'm a huge fan of normals, the normals in my collection are some of my favorites. But your theory makes no sense. If I have a mojave male from Breeder X and a mojave female from Breeder Y, I've just outcrossed the bloodline. Neither mojave shares common parentage.

    If I breed a pinstripe to a black pastel, I've just outcrossed the bloodline.

    Why would you assume that those breeding homozygous animals to homozygous aren't acquiring animals from different and diversified bloodlines?

    I would have to go look, but I believe someone once shared the statistic that cornsnakes have been line bred for up to 10 generations with no marked increase in genetic defects.

    Genetic defects like kinking in caramels or wobbling in spiders appear to be linked to certain morphs, not from line breeding.
    You are correct but the way it is stated a mojo is not the homo form. So you would only be breeding supers to supers and so on which any crossing would lead to something that is not a super so you could not breed that because all you breed is a homo animal not hets or normals.

    My whole point is that if you only breed homo to homo that would mean no more recessive traits because as soon as you cross that the next generation that would be bred would in fact create normals. Very quickly line x of albino and line y become the same so when line z is bred to it you no longer have anywhere to out cross.

    I do know that all morphs started with one animal from the wild and they were bred and then line breeding was done but then out crossing was done to normals. When most of us here on this sit get that first pastel or albino or anything we line breed to make more of them but if we are smart we then out breed to make for stronger genetics.

    Also according to the way it is wording in the OP a pastel would not be bred because you would produce normals so only a super pastel would be bred. Spiders and all other dom traits would not be bred at all because they too create normals. So from this we lose all co-dom traits, all dom traits and are left with the recessive traits that will very quickly be inbred and they will start to produce more and more genetic deformities. There would be no combo morphs at all because they too create normals unless you have something such as the panda pied that will make cinnis het pied and only that but then you are left with animals that make more normals.

    I took this in a literal way. Exactly as it was posted. If I took this wrong please let me know but that is how it is worded. Basically why breed anything that is going to make more normals.

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