Homozygous Spider Morph

[The Serpent Merchant]

SO just curious, are there any Homo forms of dominant traits in ball pythons. I understand that they are labled a certain way to make things easier but from the ones we call dominant is there a dominant morph that makes a homo version?

There are homo versions, they just don't look any different. If I bred a snake with dominate gene X to another snake with dominate gene X 25% on average would by homo for gene X.

It works the same way as with Co-Doms, the only difference is that there isn't a visual Difference between the het and the homo versions.

[Jay_Bunny]

Not only would breeding Spider X Spider to gather information on the possibility of a lethal homozygous form be a huge undertaking for any breeder, big or small, but what would that breeder do with all of those spider and normal babies? I'd be willing to try a few Spider X Spider pairings when my spider female grows up but I don't think it would be wise for any one breeder to devote so much time and resources to such a thing.

[TheSnakeEye]

Not that anyone has ever been able to prove. Which probably means they do not exist. (Homozygous Pinstripes have been proven, so Pinstripe is a dominant mutation).

While listed as dominant on many sites, Spider is probably not a dominant mutation. Instead, it may be co-dominant with a lethal super form, so that homozygous spiders never hatch.
It's not unusual for an egg or two to die during incubation, so it's unlikely it would be noticed.

Dominant Pin? Can you post links to this? Are there any known defects with them? Who usually has them available?

[OhhWatALoser]

Dominant Pin? Can you post links to this? Are there any known defects with them? Who usually has them available?

There are no links, just talk to brian directly, he hatched something like 27 pins from the same snake. Its the only one I know of. If there was defects it wouldn't be dominant. There are none avaliable. All it means is you have a pin looking animal that always passes a pin gene, why does everyone thing this is so different. Super pastels always pass a pastel gene, super pins always pass a pin gene. Difference is pin does look different in either form, so its classfied as dominant. Since they dont look different, its not really a project worth going after, all the work time and resources and you get an animal that looks exactly the same. Don't plan on seeing many of them

[snakesRkewl]

A lot of interesting concepts, unfortunately none proven true.
You can't count Brian hiding his project claiming people are giving him crap over it.
If I had a homozygous pinstripe I'd do everything I could to document and show why it's dominate.
Proof is hard to dispute, bring on the proof and more people might listen to this theory of a homozygous pinstripe or spider.

While I understand people want to prove a homo spider, as Randy says, the longer it goes the less likely there is such a thing.

[TheSnakeEye]

If there was defects it wouldn't be dominant.

How does that even make sense? Super Black Pastel's (which I'd consider dominant because 100% of the offspring are Black Pastels) have a defect, duck bills. Super Pastel x Super Pastel/Pastel supposedly can be born with defects....

All it means is you have a pin looking animal that always passes a pin gene, why does everyone thing this is so different. Super pastels always pass a pastel gene, super pins always pass a pin gene. Difference is pin does look different in either form, so its classfied as dominant.

I understand how it works just fine, I don't need help with explaining it. I understand genetics 100%. And I understand that a super pin would still look like a regular pin. Never said it would look different.... So what you're saying is you'd consider a Super Pastel co-dominant because it looks different than the Pastel? That doesn't make sense either.

Since they dont look different, its not really a project worth going after, all the work time and resources and you get an animal that looks exactly the same.

That is a matter of opinion. Suppose you put a Super Lesser to a Pin. Only 50% of the offspring should have the pin gene. Where as BEL x Super Pin would = ALL Lesser Pins... Much more valuable to me. Pin x Normal = 50% normals 50% pins. Normals are pretty worthless for selling. Super Pin x Normal = all Pins, much greater return here.

[snakesRkewl]

Super Pin x Normal = all Pins, much greater return here.

Actually a super pin or a super spider would speed up the decline in value of those morphs.
IF there was such a thing as a super pin or super spider, already two of the most produced morphs out there, the market for those two morphs would crash even further than it already has.
I would think anyone producing spider combos and pinstripe combos would not want a homozygous version proven

[TheSnakeEye]

There are no links, just talk to brian directly, he hatched something like 27 pins from the same snake. Its the only one I know of. If there was defects it wouldn't be dominant. There are none avaliable. All it means is you have a pin looking animal that always passes a pin gene, why does everyone thing this is so different. Super pastels always pass a pastel gene, super pins always pass a pin gene. Difference is pin does look different in either form, so its classfied as dominant. Since they dont look different, its not really a project worth going after, all the work time and resources and you get an animal that looks exactly the same. Don't plan on seeing many of them

Actually a super pin or a super spider would speed up the decline in value of those morphs.
IF there was such a thing as a super pin or super spider, already two of the most produced morphs out there, the market for those two morphs would crash even further than it already has.
I would think anyone producing spider combos and pinstripe combos would not want a homozygous version proven

I understand your theory there and it makes sense. Only thing I can say there is that since they are such a common morph, their value is already decreasing every second. So granted their value would take a big hit but that's coming regardless. So even if they end up costing what Pastels are at now, their combos are still valuable and even a $100 pin is worth more than a $30 normal. But I am not trying to change your mind, you make a great point and I respect it completely.

[MrBig]

[QUOTE=that_dc5;1742714]How does that even make sense? Super Black Pastel's (which I'd consider dominant because 100% of the offspring are Black Pastels) have a defect, duck bills. Super Pastel x Super Pastel/Pastel supposedly can be born with defects....



I understand how it works just fine, I don't need help with explaining it. I understand genetics 100%. And I understand that a super pin would still look like a regular pin. Never said it would look different.... So what you're saying is you'd consider a Super Pastel co-dominant because it looks different than the Pastel? That doesn't make sense either.



You obviously don't understand gentetics 100%. A super Black pastel is not a Dominant gene it is a Homo versus the Black Pastel being a het. Making this by definition a co-dom gene, meaning that when two Hets(black pastels) breed they can produce a Super or Homo (super Black Pastel) version that looks differant then the hets. To be considered Dominant there can or can not be a super or Homo version, if there is it will look exactly as the het version does. Your analogy to super pastel vs pastel is flawed because you are comparing a co-dom homo to a co-dom het, just doesn't make sense. I think you are confusing the term dominant and homogezyneous, they are not one and the same.

[TheSnakeEye]

So you're saying you'd call a Super Black Pastel a co-dominant snake, even though when paired to a normal you'd get nothing but Black Pastels? The same as if there was a homozygous Spider, you put to a normal and get nothing but Spiders. Because I wouldn't.