Quote Originally Posted by elevatethis
It probably has more to do with the fact that since homozygous spiders don't look any differently than heterozygous spiders, most people out there don't want to look like a boob when the "homozygous" spider they claimed to have sires a clutch of normals.
But until someone's possible homozygous spider produces a bunch of only spiders we don't know for sure what homozygous spider look like. It's really hard to prove something by its absence. Just as I can't say for sure that spider is homozygous lethal by the absence of a publicly proven homozygous spider you can't say for sure it's dominant because of the absence of a publicly disclosed different looking potential homozygous spider.

What if it turns out that the homozygous eggs do hatch and produce a different looking or acting snake but it doesn't thrive and can't be bred to prove it's homozygous? With other potentially homozygous lethal morphs we've assumed a radically different looking animal is the homozygous without proving it so we could still reach closure on the spider genetics eventually. But what if the homozygous is only subtly different from the heterozygous ones but still consistently different and not capable of breeding and being proven?

Now if someone is selling homozygous spiders and they turn out not to be such I could see that being a problem but just coming out and saying “I think I have a homozygous spider, I’ll report back how the breeding results go” isn’t exactly going out on a limb. I’m thinking there has to be some other reason even if it is just that 7 years isn’t long enough with all the interest in outbreeding spiders.