Adding "one more morph": A bright future for the BP industry

[BPHERP]

Its like an artist...

...the more colors on the palette, the greater the possibilities.

Brandon

PS - That was for all of us non-math, non-genetics majors.

[nixer]

this could never work because if you mixed any of the white snake genes you wouldnt know what you had unless your bred it. since it would wipe out the pattern and color.

plus it would take longer to breed them than the life cycles of the animals. and the changes would be so low that some ppl have taken more than 7 years to get a double recessive so tripple or quad recessive could take more than 20 years itself. not to mention that it would take more than 1 or 2 animals per morph.

[JLC]

I think some folks are completely missing the point of the original post. It's not suggesting that anyone will actually accomplish all those combos. It's illustrating how many combos are possible.

And while I personally may never make a "abcdefg" combo, even if I have all those genes in my collection...I could make a TON of different combos, and have the joy of deciding which ones to try for. While I aim for "acef" ...someone else with a similar collection may be aiming for "bcfg"...and another person may accomplish a "acdfg" combo.

Of course his numbers aren't to be taken as any sort of absolute. He even said there are many other factors to consider that he did not take into his original simple calculation. The point isn't some absolute number of morphs any one person can expect to create in their lifetime...it's to show that even if there are thousands of people out there breeding, any one of us still has a chance to create something unique and have the joy of planning and trying for that something special simply because the possibilities are virtually endless. And the more variety of genes you have in your personal collection, the more possibilities you open up for yourself.

[JLC]

PS -- And anyone doubting the possibilities of more than three genes (or four at the most) ever working out in ball pythons...or that there wouldn't be some neat surprises by making something beyond the common combos should take a close look at NERD's collection.

[nevohraalnavnoj]

this could never work because if you mixed any of the white snake genes you wouldnt know what you had unless your bred it. since it would wipe out the pattern and color.

This is an interesting point, and I won't be surprised when we get to the point you have to hold your animals back and breed them to know what's in there. OR you have to arrange your breedings so there is no doubt, ie, super pastel super fire X super cinny super fire, etc... Here all the outcomes are known.

JonV

[nevohraalnavnoj]

I think some folks are completely missing the point of the original post. It's not suggesting that anyone will actually accomplish all those combos. It's illustrating how many combos are possible.

And while I personally may never make a "abcdefg" combo, even if I have all those genes in my collection...I could make a TON of different combos, and have the joy of deciding which ones to try for. While I aim for "acef" ...someone else with a similar collection may be aiming for "bcfg"...and another person may accomplish a "acdfg" combo.

Of course his numbers aren't to be taken as any sort of absolute. He even said there are many other factors to consider that he did not take into his original simple calculation. The point isn't some absolute number of morphs any one person can expect to create in their lifetime...it's to show that even if there are thousands of people out there breeding, any one of us still has a chance to create something unique and have the joy of planning and trying for that something special simply because the possibilities are virtually endless. And the more variety of genes you have in your personal collection, the more possibilities you open up for yourself.

Spot on!

JonV

[nixer]

This is an interesting point, and I won't be surprised when we get to the point you have to hold your animals back and breed them to know what's in there. OR you have to arrange your breedings so there is no doubt, ie, super pastel super fire X super cinny super fire, etc... Here all the outcomes are known.

JonV

but even to get the super pastel super fire you would have to breed 2 super pastel fireflys to even begin with or you would have to prove it by breeding that you really had a super pastel super fire.

[dr del]

Hi,

Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't your example the only one in which you wouldn't need to prove it out by breeding?

Super pastel x super pastel = all super pastels.

Any thing that was a pure white snake would have to be a homozygous pastel homozygous fire.

Or do I need more coffee?

**edit**

I obviously need more coffee as I misread your post.

Sorry for making the same point you were in a considerably dafter way.

Move along folks no brain dead scotsmen here - these are not the droids you're looking for.

** end edit **

Now any other combination containing both fire and pastel on both sides would have to be presented similarly to poss hets untill the breeding results were statistically large enough to make a reasonably safe guess.

So breeding two fireflys together will give you snakes that can be visually identified and (hopefully) some white snakes.

Those Black Els should be 66% possible for carrying some variant of the pastel gene with 33% of those that do being possible homozygous pastels.

So how would you list those for sale as unproven hatchlings etc?

BlackEls 66% poss het pastel 25% poss Homo pastel?

Now the real tricky one would be a homo pied homo fire lesser.


I can see it now;

"what kind of ball python is it?"

"a white one"

"Yeah but what kind of white one?"

"do I look like a geneticist to you? it's a white snake, ya wannit or not?"




dr del

[nevohraalnavnoj]

Hi,

Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't your example the only one in which you wouldn't need to prove it out by breeding?

Super pastel x super pastel = all super pastels.


dr del

Dr Del,

Yes you are correct, this is what I tried to convey with the "or" in my above post. You could hold your animals back and prove them by breeding OR arrange your breedings so that all outcomes are known/easily identifiable.

Sorry if my post was confusing.

JonV

[N4S]

This topic makes me think to hard and hurts my head.