# Will breeding my normal royal with other morphs only give me visual normals?



## Magnum0 (Apr 10, 2008)

Pretty much what the title says.

I have a male royal normal. For example if i bred him with a pastel/spider female would i still only get normals?


----------



## Athravan (Dec 28, 2006)

Pastel and spider are codominant. Meaning you will get half the morph offspring.

Most genes are recessive, this means you would get normals het for that gene, ie. albino, you'd get normal het albinos.

Female codom morphs are usually quite a bit more expensive than male codoms. If you put two of the same codom together, you can get a "super" morph.


----------



## paulh (Sep 19, 2007)

Go to http://www.reptileforums.co.uk/genetics/76499-genetics-questions-were-afraid-ask.html for the correct definition of the term "codominant".

Besides pastel and spider, lesser platinum, mojave and a few others are possible choices to mate with your normal male.


----------



## Karl_1989 (Jan 19, 2007)

Magnum0 said:


> Pretty much what the title says.
> 
> I have a male royal normal. For example if i bred him with a pastel/spider female would i still only get normals?


He's a Spider sibling but as said its a codominant gene so you cant tell: victory:


----------



## HadesDragons (Jun 30, 2007)

Karl_1989 said:


> He's a Spider sibling but as said its a codominant gene so you cant tell: victory:


You can tell...
Spider is co-dom so if he's not a visual Spider, he doesn't carry the gene, regardless of being a sibling??

As said, the only thing that would produce morph offspring would be to breed him to a visual co-dom animal, unless you were lucky enough to get a novel mutation amongst your babies...


----------



## Karl_1989 (Jan 19, 2007)

No i can't tell lol, i sold it to him : victory:


----------



## Ssthisto (Aug 31, 2006)

HadesDragons said:


> You can tell...
> Spider is co-dom so if he's not a visual Spider, he doesn't carry the gene, regardless of being a sibling??
> 
> As said, the only thing that would produce morph offspring would be to breed him to a visual co-dom animal, unless you were lucky enough to get a novel mutation amongst your babies...


Actually, Spider appears to be *dominant* as far as anyone can tell - there hasn't been a distinguishable homozygous "super" spider. If there isn't a different appearance for a homozygous animal, the gene is dominant, not codominant. Unless of course someone proves out that the trainwrecky wobblers are homozygous spiders... and then you've got a "super spider" whose different phenotype is "trainwreck wobble". To my knowledge, though, this has not been proven to be the case.

You're absolutely right, though, that saying "spider sibling" is essentially pointless... the gene isn't there and in the wrong situations (not saying this is) people can sometimes use that to get more money for an animal on the basis that it "must be het for the gene" when that's not how dominant or codominant genes work. 

If you breed your normal to a recessive morph, you'll only get visual normals het for that morph.
If you breed your normal to any codominant morph, you'll get some normals who do not carry the morph trait and some visuals who are het for the morph trait (and SHOW that trait, because a het is visible in codominants). If you bred to a 'super' homozygous animal, you'll get all visual hets and no normals.
If you breed your normal to a dominant morph, you'll get some normals who do not carry the morph trait and some visuals who are known only het for the morph trait (and show it because the het is visible in dominants) - but are indistinguishable from a homozygous animal. If you bred and got ALL visuals consistently from that morph, you know you have a homozygous dominant instead of a het.


----------



## HadesDragons (Jun 30, 2007)

Ah I had no idea Spider was dominant - although Royal morphs aren't really my thing - I think you probably explained the "sibling" bit better than I did...


----------



## Crazy Pete (Jan 6, 2008)

yeh so ur wanting to buy a dominant or co-dominant royal morph for ur male to breed with...to be honest with u i would'nt bother buyin a female dom or co-dom morph, for the simple reason that the female can only hav a couple of clutches of eggs per year, where as if u had about 3 female royals and breed the male morph royal too all 3 in the year you will be making alot of money. With the dominant and co-dominant morph, if they are bred to a normal 50% of the clutch will carry the morph gene.

if your after a morph with a dominant gene i wud advise you choose the spider royal for the simple reason that they are a good looking affordable morph.:no1:: victory::2thumb:


----------



## Harrison (Feb 29, 2008)

Just like to mention for the millionth time that 50% of the clutch will not necessarily carry the morph gene... but each individual that is born will have a 50% chance of carrying the morph gene. Completely different and very confusing to newbies, especially ones worried why they are getting clutches with totally different numbers of morphs.


----------



## Mason (Jan 21, 2008)

Harrison said:


> Just like to mention for the millionth time that 50% of the clutch will not necessarily carry the morph gene... but each individual that is born will have a 50% chance of carrying the morph gene. Completely different and very confusing to newbies, especially ones worried why they are getting clutches with totally different numbers of morphs.


 
This *IS* going to catch out a LOT of people. We're seeing lots of people with no understanding of genetics at all thinking they will make their millions in morph breeding. There are going to be a lot of disaapointed people come hatching time when 2 out of 4 eggs (or whatever) don't produce a spider royal!


----------



## Harrison (Feb 29, 2008)

I keep finding breeders all over the internet in every forum (breeders with 20 years experience and breeding hundreds of animals a year) saying to people, "yeah that will make half of the clutch this and half of your clutch that".

How is that going to help anyone? Like you said, people will be very confused when they actually breed their animals and find it doesn't match up at all with what people had told them.

The chances of humans being male or female is 50%. Does this mean if you have two kids then you will have a boy and a girl? Nope. It means each individual has a 50% chance of being male and a 50% chance of being female.


----------



## Athravan (Dec 28, 2006)

I think people just need to remember it's like flipping a coin. You have a 50% chance of getting heads or tails - there are only 2 options... but that doesn't mean that you won't get 5 tails in a row or 5 heads in a row.


----------

