# Is it snow or super snow patternless ?



## platypus (Aug 27, 2007)

Had quite a few nice surprises mack patternless this year , albinos etc . I have waited till this was big enough to get a half decent picture of and noticed that the eyes are black so is it a mack snow patternless or s/snow patternless ?


----------



## marcgroovyge (Apr 3, 2008)

Mack snow patternless :2thumb:


----------



## Captainmatt29 (Feb 28, 2009)

Lovely mack patternless


----------



## gazz (Dec 9, 2006)

Patternless snow SPLIT Super snow.


----------



## platypus (Aug 27, 2007)

*Thanks guys*

Thats good it has help clear that up :2thumb:


----------



## tonkaz0 (Apr 25, 2008)

This new one on me gazz, can you explain what you mean split snow, ive never heard that term,
surely its a partial striped albino macksnow, what about the eyes?,
genetics isnt my thing, this is a genuine question,

regards.


----------



## marcgroovyge (Apr 3, 2008)

how do you get a split Supersnow?


----------



## tonkaz0 (Apr 25, 2008)

Thats what i mean, i have striped talbino macksnow babes with the same type of eyes but i wouldnt class them as supers in any way.


----------



## gazz (Dec 9, 2006)

marcgroovyge said:


> how do you get a split Supersnow?


All Mack snow are HET Super snow.But i don't like saying MACK snow,TUG snow,GEM snow.So.

Mack snow is Snow SLPIT Super snow-[Codominant].
TUG snow,GEM snow is [1C]Snow,[2C]Snow-[Dominant].

Example.

Snow SPLIT Super snow X Normal = .

Normal.
Snow SPLIT Super snow.
------
Snow SPLIT Super snow X Snow SPLIT Super snow = .

Normal
Snow SPLIT Super snow.
Super snow.
======
[1C]Snow X Normal = .

Normal.
[1C]Snow.
------
[2C]Snow X Normal = .

[1C]Snow.
------
[1C]Snow X [1C]Snow = .

Normal.
[1C]Snow.
[2C]Snow.
------
[2C]Snow X [1C]Snow = .

[1C]Snow.
[2C]Snow.
------
[2C]Snow X [2C]Snow = .

[2C]Snow.


----------



## gazz (Dec 9, 2006)

tonkaz0 said:


> can you explain what you mean split snow, ive never heard that term,


Snow SPLIT *Super* snow.


----------



## Captainmatt29 (Feb 28, 2009)

thats is very confusing


----------



## tonkaz0 (Apr 25, 2008)

so you mean Codominant in other words?.


----------



## gazz (Dec 9, 2006)

tonkaz0 said:


> so you mean Codominant in other words?.


In a nut shell but i'd rather word it.

Snow SPLIT Super snow X Talbino normal.

Rather than Codominant snow X Talbino normal.

After all that what a Codominant snow it a Visual HET Super snow.

It work a trate when your refering to the Codominant snow X Dominant snow breedings.


----------



## shadowfrog (Nov 16, 2008)

Wow hopefully if I get another Leopard I want one of these. I just had the original morph one. How much do these go for?


----------



## SXE-C (Sep 4, 2009)

£60 - 80, and it`s a Mack Snow Patternless in case you got unduly confused!


----------



## tonkaz0 (Apr 25, 2008)

Not confused thanks, I was refering to the not common term split!, not the identity of the gecko, I have quite a few of them myself.


----------



## SXE-C (Sep 4, 2009)

Soz no offence intended whatsoever - I gathered you had plenty of leos/experience! I meant the confusing split super snow business, when a Mack`s a Mack and genetics are confusing enough to start with without changing name and terms around.


----------



## tonkaz0 (Apr 25, 2008)

yea sorry for that, I wrote that a bit quick, didnt mean to sound so harse, best regards, Tony.


----------



## gazz (Dec 9, 2006)

tonkaz0 said:


> Not confused thanks, I was refering to the not common term split!, not the identity of the gecko, I have quite a few of them myself.


Ahhh! sorry.SPLIT is a term use in the bird trade meaning HET.But i used the term SPLIT to differ it from the others in the breeding results from HET.Due to super snow only being relivent to snows nothing else.

Example.

Talbino normal X Super snow = .

Snow SPLIT Super snow HET Talbino.
-------
Talbino normal X Snow SPLIT Super snow = .

Normal HET Talbino. 
Snow SPLIT Super snow HET Talbino.


----------



## marcgroovyge (Apr 3, 2008)

I understand!


----------



## MrMike (Jun 28, 2008)

Hmm, tbh using the terms split/het supersnow is rather confusing. Granted, a mack snow is het supersnow, however so is TUG snow. Infact, a Leo het TUG and het mack snow is a supersnow.

I understand what is meant, just it is going to cause problemse
thinks.


----------



## funky1 (Jun 18, 2008)

MrMike said:


> Hmm, tbh using the terms split/het supersnow is rather confusing. Granted, a mack snow is het supersnow, however so is TUG snow. Infact, a Leo het TUG and het mack snow is a supersnow.
> 
> I understand what is meant, just it is going to cause problemse
> thinks.


Dude, that got me thinking (I know, my other brain cell must have got lonely while the `tother was away...) Is a TUG ever a het SS, coz when a TUG is ****` - it`s still a TUG? Now obv as het TUG look the same as a **** TUG due to it being dominant (I know you know that), and one of the things that make a co-dominant a co-dom, is the fact it has a super, and a way to pin point a dominant is the fact they don`t have a super, how is TUG classable as a dominant if it has the capacity to make - or contribute toward - a super form, or is how it does it still a mystery? Is it really just the Mack Snow gene (and possibly Gem) that carry the code to make a super, and the TUG just adds that little bit of something from it`s Snow origins to complete the sequence for the SS?

Jeez that`s rambling! May just have well put - how come a TUG can make a super combined with the Mack but it can`t on it`s own?


----------



## gazz (Dec 9, 2006)

MrMike said:


> Hmm, tbh using the terms split/het supersnow is rather confusing. Granted, a mack snow is het supersnow, however so is TUG snow. Infact, a Leo het TUG and het mack snow is a supersnow.
> 
> I understand what is meant, just it is going to cause problemse
> thinks.


That why i said SPLIT rather than HET to only to link it to the snows.

So instead of (Codom)Snow X [1C](DOM)Snow.
Or (Mack)Snow X [1C]TUG Snow.

Just refering to them as snow or snow SPLIT Super snow is so much less messing about.

Snow SPLIT Super snow X [1C]Snow = .

Normal.
[1C]Snow.
Snow SPLIT Super snow.
Super snow.

OR

Snow SPLIT Super snow X [1C]Snow = .

Normal.
Snow SPLIT Super snow.
Super snow.

Which ever outcome it may infact be.


----------



## MrMike (Jun 28, 2008)

How? I have no idea  Although it is proven
that mack x TUG will give a % of supersnow. Whether mack and TUG are allelic I think is still unproven.

So a supersnow from a TUG x mack pairing has to be het for both TUG snow and mack snow.

I'm not saying it should be considered when talking about TUG snows, however if people start using the term het/split SS, then IMO it should be applied to TUG as well. Maybe to Gem as well, however I'm
not sure how Gem works with mack or TUG


----------



## marcgroovyge (Apr 3, 2008)

I am so confused now lol


----------



## funky1 (Jun 18, 2008)

MrMike said:


> How? I have no idea  Although it is proven
> that mack x TUG will give a % of supersnow. Whether mack and TUG are allelic I think is still unproven.
> 
> So a supersnow from a TUG x mack pairing has to be het for both TUG snow and mack snow.


I totally get what you mean mate, was just curious if anyone knew what bit of the TUG gene completed the SS sequence (whether it was the actual ancesteral `snow` part), which thinking about it, must be imprinted somewhere in the Mack makeup - if it`s not present in the TUG (if they can`t make supers). I`m prob going off on a tangeant here, so apologies anyway.

Just think it`s great/fascinating how a morph - the SS - can be het for 2 things that in all the other morphs I can think of off the top of my head, would appear as a phenotype. That the SS has fused/merged/made something so strong, that it wipes out (or at least doesn`t allow to show) 2 other pretty strong ones.

I`m no doubt thinking out loud here mate - I`m not directly probing you or anyone for an answer no worries!!!


----------



## gazz (Dec 9, 2006)

MrMike said:


> How? I have no idea  Although it is proven
> that mack x TUG will give a % of supersnow. Whether mack and TUG are allelic I think is still unproven.
> 
> So a supersnow from a TUG x mack pairing has to be het for both TUG snow and mack snow.
> ...


But you only get super snow from a Codom snow x Codom snow or Dom snow X Codom snow.You won't get super snows from Dom snow X Dom snow no matter how meny times you breed them.That's why i think there's no need to refer to a Dom snow as a SPLIT Super snow coz onless you breed a Dom snow to a Codom snow you won't get any super snows.

Both TUG & GEM are both Dom snows and work just the same with Codom Snows.

At the end of the day a Snows from a Dom snow X Codom snow breeding will either be a Snow or a Snow SPLIT Super snow.


----------



## gazz (Dec 9, 2006)

funky1 said:


> Jeez that`s rambling! May just have well put - how come a TUG can make a super combined with the Mack but it can`t on it`s own?


In my line of thinking when a Dom snow both [1C] and [2C].Is bred to a Codom snow or super snow.It dosn't get reconize Dom snow as being a Dom snow so forces it a act Codom snow.So as a result you get Codom snow X Codom snow results of 25%Normal/50%Codom snow/25%Super snow.Or get Codom snow X Super snow results of 50%Codom snow/50%Super snnow.


----------



## MrMike (Jun 28, 2008)

I see what you are saying Gazz, but I can see this making things more (not less) complicated for people. Essentially you are changing the word "Mack" for "snow split supersnow" and grouping both TUG and Gem together as "snow".

Unless I am missing something? (I am slightly hungover today :whistling2


----------



## gazz (Dec 9, 2006)

MrMike said:


> I see what you are saying Gazz, but I can see this making things more (not less) complicated for people. Essentially you are changing the word "Mack" for "snow split supersnow" and grouping both TUG and Gem together as "snow".
> 
> Unless I am missing something? (I am slightly hungover today :whistling2


Pretty much but i rarly use the word mack,TUG,GEM anyway.I usually refer to them as snow(Mac) and [1C]Snow/[2C]Snow(TUG/GEM).First TUG,GEM are both (Dom)snows and there's no need IMO for the two to be reconized as differant.Coz a spade is a spade the both do the same job to others as to each others.They have [1C] & [2C] and both when bred to (Codom)snow will give super snow.

So yes only two snow morphs.

(Codominant)Snow SPLIT Super snow.
(Dominant)[1C]Snow/[2C]Snow.


----------

