# het pied royal



## fat-pat (Mar 5, 2008)

I am thinking of getting a pair of het pied royals from batten reptiles and i dont fully understand the genetics of the pied morph would a clutch have a good percentage of pied off spring or just 1 or 2??

also what about het Leucistic royals


----------



## herp boy (May 4, 2007)

you would get 25% pied offspring, not sure how many eggs royals lay in a clutch though


----------



## fat-pat (Mar 5, 2008)

thats a good rate should cover cost of purchase in 1st clutch if lucky
as a quick google found clutch size of 2-10 average been 6


----------



## Mujician (Mar 7, 2007)

Yeah - generally 6 eggs.


----------



## Ssthisto (Aug 31, 2006)

Problem is, you're not guaranteed 25% pied in every clutch... to test this, flip two coins ten times.

Each flip of two coins represents one offspring.

Double heads = pied hatchling.
Anything containing at least one Tails = Possible Het Pied.

How many double heads do you get in your series of ten throws?

Ok, now try it again. Throw your two coins ten times again.

Did you get the same results?

It's a 25% chance that EACH egg will be a pied... which, over thousands of trials, will eventually work out to be around 25% pied offspring. However, one clutch isn't a big enough sample size!

The problem is that Bob doesn't talk to Norma and Billy and Joleen to find out if one of THEM is pied before coming out as a normal.


----------



## eeji (Feb 22, 2006)

Ssthisto said:


> Problem is, you're not guaranteed 25% pied in every clutch... to test this, flip two coins ten times.
> 
> Each flip of two coins represents one offspring.
> 
> ...


who's Bob? .....:whistling2: 

thats a nice example of how it works with hets : victory:


----------



## fat-pat (Mar 5, 2008)

ok so am i right to persome pied x pied would give 75% pied and 25% normal het pied??


----------



## Ssthisto (Aug 31, 2006)

Thing is, we tried it, with two sets of six throws.

First set of throws, we got:
Four Tails/Tails (not het at all).
Two Heads/Heads (visual pied). 

Second set of throws we got:
Two Tails/Tails (not het at all)
Three Heads/Tails (het pied)
One Heads/Heads (visual pied).

The first set of throws is uncharacteristic - we got four results that you only have a 25% chance of getting in any one throw, plus two other results you only have a 25% chance of getting in any one throw.

The second is a more normal distribution.

It's completely chance 

Same goes with the fifteen eggs I've got from a corn; this pairing has a 1 in 16 chance of producing Lavender/Anery Stripes. Am I "supposed" to get one if I've only got fifteen eggs? And the answer is: It doesn't work like that - the chance is per egg, not per clutch.


----------



## eeji (Feb 22, 2006)

fat-pat said:


> ok so am i right to persome pied x pied would give 75% pied and 25% normal het pied??


pied x pied would give 100% pied


----------



## crouchy (Jan 14, 2008)

fat-pat said:


> 25% a good rate, should cover cost of purchase in 1st clutch if lucky


Problem is that you will have to wait 2 -3 years before you get any offspring. Likelyhood is that the first cluth will be more like 4 eggs. You will probably get 1 pied which i assume you will want to keep. The other 3 will only be 66% hets will be worth about the same as a normal royal so its going to be more like 4 years before you sell a pied and make any money back. And in 4 years time a pied will probably sell for about £500 - £1000 depending on how many are produced over the next few years.

So dont buy them on the idea that you will make money on them because when you take into account housing, feeding and heating costs you probably wont make anything at all. Youll probably just make your money back over the next 6 - 8 years


----------



## paulh (Sep 19, 2007)

fat-pat said:


> also what about het Leucistic royals


There are no normal-looking royals that are het leucisitic.

Here is a thread on making a blue-eyed leucistic:

Kingsnake.com - Herpforum - How to make Blue eyed lucy


----------



## Ssthisto (Aug 31, 2006)

paulh said:


> There are no normal-looking royals that are het leucisitic.
> 
> Here is a thread on making a blue-eyed leucistic:
> 
> Kingsnake.com - Herpforum - How to make Blue eyed lucy


Welll.... there sort of is a normal-looking allele on the "white snake" locus that is made up of Russo Lemon Line, Mojave, Lesser, Butter, Mocha and Phantom ... the "mystery/dilute" gene that turns a Lesser Platinum into a Platinum, creates the Phantom44 out of Phantoms and probably results in the Crystal ball when combined with Mojave. It's not quite Blue-Eyed Leucistic producing... but then neither is a Super Mojave a real blue-eyed leucy.

Now, what a homozygous Mystery-Dilute looks like is anyone's guess.


----------



## nuggett5 (Sep 14, 2007)

This might help.:Na_Na_Na_Na:


----------



## nuggett5 (Sep 14, 2007)

this is a better one!
Markus Jayne, Ball pythons | ballpython.ca
lucys are dom! wich means that you need two co-dom to make one,
wich one aswell? blue or black eyed? blue eyed (wich i think look nicer) would come from two mojaves breeding. black eyed come from two fire balls I think, have to check that.


----------



## nuggett5 (Sep 14, 2007)

yea was right.
the only two wight snakes that will have het would be the snow and the ivery.


----------



## Ssthisto (Aug 31, 2006)

nuggett5 said:


> this is a better one!
> Markus Jayne, Ball pythons | ballpython.ca
> lucys are dom! wich means that you need two co-dom to make one,
> wich one aswell? blue or black eyed? blue eyed (wich i think look nicer) would come from two mojaves breeding. black eyed come from two fire balls I think, have to check that.


Leucistic is not "dominant" - it's just carrying two mutant (non-normal) genes on one of the three "White snake" loci.

*Locus 1* is the most complex - it's got multiple "flavours" (alleles) that can be combined to produce various effects. You get Blue Eyed Leucistics by combining any two of the following:
*Mojave / Lesser Platinum / Butter / Mocha / Phantom / Vin Russo Lemon Line / Vanilla(?)*
A combination of these will be het for each of the two genes it inherited - one from each parent - but they still combine to produce the Leucistic look. Sort of like slightly different flavours of the same food.
You can also get homozygous animals of each of these genes which are generally pale snakes, although not all of them are white snakes with blue eyes. A homozygous mojave isn't a BluEL for example - it's got markings on its head. A homozygous Phantom is a silvery, pale snake with markings. A homozygous Lesser is a true BluEL.

*Locus 2* is the Fire/BlkEL locus. You get Black Eyed Leucistics by breeding two Fire royals - a BlkEL is homozygous Fire. But Fire is still a codominant gene.

*Locus 3* is the Yellowbelly/Ivory locus. You get Ivory by breeding two Yellowbelly royals - an Ivory is homozygous Yellowbelly. But Yellowbelly is still a codominant gene.

*Homozygous* does not equal dominant - it just means that the _two genes of the pair_ are the* same*.

*Dominant *does not equal homozygous - it just means that an animal with *one copy* of the gene looks _exactly the same as and is indistinguishable from_ an animal with *two copies* of the gene - only having no copies looks different. 

If a two-copies-of-the-exact-same-gene-allele animal looks different to a one-copy animal, the description of a two-copy animal is "homozygous codominant" or - in herper slang, "super".

And a Blue-eyed Leucistic made using, say, Lesser and Mojave, is NOT a "Super Mojave" or a "Super Lesser" - it is a Lesser Mojave.


----------



## nuggett5 (Sep 14, 2007)

Ssthisto said:


> Leucistic is not "dominant" - it's just carrying two mutant (non-normal) genes on one of the three "White snake" loci.
> 
> *Locus 1* is the most complex - it's got multiple "flavours" (alleles) that can be combined to produce various effects. You get Blue Eyed Leucistics by combining any two of the following:
> *Mojave / Lesser Platinum / Butter / Mocha / Phantom / Vin Russo Lemon Line / Vanilla(?)*
> ...


Thats a bit hard. I Know someone who bred one from 2 mojaves? your right about the lesser x mojave lol. kev from n.e.r.d must be rong aswell, as it is in hes book as well that 2 mojaves can projuce a blue eyed lucy. but what do i know? I neaver sed they were equal, there two diffrent types of gene! so would not say that. dude before you get sherty check your info and read what other people have writ.


----------



## nuggett5 (Sep 14, 2007)

Mojave ball pythons at Australian Addiction Reptiles
there you go!


----------



## nuggett5 (Sep 14, 2007)

Graziani Reptiles | ball pythons | grazianireptiles.com
and there!


----------



## Akua_Ko_Nalu (Feb 15, 2007)

It's not just a case of them making Blue Eyed Leucistics, Mojave x Mojave can produce Leucistics, but most of the time they tend to make the Super Mojave, which has a pale grey head and a mirky white colour.

After alot of extensive research on all the possible combinations/outcomes, I've come to the conclusion that the Vin Russo line of "Het Leucistics" will give the best looking Blue Eyed Leucistics as an outcome, these are often referred to as the "White Diamond"


----------



## Ssthisto (Aug 31, 2006)

nuggett5 said:


> Thats a bit hard. I Know someone who bred one from 2 mojaves? your right about the lesser x mojave lol. kev from n.e.r.d must be rong aswell, as it is in hes book as well that 2 mojaves can projuce a blue eyed lucy. but what do i know? I neaver sed they were equal, there two diffrent types of gene! so would not say that. dude before you get sherty check your info and read what other people have writ.


Nuggett:

I personally would not call a snake that is not *completely *white with pigmented eyes a Leucistic. "Leucistic" comes from the root word "leucos" meaning white. A Leucistic Texas Rat snake is truly Leucistic - pure bright white nose to tailtip, with blue, grey or black eyes.

Therefore, a Super Mojave, which has markings on its head, is not a pure white snake with pigmented eyes; it's not leucistic. It's a white snake, yes - but not a totally white snake. Yes, some people have CALLED them leucistic - even knowledgeable breeders. 

But then people called Patternless leopard geckos "leucistic" ... right up until folk realised that a bright yellow gecko just isn't Leucistic ... and then they discovered the much whiter Blizzard (which is more like a true leucistic, although it still doesn't meet the dictionary definition).

I could call a snake with faint yellow markings and pink eyes a "leucistic" ... but it doesn't meet the dictionary definition, even if it's mostly white (i.e. a Snow royal). I'm a stickler for using the right words, and I'm sorry if that bothers you. If someone says "Leucistic is dominant" then I'm going to correct them, because that's not technically accurate or true - and may lead to confusion about how the genes actually work. If someone says that a snake with grey head markings but a generally white body is Leucistic, I'm going to correct them, because it's not a correct usage of the term.

Now, I wouldn't argue if someone said a Super Mojave was PARTIALLY leucistic - because it is. I also wouldn't argue if someone said a Pied was partially leucistic... and what you get when you cross a Lesser het Pied to a Pied indicates that they're closer related than one might have thought.



Akua_Ko_Nalu said:


> It's not just a case of them making Blue Eyed Leucistics, Mojave x Mojave can produce Leucistics, but most of the time they tend to make the Super Mojave, which has a pale grey head and a mirky white colour.


Do you have a photographic citation of a KNOWN homozygous Mojave animal - with no chance of being a Lesser/Mojave or other White Snake Complex combination - who is pure white nose to tailtip? I've never seen one that didn't have the grey head patterning, unless they change as they age?



> After alot of extensive research on all the possible combinations/outcomes, I've come to the conclusion that the Vin Russo line of "Het Leucistics" will give the best looking Blue Eyed Leucistics as an outcome, these are often referred to as the "White Diamond"


I like the Lesser Mojaves myself - NERD's "Vivid" is one of these.


----------



## Akua_Ko_Nalu (Feb 15, 2007)

Ssthisto said:


> Do you have a photographic citation of a KNOWN homozygous Mojave animal - with no chance of being a Lesser/Mojave or other White Snake Complex combination - who is pure white nose to tailtip? I've never seen one that didn't have the grey head patterning, unless they change as they age?
> 
> 
> 
> I like the Lesser Mojaves myself - NERD's "Vivid" is one of these.


 
I don't have any photographic evidence of a True Blue Eyed Leucistic from a Mojave x Mojave Breeding. To be honest, I don't think it has been done, my original post should have been worded better (I meant that the Mojave x Mojave can produce a Leucistic looking snake rather than a pure BEL). They definately make Super Mojaves, with the washed out head markings.


----------



## nuggett5 (Sep 14, 2007)

dude your getting hot headed over this. all this is not going to help the fella is it? All he wanted to know was what he would get from het x het breeding and wich snakes were het for leucistic. just go the simple wat say fireball for the leucistic and you will get a 25% chance of getting a pied. done:lol2:


----------



## Ssthisto (Aug 31, 2006)

But if someone assumes that the ONLY way to get a leucistic is to have two Fires they're missing out on cheaper ways of doing it (lesserXmojave for example)- and someone expecting to get a pure white snake with blue eyes out of a pair of Mojaves is probably going to be disappointed. For that matter, some people expecting to get a pure white snake with black eyes out of a pair of Fires will probably be disappointed too, since a lot of the "leucistics" wind up with yellow staining. That's why I'm trying to use absolutely technically correct terms.


----------

