# Royal genetics questions



## adsclarke (Feb 15, 2009)

Hey,

Corns I can do, they are obvious to me but I have a little question about royals.

I've been having a play with this:
Genetic Wizard 3.0 - World of Ball Pythons

I see no way to tell the wizard that I have an animal that is homozygous for a dominant gene like Pinstripe or Spider. I understand that there would be no super form and a homozygous animal would look exactly like a heterozygous animal.

Surely it matters to me though if I have one because of the animals that will be produced by breeding it. A homozygous animal bred to a normal will produce 100% heterozygous hatchlings.

Is my thinking right or have I missed something?

Or do people actually not care because there is no visual difference between heterozygous and homozygous?

Cheers
Ads


----------



## eightball (Jan 1, 2011)

adsclarke said:


> Hey,
> 
> Corns I can do, they are obvious to me but I have a little question about royals.
> 
> ...


spider and pinstripe gene is almost definatly dominant genes why would you need to practically put them as though theyre codominant?

their outcomes are the same right? no visual difference?


----------



## adsclarke (Feb 15, 2009)

Hey,

The Phenotype is the same for sure but the genetics are different so when calculating the outcome of a breeding it is a big deal.

I think what you are saying is no one cares rather than it not true genetically?

Cheers
Ads


----------



## corny girl (Aug 30, 2009)

adsclarke said:


> Hey,
> 
> The Phenotype is the same for sure but the genetics are different so when calculating the outcome of a breeding it is a big deal.
> 
> ...




With Royals we have Dominant, Co-Dominant & Recessive genes. You only get "Super" forms with Co-Dominant genes (these are what you call Homozygous). The outcome when breeding from Dominant is exactly the same as when breeding from Co-Dominant (except when you breed 2 together & get the Super which you won't get when breeding 2 Dominants because there is no Super form).


----------



## vetdebbie (Jan 4, 2008)

corny girl said:


> With Royals we have Dominant, Co-Dominant & Recessive genes. You only get "Super" forms with Co-Dominant genes (these are what you call Homozygous). The outcome when breeding from Dominant is exactly the same as when breeding from Co-Dominant (except when you breed 2 together & get the Super which you won't get when breeding 2 Dominants because there is no Super form).



Can we leave Co-dominant out of this ( we do understand about the difference between Dominant and Codominant) just for the purposes of this discussion.

With Dominant genes, the heterozygous form and the homozygous form are going to look the same - after all that is the definitation of a dominant gene. But breeding a homozygous dominant to a normal is going to produce different outcomes to breeding a heterozygous dominant animal to a normal. 

The point is you can't select this option in the calculator, which is a bit odd.

Unless royal pythons work differently to all other animals.......


----------



## Dave Balls (Jan 26, 2011)

could be because theres not much call for it? i.e. most people dont do pairings where there is no super form, and hardly anyone owns a homozygous version of a dominant morph


----------



## vetdebbie (Jan 4, 2008)

Dave Balls said:


> could be because theres not much call for it? i.e. most people dont do pairings where there is no super form, and hardly anyone owns a homozygous version of a dominant morph


Entirely possible, but with both me and Ads being fairly pedantic (and happy to admit it) annoyingly incomplete.


----------



## markhill (Sep 22, 2006)

email the site owners and bring it to their attention.

It does make a difference when working out potential offspring, there will be no normals for a start from a **** Pin, Spider or other dominant morph if anyone actually has one.


----------



## Dave Balls (Jan 26, 2011)

vetdebbie said:


> Entirely possible, but with both me and Ads being fairly pedantic (and happy to admit it) annoyingly incomplete.


I would just use super pastel, and pretend the result says spider(etc)


----------



## vetdebbie (Jan 4, 2008)

markhill said:


> email the site owners and bring it to their attention.
> 
> It does make a difference when working out potential offspring, there will be no normals for a start from a **** Pin, Spider or other dominant morph if anyone actually has one.



Adam did this, then got banned as the site owner denies it is possible to have a homozygous dominant morph.......


----------



## paulh (Sep 19, 2007)

vetdebbie said:


> Adam did this, then got banned as the site owner denies it is possible to have a homozygous dominant morph.......


 Goes to show the low level of genetics knowledge out there.

I have also emailed, but I don't know whether it went through. The program locked up. If I get banned, I'll know that it did.


----------



## markhill (Sep 22, 2006)

maybe if we all barrage the site with emails then he'll have to take notice?
(or ban us all:lol2


----------



## vetdebbie (Jan 4, 2008)

LOL thanks for the support, but I feel with the level of combined ignorance and arrogance that it will be bans all round


----------



## bothrops (Jan 7, 2007)

vetdebbie said:


> Adam did this, then got banned as the site owner denies it is possible to have a homozygous dominant morph.......


The first couple of replies on this thread show it isn't just over there that there are fundamental misunderstandings.:whistling2:


As far as I know, there are no living homozygous spiders in existence (my assumption being that the mutation is actually codominant and the homozygous spider is lethal at a very early stage of development) but regardless of whether there is or not it is still vital that all mutations involve a gene PAIR.

How can someone write a genetics calculator and still not know this?....and worse still, think that banning people that disagree will make him right!?

*Joins to carry on the Campaign Against Herp Genetics Ignorance*


----------



## bothrops (Jan 7, 2007)

Post made.

Hopefully it should explain the confusion.


Ads/Debbie....

just for completeness, the confusion is due to the fact that a neither a homozygous spider nor a homozygous pinstripe have TO DATE been PROVEN.

Therefore they 'don't exist'.

HOWEVER - we all know that biologically they must exist if the gene is actually truly dominant.

Therefore, as I pointed out on the thread, it is my hypothesis that both mutations are actually codominant in reality and the homozygous form is actually a lethal combo that either doesn't even get to the egg formation stage (no slugs) or doesn't develop (therefore slugs should be produced).

However, as there is no data from the breeders regarding slug to fertile egg ratios from spider x spider matings or pinstripe x pinstripe matings, it is possible it will not be known for some time.


----------



## paulh (Sep 19, 2007)

I saw a claim on one of the forums that a homozygous pinstripe had been proven by breeding test. However, I can't remember which forum it was now. And as far as I can recall, even the claim was hearsay. Nevertheless, I have proven a couple of examples of homozygous dominant mutant genes in pigeons. And it's been done with salmon (AKA hypo) in boa constrictors, though that is not an ideal example of a dominant mutant. So it is just a matter of time until even the diehards are dragged kicking and screaming into acceptance of the existence of animals that are homozygous for a dominant mutant gene.


----------



## vetdebbie (Jan 4, 2008)

bothrops said:


> Post made.
> 
> Hopefully it should explain the confusion.
> 
> ...



Thanks for that Bothrops.

Yes we know that there are no proven homos yet, I pointed it to Ads from one of your previous posts 

I have a feeling that it is one of those things that is going to hit the stubborn streak in us and we will end up getting a pair of pins just to prove it out!


----------



## markhill (Sep 22, 2006)

Didn't Brian at BHB claim to have a **** Pin that throws Pins in every breeding?


----------



## kidman (Sep 15, 2008)

I did see a post some where that some one put a pin male to 5 or 6 female normals and every thing came out as pins can't remember where I saw this tho on here or Captivebred.


----------



## eeji (Feb 22, 2006)

i think the main problem is general ignorance that average joe with his pinstripe (or whatever) refuses to believe that dominant morphs can be het and will defend this belief to the death and insist that its impossible - 'dominant morphs can't be het because they all look the same' etc etc


----------

