# Can someone ask me what some leo pairings would create?



## repkid (Nov 30, 2007)

Please state whether they are recessive, co-dom or dom. 

I am trying to figure out whether I have genetics correct or not.


----------



## Mujician (Mar 7, 2007)

albino to hypo?


----------



## MrMike (Jun 28, 2008)

Supersnow x Mack snow Bell albino. Supersnow is the homozygopus version of Mack snow, and Bell albino is recessive.


----------



## boywonder (Mar 10, 2008)

murphy patternless het bell x bell het murphy patternless?, (both bell and murphy patternless act recessive)


----------



## MrMike (Jun 28, 2008)

boywonder said:


> murphy patternless het bell x bell het murphy patternless?, (both bell and murphy patternless act recessive)


Cheeky lol


----------



## Blackecho (Jun 30, 2008)

repkid said:


> Please state whether they are recessive, co-dom or dom.
> 
> I am trying to figure out whether I have genetics correct or not.


You have to answer them you know


----------



## repkid (Nov 30, 2007)

Mujician said:


> albino to hypo?


 Not sure as I don'y know whether they are recessive or co dom etc.



MrMike said:


> Supersnow x Mack snow Bell albino. Supersnow is the homozygopus version of Mack snow, and Bell albino is recessive.


25%super snow albinos, 25%super snows het albino and 50% mack snow het albino? :lol2: thats probably completely wrong.



boywonder said:


> murphy patternless het bell x bell het murphy patternless?, (both bell and murphy patternless act recessive)


 Would it be 50% murphy pattys het bell and 50% bell het murphy pattys.

If not is it 100% normals het for bell and murphy patternless?


Blackecho said:


> You have to answer them you know


 I know lol.

In all honesty I completely forgot I made this thread:blush:


----------



## gazz (Dec 9, 2006)

repkid said:


> Not sure as I don'y know whether they are recessive or co dom etc.


Talbino,Ralbino,Balbino are all recessive and Hypo is dominant.


----------



## repkid (Nov 30, 2007)

Mujician said:


> albino to hypo?





gazz said:


> Talbino,Ralbino,Balbino are all recessive and Hypo is dominant.


 
So you'd get 100% hypos 50% het albino?


----------



## gazz (Dec 9, 2006)

repkid said:


> So you'd get 100% hypos 50% het albino?


The hypo part is ONE possible outcome there is another.The percentage of HET albinos is wrong.


----------



## repkid (Nov 30, 2007)

75% hypo 100% het albino and 25%albino het hypo?


----------



## MrMike (Jun 28, 2008)

MrMike said:


> Supersnow x Mack snow Bell albino. Supersnow is the homozygopus version of Mack snow, and Bell albino is recessive.





repkid said:


> 25%super snow albinos, 25%super snows het albino and 50% mack snow het albino? :lol2: thats probably completely wrong.


Close, I see your working. But, as Supersnow carries 2 copies of the mack snow gene, it will always pass one to the offspring. The mack snow only carrie sone, so will either pass the mack snow gene or the "not" mack snow gene. The mack snow bell albino carries 2 copies of the Bell gene as it is visually a Bell albino, but the supersnow does not carry the Bell albino gene, so all offspring will be het Bell albino.

Supersnow x Mack snow bell albino will give 50% Supersnow het bell albino, 50% mack snow het bell albino.

Get it?


----------



## gazz (Dec 9, 2006)

repkid said:


> 75% hypo 100% het albino and 25%albino het hypo?


100% HET albino.YES.

Rest NOP!.


----------



## repkid (Nov 30, 2007)

MrMike said:


> Close, I see your working. But, as Supersnow carries 2 copies of the mack snow gene, it will always pass one to the offspring. The mack snow only carrie sone, so will either pass the mack snow gene or the "not" mack snow gene. The mack snow bell albino carries 2 copies of the Bell gene as it is visually a Bell albino, but the supersnow does not carry the Bell albino gene, so all offspring will be het Bell albino.
> 
> Supersnow x Mack snow bell albino will give 50% Supersnow het bell albino, 50% mack snow het bell albino.
> 
> Get it?


 Yes that makes sense. So I did actually get 75% correct? Go me!


----------



## MrMike (Jun 28, 2008)

repkid said:


> Yes that makes sense. So I did actually get 75% correct? Go me!


haha yeah :notworthy:


----------



## repkid (Nov 30, 2007)

gazz said:


> 100% HET albino.YES.
> 
> Rest NOP!.


 100% hypos that are 100% het for albino?


----------



## gazz (Dec 9, 2006)

repkid said:


> 100% hypos that are 100% het for albino?


YEP! that one but there is another possible outcome.


----------



## repkid (Nov 30, 2007)

gazz said:


> YEP! that one but there is another possible outcome.


 Go on then...


----------



## Mujician (Mar 7, 2007)

Only half would be hypo so the outcome would be half the clutch normal 100% het albino, and the other half would be hypo 100% het albino


----------



## repkid (Nov 30, 2007)

Mujician said:


> Only half would be hypo so the outcome would be half the clutch normal 100% het albino, and the other half would be hypo 100% het albino


 Ok cheers.

Anymore questions?

Need to keep practising:2thumb:


----------



## MrMike (Jun 28, 2008)

Sunglow (SHTCTB tremper albino) x Sunglow (SHTCTB Bell albino)


----------



## repkid (Nov 30, 2007)

MrMike said:


> Sunglow (SHTCTB tremper albino) x Sunglow (SHTCTB Bell albino)


As hypo is dominant would you get,

100% sunglows het for both strains of albinos?


----------



## MrMike (Jun 28, 2008)

repkid said:


> As hypo is dominant would you get,
> 
> 100% sunglows het for both strains of albinos?


Most probably yes. But, as SH,B,T, and Ct are line bred, there is a chance of not having these traits visually.

Also, if both sunglows only carry 1 copy of the hypo gene, there will be a 25% chance of the offspring not being hypo.

As said above, your answer is the most likel;y outcome though :2thumb:


----------



## repkid (Nov 30, 2007)

MrMike said:


> Most probably yes. But, as SH,B,T, and Ct are line bred, there is a chance of not having these traits visually.
> 
> Also, if both sunglows only carry 1 copy of the hypo gene, there will be a 25% chance of the offspring not being hypo.
> 
> As said above, your answer is the most likel;y outcome though :2thumb:


Cool. So you mentioned the SH, B, T and ct as line bred outcomes but as both the parents have these then they would be carried on right?

Or do you mean that there arent actually genetics of these appearances found in either of the parents so there is a chance you won't get any of these things even with careful parent matchings?


----------



## MrMike (Jun 28, 2008)

repkid said:


> Cool. So you mentioned the SH, B, T and ct as line bred outcomes but as both the parents have these then they would be carried on right?


Most probably yes, but there is a chance of having "poorer" quality, or a chance of "better" quality :2thumb:


----------



## repkid (Nov 30, 2007)

MrMike said:


> Most probably yes, but there is a chance of having "poorer" quality, or a chance of "better" quality :2thumb:


 Alright cheers.

What would a dominant x dominant create though.

For example what would enigma x hypo create?

Would it just be 50/50 both het for each other?


----------



## MrMike (Jun 28, 2008)

repkid said:


> Alright cheers.
> 
> What would a dominant x dominant create though.
> 
> ...


It depends on how many copies of each gene the animals carry, whether they are heterozygous (one copy) or homozygous (two copies) for the traits in question.

If both animals are homozygous for their respective traits...

Enigma (homozygous) x Hypo (homozygous) will give 100% hypo enigmas (heterozygous for each gene)

This is because both animals will pass on the gene for the trait they carry.

=========================================

If the Enigma is heterozygous and the Hypo is homozygous....

Enigma (Heterozyous) x Hypo (homozygous) will give 50% Hypo enigma (heterozygous for each gene) and 50% hypo (heterozygous)

This is because the Enigma only carries one copy of the gene, so a 50% chance of passing it on to offspring.

================================================

If the enigma is homozygous and the Hypo is heterozygous....

Enigma (Homozygous) x Hypo (Heterozygous) will give 50% Hypo enigma (heterozygous for each gene) and 50% enigma (heterozygous)

This is because the Hypo only carries one copy of the gene, so a 50% chance of passing it on to offspring.

===================================================

If the Enigma is heterozygous and the hypo is heterozygous...

Enigma (heterozygous) x Hypo (heterozygous) will give 25% hypo enigma (heterozygous for each gene), 25% Enigma ((heterozygous), 25% Enigma (heterozygous) and 25% normal (carryinng neither the Enigma or Hypo genes)

===================================================

I hope this makes sense, please tell me if not, I kind of got carried away there.....


----------



## sam12345 (Dec 28, 2007)

Dont mean to nit pick but ive found a few corrections...



Mujician said:


> Only half would be hypo so the outcome would be half the clutch normal 100% het albino, and the other half would be hypo 100% het albino


I see what you mean but its not guarenteed half the clutch would be normals het and the other half would be hypo hets it just means there is 50% chance of each egg being either normal or hypo het for albino.
You may end up with 100% normals or 80/20 hypo/normal.



repkid said:


> As hypo is dominant would you get,
> 
> 100% sunglows het for both strains of albinos?


They would actually only be hypo or super hypo het albinos depending on what line bred traits are passed on!
A sunglow is when a hypo or super hypo is visually displaying the albino gene aswell and as none of the offspring will they will just be hypo or SH

Heres a trick on for you....

Super Snow T-Albino (super snow is double copy co dom, and t-albino double(2copy) ressesive) x RAPTOR (T-albino is double ressesive and eclipse is double ressesive)
For this example dont forget rev stripe, tangerine are line bred traits not genetic!


----------



## gazz (Dec 9, 2006)

repkid said:


> Go on then...


 
Possible outcome 1.
Albino normal X Hypo(SF) = .

50%Normal HET albino.
50%Hypo(SF) HET albino.
----
Possible outcome 2.
Albino normal X Hypo(DF) = .

100%Hypo(SF) HET albino.


----------



## Ssthisto (Aug 31, 2006)

Ok, here goes:

Recessive Black Pearl X Dominant Black Eyed het Black Pearl (out of a Black Pearl not Black Eyed X Dominant Black Eyed pairing)

I'm using mythical traits simply because I want you to pay attention to how the traits WORK and not what you expect them to do.


----------



## repkid (Nov 30, 2007)

sam12345 said:


> Dont mean to nit pick but ive found a few corrections...
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 Does RAPTOR stand for red albino patternless tremper orange?



Ssthisto said:


> Ok, here goes:
> 
> Recessive Black Pearl X Dominant Black Eyed het Black Pearl (out of a Black Pearl not Black Eyed X Dominant Black Eyed pairing)
> 
> I'm using mythical traits simply because I want you to pay attention to how the traits WORK and not what you expect them to do.


 I'm not sure is there such thing as a black eyed black pearl? Never heard of or seen any of these morphs?


----------



## repkid (Nov 30, 2007)

MrMike said:


> It depends on how many copies of each gene the animals carry, whether they are heterozygous (one copy) or homozygous (two copies) for the traits in question.
> 
> If both animals are homozygous for their respective traits...
> 
> ...


 Yes, thanks:2thumb:


----------



## sam12345 (Dec 28, 2007)

repkid said:


> Does RAPTOR stand for red albino patternless tremper orange?
> 
> 
> I'm not sure is there such thing as a black eyed black pearl? Never heard of or seen any of these morphs?


It stand for Ruby/Red eyed Albino Patternless Tremper ORange.
eclipse (red eye) ressesive, albino ressesive, tremper patternless line bred, Orange (tangerine) line bred!


----------



## repkid (Nov 30, 2007)

sam12345 said:


> It stand for Ruby/Red eyed Albino Patternless Tremper ORange.
> eclipse (red eye) ressesive, albino ressesive, tremper patternless line bred, Orange (tangerine) line bred!


 So RAPTOR x Super snow tremper albino would create:

Well there are two copys of snow and 2 copys of tremper.

So 25% chance of super snow tremper albino patternless 50% het eclipse if thats possible?

25% chance of super snow tremper albino 50% het eclipse

25% chance of tremper albino 100% het snow 50% het eclipse

12.5% chance of mack snow albino 50% het eclipse

12.5 % chance of mack snow 100% het albino 50% het eclipse???

Jeez that took a lot of thinking lol and its probably wrong.:lol2:


----------



## Ssthisto (Aug 31, 2006)

repkid said:


> Does RAPTOR stand for red albino patternless tremper orange?


*R*ubyeyed-*A*lbino-*P*atternlessreversestripe-*T*remper-*OR*ange.



> I'm not sure is there such thing as a black eyed black pearl? Never heard of or seen any of these morphs?


If you understand how genetics work and what the RULES are then it doesn't matter if "dominant black eyed" and/or "recessive black pearl" exist or not, surely - you'd still be able to tell me what the genetic breakdown should be for a crossing between a homozygous recessive animal to a heterozygous-dominant animal who is also het for the separate recessive trait.

No, there isn't such a thing as either morph, that's why I said "I'm using mythical traits."


----------



## sam12345 (Dec 28, 2007)

repkid said:


> So RAPTOR x Super snow tremper albino would create:
> 
> Well there are two copys of snow and 2 copys of tremper.
> 
> ...


Nope... super snow x a non snow parent will always give 100% mack snow offsrping because it is co dom double copy... to get super snows you would have to have both parents carrying atleast 1 copy of the snow gene.
Patternless in RAPTOR is line bred so can not really be worked out in an equation just possilbly showing reduced pattern, the same goes to the ORange aswell.
The other GENE in raptor is eclipse.

So effectively you are working out SS albino x Albino eclipse. Remembering the offspring may show reduced patterning, reverse stripe or tangerine colouring!

Another tip aswell is if a gecko is visually carrying a ressesive trait and the other parent isnt... the offspring are going to be 100% het for the parents trait.


----------



## Ssthisto (Aug 31, 2006)

repkid said:


> So RAPTOR x Super snow tremper albino would create:


RAPTOR is homozygous eclipse, homozygous albino.
Super Snow Tremper Albino is homozygous snow, homozygous albino.

ALL of the offspring have to be albino - there's no "not albino" to give.
Because Snow is a codominant trait, ALL of the offspring are getting one copy of snow from the Super Snow parent, therefore ALL of the offspring will be Snows.
And the RAPTOR will ALWAYS give one copy of Eclipse to any baby.

You can't get ANY Super snows because Super Snow is homozygous snow (got one copy of snow from mum, one copy of snow from dad). RAPTOR doesn't have a copy of Snow to give.


----------



## repkid (Nov 30, 2007)

Ssthisto said:


> *R*ubyeyed-*A*lbino-*P*atternlessreversestripe-*T*remper-*OR*ange.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


kk here goes.

Recessive Black Pearl X Dominant Black Eyed het Black Pearl :

75% black eyed 100% het black pearl - 

25% black pearl 100% het black eyed


----------



## repkid (Nov 30, 2007)

sam12345 said:


> Nope... super snow x a non snow parent will always give 100% mack snow offsrping because it is co dom double copy... to get super snows you would have to have both parents carrying atleast 1 copy of the snow gene.
> Patternless in RAPTOR is line bred so can not really be worked out in an equation just possilbly showing reduced pattern, the same goes to the ORange aswell.
> The other GENE in raptor is eclipse.
> 
> ...





Ssthisto said:


> RAPTOR is homozygous eclipse, homozygous albino.
> Super Snow Tremper Albino is homozygous snow, homozygous albino.
> 
> ALL of the offspring have to be albino - there's no "not albino" to give.
> ...


Alright then.

So albino eclipse x super snow albino:

50% mack snow 100% het eclipse and albino.

25% mack snow albino 100% het eclipse.

25 mack snow eclipse 100% het albino????


----------



## Ssthisto (Aug 31, 2006)

Ok, where are you getting your numbers? Explain to me why three quarters of the animals will be black eyed when only one animal carries ONE copy of the gene (that means "50% chance of passing on the trait") ... and if it's a dominant trait, you don't get an invisible het.

The actual results are:

25% Black eyed het Black Pearl (Got a copy of black eyed from one parent and a copy of not-black-eyed from the other; got a copy of black pearl from the black pearl parent, and a copy of not-black-pearl from the other).
25% Black eyed Black Pearl (got a copy of black eyed from one parent and a copy of not-black-eyed from the other; got a copy of black pearl from both parents)
25% Normal het Black Pearl (got a copy of not-black-eyed from both parents, got a copy of black pearl from the black pearl parent and a copy of not-black-pearl from the other)
25% Black Pearl (got a copy of black pearl from both parents, got a copy of not-black-eyed from both parents)

Here's another one:

A female Recessive Skunk Stripe het Recessive Albino X a male Recessive Albino het Recessive Skunk Stripe

What results do you get? (incidentally, these traits do exist... in fat-tailed geckos)


----------



## Ssthisto (Aug 31, 2006)

repkid said:


> Alright then.
> 
> So albino eclipse x super snow albino:
> 
> ...


Nope, because two visual albinos of the same strain CANNOT produce a non-albino offspring.


----------



## repkid (Nov 30, 2007)

Ssthisto said:


> Ok, where are you getting your numbers? Explain to me why three quarters of the animals will be black eyed when only one animal carries ONE copy of the gene (that means "50% chance of passing on the trait") ... and if it's a dominant trait, you don't get an invisible het.
> 
> The actual results are:
> 
> ...


Well looking back i realise i have completely messed up the numbers lol.

A female Recessive Skunk Stripe het Recessive Albino X a male Recessive Albino het Recessive Skunk Stripe:

You'll get:

50% skunk stripe 100% het albino?

50% albion 100% het skunk stripe

You get 1 homozygous trait from each pair and 1 heterzygous trait from each pair both of which are opposites if you know what I mean. So two copys of each morph which means 50% chance and het for the other because there are the same amount of genes and they are both recessive.


----------



## repkid (Nov 30, 2007)

Ssthisto said:


> Nope, because two visual albinos of the same strain CANNOT produce a non-albino offspring.


 Right soo

100% mack snow albino 100% het for eclipse?

Because you have to end up with both visual snows and albino but not 1 of each. So in effect they mix and only 1 gene of eclipse is passed so it is het eclipse?.?.?


----------



## sam12345 (Dec 28, 2007)

repkid said:


> Right soo
> 
> 100% mack snow albino 100% het for eclipse?
> 
> Because you have to end up with both visual snows and albino but not 1 of each. So in effect they mix and only 1 gene of eclipse is passed so it is het eclipse?.?.?


 
Yep


----------



## Ssthisto (Aug 31, 2006)

repkid said:


> Well looking back i realise i have completely messed up the numbers lol.
> 
> A female Recessive Skunk Stripe het Recessive Albino X a male Recessive Albino het Recessive Skunk Stripe:
> 
> ...


No. Think about it this way maybe:

Skunk Stripe het albino is *ss Aa*
Albino het Skunk Stripe is *Ss aa*

If *S* only goes with other *S* (or *s*) and *A *only goes with *A *(or *a*) then how many different combinations are there if each parent gives one copy of EACH pair of genes to the babies? 

Mum can only give Skunk Stripe to the babies - she doesn't have "not skunk stripe".
Dad can only give Albino to the babies - he doesn't have "not albino".

There are FOUR different possibilities - but what are they?


----------



## repkid (Nov 30, 2007)

25% skunk stripes het albino
25% skunk stripes
25% albino het skunk stripe
25% ablino 


I have learnt all the genetics after talking to sam12345 on msn and sam taught me how to use the wizard genetics thing. So I can now do all leo genetics with the help of that.


But I have 1 question, how do you know if an enigma has 1 or 2 copies of enigma? Is it 1 copy if only 1 parent was enigma and 2 copies if both parents were enigma?


----------



## Ssthisto (Aug 31, 2006)

repkid said:


> 25% skunk stripes het albino
> 25% skunk stripes
> 25% albino het skunk stripe
> 25% ablino


No again - because they have a skunk stripe parent, ALL of the babies have to be at least het skunk stripe; because they have an albino parent, all of the babies have to be at least het albino.

The actual answer is:

25% normal het albino and skunk stripe
25% albino het skunk stripe
25% skunk stripe het albino
25% skunk striped albino

This exact same breakdown happens if you have ANY single Recessive A het B crossed to Recessive B het A - Albino and patternless, blizzard and eclipse...



> I have learnt all the genetics after talking to sam12345 on msn and sam taught me how to use the wizard genetics thing. So I can now do all leo genetics with the help of that.


I don't think using the gene wizard is helping you - I really don't think you understand how all these percentages happen or what exactly makes an offspring het for the gene.

If one parent is visually a recessive gene like Albino, ALL of its offspring will be het for that gene.
If one parent is visually a homozygous codominant gene like Super Snow, ALL of its offspring will be het for the gene and will show the het version.
If one parent is visually a dominant gene like Enigma, all offspring that show the gene are at least het for it; all offspring who do not show it do not carry it at all.

I think you need to learn the four genetic rules - how the traits actually work - without having a computer program tell you what you should get, because a computer program is only as good as the information it's given, and if you don't understand the rules behind it... you won't be giving the program accurate information.



> But I have 1 question, how do you know if an enigma has 1 or 2 copies of enigma? Is it 1 copy if only 1 parent was enigma and 2 copies if both parents were enigma?


The only way to know for sure is to breed it to a normal - if you get even one non-enigma baby you know you have a het-enigma; if you never get a normal baby in a large number of offspring, you probably have a homozygous-enigma.

A pairing where one parent is Enigma and the other is not CANNOT produce a homozygous enigma offspring.
A pairing where both parents are Enigmas has a chance of producing homozygous enigmas, but if one or both parents are het-enigmas, it can also produce het-enigma offspring.


----------



## sam12345 (Dec 28, 2007)

I think the problem is he doesnt understand what genes are ressesive co dom and dom.
Every example i gave him he was getting right when i spoke to him.

Lets try one with the morphs that you know:

Mack snow albino x patternless.


----------



## Ssthisto (Aug 31, 2006)

sam12345 said:


> I think the problem is he doesnt understand what genes are ressesive co dom and dom.


I'm not sure that's the case when someone says "dominant X gene" and "recessive Y gene" ... I think the problem is that there is a misunderstanding of how the genes work at all.

One of the problems is that the animal doesn't have just one "colour gene pair" - it has MANY.

A Mack Snow albino crossed to a patternless is the following set of gene pairs:

Mack snow albino not patternless = Ms/ms a/a P/P
Patternless not mack snow albino = ms/ms A/A p/p

Each gene pair only refers to the MATCHING pair in the other animal (patternless only matches patternless P/p; it does not affect nor is it affected by albino A/a).


----------



## repkid (Nov 30, 2007)

sam12345 said:


> I think the problem is he doesnt understand what genes are ressesive co dom and dom.
> Every example i gave him he was getting right when i spoke to him.
> 
> Lets try one with the morphs that you know:
> ...


50% normal het albino and patty.

50% mack snow het ablino and patty.

Brad


----------



## Ssthisto (Aug 31, 2006)

Ok, that one was correct - but was it correct because you worked it out or because a computer program did, or because you've learned by rote what that pairing produces?

How about this - because leopard gecko genetics work EXACTLY the same way as royal python genetics or cornsnake genetics, can you tell me what the following pairings will make:

In corn snakes, Amelanistic is recessive to normal. Blotched is dominant to Striped. 

If I cross a Blotched Amelanistic to a Striped Amelanistic what will I get?
What if I cross a Blotched Amelanistic to a Striped het Amelanistic?

In royal pythons, Mojave is codominant to Normal. Albino is recessive to normal. Pinstripe is dominant to normal.

If I want to get Albino Mojave Pinstripes, and I have an Albino Pinstripe female, what male do I need to buy in order to get my goal in the FIRST generation?


----------



## repkid (Nov 30, 2007)

Ssthisto said:


> Ok, that one was correct - but was it correct because you worked it out or because a computer program did, or because you've learned by rote what that pairing produces?
> 
> How about this - because leopard gecko genetics work EXACTLY the same way as royal python genetics or cornsnake genetics, can you tell me what the following pairings will make:
> 
> ...


Am I allowed to use wizard genetics? It's the website I used for the previous question.


----------



## repkid (Nov 30, 2007)

For the corn one without using the computer would you get 100% amelanistics het blothed and striped?


The royal one would it have to be a Mojave het albino male?


----------



## Ssthisto (Aug 31, 2006)

repkid said:


> For the corn one without using the computer would you get 100% amelanistics het blothed and striped?
> 
> 
> The royal one would it have to be a Mojave het albino male?


Very good. Would the amelanistics LOOK blotched, or would they look striped?

And the mojave het albino male is one way - it's the cheapest, that's for sure! I would go for an albino mojave personally to increase the chances (since then you wouldn't get babies who are not albino - so you've got a 50/50 chance of mojave albinos, a 50/50 chance of pinstripe albinos, and therefore a 25% chance of getting the mojave pinstripe - quadruple the chance of getting one from a het-albino cross).


----------



## repkid (Nov 30, 2007)

Ssthisto said:


> Very good. Would the amelanistics LOOK blotched, or would they look striped?
> 
> And the mojave het albino male is one way - it's the cheapest, that's for sure! I would go for an albino mojave personally to increase the chances (since then you wouldn't get babies who are not albino - so you've got a 50/50 chance of mojave albinos, a 50/50 chance of pinstripe albinos, and therefore a 25% chance of getting the mojave pinstripe - quadruple the chance of getting one from a het-albino cross).


:lol2: I was going to mention albino mojave but wasn't sure if it actually existed because i'm not that into royals. But i fugured that albino was recessive so would NEED ANOTHER copy to be visually albino and mojave is dominant so you only need 1 copy for it to be visual. Therefore the answer HAD to include 1 mojave and 1 albino copy :2thumb:

And the corn question. Erm, what does blotched look like? IF it is different to the normal pattern that a regular corn would posess then no it wouldnt looked blotch and it wouldnt look striped either because the outcome is visually amel het blotched and stripe. And if they are het they are not visible.


brad


----------



## Ssthisto (Aug 31, 2006)

repkid said:


> :lol2: I was going to mention albino mojave but wasn't sure if it actually existed because i'm not that into royals. But i fugured that albino was recessive so would NEED ANOTHER copy to be visually albino and mojave is dominant so you only need 1 copy for it to be visual. Therefore the answer HAD to include 1 mojave and 1 albino copy :2thumb:


Exactly. I don't know if there are any visual albino mojaves out there yet  And the best chance you could get is actually "super mojave albino" - because then every baby would have to be both mojave AND albino - and gives you a 50% chance of getting all three traits in the breeding.



> And the corn question. Erm, what does blotched look like? IF it is different to the normal pattern that a regular corn would posess then no it wouldnt looked blotch and it wouldnt look striped either because the outcome is visually amel het blotched and stripe. And if they are het they are not visible.


Actually, if "blotched" is dominant to "stripe" it doesn't matter if it's different to "normal" - because you'd wind up with visual Blotched het Stripe offspring. The only time you ever describe one gene as dominant to (or recessive to) another is if they're part of the same gene pair. 

Hets aren't always invisible IF an animal is het for two things on the same gene pair - or if the het trait is a dominant or codominant.

A Mack Snow leopard gecko is het for Mack snow and het for "not mack snow" you see


----------



## kirsten (Jan 13, 2008)

repkid said:


> Am I allowed to use wizard genetics? It's the website I used for the previous question.


 
awesome, i've just pulled up that genetic wizard thing, and it's amazing. i just need to know now whether the genetics of my gex are dom, co-dom, recesive and whatnot. hehe.

thank you so much for pointing the site out, cuz i was trying to remember my lessons and tables from genetics in biology gcse, and failing misserably.


----------



## repkid (Nov 30, 2007)

Ssthisto said:


> Exactly. I don't know if there are any visual albino mojaves out there yet  And the best chance you could get is actually "super mojave albino" - because then every baby would have to be both mojave AND albino - and gives you a 50% chance of getting all three traits in the breeding.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Ah I see what you mean BUT, it is impossible for something to be het for a dominant or co dominant morph becuase they only need 1 copy to become ****, is this not right?


----------



## MrMike (Jun 28, 2008)

repkid said:


> Ah I see what you mean BUT, it is impossible for something to be het for a dominant or co dominant morph becuase they only need 1 copy to become ****, is this not right?


No, het for something just means it carries one copy of the gene, whether it is visual or not. Mack snow is heterozygous for mack snow, but you can visually see it.


----------



## repkid (Nov 30, 2007)

:blush:Oh


I read earlier when I first started to learn the genetics that het meant and invisible trait. But can you see what I am getting at with the whole, if its dom or co dom it only needs one copy to become **** in a sense?


----------



## MrMike (Jun 28, 2008)

repkid said:


> :blush:Oh
> 
> 
> I read earlier when I first started to learn the genetics that het meant and invisible trait. But can you see what I am getting at with the whole, if its dom or co dom it only needs one copy to become **** in a sense?


Alot of people make that mistake, don't worry. Het for a recessive mutation would be invisible.

I see what you mean, but it isn't correct. Co dom or Dom mutations only need to be het to become visible. **** for a co dom mutation will create a different look, ie Mack snow and super snow. **** for a Dom gene will look no different to the het counterpart.


----------



## repkid (Nov 30, 2007)

Ah yes keep getting confused lol!

So this is how it stands in my head atm.

het for dom means tere is only 1 copy BUT it visual because it is a dom morph and would still look the same if there were 2 copys but if there are two copys it may affect the outcomes.

het for co dom means there is only 1 copy and it is visual but there is a super form yet to be made if another copy is added.

het for recessive means there is only 1 copy and it IS invisible. To become visual there has to be 2 copys of it.


----------



## MrMike (Jun 28, 2008)

repkid said:


> Ah yes keep getting confused lol!
> 
> So this is how it stands in my head atm.
> 
> ...


Thats it! :notworthy:


----------



## repkid (Nov 30, 2007)

:lol2:

Now just to learn it without the computer.:roll:


----------



## MrMike (Jun 28, 2008)

repkid said:


> :lol2:
> 
> Now just to learn it without the computer.:roll:


Right, no calculators

Tremper Albino Eclipse x Bell Albino Mack snow het Eclipse

Tremper albino = recessive
Eclipse = Recessive
Bell albino = Recessive
Mack snow = codom


----------



## repkid (Nov 30, 2007)

MrMike said:


> Right, no calculators
> 
> Tremper Albino Eclipse x Bell Albino Mack snow het Eclipse
> 
> ...


Mack snow albinos het eclipse?


----------



## MrMike (Jun 28, 2008)

repkid said:


> Mack snow albinos het eclipse?


No, remember you have 2 different strains of albino, which are incompatible.


----------



## repkid (Nov 30, 2007)

MrMike said:


> No, remember you have 2 different strains of albino, which are incompatible.


 Alright I wan't sure about the two differnet types of albino so I left them out and hoped for the best :lol2:.

Mack snow het eclipse, t_albino and b_albino


----------



## paulh (Sep 19, 2007)

You always have to remember that there are two genes in a gene pair, and all gene pairs are either homozygous or heterozygous. Homozygous simply means that the two genes are the same. Heterozygous simply means that the two genes are not the same. If you reach into your sock drawer and pull out two identical red socks, the pair is homozygous. If you pull out two identical blue socks, the pair is homozygous. If you pull out a blue sock and a red sock, the pair is heterozygous.

An animal is heterozygous if the gene pair of interest is heterozygous and homozygous if the gene pair of interest is homozygous.

Homozygous normal = 2 copies of the normal gene = looks (and is) normal

Homozygous for a recessive mutant = 2 copies of the recessive mutant gene = full mutant appearance.

Heterozygous for a recessive mutant = recessive mutant gene (usually) paired with a normal gene = looks normal.

Homozygous for a dominant mutant = 2 copies of the dominant mutant gene = full mutant appearance.

Heterozygous for a dominant mutant = dominant mutant gene (usually) paired with a normal gene = looks like the homozygous dominant type.

Homozygous for a codominant mutant = 2 copies of the codominant mutant gene = full mutant appearance.

Heterozygous for a codominant mutant = codominant mutant gene (usually) paired with a normal gene = does not look normal and does not look like the homozygous codominant type. May be more or less intermediate between normal and the homozygous codominant mutant type, or may show some other difference.

I put "(usually) paired" because that is the most common case but not the only possible case.


----------



## repkid (Nov 30, 2007)

paulh said:


> You always have to remember that there are two genes in a gene pair, and all gene pairs are either homozygous or heterozygous. Homozygous simply means that the two genes are the same. Heterozygous simply means that the two genes are not the same. If you reach into your sock drawer and pull out two identical red socks, the pair is homozygous. If you pull out two identical blue socks, the pair is homozygous. If you pull out a blue sock and a red sock, the pair is heterozygous.
> 
> An animal is heterozygous if the gene pair of interest is heterozygous and homozygous if the gene pair of interest is homozygous.
> 
> ...


 :2thumb:


----------



## MrMike (Jun 28, 2008)

repkid said:


> Alright I wan't sure about the two differnet types of albino so I left them out and hoped for the best :lol2:.
> 
> Mack snow het eclipse, t_albino and b_albino


Thats one possibility, there are 3 more


----------



## repkid (Nov 30, 2007)

MrMike said:


> Thats one possibility, there are 3 more


 Not a clue mate.


----------



## gazz (Dec 9, 2006)

repkid said:


> :blush:Oh
> 
> 
> I read earlier when I first started to learn the genetics that het meant and invisible trait. But can you see what I am getting at with the whole, if its dom or co dom it only needs one copy to become **** in a sense?


That's why i use the term (Single factor) for HET in dominant.And (Double factor) or **** in dominant.Them is more esay to understand for examle.

(HET)Enigma HET albino
(****)Enigma HET albino.

or

(SF)Enigma HET albino.
(DF)Enigma HET albino.

(HET)Enigma HET albino X albino normal = 25%Normal,25%Albino normal,25%(HET)Enigma HET albino,25%Albino (HET)enigma.

or

(SF)Enigma het albino X albino normal = 25%Normal,25%Albino normal,25%(SF)Enigma het albino,25%Albino (SF)enigma.

I know whitch i find less confusing :lol2:.


----------



## MrMike (Jun 28, 2008)

repkid said:


> Not a clue mate.


You do have a clue


----------



## repkid (Nov 30, 2007)

MrMike said:


> You do have a clue


 Tremper Albino Eclipse x Bell Albino Mack snow het Eclipse=

mack snow het eclipse, bell albino and tremper albino

normal

normal albino???

I really dont know what else there could be?


----------



## MrMike (Jun 28, 2008)

repkid said:


> Tremper Albino Eclipse x Bell Albino Mack snow het Eclipse


25% Mack snow eclipse het T_albino and B_albino
25% Mack snow het T_albino and B_albino and eclipse
25%% Eclipse het T_albino and B_albino
25% normal het T_albino and B_albino and eclipse


----------



## gazz (Dec 9, 2006)

What about.

Normal HET Talbino,Balbino X Normal HET Talbino,Balbino = .


----------



## repkid (Nov 30, 2007)

MrMike said:


> 25% Mack snow eclipse het T_albino and B_albino
> 25% Mack snow het T_albino and B_albino and eclipse
> 25%% Eclipse het T_albino and B_albino
> 25% normal het T_albino and B_albino and eclipse


 Where did the eclipse come from? Is it a mixture of talbino and balbino?


----------



## MrMike (Jun 28, 2008)

repkid said:


> Where did the eclipse come from? Is it a mixture of talbino and balbino?


The actual gene you mean? It came up in Ron Trempers APTOR projects I think, not too sure. It is totally seperate to T_albino and B_albino, just when both expressed together (eclipse and any albino gene) the eyes become solid red instead of solid black.


----------



## repkid (Nov 30, 2007)

Ok. Lets try again then :2thumb:


----------



## Ssthisto (Aug 31, 2006)

Ok, what could you possibly get if you crossed:

A male unproven Banana Blizzard to a female Super Hypo het Blizzard and Patternless ?


----------



## repkid (Nov 30, 2007)

Ssthisto said:


> Ok, what could you possibly get if you crossed:
> 
> A male unproven Banana Blizzard to a female Super Hypo het Blizzard and Patternless ?


 
Well firstly theres a posssibility you will get nothing becuase the male might be infertile.:lol2:


Is banana a line bred trait or proper morph. If it is a morph was is it?


----------



## gazz (Dec 9, 2006)

repkid said:


> Well firstly theres a posssibility you will get nothing becuase the male might be infertile.:lol2:
> 
> 
> Is banana a line bred trait or proper morph. If it is a morph was is it?


A true Banana blizzard is a double recessive morph it's a leo that's (****)blizzard & (****)patternlees in one leo.


----------



## repkid (Nov 30, 2007)

Ssthisto said:


> Ok, what could you possibly get if you crossed:
> 
> A male unproven Banana Blizzard to a female Super Hypo het Blizzard and Patternless ?


Hmmm well.

Firstly the eggs may be slugs (sp?) if the male is infertile.

Apart from that,

Hypo banana blizzards?

Heres my working:

2 copys of hypo mean it's visual even 1 does. But cause it is super it has 2 copies?

2 copies of blizzard mean it's visual.

2 copies of patternless mean it's visual?


----------



## MrMike (Jun 28, 2008)

Super hypo is a funny one. Hypo is a dominant gene so there is no super form. Both het and **** give the same look to the Leo. Super hypo is a line bred reduced spotting from hypo.


----------



## Ssthisto (Aug 31, 2006)

repkid said:


> Hmmm well.
> 
> Firstly the eggs may be slugs (sp?) if the male is infertile.
> 
> ...


The female's only HET for patternless and blizzard... but when I said "unproven" banana blizzard, I mean "an animal sold as a banana blizzard but never test-bred against a patternless to prove it's homozygous patternless."

And because there are very few (read "one") proven genuine banana blizzards out there... you're likely to get normals het blizzard, possible het patternless, blizzards possible het patternless, hypos het blizzard and poss. het patternless and hypo blizzards poss. het patternless.


----------



## repkid (Nov 30, 2007)

Why wouldn't you get all blizzards het patternless?

Becuase there are 2 copies of blizzarD?


----------



## Ssthisto (Aug 31, 2006)

repkid said:


> Why wouldn't you get all blizzards het patternless?
> 
> Becuase there are 2 copies of blizzarD?


The female is only HET blizzard.

She has one copy of Blizzard and one copy of "not blizzard" for that gene pair. She has a 50% chance she will pass on "not blizzard" (which is the dominant trait) to her offspring. Think of her genotype as HH Bb Pp - homozygous hypo, heterozygous blizzard, heterozygous patternless.

Dad is homozygous blizzard - he has two copies of blizzard so he will always pass on a copy of Blizzard to every offspring. The male is ** bb ** - you don't know whether he's hypo, because Blizzard hides hypo. And until you breed him and produce patternless, you don't know whether he's het or homozygous patternless, either.


----------



## repkid (Nov 30, 2007)

Ssthisto said:


> The female is only HET blizzard.
> 
> She has one copy of Blizzard and one copy of "not blizzard" for that gene pair. She has a 50% chance she will pass on "not blizzard" (which is the dominant trait) to her offspring. Think of her genotype as HH Bb Pp - homozygous hypo, heterozygous blizzard, heterozygous patternless.
> 
> Dad is homozygous blizzard - he has two copies of blizzard so he will always pass on a copy of Blizzard to every offspring. The male is ** bb ** - you don't know whether he's hypo, because Blizzard hides hypo. And until you breed him and produce patternless, you don't know whether he's het or homozygous patternless, either.


 Oh ok I thought she defiantely passed it on. My bad.


----------

