# Homozygous for Bell and Tremper Albino



## lanu (Jan 23, 2008)

High guys, 

What happens when you get a baby which is homozygous for both bell and tremper albino? Does it fail in the egg? Appear as one or the other? Come out normal instead? I only ask as its a possible output of our breeding programme and I'll steer clear of it if it causes embryonic problems.

Cheers

L


----------



## boywonder (Mar 10, 2008)

i've never heard of a leo expressing both tremper and bell but if you breed tremper x bell you get normals heterozygous for both traits, if you bred these double hets together, from what i've read, tremper strain babies are produced because the alliet pair that controls tremper combine first on the dna chain, the bell is later on and cannot also be expressed visualy. or so i've read,


----------



## Ssthisto (Aug 31, 2006)

A double homozygous Tremper/Bell might well look like a Tremper albino - but quite simply you'd have to keep ALL albino offspring and test-breed them against known albino-strain animals. Any animal that never produces a non-albino offspring when bred to BOTH strains of albino can be assumed to be double homozygous. They'd almost certainly look like one strain or the other (not something "new") simply because one of them will break the melanin production process sooner than the other.

Sort of like having a car - "car won't go" is a result, and there's several ways to get "car won't go" (and probably more ways to get 'won't go' than 'will go'). It doesn't matter if you "can't find the keys" or "have no petrol", though, if the reason "car won't go" is because "Engine's been stolen".


----------



## snakeprint (May 29, 2008)

Ssthisto said:


> Sort of like having a car - "car won't go" is a result, and there's several ways to get "car won't go" (and probably more ways to get 'won't go' than 'will go'). It doesn't matter if you "can't find the keys" or "have no petrol", though, if the reason "car won't go" is because "Engine's been stolen".


 
That's a pure genius explanation. I'm liking!! You sound like the sort of person who could teach genetics to goldfish.


----------



## Morphene (Jun 28, 2008)

I liked the explanation too. 
Not a problem for Fred Flintstone though.

what about if you had 1.1 mack snows het for bell & tremper & crossed them. Would the fact that the two albino strains carried by a co-dom morph make a difference to how they do or do not combine ? Sort of like how amel x ultra works in corn snakes where you have an in between. (ultramel).


----------



## boywonder (Mar 10, 2008)

the mack gene works independently of the other traits, you'd get normals, trempers, macks, super snows, tremper macks and tremper super snows
no trempers would be het bell
its my belief that both albino strains require the same locus on the DNA strand and that one bell allele and one tremper allele result in normals
but two tremper alleles prevent the possibility of carrying the bell gene because you need 2 recessive allele's to get a visual albino, but tremper seems dominant over bell, 
all this is speculation and based on things i've read on us breeder forums.


----------



## Morphene (Jun 28, 2008)

That's like anery (A) & lavender in corn morphs. I think if anery is crossed to lavender you would get an anery looking snake from the F1 parents in the F2 offspring. no double het. one cancels the other out. seeing as these traits would have originally have been a mutation from a normal how would it have over-rided the other 'dominant' recessive trait in the first place to be produced, if both on the same locus (but one allele dominant to the other) ? like with the tremper & bell albino ?

Does that make sense ?


----------



## Ssthisto (Aug 31, 2006)

boywonder said:


> no trempers would be het bell
> its my belief that both albino strains require the same locus on the DNA strand and that one bell allele and one tremper allele result in normals
> but two tremper alleles prevent the possibility of carrying the bell gene because you need 2 recessive allele's to get a visual albino, but tremper seems dominant over bell,
> all this is speculation and based on things i've read on us breeder forums.


That's incorrect, Boywonder.

If Tremper Albino and Bell Albino shared the same gene locus (gene pair) then one copy of Tremper + one copy of Bell would produce SOME visual morph - because there is no "normal" gene on that pair. It might not be an Albino but it would have some visual appearance distinct from normal because it does not have a gene that codes for CORRECT melanin production. If Tremper were dominant to Bell on the same gene locus, you'd get Tremper Albinos if you crossed a Tremper to a Bell, in the FIRST generation. This is exactly the case with the Stripe/Motley locus in corn snakes - a homozygous Stripe has one appearance, a homozygous Motley has another appearance, but an animal who is het for Stripe and het for Motley has a non-normal appearance because there is no gene coding for normal pattern production - you get ALL motleys. And yes, Stripe and Motley are also recessive to Normal.

Tremper Albino is one gene locus.
Bell Albino has to be a different gene locus based on results when you breed them together.

Therefore it is possible to have an animal that is homozygous for one and heterozygous or homozygous for the other - unless the state of double homozygosity is lethal (which wouldn't be impossible).



Greedy-Gecho7 said:


> That's like anery (A) & lavender in corn morphs. I think if anery is crossed to lavender you would get an anery looking snake from the F1 parents in the F2 offspring. no double het. one cancels the other out. seeing as these traits would have originally have been a mutation from a normal how would it have over-rided the other 'dominant' recessive trait in the first place to be produced, if both on the same locus (but one allele dominant to the other) ? like with the tremper & bell albino ?
> 
> Does that make sense ?


Actually, I've MET a homozygous Lavender, homozygous Anery corn snake. They look like very grey Lavenders. That's because Lavender appears to "break" ALL the pigment production and Anery just breaks part of it; you get less of the pinky/peachy colour that shows on lavenders because Anery broke that bit, but you don't get an anery-looking snake because Lavender broke everything else. And I have Anery het Lavender animals upstairs this very moment from an Anery-Lavender parent.

On the other hand, a Caramel Anery DOES look like an Anery - a very clean, high-contrast, low-yellow one. That's because Caramel breaks part of the colour coding that produces the reds; Anery breaks the reds and the yellows. They don't "cancel each other out" - but because they're subtractive (they 'break' colour production instead of 'enhancing' it) you get something that's a subtle combination of both.

Remember that it's not just ONE gene pair coding for ALL colours on a snake or lizard. There are dozens or hundreds of pairs. And each and every one of them has an effect on the colouration of the animal you see.


----------



## Morphene (Jun 28, 2008)

sorry to have hi-jacked this thread, but that is interesting Ssthisto.

So when you say breaks the colour production that's sort of like a hypo reducing the amount of black but not illiminating it completely.

I had read on another forum that a Bell x Tremper was produced but didn't survive long. So this could be the lethal combo of being double homozygous like you also mentioned.

So how would this work in the first place; being a double **** disaster ?

if the genes, etc are from the same typ of animal & work in the same way being recessive & almost produce the same colour & pattern, why would these particular ones conflict with each other & how ?


----------

