# Hypo mack snow



## gizmogecko (Jun 3, 2007)

I have a hypo mack snow leopard gecko, what is best to breed it with next year to continue the line of hypo mack snows please.


----------



## sparkle (Mar 21, 2007)

gizmogecko said:


> I have a hypo mack snow leopard gecko, what is best to breed it with next year to continue the line of hypo mack snows please.


 
another hypo mack snow or super mack snow i would suggest.. although others wil know far better as im not great with genetics most days


----------



## cjreptiles (Nov 13, 2006)

Both good suggestions. A super hypo would also be a good idea.

Any photos of your hypo Mack? Here is one of my younger ones:


----------



## brittone05 (Sep 29, 2006)

Sorry to slightly hijack - CJ what sort of things would you be looking to breed to macks other than another mack? What would be the outcomes?


----------



## cjreptiles (Nov 13, 2006)

brittone05 said:


> Sorry to slightly hijack - CJ what sort of things would you be looking to breed to macks other than another mack? What would be the outcomes?


Quick answer is anything 

Something recessive like albino or blizzard will only come out in the second generation unless the Mack is already het for the trait. Mack blizzards and albino Macks are both very cool, though.

Mack x Mack is always a good idea as it means you can produce super snows.

Mack x super hypo tangerine in the first generation can be a little dull (though this is not always the case), but with selective breeding over a few generation can look very nice - see JMG's creamsicles, for example.

My favourite is Mack x enigma, but unless you have £750+ to invest in an enigma I suppose that is out of the question!

Or you can be creative and come up with your own combination (though, no doubt someone else has already come up with it by now, like AM's Mack RAPTORs, for example. They are quite cool.)


----------



## brittone05 (Sep 29, 2006)

SO how do you make Eclipses please CJ - or are they a naturally occuring thing - I am still a little rusty on the old genetics thing - I know basic stuff like mack to mack and sort of about mack to say albino dependant on hets in the mack and obviously the varying strains of albino.

My friend owns a mack male, selctive snow female, few lavenders, normals, SHTCT, patty albino (I think she is tangerine too but not sure)


----------



## cjreptiles (Nov 13, 2006)

brittone05 said:


> SO how do you make Eclipses please CJ - or are they a naturally occuring thing - I am still a little rusty on the old genetics thing - I know basic stuff like mack to mack and sort of about mack to say albino dependant on hets in the mack and obviously the varying strains of albino.
> 
> My friend owns a mack male, selctive snow female, few lavenders, normals, SHTCT, patty albino (I think she is tangerine too but not sure)


Eclipses or enigmas?

Both are mutations in their own right - they cannot be made by combining other morphs. The eclipse gene, however, is recessive (well...that is a little debatable), while the enigma gene is domininat so if you wait a couple of years, enigmas will come down in price considerably.

The eclipse gene just means they eyes go solid black (or red in albinos - which is partly how RAPTORs are made).

The enigma gene is more complicated. It seems to have some sort of hypo-ing effect, but also affects the eyes and - strangely - when combined with the Bell albino gene, red eyed enigmas are made. This is when the eyes are albino but not the body (ocular albinism). The same does NOT occur when the Tremper strain is used. Don't think Rainwater albinos have been tried yet. Hatchlings enigmas are very cool looking and look totally different to any other morph (the one below is a couple of weeks old)








So...all in all, the enigma morph is a bit of an enigma 

"My friend owns a mack male, selctive snow female, few lavenders, normals, SHTCT, patty albino (I think she is tangerine too but not sure)"

Are you asking what would go well with a Mack hypo...or...something else? What sex is the Mack hypo?


----------



## brittone05 (Sep 29, 2006)

not a hypo no - it isn't the thread starter I am referring to but another firend of mine - she owns a male mack snow, female recessive snow and so on (as above)

What sort of things would he produce out of them realistically without knowing any fo the hets carried.

(Thanks BTW - you are a whizz with gentics heh)


----------



## cjreptiles (Nov 13, 2006)

brittone05 said:


> not a hypo no - it isn't the thread starter I am referring to but another firend of mine - she owns a male mack snow, female recessive snow and so on (as above)
> 
> What sort of things would he produce out of them realistically without knowing any fo the hets carried.
> 
> (Thanks BTW - you are a whizz with gentics heh)


Ah okay

So:
Male Mack snow

Mack x linebred snow = 50% Macks, 50% 'normals'. However...both the Macks and the normals will be whiter than normal (if the 'normals' are very white, they are effectively linebred snows still). Mack snows from Mack x linebred snows are quite popular in the States due to their whiteness.

Mack x lavender = 50% Macks, 50% normals...both might have some lavender influence.

Mack x normal = 50% Mack, 50% normal.

Mack x SHTCT = 50% Hypo Macks, 50% Hypos...all might have some carrot tail influnce, slightly depending on how much CT the SHTCT has.

Mack x patty albino = 50% Macks, 50% normals - all will be het. for both patternless and albino, so if you breed two of the Mack het. patty and albino siblings together you could concievealby (with a bit of luck as there is only a 1/64 chnace  ) get a super snow patternless albino!

Hope that is what you wanted to know.


----------



## brittone05 (Sep 29, 2006)

Many thanks CJ - am writing it down as we speak hehe

So a mack to mack will create a super yes - conceiveably, a super to normal then will still only produce 50% macks, 50% nmormals - takes a wee whie to sink in with me sorry hehe


----------



## cjreptiles (Nov 13, 2006)

brittone05 said:


> Many thanks CJ - am writing it down as we speak hehe
> 
> So a mack to mack will create a super yes - conceiveably, a super to normal then will still only produce 50% macks, 50% nmormals - takes a wee whie to sink in with me sorry hehe


Mack x Mack = 25% normals, 50% Macks, 25% super snows

Super snow x normal = 100% Macks.


----------



## Ssthisto (Aug 31, 2006)

brittone05 said:


> Many thanks CJ - am writing it down as we speak hehe
> 
> So a mack to mack will create a super yes - conceiveably, a super to normal then will still only produce 50% macks, 50% nmormals - takes a wee whie to sink in with me sorry hehe


No, a super to a normal HAS to produce 100% Macks - because a super doesn't have a "not mack" gene to give.

And a Mack to a Mack will produce supers only 25% of the time - and it'll produce normals 25% of the time, too!


----------



## brittone05 (Sep 29, 2006)

Thanks youuuuuuuuu   

(Sorry Gizmo for slightly stealing your thread too )


----------



## Herpinfested (Apr 24, 2007)

if i were you id go for patternless macks not only do they look cool i dont think ive seen them for sale in the uk


----------



## brittone05 (Sep 29, 2006)

Forgot to ask - witht he whole mack to mack thing - if 25% are normals, will they also be het for mack or is mack not a hetable (if that is even a word!!) gene


----------



## cjreptiles (Nov 13, 2006)

brittone05 said:


> Forgot to ask - witht he whole mack to mack thing - if 25% are normals, will they also be het for mack or is mack not a hetable (if that is even a word!!) gene


Since Mack is incompletely dominant, 'het' Macks ARE Mack snows (and homozygous Mack snows are the super snows). Therefore the normals have no Mack alleles in them and are not het for Mack.


----------



## brittone05 (Sep 29, 2006)

Thanks CJ - think I am actually getting this whole gentic thing a bit now heheh

I do know some simple stuff but no where as far into things as the likes of yourself and Ssistho


----------

