# difference between patternless and blizzards??



## mad baboon (Oct 2, 2008)

hello i was wondering what the differance was. i brought a "patternless" leo a couple of years back. and she changes colour from really pale to pink to yellow and sometimes a really dark grey all over her body (apart from her belly). i havnt noticed other patternless leos doing this before changing colour. also alot of blizzard and patternless leos in pictures look the same to me. so i was wondering what the differance is between them? and if mines a blizzard? i doubt it, but her changing colour is unusual to me.


thanks.


----------



## sam12345 (Dec 28, 2007)

Patternless' tend to be "greener".
Blizzard's tend to be be grey with a yellow tinge.

It can be almost impossible to distinguish between certain individuals. :no1:


----------



## AnnieM (Nov 4, 2011)

Is there a difference as babies? We have what I was told on here was a Murphy's patternless, but I have been leftover believe these have markings as a baby, ours was totally see through until he took on his greyish, yellowish hue. I guess the only way to tell for sure is to test breed him.


----------



## mad baboon (Oct 2, 2008)

ok, thanks guys. my patternless was supposed to be a murphy, but it has 0% green on it and from all the images i have seen it looks more like a blizzard. :/ so im not sure if its parents had 2 differnt patternless genes in them? im not sure but its more grey/yellow than anything.

its exactly like this:
http://www.tropifauna.co.uk/blizzard448.jpg


----------



## Gregg M (Jul 19, 2006)

Patternless are born with blotches and they fade as the animal grows. You can see some of the pattern in adults but it is very faded. Blizzards are born completely patternless.

They can be hard to tell apart as adults but a trained eye can usually tell them apart pretty easily. I can tell you that a green color is not what separates the two. Many patterneless are grey to yellow and almost orange in some lines. Same goes for blizzards. Both can and do show carroting in the tail base.

Genetically they are very different. The recessive genes are not compatable.

There have been crosses done with the two genes and the double homozygous is called a banana blizzard.


----------



## kirsten (Jan 13, 2008)

AnnieM said:


> Is there a difference as babies? We have what I was told on here was a Murphy's patternless, but I have been leftover believe these have markings as a baby, ours was totally see through until he took on his greyish, yellowish hue. I guess the only way to tell for sure is to test breed him.



as babies, murphy's patternless, have a pattern, ironically. blizzards don't.

there's a picture of one here. http://www.cornsnakes.com/forums/showthread.php?p=1419952


----------



## mad baboon (Oct 2, 2008)

kirsten said:


> as babies, murphy's patternless, have a pattern, ironically. blizzards don't.
> 
> there's a picture of one here. baby geckos 2011 - CornSnakes.com Forums



ok thanks. is it normal for them to change colour mine can change from pink to dark grey in like 1 or 2 mins


----------



## kirsten (Jan 13, 2008)

mad baboon said:


> ok thanks. is it normal for them to change colour mine can change from pink to dark grey in like 1 or 2 mins


blizzards tend to change colour, from mood, temperature, time of day, from dark grey, white, pink, yellow.

patternless don't tend to change much at all, i think you may have a blizzard.

the other give away, blizzards can have false eclipse eyes, either partial or fully black eyes. patternless don't ever have this i don't believe.


----------



## Gregg M (Jul 19, 2006)

mad baboon said:


> ok thanks. is it normal for them to change colour mine can change from pink to dark grey in like 1 or 2 mins


Yes, it is completely normal for all leopard geckos to change color. With patternless, blizzards, and other reduced pattern morphs like super hypos, it is just more noticable because of the lack of patterning. They change color for reasons like temperature changes and even their surroundings can cause them to lighten or darken up.



kirsten said:


> the other give away, blizzards can have false eclipse eyes, either partial or fully black eyes. patternless don't ever have this i don't believe.


Firstly, it is not a false eclipse that blizzards can have. It is an eclipse eye trait. It is just not attached to the raptor morph. And secondly patternless can display this as well. I hatched out quite a few patternless with snake and eclipse eyes back when I was producing a few hundred leos a season.


----------



## kirsten (Jan 13, 2008)

Gregg M said:


> Firstly, it is not a false eclipse that blizzards can have. It is just not attached to the raptor morph. And secondly patternless can display this as well. I hatched out quite a few patternless with snake and eclipse eyes back when I was producing a few hundred leos a season.


the term for eyes which look like eclipse but have no genetic standing, and nothing to do with the eclipse gene and raptor line, is FALSE eclipse. as it looks like eclipse but isn't, so yes, snake eyes and black eyes in mack snows, and blizzards are called false eclipse eyes.


----------



## Gregg M (Jul 19, 2006)

kirsten said:


> the term for eyes which look like eclipse but have no genetic standing, and nothing to do with the eclipse gene and raptor line, is FALSE eclipse. as it looks like eclipse but isn't, so yes, snake eyes and black eyes in mack snows, and blizzards are called false eclipse eyes.


They are still eclipse eyes. Also the black eyes in Mack super snows are genetic and a part of the morph. It is also proven that the eclipse eyes in blizzards is also passed down to offspring. The term "false eclipse" is not a real term. It is not used by breeders. It is use by people who just want to make stuff up as they go along.

It is quite annoying to see people who have a couple of pets leopard geckos try and tell seasoned breeders what is what.

Just a side note.
Eclipse eyes have been around longer than the raptor gene. In fact snake eyes and full eclipse eyes first appeared in blizzards.


----------



## AnnieM (Nov 4, 2011)

kirsten said:


> as babies, murphy's patternless, have a pattern, ironically. blizzards don't.
> 
> there's a picture of one here. baby geckos 2011 - CornSnakes.com Forums


Well looking at those pictures he looked like the top one as a baby which I think was a supersnow tremper albino, he's not one of those as he's grey/pink/yellow/purple colours now, he changes throughout the day. 
His eyes are very dark and you have to look really hard to see any markings in them. I'm hoping to breed him this year but as I don't know what he is it's hard to know what to put him to.
This is him, any ideas? He was sold to us as a bell albino!


----------



## kirsten (Jan 13, 2008)

Gregg M said:


> They are still eclipse eyes. Also the black eyes in Mack super snows are genetic and a part of the morph. It is also proven that the eclipse eyes in blizzards is also passed down to offspring. The term "false eclipse" is not a real term. It is not used by breeders. It is use by people who just want to make stuff up as they go along.
> 
> It is quite annoying to see people who have a couple of pets leopard geckos try and tell seasoned breeders what is what.
> 
> ...


you're wrong, they are not eclipse eyes, as eclipse is a simple recessive mutation that is already proven and named by the person who discovered it, Mr Ron Tremper. The "eclipse" seen in blizzards and snows, it's not genetically reproducible, it is NOT a simple genetic mutation, so is coined a false eclipse by many well known breeders and genetic buffs on this site, it's a random occurrence directly associated with the blizzard and snow gene, same for heterozygous snows, yes the fully black eyes it reliably reproduced with homozygous snows, but it is irremovable from the snow line.

I'm happy for you to continue to believe as you do. that's your choice.


----------



## kirsten (Jan 13, 2008)

AnnieM said:


> Well looking at those pictures he looked like the top one as a baby which I think was a supersnow tremper albino, he's not one of those as he's grey/pink/yellow/purple colours now, he changes throughout the day.
> His eyes are very dark and you have to look really hard to see any markings in them. I'm hoping to breed him this year but as I don't know what he is it's hard to know what to put him to.
> This is him, any ideas? He was sold to us as a bell albino!
> image



there's a picture of a baby blizzard at the bottom of that page, they range from dark grey to white as babies. pop up a picture of his eyes. he's likely blizzard he he was plain as a baby.


----------



## Gregg M (Jul 19, 2006)

kirsten said:


> you're wrong, they are not eclipse eyes, as eclipse is a simple recessive mutation that is already proven and named by the person who discovered it, Mr Ron Tremper. The "eclipse" seen in blizzards and snows, it's not genetically reproducible, it is NOT a simple genetic mutation, so is coined a false eclipse by many well known breeders and genetic buffs on this site, it's a random occurrence directly associated with the blizzard and snow gene, same for heterozygous snows, yes the fully black eyes it reliably reproduced with homozygous snows, but it is irremovable from the snow line.
> 
> I'm happy for you to continue to believe as you do. that's your choice.


LOL. Ok.
You do realize that you are talking to someone who has beed breeding these animals longer than you are alive. LOL. You are also talking to someone who is good friends with Ron. LOL.


----------



## Big Red One (Oct 17, 2007)

He's a Murphy's patternless.....

To be 100 percent, acquire a known murphy's patternless female and you should get all murphy's patternless offspring ( with the blotchy patterning).


----------



## AnnieM (Nov 4, 2011)

Here is an eye shot.


----------



## mad baboon (Oct 2, 2008)

sazzle said:


> Back to topic - I think you may well have a blizzard with how you are describing the changes. I never noticed much difference with colour changes in my patternless but did in my blizzard x


ok, thanks i guess i wont know for sure unless i breed her to a male blizzard

thank you all for your help


----------



## blizard87 (May 9, 2011)

my hypo het blizzard girl changes daily from a stunning bananah yellow to a really nice cream to a dirty greyish colour.usually depends on time of day.she seems to look at her best in the evening...same as my tokays and cresties


----------



## Gregg M (Jul 19, 2006)

blizard87 said:


> people need reminding where their place is?? i never get involved in forum arguments but that made me cringe.nothing like a good bit of self importance


Its not about self importance. Its about the importance of generating proper information. If you are giving false information, you should not be giving the information, you should be taking it in.


----------



## sam12345 (Dec 28, 2007)

Holy :censor:! I wouldn't usually post on a thread like this where I've had no major involvement in the debate, but I hate these "i'm and expert, so i'm right" threads.
How do a bunch of like minded people turn to slating each other on a public forum?

Gregg, your attitude frankly stinks. Your wording comes across as aggressive and arrogant, whether intended or not you need to think that emotion can't be portrayed through a keyboard, and it will be read as written. Then again, I think you know how its going to come across from some of your previous post apologising about you being an American from NC.

When you are debating (which is what the forum is for), try using some evidence to back your case up. "I'm good friends with Tremper" doesn't really cut it here. Mr Tremper doesn't have the same reputation here as he does in the states. Lots of sick animal were received on imports from him (I'm not pointing the blame to him as some of it was his importer), and people are tired of old morphs renamed and sold for bigger bucks!

Now the biggest thing about internet advice is, its very contradicting. With leopard geckos it seems what the likes of Ron broadcast to the world 10-15 years ago is the gospel spread to the world of leopard gecko keeping, and we all know times have changed, husbandry and equipment has got better, and us keeper thus must be receptive to change for the welfare of our animals.
What makes your advice any better than the advice Tom, Dick or Harry gives, even if opinions do differ immensely? What means just because you've been keeping for 20 year, that someone keeping 1 leo for 1 year hasn't come up with a better way of doing things? What's to say the person you singled out as having 2 leos isn't a scientist researching for the better care of reptiles in captivity? This is the same with genetics, Whats to say non of the people in this thread are geneticist? 
Sorry dude the "Eclipse/Snake Eye" linked with Blizzards and Snows isn't genetically reproducible on its own, and can't be reproduced in a uniform pattern even in conjunction with the other genes in question. 

I will add a statement here.... "This is what I and all other breeders, hobbyists and self proclaimed pros have found. I would be truly excited if you could prove otherwise with facts and evidence, as quite frankly it changes the way everyone has been working with the Blizzard gene.

True Eclipse x True Eclipse = 100% True Eclipse (varying degrees)
Blizzard expressing eclipse x Blizzard expressing eclipse = A random number of eclipse eyed offspring, perhaps none at all.

A friend of mine (who doesn't use the forums) spent years trying to isolate the solid eye gene from blizzards but failed. I will see if I can get him to show his face on this thread in due course."

Anyway my main point is, think how your post will be read before you post it. We can't choose who reads them, and thus can't predict the response. So you may find some one takes offence to them, you may find another (like me) laughs at them etc etc....


----------



## pigglywiggly (Jul 19, 2008)

play nicely children ( or not at all )


----------



## Big Red One (Oct 17, 2007)

Sam.

Spot on mate.


----------



## Gregg M (Jul 19, 2006)

sam12345 said:


> Holy :censor:! I wouldn't usually post on a thread like this where I've had no major involvement in the debate, but I hate these "i'm and expert, so i'm right" threads.
> How do a bunch of like minded people turn to slating each other on a public forum?.


Its not that type of thread. However, when someone is tryin to prove their point it is relative to point out credentials.



sam12345 said:


> Gregg, your attitude frankly stinks. Your wording comes across as aggressive and arrogant, whether intended or not you need to think that emotion can't be portrayed through a keyboard, and it will be read as written. Then again, I think you know how its going to come across from some of your previous post apologising about you being an American from NC.


Sure I guess my attitude can stick. Especially when people who read a couple of things on an internet forum think they are experts and try to tell experienced people whats "really going on". And yeah, my attitude and pull no punches way has much to do with where I am from. Sorry I am not fake, soft, or sweet to the bone. It also does not help matters when people start name calling. And if it all sounds arrogant, its because I know exactly what I am talkings about.



sam12345 said:


> When you are debating (which is what the forum is for), try using some evidence to back your case up. "I'm good friends with Tremper" doesn't really cut it here. Mr Tremper doesn't have the same reputation here as he does in the states. Lots of sick animal were received on imports from him (I'm not pointing the blame to him as some of it was his importer), and people are tired of old morphs renamed and sold for bigger bucks!


Me knowing Ron was not the point at any time. It was stated that he proved out the ecipse gene. It was laughable because I know exactly who proved the "gene" and when.
What was an old morph he sold for bigger bucks anyway? He is the founder of most of the morphs available today and has done more fore the leopard gecko hobby than anyone else.



sam12345 said:


> Now the biggest thing about internet advice is, its very contradicting. With leopard geckos it seems what the likes of Ron broadcast to the world 10-15 years ago is the gospel spread to the world of leopard gecko keeping, and we all know times have changed, husbandry and equipment has got better, and us keeper thus must be receptive to change for the welfare of our animals.
> What makes your advice any better than the advice Tom, Dick or Harry gives, even if opinions do differ immensely? What means just because you've been keeping for 20 year, that someone keeping 1 leo for 1 year hasn't come up with a better way of doing things? What's to say the person you singled out as having 2 leos isn't a scientist researching for the better care of reptiles in captivity? This is the same with genetics, Whats to say non of the people in this thread are geneticist?
> Sorry dude the "Eclipse/Snake Eye" linked with Blizzards and Snows isn't genetically reproducible on its own, and can't be reproduced in a uniform pattern even in conjunction with the other genes in question.


You have really missed the point altogether in an attempt to be more correct than me. Firstly we know for a fact that no one on this thread is a scientist trying to find a better way to keep these animal nor is anyone a genetisist trying to figure out the genetics in leopard geckos. It will just never happen like that and you and I both know this.

While the genetics that cause eclipse eyes in blizzards have not been pinpointed, it is indeed passed down to offspring thus making it a genetic trait. It may not be as reliable but it is still genetic. I have personally reproduced it in blizzards myself with some regularity. The eclipse eyes in snows is linked to the morph so it is reliably reproduced and is indeed genetic.

You are all about to get a little history lesson on the eclipse eyes in blizzards and a lesson on the eclipse gene that some of you THINK is a simple recessive. 



sam12345 said:


> I will add a statement here.... "This is what I and all other breeders, hobbyists and self proclaimed pros have found. I would be truly excited if you could prove otherwise with facts and evidence, as quite frankly it changes the way everyone has been working with the Blizzard gene.


Nothing has changed. It is old news that many of you are not up on apparently.



sam12345 said:


> True Eclipse x True Eclipse = 100% True Eclipse (varying degrees)
> Blizzard expressing eclipse x Blizzard expressing eclipse = A random number of eclipse eyed offspring, perhaps none at all.


I will tell you that eclipse eyed blizzard to eclipse eyed blizzard will produce some eclipse eyed blizzards. I have done it over and over myself. Are you personally working with eclipse eyed blizzards?



sam12345 said:


> A friend of mine (who doesn't use the forums) spent years trying to isolate the solid eye gene from blizzards but failed. I will see if I can get him to show his face on this thread in due course."


 Ah, there it is. The old "a friend of mine line". LOL. That never gets old. I will agree that it may not be able to be isolated from blizzards but it can be passed from blizzard to blizzard. Just like what you call the "true eclipse gene" can not be isolated from the the stripe X reverse stipe cross that produces the solid eye. We are getting closer to the lesson now.



sam12345 said:


> Anyway my main point is, think how your post will be read before you post it. We can't choose who reads them, and thus can't predict the response. So you may find some one takes offence to them, you may find another (like me) laughs at them etc etc....


You can laugh at, ignore, or be insulted by my posts. It does not matter one bit to me. People who know me and know what I am saying is true will take what they need from it.

So, on to the lesson.
First of all the solid eyes first turned up in blizzards. They were called eclipse eyes long before the first RAPTORS popped up in the hobby. Even when the first RAPTORS appeared, the trait was still not called eclipse. The albino version was around before the non-albino eclipses came about.

The eclipse eyes in RAPTORS or in the non albino form is not a simple recessive. This was proven by A&M gecko. It is actualy a polygenic trait that can only show from pairing the stripe and reverse stripe genes. Any eclipse you will ever see has the two stripe genes in them otherwise you would not see the solid or snake eyes. This is a fact. If you look at the tail of any eclipse eyed leo, you will see the stripe influence even if the main body pattern is banded or jungle.

So just like the other eclipse eyed morphs, the gene that makes it happen can not be isolated and put into every morph. However, the striped genetics can be somewhat hidden when mixed into other morphs. The eclipse eyed gene is not recessive in any way shape or form no matter what morph it comes from but it can be passed down to offspring who share the same genetics.


----------



## sam12345 (Dec 28, 2007)

Gregg M said:


> Its not that type of thread. However, when someone is tryin to prove their point it is relative to point out credentials.
> 
> Sure I guess my attitude can stick. Especially when people who read a couple of things on an internet forum think they are experts and try to tell experienced people whats "really going on". And yeah, my attitude and pull no punches way has much to do with where I am from. Sorry I am not fake, soft, or sweet to the bone. It also does not help matters when people start name calling. And if it all sounds arrogant, its because I know exactly what I am talkings about.
> 
> ...


I do not doubt that one bit. I respect Ron for the good things he has done for the hobby. Without him the hobby probably wouldn't be what it is today without his work. I think we all owe a lot to him.



Gregg M said:


> You have really missed the point altogether in an attempt to be more correct than me. Firstly we know for a fact that no one on this thread is a scientist trying to find a better way to keep these animal nor is anyone a genetisist trying to figure out the genetics in leopard geckos. It will just never happen like that and you and I both know this.


If you read my post properly, you will see it is more geared towards your "i'm right your wrong" attitude, and how rude and arrogant you were being to other members, not the actual genetic side of things. Then again I suppose you won't digest what other members are saying unless its "oh Gregg your so great what would this hobby be without you"! And I'm not trying to start an argument here that honestly what I think you want to read...



Gregg M said:


> While the genetics that cause eclipse eyes in blizzards have not been pinpointed, it is indeed passed down to offspring thus making it a genetic trait. It may not be as reliable but it is still genetic. I have personally reproduced it in blizzards myself with some regularity. The eclipse eyes in snows is linked to the morph so it is reliably reproduced and is indeed genetic.


Some regularity doesn't make a trait genetic... What you failed to take in again, because you can't accept others views or findings except your own and Mr Tremper's is that Blizzard with Eclipse x Blizzard with Eclipse could produce all Blizzard Eclipses, Some Blizzard Eclipses or no Blizzard Eclipses.
Het Blizzard x Het Blizzard can produce the same, as with Blizzard x Het Blizzard.
In every combination there is no uniform regularity. 



Gregg M said:


> You are all about to get a little history lesson on the eclipse eyes in blizzards and a lesson on the eclipse gene that some of you THINK is a simple recessive.
> 
> Nothing has changed. It is old news that many of you are not up on apparently.
> 
> I will tell you that eclipse eyed blizzard to eclipse eyed blizzard will produce some eclipse eyed blizzards. I have done it over and over myself. Are you personally working with eclipse eyed blizzards?


Again, you say SOME. This would imply if it is genetic its not acting in a recessive manner. Your theory is flawed.



Gregg M said:


> Ah, there it is. The old "a friend of mine line". LOL. That never gets old. I will agree that it may not be able to be isolated from blizzards but it can be passed from blizzard to blizzard. Just like what you call the "true eclipse gene" can not be isolated from the the stripe X reverse stipe cross that produces the solid eye. We are getting closer to the lesson now.


Gregg, we aren't at school dude. It's not my dad is bigger than your dad in the playground again.
I have spoken to my friend and he wishes not to be named or join the forum to add to this debate due to the fact he has some extremely valuable reptiles that he keeps in a green house for 4 months of the year, and would prefer to be "off the radar" due to this. Think what you will... Even call him "Pixie" if it makes him seem a little more fictional. 




Gregg M said:


> You can laugh at, ignore, or be insulted by my posts. It does not matter one bit to me. People who know me and know what I am saying is true will take what they need from it.


I laugh at your posts and also get quite frustrated at the same time, because obviously your an avid keeper/breeder/hobbyist (what ever you want to be referred to) who obviously has a lot to offer, but you can not seem to channel your views or accept others and this is your big downfall.
Please don't think I'm trying to arse lick you or gain any respect because thats not my style, and to be frank I couldn't give a rat arse what you think of me.



Gregg M said:


> So, on to the lesson.
> First of all the solid eyes first turned up in blizzards. They were called eclipse eyes long before the first RAPTORS popped up in the hobby. Even when the first RAPTORS appeared, the trait was still not called eclipse. The albino version was around before the non-albino eclipses came about.


Correct...



Gregg M said:


> The eclipse eyes in RAPTORS or in the non albino form is not a simple recessive. This was proven by A&M gecko. It is actualy a polygenic trait that can only show from pairing the stripe and reverse stripe genes. Any eclipse you will ever see has the two stripe genes in them otherwise you would not see the solid or snake eyes. This is a fact. If you look at the tail of any eclipse eyed leo, you will see the stripe influence even if the main body pattern is banded or jungle.


By the term polygenic, do you mean the correct definition of "multiple genes" or the commonly misused term in the reptile world meaning "line bred"?
Despite your definition, I think even Ron himself would disagree with this...
One term "Banded RAPTOR"
http://www.fallenangelgeckos.com/hermes12.jpg No stripe influence at all
http://www.geckosunlimited.com/community/members/lg-geckos-albums-few-snap-shots-picture677-008.jpg No stripe influence
Mack Snow RAPTOR Banded - Cambridge Gecko No stripe influence
http://www.leopardgecko.com/Websites/leopardgecko/Images/available/hamm/snow918a.jpg No stripe influence.

Now my view on this if you've got a few spare minutes to contemplate it is...
Because of the origins of the "Tremper Eclipse" being heavily intertwined with a heavily line bred trait, the patternless reverse stripe (stripe and rev stripe) this has meant the traits often get passed on with the tremper eclipse gene.
This is also why its so easy to identify an RAPTOR/APTOR outcross gecko.




Gregg M said:


> So just like the other eclipse eyed morphs, the gene that makes it happen can not be isolated and put into every morph. However, the striped genetics can be somewhat hidden when mixed into other morphs. The eclipse eyed gene is not recessive in any way shape or form no matter what morph it comes from but it can be passed down to offspring who share the same genetics.


If your so sure of this perhaps you should inform Ron?
Im sure he'd be most intrigued to find out that the gene he has marketed as "simple recessive" for the passed however many years is in fact not recessive at all.... At this point I'll re-quote you...


> Me knowing Ron was not the point at any time. It was stated that he proved out the ecipse gene. It was laughable because I know exactly who proved the "gene" and when.
> What was an old morph he sold for bigger bucks anyway? He is the founder of most of the morphs available today and has done more fore the leopard gecko hobby than anyone else.


It would be much appreciated if you could include some evidence with your next reply.


----------



## kirsten (Jan 13, 2008)

no stripe influence in this banded albino eclipse

and I could give you the name of a geneticist who is on this forum, and indeed studying the genetics and simple mutations of reptiles.


----------



## Gregg M (Jul 19, 2006)

If I do not know something as fact, I keep my mouth shut. It has been proven over and over that the "eclipse gene" is not a simple recessive. It can not be isolated. Again, the stripe genes can be covered up but not taken away.

Kristen, What is the background of the gecko you have just posted? And as far as your genetists goes, if it is not published it has not been studied to any extent worth mentioning.


----------



## kirsten (Jan 13, 2008)

Gregg M said:


> If I do not know something as fact, I keep my mouth shut. It has been proven over and over that the "eclipse gene" is not a simple recessive. It can not be isolated. Again, the stripe genes can be covered up but not taken away.
> 
> Kristen, What is the background of the gecko you have just posted? And as far as your genetists goes, if it is not published it has not been studied to any extent worth mentioning.


Then show us this proof and we will consider ourselves corrected. Because so far you've just given us the "I'm right, so there!" response. Because as you say, if it's not published or peer reviewed evidence.......

My name is kIRsten


----------



## Gregg M (Jul 19, 2006)

Have a quick read on this. I can dig up tons more. I am looking for the A&M thread where they proved it to not be genetic. I am sure this is information you have never seen as you were most likely not keeping reptiles at the time.

RAPTORs? - FaunaClassifieds


----------



## sam12345 (Dec 28, 2007)

Gregg M said:


> Have a quick read on this. I can dig up tons more. I am looking for the A&M thread where they proved it to not be genetic. I am sure this is information you have never seen as you were most likely not keeping reptiles at the time.
> 
> RAPTORs? - FaunaClassifieds


Stop assuming you know people's background.... You quite simply don't!

I have had a quick read of that thread and my theory is still possible. ALL of the geckos that seem to have produced solid eyed geckos are either known (or thought) to be eclipse gene carriers, or stem from stripe/rev stripe/patty rev stripes, probably the original eclipse group. These geckos can quite easily be het eclipse. The linked thread is not conclusive, and is no more proof than me say I produced a solid blue gecko, but it flew away. Again it's just speculation.

Also some people in the thread claim the stripe traits to be recessive... A bit contradictory don't you think?

I presume that because "if you don't post about it, you probably agree with it" that you are now in agreement about the original point RE the blizzard false eclipse?


----------



## Tombo46 (Aug 5, 2010)

sam12345 said:


> Stop assuming you know people's background.... You quite simply don't!
> 
> I have had a quick read of that thread and my theory is still possible. ALL of the geckos that seem to have produced solid eyed geckos are either known (or thought) to be eclipse gene carriers, or stem from stripe/rev stripe/patty rev stripes, probably the original eclipse group. These geckos can quite easily be het eclipse. The linked thread is not conclusive, and is no more proof than me say I produced a solid blue gecko, but it flew away. Again it's just speculation.
> 
> ...


I have a solid blue gecko that is flying right now...

Though it is a Tokay and it's on an air plain en route to Germany as we speak


----------



## Gregg M (Jul 19, 2006)

sam12345 said:


> Stop assuming you know people's background.... You quite simply don't


I am sure I am not wrong on this.



sam12345 said:


> I have had a quick read of that thread and my theory is still possible. ALL of the geckos that seem to have produced solid eyed geckos are either known (or thought) to be eclipse gene carriers, or stem from stripe/rev stripe/patty rev stripes, probably the original eclipse group. These geckos can quite easily be het eclipse. The linked thread is not conclusive, and is no more proof than me say I produced a solid blue gecko, but it flew away. Again it's just speculation.


Conclusive, no, but gives you a glimps of the early beginning of the morph that most were never able to see. Like I said, I will do more digging and find the post where A&M gecos proved out the genetics and how the eclipse was actually made. It had nothing to do with recessive genes.



sam12345 said:


> Also some people in the thread claim the stripe traits to be recessive... A bit contradictory don't you think?


The stripe line being believed to be recessive is irrelevant. It has nothing at all to do with the fact that certain stripe genes need to be in place to express that particular eclipse gene.



sam12345 said:


> I presume that because "if you don't post about it, you probably agree with it" that you are now in agreement about the original point RE the blizzard false eclipse?


I do not agree it is a false eclipse. The point that I was trying to make from the beginning is that it is still an eclipse. Its not the same gene as RAPTORS but it is still an eclipse. Fact is, the Blizzards were displaying the eclipse eye long before the RAPTORS came about. The term "false eclipse" does not exist. Its like saying anything not a tremper albino is a "false albino".

Most of you do not know any of the morph history. This is how can guage how long someone has actually been doing this for. At least with leopard geckos. These things are common knowledge to those who have been in this from the start of these morphs. I started breeding leopard geckos since before the introduction of the blizzards. I know, its not a big deal. Leopard geckos are just about the easiest reptile to keep and breed by far. Anyone could do it. My 10 year old neice does it. However being around for so allowed me to see things turn in this part of the hobby that most of you have no idea about. 

I am all about evolution in this hobby. In fact I have changed the way many leopard geckos keep their geckos. I was the first to advise you keep leopard geckos at 92 degrees or higher. Before I started doing it and showing result, the average hot spot temp in a leos cage was 88 degrees. I am sure I have the proof of that as well.


----------



## MP reptiles (Dec 30, 2010)

Tombo46 said:


> I have a solid blue gecko that is flying right now...
> 
> Though it is a Tokay and it's on an air plain en route to Germany as we speak


You spoiled it tom!


----------



## Tombo46 (Aug 5, 2010)

MP reptiles said:


> You spoiled it tom!


Haha, people are more interested in other things to care


----------



## MP reptiles (Dec 30, 2010)

Gregg M said:


> I am sure I am not wrong on this.


How can you be sure? There are people on here who have been keeping reptiles for longer than anyone ive heard of.

And again you dont seem to be able to accept that you may not be correct.


----------



## Tombo46 (Aug 5, 2010)

Gregg M said:


> fact I have changed the way many leopard geckos keep their geckos.


ok now this is getting silly...


----------



## Gregg M (Jul 19, 2006)

MP reptiles said:


> How can you be sure? There are people on here who have been keeping reptiles for longer than anyone ive heard of.
> 
> And again you dont seem to be able to accept that you may not be correct.


Ok, if they have been keeping for a long time, they would know the history behind the morphs. Its all about the knowledge base.

I am sure that there are people here on this site that have been keeping for a very long time. Just none of them have posted on this thread. When it comes to the history of blizzards and eclipse eyes, I know I am correct because I have worked with hundreds of these animals and saw the genetics unfold my self from the very begining.


----------



## kirsten (Jan 13, 2008)

In 2006 I was half way through my service for queen and country, and was indeed keeping reptiles, don't presume to know me. I was a breeder of high end leopard geckos until 2009 when my divorce forced me to sell up. I now only have space for a few enigma syndrome suffering rescues. Once I finish my current course in nursing and have a permenant home, I shall be looking to breed again I imagine.

Just exactly how you young and uneducated to you think I am?!

Sam has twice tried to point out to you that he actually knows me, my past and that you're making a error in judgement.


----------



## Gregg M (Jul 19, 2006)

kirsten said:


> In 2006 I was half way through my service for queen and country, and was indeed keeping reptiles, don't presume to know me. I was a breeder of high end leopard geckos until 2009 when my divorce forced me to sell up. I now only have space for a few enigma syndrome suffering rescues. Once I finish my current course in nursing and have a permenant home, I shall be looking to breed again I imagine.
> 
> Just exactly how you young and uneducated to you think I am?!
> 
> Sam has twice tried to point out to you that he actually knows me, my past and that you're making a error in judgement.


Ok Fair enough. I apologize for my assumptions.
BUT,
In that case there is no excuse for you to not know the history of the morphs than. You started keeping a year or so after the first RAPTORs sufaced here in the States. You should know what makes the eclipse eye. Maybe its because you had 4 seasons of breeding leopard geckos at best or at the time this information was posted all over the net, it did not matter to you. It was actually a huge topic here in the States for a long time.

If you do not want to take what I am saying and look up older threads on other sites that prove what I am saying is factual, that is fine. It still does not change what really goes on.

The fact is, the eclipse eye trait is not a simple recessive and can not be milked from the stripe/reverse stripe/jungle complex. Just like it can not be isolated from the blizzards or mack snow lines.

I am not going to go tit for tat with you on how long we have been doing this. I can say that leopard geckos have been a big part of my breeding projects from 1994 until about 3 years ago. I am now focusing on our varanids and snakes.


----------



## kirsten (Jan 13, 2008)

you can't call the eye trait that is locked into and directly related to, and unreliably reproducible a simple genetic mutation and you certainly can't give it the same name as a trait that already exists.

In the UK we call the eye trait that randomly occurs and is directly linked to and associated with Blizzard and heterozygous co-dominant snows, false eclipse, so as to differentiate between the true simple genetic mutation, which is reliably reproduced which is already named eclipse.

hence we have false and true eclipse.

evidence is only reliable for 5 years, so threads from 2006 are not reliable or relevant, as there a new discoveries and advances in understanding. If you can show me conclusive evidence that leaves no room for ambiguity, then I shall consider myself corrected. untill then, we can differ in opinion as my research and understanding is the same as that of MANY others in the UK, and differs vastly from what you say.


----------



## Gregg M (Jul 19, 2006)

kirsten said:


> you can't call the eye trait that is locked into and directly related to, and unreliably reproducible a simple genetic mutation and you certainly can't give it the same name as a trait that already exists.
> 
> In the UK we call the eye trait that randomly occurs and is directly linked to and associated with Blizzard and heterozygous co-dominant snows, false eclipse, so as to differentiate between the true simple genetic mutation, which is reliably reproduced which is already named eclipse.
> 
> hence we have false and true eclipse.


You still do not get it. The blizzards were the first to show this trait. It was called and eclipse eye long before eclipse came out. It is reliably reproduced in snows and somewhat reliably reproduced in blizzards. Also the elipse gene in the stripe/reverse stripe complex is not all that reliable. It may act recessive like most polygenic traits but it is not actually recessive.

And you proved my point from the start of this. You said in the UK they call it a false eclipse in blizzards and snows. These traits began in the US and were already named and were never called false eclipse. Like I said, it is not a real term and was made up by people as they went along. It is that simple.


----------



## kirsten (Jan 13, 2008)

Gregg M said:


> You still do not get it. The blizzards were the first to show this trait. It was called and eclipse eye long before eclipse came out. It is reliably reproduced in snows and somewhat reliably reproduced in blizzards. Also the elipse gene in the stripe/reverse stripe complex is not all that reliable. It may act recessive like most polygenic traits but it is not actually recessive.
> 
> And you proved my point from the start of this. You said in the UK they call it a false eclipse in blizzards and snows. These traits began in the US and were already named and were never called false eclipse. Like I said, it is not a real term and was made up by people as they went along. It is that simple.


I fully understand what you're trying to say, but somewhat reliably is not what we're talking about, it's still random, two blizzards both showing tinted/flase eclipse eyes can and do produce normal eye offspring. two true eclipse adults will reliably and perfectly produce eclipse eye'd offspring (either snake or full eclipse) without fail. you can CALCULATE the outcome of offspring from true eclipse pairing, which makes it a true simple genetic mutation, you CAN'T from blizzard, therefore it is not a simple genetic mutation.

all terms have been "made up" at some point by the people who named them in the first place, sunglow, black hole, stealth and eclipse (it's just a name).


----------



## Gregg M (Jul 19, 2006)

kirsten said:


> two true eclipse adults will reliably and perfectly produce eclipse eye'd offspring (either snake or full eclipse) without fail. you can CALCULATE the outcome of offspring from true eclipse pairing, which makes it a true simple genetic mutation


Thats the thing. You can produce non-eclipse/non snake eyed animals from two eclipse parents. I have done it and so have many other breeders. It is not a stable gene mutation like you belive it to be. Especially when the morph was first introduced.

All of these eclipse eyed animals are true genetic mutations. The can and are passed down to their offspring. If anything the most reliable out of the 3 is the Mack Super Snows. You can indeed guarantee that if you pair 2 snows together you will get supers with eclipse eyes.


----------

