# Lucys ??



## vitticeptus (Jul 16, 2008)

Can you create a lucy by breeding together a mojave and a lesserplatty??


----------



## biohazard156 (Nov 11, 2007)

Yep, you will get a 25% chance of getting a blue eyed leucistic from that pairing, plus, normals, mojaves and lessers.


----------



## vitticeptus (Jul 16, 2008)

Thanks Anna.I thought you would,the same would apply to butters then as they are all part of the same complex.


----------



## biohazard156 (Nov 11, 2007)

Yeah, you will get Blue eyes from the following pairs or a combination of any of the below animals

Mojave x Mojave
Lesser x Lesser
Butter x Butter
Vin Russo het x Vin Russo het 

To get black eyes you are looking at a Fire x Fire combo.


----------



## Blackecho (Jun 30, 2008)

Apart from Mojo x Mojo which is not considered clean enough for a BluEL by most so is called a Super Mojo.


----------



## Caz (May 24, 2007)

Blackecho said:


> Apart from Mojo x Mojo which is not considered clean enough for a BluEL by most so is called a Super Mojo.


But is still a leucistic snake.


----------



## Siman (Apr 12, 2008)

Caz said:


> But is still a leucistic snake.


Not really... If you consider that a leucistic is suppose to be without pigmentation in the skin: 

"Appearing as white. Absence of pigment (melanophores and xanthophores) through out the body with the exception if the animals iris; usually a solid white animal with black or blue eyes."

They do have some pigmentation still.


----------



## Ssthisto (Aug 31, 2006)

Don't forget:

Phantom X Lesser, or Butter, or Russo
A homozygous Phantom is a silvery snake; a het-Phantom-het-Mojave is similar.

As for the "Homozygous Mojo / BluEL" debate.... if someone advertised blue-eyed leucistic royals without photos, and I bought one, and it turned out to be a grey-headed Super Mojave ... I would be extremely disappointed and asking for my money back (same as I would if someone advertised BlkEL and sold me a blotchy yellow Super Fire). Sure, it'd be a lesson in not buying sight unseen - but at the same time, if you're expecting "blue eyed white" a Super Mojave will not give that to you.


----------



## Caz (May 24, 2007)

Siman said:


> Not really... If you consider that a leucistic is suppose to be without pigmentation in the skin:
> 
> "Appearing as white. Absence of pigment (melanophores and xanthophores) through out the body with the exception if the animals iris; usually a solid white animal with black or blue eyes."
> 
> They do have some pigmentation still.


Leucism doesn't require the whole animal to be 'pure' white - most leucistic animals have a faded look over all or part of their body. (Check out leucistic tigers/zebras etc etc.) A 'super' mojave is just a leucistic snake which shows some colour fading. 

The strict definition of piebald is partial leucistic - some cells still showing full pigmentation. So a 'super' Mojave is scientifically a full leucistic snake (whether people like it or not :lol2


----------



## RubbleUK (Apr 12, 2007)

One point to remember is the the power of a BEL against a super for future breeding is very different:

Mojave x Lesser/Butter/Russo/Phantom (or any combination of 2 DIFFERENT parents from these) = 25% chance of a double trait co-dom morph that happens to be white with blue eyes.

Breed the offspring back to a normal and you will get 25% chance of a BEL, 25% chance of parent 1 morph, 25% chance of parent 2 morph and 25% chance of NORMAL.

Mojave x Mojave = 25% chance of a Super Mojave

Breed a Super Mojave back to a normal and ALL the offspring will be Mojave, NO normals.

If you are looking to produce a clean pure white first generation BEL then Mojave x Lesser is probably the cheapest way of doing it but the second generation is likely to be of diminished power as you only have a 25% chance of producing double trait offspring.

If you are looking to produce combo morphs then a male Super Mojave is probably more attractive as you can produce more morph and double trait offspring with it.

For example:

Super Mojave x Spider = 50% chance of Spider Mojave and 50% chance of Mojave.

Super Mojave x Pinstripe = 50% chance of Jigsaw and 50% chance of Mojave.

Super Mojave x Enchi = 50% chance of Mochi and 50% chance of Mojave.

Super Mojave x Ghost = 100% chance of Mojave het Ghost. Breed a Mojave het Ghost back to a Ghost and you have a 25% chance of a Ghost (Hypo) Mojave which is a stunning animal, there's a really good one on the Crystal Palace web site.

So BEL v Super, totally different genetics but each has it's place in any decent royal collection.

JMHO

Chris


----------



## RubbleUK (Apr 12, 2007)

Forgot to mention that if you go Super Lesser, Super Butter or Super Russo (White Diamond), you get the clean pure white look of the BEL plus the Super genetics BUT it won't reproduce itself with a normal like a BEL from different morph parents is capable of.

Decisions, decisions eh?!

Chris


----------



## Ssthisto (Aug 31, 2006)

RubbleUK said:


> Mojave x Lesser/Butter/Russo/Phantom (or any combination of 2 DIFFERENT parents from these) = 25% chance of a double trait co-dom morph that happens to be white with blue eyes.
> 
> Breed the offspring back to a normal and you will get 25% chance of a BEL, 25% chance of parent 1 morph, 25% chance of parent 2 morph and 25% chance of NORMAL.


Unfortunately, there is 0% chance of getting a BluEL when crossing a Mojave/Lesser to a normal.
Fortunately, there is also 0% chance of getting a normal when crossing a Mojave/Lesser to a normal.



RubbleUK said:


> Forgot to mention that if you go Super Lesser, Super Butter or Super Russo (White Diamond), you get the clean pure white look of the BEL plus the Super genetics BUT it won't reproduce itself with a normal like a BEL from different morph parents is capable of.


A Butter/Lesser, Butter/Russo, Butter/Mojave, Lesser/Russo, Lesser/Mojave or Mojave/Russo cannot produce a blue-eyed leucistic when bred to a normal either (unless of course that "normal" is actually a Russo, Special or other not-very-obvious morph)

You will get 50% of one morph ingredient and 50% of the other morph ingredient. No normals, no BluELs. 

That's because as far as the breeding trials have shown on the majority of morphs-producing-blue-eyed-leucistic (The "White Snake Complex") they are alleles of the same gene pair. 

Think of a Lesser/Mojave as being a "super" of a sort. It's not carrying "normal" on the gene pair - it's carrying Lesser as half of the pair and Mojave as the other half of the pair. And when that animal breeds it can pass on either-or, not both/neither. 

These genes are not separate traits like Spider and Pastel are; a Bumblebee can produce Bumblebees with a normal because it actually has two traits, two loci, which can be passed independently of one another. 
This can be expressed as:

Normal:* s/s p/p* (noncarrier spider, noncarrier pastel)
Pastel:* s/s P/p* (noncarrier spider, heterozygous carrier pastel)
Spider: *S/s p/p *(heterozygous carrier spider, noncarrier pastel)
Bumblebee:* S/s P/p* (heterozygous spider, heterozygous pastel)

Two different traits, and a Bumblebee can pass either Spider or "not Spider"; it can ALSO pass either Pastel or "not Pastel".

A BluEL has ONE gene locus, not two (and a lot of different possible flavours of that locus) - and therefore can only pass one or the other. This can be expressed as:

Normal:* w/w *(noncarrier of _any _white snake locus gene)
Mojave: *Wm/w* (heterozygous Mojave, heterozygous not-white-snake)
Lesser: *Wl/w* (heterozygous Lesser, heterozygous not-white-snake)
Mojave Lesser BluEL: *Wl/Wm* (heterozygous Lesser, heterozygous Mojave)

As you can see, the BluEL has NO "normal" gene on that gene pair - it can only produce Mojaves or Lessers - and because it's a single gene pair, without some really weird extra chromosomes being passed over, it can't pass on BOTH to its offspring either.


----------



## Blackecho (Jun 30, 2008)

Nicely put Ssthisto


----------



## RubbleUK (Apr 12, 2007)

Comment echoed and I'm happy to stand corrected. 

There's clearly a lot of misleading information available both on major US ball python breeders sites as well amongst the established ball breeding community here in the UK as Ssthisto and I have been discussing via PM since my post but hey, that's the big benefit of this forum - you can actually find out what's real and not just myth.

Top job and thanks again for the clarification.

Chris


----------



## Ssthisto (Aug 31, 2006)

Part of the problem is that people do seem to have trouble wrapping their minds around the idea that there might be multiple mutant alleles on one gene locus. The typical idea is "one morph, one gene pair" - but once you get into things like the White Snake Locus (which has half a dozen or so known mutant traits) you wind up getting a lot of confusion. That's where watching things like Ralph Davis' clutch results - and keeping an eye on the relevant discussions on multiple forums, especially the American focussed-on-royals forums - helps. 

Of course, I still want absolute verification on what's going on with "Type I" and "Type II" Womas - the former are the ones that can produce Soul Suckers when bred to a Lesser, the latter apparently do not. 

Based on the phenotype of a Soul Sucker, it strongly resembles what a Platinum Woma _should _look like... I want to see if anyone has done a cross that could be expected to produce Platinum Womas (Platinum X Lesser Woma *or *a Woma with one Platinum parent X Lesser) - and what those animals look like.


----------

