just when genetics start making sense.....

i bred amel male to an amel female, she laid 5 eggs, 2 were bad. that left me with 3 eggs that hatched this morning. 2 amels and a normal. how can i hatch a normal out of an amel to an amel breeding?

I have no clue, but is it really a normal or maybe it could be one of the morphs that resembles normals at hatching. Of course I can't think of any off the top of my head...
Do you have any pictures that you can post?

it is probably because one of the amels you bred was het for normal . . .


KRIS

Amels can't be het for normal. For an animal to express amelanism, they have to be homozygous for it. If it had one amel gene and one normal gene, it would express normal coloration.

you have any pics?? Is thre a storng black color?? Perhaps het for hypo?????

yeah, there is a strong black color. i will post pics this week

Pics of the parents?

Also, is there any chance that the female was with any other male?

Definately try to post pics of the parents. Some hypos can look like amels, and if it was het aneryth, that would account for the amel offspring and the normal one.

the female was definetly not with any other males, i will post a pic soon. i am starting to wonder if that maybe one of the parents is a jungle, that looks like a corn, or 3/4 corn if you will. i bought both from different dealers at a show. i hope this is not the case but this is the only thing that makes any sense to me. they both look like corns to me though. perplexes me. if this is the case, it is just another reason to buy from a reputable dealer. maybe i will have to make the long drive from ohio to oregon, or talk clint into shipping!

It would seem to me that your options are rather limited as to what is actually occuring.

First, even if both the snakes are het for anery, that would simply mean that there would be a pecentage of snows in the clutch, not any anerys or normals. Since the animals are (ostensibly) both homozygous amel, then an anery gene coming to the surface would create a snow, not an anery, and normals are out of the question.

If one of the parents is actually a hypo and not an amel, then all of the babies should have been normals het for amel and het for hypo, unless you hypo is also het for amel. That would be a possibility, but your hypo should have dark eyes. If the eyes are red, its an amel, and the babies should, once again, be all amel het for whatever lies beneath the surface.

Which, brings me to me final suggestion. What if there is an "amel B" gene that has yet to be discovered, and one of your snakes is het for it? If that were true, then your two adults could both be amels, and the majority of their offspring would also be amels, but one of the clutch has two amel genes that are not compatible, and the normal coloration shows through. The main problem I have with this theory (beside the fact that no one else has ever seen an amel B gene anywhere over the last several decades of corn breeding) is that in order for one of your adults to be het for the "amel B" gene, it seems to me that it would be phenotypically just like the "normal" hatchling you're descrbing. One "amel A" and one "amel B" allele at that particular locus. If that's not how it would be, how could we explain the existence of two regular amel hatchlings from the clutch?

Even if one of the parents is a jungle corn (to whatever degree), it wouldn't solve much of the problem. Either the amel of the particular snake is compatible with its mate, or it is not. The fact that some of the clutch is amel shows that the amel genes are compatible just like a Great Plains Rat snake's amel is compatible to a corn's, making creamsicles when they are crossed.

So, my conclusion, without the benefit of some pictures, is to say that either your hatchlings are not what you think they are, or your adults are not what you think they are. I know that's not much of a revelation to anyone, but it is the only logical conclusion which I can justify with the current level of information available.