Tessera Debate

Originally Posted by Shiari

Ah, but are not people claiming that this pattern is the result of a corn being bred to a snake with a similar pattern? It would be like breeding a corn to a garter and expecting to get tesseras. In fact, the tessera pattern is quite common in the snake world... just doesn't tend to be a dominant trait, perse. And even if a dominant from a hybrid... the early generation "normal" offspring should carry genetic traces of that hybrid ancestor...We could easily see pictures of those animals, and I'll bet you none of them look any different from a normal corn snake.

Yes you are absolutely right THere would be other features/indicators of the hybridization in the first generation for sure, However you would be amazed at how quickly you could bring them back to true cornsnake characteristics with very careful selective linebreeding to "fix" the cornsnake type back into the line you could have true cornsnake look within just a couple of gens if it was done right.

Just so we're clear I'm NOT saying that they ARE hybrids, personally I don't care if they are or not they look like a cornsnake to me and even it was a hybrid to begin with they are essentially corns now even if you did test them it's unlikely you'd be able to pick up any genetic markers (after five generations it gets exceedingly difficult)

Now playing a little devils advocate here

How do we kow we've seen the very first animals? Perhaps the breeder that had them got his origonal animals from someone else, who could have done the origonal cross, perhaps that person coninued to breed them into his cornsnakes without noticing anything, and it was THOSE animals (now several generations or more from the origonal mutation) that Don and them got their hands on, so we will probably never know or care to know as there isnt an official "registry" of cornsnakes and its up to individual breeders to keep accurate records.

Add into that the cornsnakes ability to retain sperm and to double clutch with different males (or a combination of males) and it makes authenticating parentage exceedingly difficult.

Here's another theory, what if that origonal animal that showed the gene, was from a wild caught female? from a who knows what father? WIth a gene like Tessara it only takes one animal to propogate the look at a very rapid rate. They're rare right now cause only a few people have them, but being produced at a rate of %50 or so per clutch it'll take off really quickly.

ANyway like many others have said, at this point, they look like cornsnakes, they produce like cornsnakes, they're healthy and pretty, so for all intents and purposes they're cornsnakes

If you don't like em, don't breed em, you never have to worry about it popping up in your lines cause it's dominant, you either have it or you don't

Burden of proof lies in the "omg it's a hibird" camp. Find me that ratsnake or king or milk species with the tessera pattern as a dominant trait. Should be fairly simple to do, yes?

Originally Posted by Cattsy

so we will probably never know or care to know as there isnt an official "registry" of cornsnakes and its up to individual breeders to keep accurate records.

Actually, there is an official registry for cornsnakes. It's called the American Cornsnake Registry. You can go back many generations, if the breeder has registered the snakes. I have snakes that have three and four generation pedigrees. All my snakes are registered. It's pretty cool actually- I've discovered some relationships between snakes that I own that I wouldn't have known about otherwise! You can even see pictures of the ancestors. You are also able to register the snake as a hybrid- so there will never be any doubt with its offspring.

I think I remember the big to-do about the "other" Tesseras, although I don't remember what came of it. I know someone was convinced that they were the product of a corn x Cali king cross, because of the pattern. I have to admit, it looks similar! But as noted above, snake patterns, around the world, are limited to the same basics. Saddles, stripes, motley spots, diamonds.

Originally Posted by Nanci

Actually, there is an official registry for cornsnakes. It's called the American Cornsnake Registry. You can go back many generations, if the breeder has registered the snakes. I have snakes that have three and four generation pedigrees. All my snakes are registered. It's pretty cool actually- I've discovered some relationships between snakes that I own that I wouldn't have known about otherwise! You can even see pictures of the ancestors. You are also able to register the snake as a hybrid- so there will never be any doubt with its offspring.

Yes but the burden of registration and regulation relies on the breeder there isn't an offical "body" that regulate registrations such as the AKC or CKC of dogs etc is more what I was getting at It's "self regulated" (not that that makes it any less useful) Am I making sense? ALso there's no requirement for registering a snake, there isn't any verification of pedigree required to register a snake afaik, am I making sense?

For example, in order to register a dog in AKC the parents must be registered and you have to produce a four (I think) generation pedigree of registered animals.

WIth some of the cat registries though, for example with "Thai" cats, which is a new breed to the registry you can use unregistered animals if you submit to the body to have them recognized as foundation stock. You have to provide pictures and history to prove "type" before you are able to register the offspring though. THey allow this to introduce genetic diversity due to low numbers of registered animals

(Obviously my background is in breeding purebred dogs and cats which is why I'm more familiar with those processes)

Originally Posted by Shiari

Burden of proof lies in the "omg it's a hibird" camp. Find me that ratsnake or king or milk species with the tessera pattern as a dominant trait. Should be fairly simple to do, yes?

Yeah you're absolutely right and I completely agree, the burden of proof in the theory they are hybrids SHOULD fall to those that believe that it should be so. As others have stated the three that have been working with this gene (from my short involvement) are all highly respected in the cornsnake community and from the information I've seen/heard/read it seems they have been very forthcoming on the information they have.

PS hope I'm not offending anyone with my observations, personally I'm excited about the tessara's cause it's exactly the kind of gene's that I'd love to work with Not that I'll be able to afford any any time soon LOL

On registries:

Originally Posted by Cattsy

Yes but the burden of registration and regulation relies on the breeder there isn't an offical "body" that regulate registrations such as the AKC or CKC of dogs etc is more what I was getting at

The ACR is just as "official" as the AKC or any other registry; it is just younger.

It's "self regulated" (not that that makes it any less useful) Am I making sense? ALso there's no requirement for registering a snake, there isn't any verification of pedigree required to register a snake afaik, am I making sense?

ACR is still an open registry. "There are no plans to close the books, as that would be detrimental to the whole idea of building an inclusive family tree. Enough new blood is coming in from wild caught animals to justify keeping it open. New genes that pop up in unregistered stock would also be difficult or impossible to trace. There is no good reason to exclude any stock from the registry, so it will remain open indefinitely."

For example, in order to register a dog in AKC the parents must be registered and you have to produce a four (I think) generation pedigree of registered animals.

Taking dogs for example "AKC registration means that the parent dogs were registered, that an irresponsible breeder lied or was mistaken about the breeding that produced the litter, or that an unprincipled breeder was commiting outright fraud to raise the value of the puppies. Registration itself is neither a guarantee nor even an indication of quality. No one examines the parent dogs or the puppies to see if they really qualify for registration, and AKC depends on breeders to be honest when applying for a litter registration. Some unethical breeders apply for registration forms for puppies that have died or were never born, and they then use these certificates on puppies of doubtful parentage.

To complicate matters further, a female dog can be impregnated by several male dogs during her fertile cycle; if the dogs are not watched closely and appropriately confined, some puppies in the litter may have different fathers than other puppies. Thus, in kennels where males and females of different breeds typically run together, mixed breed puppies can actually be registered as purebred. This is not uncommon with puppy mill dogs or with backyard breeders who have several breeds, and has led to many complaints that the puppy purchased as a particular breed has grown into a dog that looks like something else.


WIth some of the cat registries though, for example with "Thai" cats, which is a new breed to the registry you can use unregistered animals if you submit to the body to have them recognized as foundation stock. You have to provide pictures and history to prove "type" before you are able to register the offspring though. THey allow this to introduce genetic diversity due to low numbers of registered animals

(Obviously my background is in breeding purebred dogs and cats which is why I'm more familiar with those processes)

Originally Posted by Nanci

Taking dogs for example "AKC registration means that the parent dogs were registered, that an irresponsible breeder lied or was mistaken about the breeding that produced the litter, or that an unprincipled breeder was commiting outright fraud to raise the value of the puppies. Registration itself is neither a guarantee nor even an indication of quality. No one examines the parent dogs or the puppies to see if they really qualify for registration, and AKC depends on breeders to be honest when applying for a litter registration. Some unethical breeders apply for registration forms for puppies that have died or were never born, and they then use these certificates on puppies of doubtful parentage.

THis is very true, ANY registry depends on a breeders honesty (I wasn't meaning to imply that people weren't being honest I hope that wasn't how it came across)

Cocker SPaniels is the breed that I was most involved in. In cockers, in the last 20 years, the merle gene has popped up, and has been traced back to one dog. There is a HUGE debate in the cocker community about merle as it's nto a cocker spaniel color, however the AKC continues to register merle animals (often as roan) because there has been more than five generations since the origonal dog and no way to go back and find out if the dog in question is actually the dog it was supposed to be. Most people believe that it was a sheltie, and was either purposely or accidentally introduced into the lines (such as you mentioned having more than one sire in a litter as a possability)

Several breeders proved that with a sheltie outcross within THREE generations you could have true cocker type, and even if the occasional "throwback" did appear they resemble the "Old type" cockers enough to still be considered cockers (especially to those not highly familiar with the breed)

However, from the AKC's stance, they are now as "purebred" as any other cocker spaniel due to the generations of breeding since then and the inability to actually verify the parentage of the dog in question.

Again, the burden of proof lies with those that believe the merle to be a result of an outcross to a different breed, proof, that as of yet no one has been able to produce, therefore the AKC continues to register those dogs as purebred.

the same thing with these tessara's the burden of proof lies with those that doubt it's parentage.

At least witht he merles in cockers there are pedigree's available and people were able to trace the gene to it's origin (or supposed origin) The cornsnake registry isn't quite at that point yet (now, a few years from now, might be a different story, especially if people are diligent about registering their animals)

Corns are also complicated by the fact that you can catch them in the wild, that of course is something that dogs don't contend with

I can see both sides in the debate, one that there is interpretation open to those that belive there is a possability they could be hybrids, and to those that are in the camp that it's just another wild genetic mutation. There are arguments on both sides to support both points of view and I doubt there will ever be any resolution to the debate.

Do the founding animals have names? Or numbers? In the green tree python world, adults who produce something new and become famous always have names. This should be looked into.

As for the topic at hand, i dont like this morph (nothing against those who do) and i dont like hybrids (see other parenthesis). I still dont think the founders were hybrids. And if they were, so what? How about i point at any other snake in your collection and scream "HYBRID!" Id be right, no matter where i pointed. And you certainly couldnt dissuade me without the paper trail going back to the founding wild stock. So, youre a giant hypocrite for hating.

Off topic slightly but The Jockey Club does actually keep track of DNA on registered horses to confirm parentage. Maybe one day this will be an option for corn snakes.


http://www.equineline.com/registry.c...TOKEN=38809502