• Hello!

    Either you have not registered on this site yet, or you are registered but have not logged in. In either case, you will not be able to use the full functionality of this site until you have registered, and then logged in after your registration has been approved.

    Registration is FREE, so please register so you can participate instead of remaining a lurker....

    Please be certain that the location field is correctly filled out when you register. All registrations that appear to be bogus will be rejected. Which means that if your location field does NOT match the actual location of your registration IP address, then your registration will be rejected.

    Sorry about the strictness of this requirement, but it is necessary to block spammers and scammers at the door as much as possible.

Just one quick question...

ZephYR

ZephYR

Clean up in Aisle 1!!
I'm thinking of buying a pewter, but I would like to know what offspring I would get if I bred it with a normal. ( I have a Normal and I would like to breed him ) so please can you help me. Thanks.
 
It's fairly debated about the bloodred genetics and how they are defined.
IF they are as one of my suppliers believes. codominant genes,
THEN you would get 50% Normals het charcoal, 50% Bloodreds het charcoal.

I'm not saying this as fact, but it IS one of the possibilities of the bloodred genes.

Do you follow?
 
nehpets1 said:
It's fairly debated about the bloodred genetics and how they are defined.
IF they are as one of my suppliers believes. codominant genes,
THEN you would get 50% Normals het charcoal, 50% Bloodreds het charcoal.

I'm not saying this as fact, but it IS one of the possibilities of the bloodred genes.

Do you follow?
Click to expand...

There is no debate about bloodred genetics. Bloodred is variably codominant, you just have the wrong definition for codominant. Seems like you're using the 'boa world' definition of codominance, which is incorrect.

Codominant would give an intermediate phenotype, not bloodreds. You do not get bloodreds from a bloodred x normal breeding. It would be a mix, as we normally see with a lot of het bloodred snakes (skull pattern, extra redness, clear line in the belly, etc).

You'd get 100% normals het for bloodred and charcoal.
 
see I don't understand that. No offence, but waht is the cornsnake definition of codominance vs the boa definition of codominance. I understand that bloodred is not the same as say the spider gene in ball pythons, but, if it's dominant, why wouldn't it end up with 50:50
 
Joejr14 said:
It would be a mix, as we normally see with a lot of het bloodred snakes (skull pattern, extra redness, clear line in the belly, etc).

You'd get 100% normals het for bloodred and charcoal.
Click to expand...

If the het for bloodreds can often be identfied by "(skull pattern, extra redness, clear line in the belly, etc)" then does not that give us three differant phenotypes? And isn't that the very definition of codominance? So, how can you call the hets "normal"? Is the "(skull pattern, extra redness, clear line in the belly, etc)" simply the result of polygenics?
:shrugs:
Just trying to better understand this gene. Thanks.
 
nehpets1 said:
see I don't understand that. No offence, but waht is the cornsnake definition of codominance vs the boa definition of codominance. I understand that bloodred is not the same as say the spider gene in ball pythons, but, if it's dominant, why wouldn't it end up with 50:50
Click to expand...

Taken right off the Cornsnake Genetics FAQ:

Q: What is meant by a gene being codominant?
A: Genes that are on a given loci that are both expressed in some degree.

When a specific gene is variably codominant to another gene, (ie bloodred to normal), when you breed one to the other you're going to get offspring that show expression on a scale of 1-99. 99 being exteme codominance, which would be an animal that looks almost identical to a bloodred, and 1 being a snake that looks nothing like a bloodred and looks like a typical normal.

In most cases, crosses like that hit the 50/50 mark. You see SOME signs of the bloodred 'gene' in effect. Ie, bald head/skull pattern, some side diffusion, and a clear stripe in the middle of the belly. When I say clear stripe, I mean a clear stripe of white on a checkered belly.

You ask why that wouldn't lead to 50% bloodreds? Because bloodreds normally have bald heads, diffused sides, and completely clear bellies. Bloodred hets do not have all of that. Furthermore, offspring from bloored x normal pairings will give you bloodreds, and normals. Some of those normals will have some level of bloodred expression, but they are not bloodreds.

The problem in the boa world is this 'super' crap. If the 'super' looks like non 'super', then the gene is dominant, and not codominant. I know there are a few moprhs in boas like salmon (i think) where you have salmon, and super salmon. If salmon and super salmon look the same, then the gene isn't codominant, but dominant. A gene is only codominant if there are 3 phenotypes, IE: ultramel, where you have amel, ultra, and ultramel.

Bloodred is not a dominant gene, so it's impossible to get bloodreds from a bloodred x non-bloodred cross in the F1. And that is why you're not getting a 50:50 from the cross, because bloodred is CODOMINANT and not DOMINANT.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top