From the photos you linked and your descriptions, I would guess that unless proven otherwise, toffee and buf are the same gene. They both look and act the same with just the usual variation seen with every other mutation. Yes, a few more test breedings are in order to confirm everything and while it would be ideal to breed snakes that only carry the genes in question, you work with what you have. I know you're not a big breeder, such as Don Soderberg, who has hundreds, if not thousands, of snakes at his disposal. You probably have just the one toffee and are doing the best you can. You kept the other genes involved as similar as possible so you wouldn't have to distinguish a toffee amel from a normal buf from a toffee buf had the two genes shown a difference.
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Classic X classic = classic.
If you have two very similar looking classics such as buf/toffee --or-- kastanie/copper and they breed and the results look very much all alike does it mean they are the same thing? why not instead breed buf X amel buf X lavender buf X bloodred AND toffee X amel toffee X lavender toffee X bloodred hold back all offspring breed f1 sibling X sibling and then compare how the toffee amels compare to the buf amels? and so forth. I do not understand what breeding 2 similar looking baseline classic morphs is supposed to prove. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
If one parent is homozygote fore a dominant (orange) trait all hachlings should show that trait. The traits might mask each other, or they might enhange each other. You can not know. The best testbreeding would be to breed two known heterozygote: Het dominant Buf amel X Het dominant Toffe amel Then you would get about 25 % without buf or toffe 50% with buf or toffe 25 % with double trait dominant het buf+ dominant het toffe (extreme orange?) If you got 75 % orange but 25 % of them look differen orange, then it might be different genes. If you have two different orange dominant genes and one parent is het dominant and the other is homo for the other dominant gene, then all should be orange but 50% should be double hets for two dominant genes. Then there probably would be that half of the clutch would be different in the orange than the other half. If you get no clear proportions in the clutch, but just a gradient of natural variation, then buf and toffe is probably just the same gene. So, calculate proportions for the outcome you should get from what you know of the parents, if they are het or homo for the dominant genes. Let the proportions guide you. |
Quote:
I'd take one female buf and one female toffee (these should NOT be het caramel) and than I'd pair a normal male to them. I'd keep one or more female bufs/toffees from both clutches and pair the father again to them and than I'd compare them. The lineage factor is hard to eliminate, but in this way you would be able to compare those two colour morphs with "nearly the same" lineage. Really not easy to find a way to prove or disprove :awcrap: |
Quote:
Quote:
When breeding to a lavender, toffee X lavender the lavender has no hets. Hets often influence visual color. so. Toffee X Lavender. The next year, breed Buf X the exact same individual lavender. |
Quote:
Before this breeding was done nobody knew if combining buf and toffee would make some kind of superform if they would rule out each other or anything about the results. You want to know what you are doing. That is reason enough for doing test breedings. |
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:59 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.