• 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.

Testbreeding Buf x Toffee

S

slangenbroed

New member
First testbreeding between the buf and the toffee gene. ( from me )
Auratumstriped ( Toffee-amel-striped ) x Orange het motley ( Buf-amel het motley )
6 eggs ( Both genes are dominant)
4 Orange colored motleys
2 Orange colored ( one still in the egg )
There are no visual difference in the animals, not in the motleys and not in the other animals.
All 6 are orange colored ( lucky ? )Or is someone Homo ( the parents )The Orange not possible that she is homo, the auratum could be homo becouse he is from auratumstriped x the same.
 
"Or is someone homo" for what? Orange x Auratum would produce all animals expressing the amel gene, because both parents are homo amel. Whether or not they're Orange or Auratum is for you to decide. Pictures would be very helpful, especially to help breach the language barrier.
 
Are the babies "just" amel? and toffee and buf were not the same, so the babies are het toffee and buff?

Or are the babies homo amel and homo toffee/buf, which are the same gene?
 
Ok
Buf is a dominant gene discoverd in 2001 in holland its a hypoerythristic gene and made a amel into orange.
Toffee is also a dominant gene discoverd in i beleef 2006-2008 in Germany and looks the same and act the same.
This discoveries are made 200 km from each other, the discossion is, if this gene is the same or not the same.
But there is never made a testbreeding between theese genes, so i get a auratumstriped ( Toffee-amel- striped)male and cross him to a Orange het motley female ( Buf-amel-het motley )Becouse this genes are dominant there must be a hetro and a homosygoot form, but they look the same you can not tell witch one is het ore homo, not until breedings are done.
Example Buf
Bn = Buf B for buf, n for wildtype, when we cross a buf to a buf , the punnet square says.

-----B--------n
B----BB------Bn
n----Bn------nn

BB is the buf in homo form
Bn is the buf in hetero form
nn is wildtype

The BB and the Bn looks the same

The Toffee gene act the same.
Now a made this first testbreeding from Buf-amel x Toffee-amel ( let the motley and stripe away )
One thing we now everything must be amel 100%
I got 6 eggs al 6 are amel that ok ,but also Buf ore Toffee becouse all the offspring is Orange .I can not see any difference between them as a wrote.
What i ment with the homo thing is. If the toffee is homosygoot TT then al the ofspring is Toffee-amel ( auratum )But where is the buf there must be buf in the game.If buf and toffee are the same then all animals look the same ( Orange ).If buf and toffee is not the same , this breeding would produce differentsie thats my opinion
 
(And if anyone is having trouble following this, Jan has a really god pictorial illustration of the genetics on his website).
 
Oh! I think I get it now. My question is why didn't you breed a toffee and a buf with no extra genes? If there were any differences, that would have made them much clearer. In my opinion, buf and toffee are the same gene, but I'd also like to see a regular buf (not orange) and a regular toffee (not auratam) crossed. I think the results could be very interesting.
 
RobbiesCornField said:
Oh! I think I get it now. My question is why didn't you breed a toffee and a buf with no extra genes? If there were any differences, that would have made them much clearer. In my opinion, buf and toffee are the same gene, but I'd also like to see a regular buf (not orange) and a regular toffee (not auratam) crossed. I think the results could be very interesting.
Click to expand...
i agree but i haven'd a plain toffee, but there is more, look at this link http://iansvivarium.com/viewtopic.php?f=21&t=8958
 
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.
 
Susan said:
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.
Click to expand...

That's correct
 
slangenbroed said:
Becouse this genes are dominant there must be a hetro and a homosygoot form, but they look the same you can not tell witch one is het ore homo, not until breedings are done.
Example Buf
Bn = Buf B for buf, n for wildtype, when we cross a buf to a buf , the punnet square says.

-----B--------n
B----BB------Bn
n----Bn------nn

BB is the buf in homo form
Bn is the buf in hetero form
nn is wildtype

The BB and the Bn looks the same

The Toffee gene act the same.
Now a made this first testbreeding from Buf-amel x Toffee-amel ( let the motley and stripe away )
One thing we now everything must be amel 100%
I got 6 eggs al 6 are amel that ok ,but also Buf ore Toffee becouse all the offspring is Orange .I can not see any difference between them as a wrote.
What i ment with the homo thing is. If the toffee is homosygoot TT then al the ofspring is Toffee-amel ( auratum )But where is the buf there must be buf in the game.If buf and toffee are the same then all animals look the same ( Orange ).If buf and toffee is not the same , this breeding would produce differentsie thats my opinion
Click to expand...

If all hatchlings look the same orange way then it is likely that buf and toffee are the same gene and that at least one of the parents are homozygote for the dominant gene.
 
NiklasTyreso said:
If all hatchlings look the same orange way then it is likely that buf and toffee are the same gene and that at least one of the parents are homozygote for the dominant gene.
Click to expand...
They all shed now and i see a little variation just as in a orange only clutch, if a make a pic you can't see the different.Maybee iff they growing up ???? Lets feed them and wait.
 
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.
 
dave partington said:
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.
Click to expand...
i think you mist the link in post number 10
 
NiklasTyreso said:
If all hatchlings look the same orange way then it is likely that buf and toffee are the same gene and that at least one of the parents are homozygote for the dominant gene.
Click to expand...

Thinking it over again, what I first wrote might be wrong.

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.
 
dave partington said:
I do not understand what breeding 2 similar looking baseline classic morphs is supposed to prove.
Click to expand...

I totally second that!

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:
 
JimGERcream said:
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:
Click to expand...

slangenbroed said:
i think you mist the link in post number 10
Click to expand...

I was thinking this over more.
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.
 
dave partington said:
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
Click to expand...
Thats easy to say now, after the breeding have been done.

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.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top