Questioning the strawberry gene

What an amazing thread and one that interests me alot..!!!

This may get very photo heavy and create a few questions..
Firstly I will list what I have int the strawberry, pink, redfactor, coral, lines for projects

Hypo redfactor masque (80% sure she is not homo diffused)

Jmg coral ghost ( I would never label as strawberry or hypo)

Jmg salmon snow

SMR anery strawberry ( definitely anery and Strawberry gene)

And.......
Trio of JMG SALMON SNOW X POPPYCORN BUBBLEGUM SNOW ( keeper) offspring that are very very pink 1.1 of which are Strange cargo holdbacks

I feel I may need to take some pictures hahaha!!!

With the jmg x poppycorn cross I would say there is a large portion of line breeding involved with the poppycorn line. I already know that the JMG are merely line bred anery from many chats with Jeff. But the intense colours in the offspring really surprised me...

Mmmmmm now projects hahahaha which way do I take it.
Only the anery strawberry and jmgx poppycorn are male..
ALL others female......!!!!

Right where is the slr..????

So I kept digging around and found this old thread.
Bon Appetit!
http://www.cornsnakes.com/forums/showthread.php?t=35030
and this one too
http://www.cornsnakes.com/forums/showthread.php?t=120405

Daggomit Dave,

So I kept digging around and found this old thread.
Bon Appetit!
http://www.cornsnakes.com/forums/showthread.php?t=35030
and this one too
http://www.cornsnakes.com/forums/sho...d.php?t=120405

Click to expand...

I got home from work around 430 thinking im done for the day. I go outside for a cig bring the laptop to see what NEW! Its about 40 degrees outside no biggie im only gonna be out 10 min max. Nope its now 642 and im freezing!! :rofl:Thanks alot lol! But seriously thanks for the info i had not seen these in my searches much appreciated!

this thread is really interesting and completely confusing. i guess i should have payed more attention/asked more questions on the background of my snakes. i've spent the morning trying to trace them back to the original breeder at least so i can get a better idea of lines etc. i like pink snakes and have several projects in mind. i'm at least another year away from breeding, so i have time to nail things down. the pink collection consists of
0.1 strawberry snow
1.0 strawberry anery -this is how they were purchased and they look like it to me. the anery has a pale pink background and with pinkish/brown saddles

0.1 coral snow from vms which are labeled as hypo-strawberry or strawberry and are very pink

1.0 anery tequila sunrise, very faint pink, becoming more prominent with every shed

0.1 tequila sunrise ghost x jmg salmon ghost, dark pink

1.0 hypo lavender

Coral ghosts and strawberry

Hi all,

This has been interesting to read about. So, I’ll admit that I’m a beginner to keeping corns and not a breeder (yet), but I do have a biology/genetics background. The strawberry gene, it’s codominance with hypo A and what it apparently does in combination with other genes such as anery A to make morphs such as coral ghosts (very nice snakes) is fascinating. But here are a few questions about the apparent effect in those morphs:

From what the morph guides describe, the strawberry gene/allele is a simply a hypomelanistic gene. If this is true, it should simply reduce the amount of black pigment or melanin to greater or lesser degree than hypo A with which it is allelic. Therefore a snake with one strawberry and one hypo A gene would be intermediate in the reduction of black pigment. That all makes sense. It even makes sense that variations in the reduction of black pigment caused by different hypo genes could make an otherwise wild-type/normal snake appear more or less redder.

But how does the presence of the strawberry gene alone (whether in combo with hypo A or not) add a red/pink tone to a coral ghost? The snake is partly a ghost, because anery A has eliminated the red pigments (and at least some of the yellows, etc.); how can strawberry, a gene involved in the reduction of black pigments, add red back to make it a coral ghost?

Is it that there is more than one type of reddish pigment (maybe in a deeper layer of the skin) and anery A hasn't completely removed all this pigment? (As one possibly can see in the brownish tones of some aneries)? Perhaps strawberry goes further than hypo A in uncovering the remaining red pigments? But then again, regular anery As and ghosts can have such pale ground colors already. And why aren't all snows so pink, since they are anery A with a complete lack of melanin via amel? Are there any coral phantoms with strawberry genes?

From what I've red so far in this forum, redcoat/redfactor (are they the same?) are examples of genes that can act in a dominant fashion to increase red. Is it possible that one of these (or something like them) is linked genetically to the strawberry gene, much like masque is linked (to a degree) to diffusion?

Thanks for reading,

Dipsas

Good questions.
The only ACR registered strawberry gene carriers I have are a male HypoStrawberry (1 gene each) Pinstripe Motley het lavender (which will begin breeding this year) and a female Strawberry Amel (Scout) I am going to raise up well beyond the purported "minimum size" before breeding, in 2014. Both produced by Connie H. This pic is a couple years old, taken with flash.

JimGERcream said:

great thread. I also have my doubts with the whole strawberry thing. meanwhile there are tons of breeders who started projects with JMGs corals and all label these babys as het strawberrys (JMG coral ghost = strawberry anery, does anyone ever proved that??), most of these breeders assume some JMG coral lookalikes in F2 (maybe + x), but when strawberry causes the pink groundcolour (I don't believe that), why do so much f1 anery babys show so much pink? I'd say it's more a question of linebreeding (the red factor?!) than strawberry.

The few "known" strawberry anerys which were produced from other lineages looked nothing like the JMGs. No pink groundcolour, just some cool pastel brownish saddles. I'm sure there won't be just a few breeders who will be disappointed with the project results. :shrugs:

Click to expand...

I asked JMG about this and he told me he has never tested coral ghost for strawberry so he does not know wether it has strawberry in it. The pink does act dominant and that is why he used it to line breed pink ghosts.

SnakeAround said:

I asked JMG about this and he told me he has never tested coral ghost for strawberry so he does not know wether it has strawberry in it. The pink does act dominant and that is why he used it to line breed pink ghosts.

Click to expand...

True.

Considering how strawberry goes co-dom in the F1, if bred with another highly developed (multi-generational) line-bred trait of F1 heritable color, how exactly would one test for strawberry anyways? When it comes to strawberry, I feel that reporting of what appears to be going on should be done so carefully. I do my best not to present assumptions as facts, but sometimes I slip up.

Thanks for asking, SnakeAround.

@Dave
Afaik it is just visible with the microscope. Breeding tests would produce hypomelanistic lookalikes, no surprise if this gene (if it really excists??) acts codom to hypo A. Imho that it really a weird topic... :shrugs:

I did not ask that specifically for this thread Jim, I did because I own a JMG coral ghost male but you are welcome

Dave those are some stunners

SnakeAround said:

I did not ask that specifically for this thread Jim, I did because I own a JMG coral ghost male but you are welcome

Click to expand...

I don't know how many reside here. We took on the JMG cs inventory back in April 2012...

Let's just have fun mixing it all up with other stuff and see what happens next.

i really NEED to get my hands on some of these, but so far away

Hi everyone. I would like to point out, in my Newbie lack-of-experience (so please don't be offended if I accidentally tread on toes or something like that, it's not intentional I promise!), that I am the least qualified person to stick my nose in here. But sometimes, a fresh perspective, a change of paradigm (don't ask), can help. Bear with me a little bit here, please, I'm trying my hardest to be tactful, something I am not well known for, I'm more known for bluntness, but I do not want to offend anyone (please don't take offense, pretty please?).

I'd like to thank everyone for the carefully provided information and threads and ... lines? with as few sinkers <g> as possible in this topic. It's fascinating; the genetics and proofs are fascinating, and, frankly, I don't think I've ever seen a picture of a real Strawberry before. For reasons I won't go into, this is not a good thing... And all the pictures of all the animals are wonderful, BTW, I'm taking notes on picture taking alone...

I'd like to point out that this type of problem (genetic background of a color/morph) might be a direct fall-out/related to the use of "brand names" or "trade names" for a "new" color/morph, whether for advertising purposes or... {I forget the proper term for "coolness factor", trying to concentrate on where I'm going with this}.

I mention this because, precisely because, as a Newbie, at first I had no idea what an "Opal", "Snow", or "Avalanche" were. I had a visual reference for "sunglow" only because I had had a "sunglow motley", but that did not define what sunglow meant. And, it turns out, Sunglow might have as many definitions as Coral and Strawberry, plus Hypo and Bloodred... Now there's Buf, Topaz, Cayenne, Orchid, Lava, Fire... Well, The Corn Calc list of Brand/Trade names doesn't always have them all, and it's not necessarily right, now, it seems.

Simple, old, easy (I hope) example case in point: While Sunglow Motley sounds much more interesting than Amel Motley, which is more true? As I understand it, and I could be wrong, Amel Motley is genetically correct, but some of these have been line-bred (not on an island per se but selectively) for extra-flashy reddish-orange and yellow motley, giving the Amel line the Sunglow Brand/Trade-name -- except no one actually trademarked it, formally?

And, taking a guess by expanding the simple example, since Sunglow line-bred "broke the dyke", now we (seem to) have the Coral line-breds, also not Brand/Trade-named, since the "industry standard didn't require it, but actual genetics probably not known?

What in the heck am I trying to say after all this babbling? Get to the point, Cara, go back to being the blunt scientist: Brand/Trade-names are generally used to protect proprietary information (hide information from competitors) about a product. If you don't mind someone else learning that your snake has a recessive Strawberry and Anery gene, well, then it's an Anery-Strawberry (or Strawberry-Anery), but if it's a line-bred Snow for shades of pink, then it's a Bubblegum(T), FakesSnakeBreederName, Inc., and most folks will know that the trademarked Bubblegums will likely have the creme de la creme kept back by the original manufacturer (breeder) so that they have the best product to sell.

And TM law gets applied... But wait, TM law, it doesn't get applied, because the industry doesn't require formally TM'ing the product, or informally warned the buyers that the line(s) in question are "breeder unique", now here's the problem.

(This last is exaggerated for demonstration only, a few breeders I have run across have informally warned me they have done some line-breeding of their particular genetic line(s).)

So, Caveat emptor it seems does apply... er, "let the buyer beware".