• 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.

Genetically defective?

Nanci, I noticed when cooking long&slow, that none of the lavenders had deformities.
It appears/seems to me, that there is a difference between a visual fully developed hatchling, and a fully developed hatchling.
 
DuxorW said:
In 12 healthy eggs, the odds of getting zero amels and all normals is around 3%. Think of how many times people have paired two het amels together. When thinking of it that way, it is inevitable that this will happen to somebody.
Click to expand...

When I was fiddling with the classics 100% het amel, caramel, terrazzos, (4.7 adults), I hatched out 3 amels out of a couple hundred eggs. None were amel terrazzos. Hatched out a lot of caramels and terrazzos and caramel terrazzos, and a couple butters.

Thinking outside the conventional punnet box:
I have begun to wonder if, when beginning a project which will yield all classics,
IF it is better to begin with an 3rd generation amel- that is an amel who's parents and grandparents were all amels-
if somehow tying up the amel gene into itself for several generations- and then starting the project which produces classics-
if that somehow will yield a higher number of amel babies/increase the chances of hitting amel from the classics 100% het.

Still shooting for that 1/12500 chance of hypostrawberry amel anery charcoal bloodred caramel motley/stripe :sidestep:
 
Thinking outside the conventional punnet box:
I have begun to wonder if, when beginning a project which will yield all classics,
IF it is better to begin with an 3rd generation amel- that is an amel who's parents and grandparents were all amels-
if somehow tying up the amel gene into itself for several generations- and then starting the project which produces classics-
if that somehow will yield a higher number of amel babies/increase the chances of hitting amel from the classics 100% het.
Click to expand...

The offspring will still all be het amel and have one normal allele and one amel allele that segregate randomly into the gametes. If you showed otherwise you'd win a Nobel Prize :)
 
Although in case anyone is interested there are a class of genes called "segregation distorters" that force themselves into the gametes at a rate higher than what should occur by chance, a phenomenon known meiotic drive. They often do this by killing the gametes that don't carry them. But amel isn't a segregation distorter.
 
Nanci said:
Can you say this a different way?
Click to expand...

I cook the eggs at 86 and get a lot of hatchlings in 7-8 weeks, which are 6 grams, but there is a lot of un-absorbed or 'leftover" fluid in the egg shells, and some DIE and kinks and problem-feeders-
and the rest look like they are fully developed on the outside of their bodies-

-versus-

I cook the eggs at 76 for 11-13 weeks, hatchlings are 9-14 grams, there is no fluid remaining in any egg shells, there are fewer DIE, no kinks, almost -or-no problem feeders-- and they all look fully developed on the outside of their bodies-
----------------------------------------
Is one cooking temperature better then the other? Or is this just another instance of persons doing things different ways, which all yield a generalized end result?
 
I would expect a cooler incubation to be better as long as it is high enough to support development of the egg. I'd imagine a higher temp that is hatching eggs sooner is like rushing to do a job...you get it done faster but with higher odds of mistakes.
 
(This coming from someone who has never hatched a clutch in his life. But makes sense to me biologically!)
 
DuxorW said:
The offspring will still all be het amel and have one normal allele and one amel allele that segregate randomly into the gametes. If you showed otherwise you'd win a Nobel Prize :)
Click to expand...

I've got enough dust collectors, don't desire a Noodle Prize.
While that model involved one simple recessive,

what happens when the pairing involves homo 5 simple recessives X 5 different homo simple recessives?

We have been taught that all simple recessive genes are all simple, but are some more simple than others?
Are some more difficult to coax out, and why?

that is- is it easier to coax out some simple recessives than others -when there's a load of them in the sibling classics?
How can all of the different "simple recessive" genes be considered the same when filling out the punnet math? Which brings me back to the OP; 100% het amel X 100% het amel = 0 amel.

Nate, what are the parents 100% het for?
And what are the parents 66%, 50%, 33%, 25% and 12.5% possible het for?

Just me, looking for reason of causality and effect.
 
The inheritance of each should not effect the inheritance of any of the others. I know it sounds crazy but experiment after experiment has shown it to be true and we now know why (the way the chromosomes carrying the genes behave during meiosis). Like I mentioned, the odds of him getting zero amels in a clutch of his size was about 3%, so it is bound to happen to many people given how common that type of pairing is.

There is an exception and it is when two different mutations are close to each other on the same chromosome. Imagine that the amel locus and stripe locus were VERY close to each other on the same chromosome, say chromosome 5. Mate a male visual amel stripe to a classic. You will get all classics het for stripe and amel. But remember, these babies will have one chromosome 5 that has the amel and stripe mutations on it (the one they got from dad), and their other chromosome 5 will have the wild type versions of these genes. If you mate these back to their amel stripe father, you'd expect to get 1/4 amel stripe, 1/4 classic, 1/4 stripe, and 1/4 amel. However, when different mutations are near each other on the same chromosome they will be inherited together as a unit, so you would actually see 1/2 amel stripe 1/2 normal (you would treat "amel stripe" like a single gene). However, if the original sire were stripe and the original dame were amel, if you mated those offspring to an amel stripe you would never get any amel stripes! This phenomenon is called linkage. If the genes are further apart you get intermediate results because a meiotic crossover can occur but as they get further and further away from each other you start to see independent assortment.

But with amel, you are dealing with a single gene. Each egg in that clutch had a 1/4 odds of being amel but it just didn't happen due to chance and nothing can change that. The female made 50% amel eggs and 50% normal ones, and so did the father with his sperm, and they met together randomly.
 
oh god, please don't get Duxor started on more high-end genetics. My head still hurts from last week's lecture on Crossover Inhibition in Recessive Sex-Linked Traits.;)
 
Lol!!! I have been worried that I am hijacking threads with my genetics-y gobbledygook.
 
Just remember that I am far from infallible when it comes to genetics (and especially anything else, lol)! I had to modify my cinder theory in light of new data and may need to again, although I doubt it will change this time! Working on some pedigrees based on some great info from Walter and hopefully Carol.
 
dave partington said:
Nanci, I noticed when cooking long&slow, that none of the lavenders had deformities.
It appears/seems to me, that there is a difference between a visual fully developed hatchling, and a fully developed hatchling.
Click to expand...

This is great info. It would be awesome if we could get some other people to experiment with incubating lavender clutches at lower temps and see if they see reduced issues with kinks. It would probably be especially useful to try repeating the exact same pairings that previously produced a fair number of kinks and see what happens...but I know generally people try to avoid repeating those pairings.

I know I've seen various speculations in various places (but don't really know if they all originated from the same person and how much evidence there is or isn't to back it up) that maybe we incubate our N. American colubrids at temps that are too high. So, based on those speculations, it would make sense that incubating low & slow would produce healthier babies with fewer issues. The idea that babies incubated at 84 might *look* fully developed, but either have issues because they aren't fully developed on the inside and/or just didn't quite develop right makes perfect sense as a possibility.

However, I'm having a hard time lining that up with what I know of weather patterns here in N. America. Don't most places where corns & other colubrids live get temps upwards of 80 degrees during the months that the eggs would be incubating in the wild? Sure, the female can lay her eggs in sheltered places, so they won't be totally subjected to the extremes of the temperature range, but when there is a heat wave and the temps don't even drop below 80 at night... those eggs are probably gonna get pretty hot. What happens then? No corn snake babies that year?
 
kc261 said:
This is great info. It would be awesome if we could get some other people to experiment with incubating lavender clutches at lower temps and see if they see reduced issues with kinks.
Click to expand...

I have a clutch of hypo lavender male x lavender poss het hypo female due to hatch in a couple weeks, and have been incubating them (as I do all my corns) at 81-82. I'll post results when I have them. Fingers crossed.
 
Well, I'm going to do one or two clutches next year. I'll go 78-80. I hate kinks. One here or there, it happens, but tied to what used to be my favorite gene?? I can't stand it. Unless we can "prove" that kinked individuals aren't kink-spreading pariahs and they can be sold or given as pets or whatever.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top