Orange x golddust give's

[slangenbroed]

The first pictures from this combo
Ultramel and Ultraorange??????
From this breeding i got amel-orange-Ultramel and Ultraorange??
The rest is comming on my site
www.slangenbroed.nl

 

[SnakeAround]

Or:

Amel het caramel x golddust gives:

Ultramel het caramel
Ultra het caramel
Amel het caramel
Golddust
Butter

First picture looks like an ultramel, second like a golddust.

 

[danielle]

I agree on ultramel and golddust and very pretty at that.

 

[slangenbroed]

Or:

Amel het caramel x golddust gives:

Ultramel het caramel
Ultra het caramel
Amel het caramel
Golddust
Butter

First picture looks like an ultramel, second like a golddust.

I now what you are trying to say.BUT
Orange is not a amel het caramel ( look at the facts )
Butter het mot x Orange offspring all orange no butter
Golddustmotley x Orange offspring amel-orange-ultramel and ultraorange
no butter and no golddust ( the pic is not a golddust it look a bit like one but it isn't one )
If it is what you are telling why is there amel and orange and not all orange becouse that is what you are telling.

 

[Shiari]

There are no facts. You have failed to produce a pairing that shows orange to be a new gene.

 

[TripleMoonsExotic]

Why do we all keep feeding into his nonsense? :noevil:

 

[Michael823]

Butter het mot x Orange offspring all orange no butter

Exactly, if they were all normals you might have a new gene, seeing you would have possibly proven that your "Orange" gene isn't compatible with Caramel. So a Butter het Motley x Orange breeding that produced all Orange, proves that Caramel and Orange are one in the same.

Butter het Motley = Caramel, Amel, het Motley
Orange = Caramel

So breeding the two would naturally produce all "Orange" AKA Caramel het Amel, ph Motley, and zero Butters seeing the "Orange" has no Amel gene. Breed the "Orange" babies together and you'll get Butters, then hopefully you'll realize where you're confused.

It's one thing to be confused and ask for help, or even try to explain what you mean. But you are refuting something that seems to be obvious, and it would be unfair to try to sell some new rare gene "Orange" when it's really just a caramel.

Nice babies though!

 

[tbtusk]

Or:

Amel het caramel x golddust gives:

Ultramel het caramel
Ultra het caramel
Amel het caramel
Golddust
Butter

First picture looks like an ultramel, second like a golddust.

Just to clarify for others reading through, you would not get any ultras het caramel from this pairing.

Exactly, if they were all normals you might have a new gene, seeing you would have possibly proven that your "Orange" gene isn't compatible with Caramel. So a Butter het Motley x Orange breeding that produced all Orange, proves that Caramel and Orange are one in the same.

Butter het Motley = Caramel, Amel, het Motley
Orange = Caramel

So breeding the two would naturally produce all "Orange" AKA Caramel het Amel, ph Motley, and zero Butters seeing the "Orange" has no Amel gene. Breed the "Orange" babies together and you'll get Butters, then hopefully you'll realize where you're confused.

An orange is either amel + a new gene or amel + het caramel. Its not a caramel. Not sure how that changes the rest of your ideas!



I would say, keep back a variety (variety being key here if anyone wants to have a good case in the future IMO) of these hatchlings and see what they look like in a year or so. If there is a new gene here and it is dominant or co-dominant, we identify the following phenotypes:

ultramel
amel
ultramel buff
orange

If your snakes are het caramel and there is no new gene we'd see the following:

ultramel het caramel, which would appear to be an ultramel buff
amel het caramel, which would appear to be an orange
butter
golddust

All of these will be easier to identify after giving the hatchlings some time to develop their yellow colors. Trying to decide what each of these snakes really is is far to difficult at the moment IMHO, especially considering how complex this topic has become. EDIT: Also, I wanted to add, if all that is happening is that these snakes are simply expressing the caramel gene extensively in the heterozygous form, ultramels het caramel may look very caramel-y, making things hard to identify.

And i haven't even thought of what we'd see if you DO have a new gene, and it is on the same locus as caramel.... eek

Maybe we can get this sorted out completely by 2010!

 

[wasuslitherin]

Oh my gosh I hope the first one stays that color!! looks kinda Neon.

 

[Michael823]

Just to clarify for others reading through, you would not get any ultras het caramel from this pairing.



An orange is either amel + a new gene or amel + het caramel. Its not a caramel. Not sure how that changes the rest of your ideas!

I just assumed Caramel seeing he said the pairing of Butter het Motley x "Orange" resulted in all Orange, with no Butter. So wouldn't that make Orange a Caramel, because if there were no butters than Orange either = Caramel or Amel, and I think Amel wouldn't be labeled Orange.

Butter het Motley x Orange = All Orange

So somewhere the Butter has the Orange gene, or the Orange has a common gene that's found in Butter, either Amel or Caramel. So to produce all Orange you would rule out Orange = Amel het Caramel, otherwise the pairing would have resulted in some Butters correct?
Which leads me to believe that Orange = Caramel, because the clutch consisted of zero butters, yet all oranges, and seeing I have no clue what an Orange is, I'm left to assume it's simply Caramel, otherwise they wouldn't have all been Orange.

 

[Michael823]

Okay scratch my post, I did not realize the pairing of Orange x Gold Dust resulted in UltraOranges, and Amel Oranges (most likely AKA Gold Dusts and Butters). That takes my theory of Caramel away, I think you're right it's an Amel het Caramel that just so happened didn't produce Butters. Either way I think Orange has been debunked, I'm really confused what the confusion is (if that makes sense)!

 

[tbtusk]

haha. the confusion is... complicated i think.

Your assumption made absolute sense, but I was just going with what had been argued and (mostly) decided on earlier on, which was that it was either an amel het caramel or a amel with some new gene.

 

[TandJ]

I now what you are trying to say.BUT
Orange is not a amel het caramel ( look at the facts )
Butter het mot x Orange offspring all orange no butter
Golddustmotley x Orange offspring amel-orange-ultramel and ultraorange

How could you get an ultra orange? Unless the orange was an ultramel, which means you can't have an amel het ultra..

Your results are looking like what I got from my creamsicko project.. *shrugs*

I am hoping you have found a new gene, and I am hoping that some one else has gotten some of these animals to test.. I would more than love to get 2.2 of these animals for my own personal intrest.

Regards.. Tim of T and J

 

[TandJ]

I now what you are trying to say.BUT
Orange is not a amel het caramel ( look at the facts )
Butter het mot x Orange offspring all orange no butter
Golddustmotley x Orange offspring amel-orange-ultramel and ultraorange
no butter and no golddust ( the pic is not a golddust it look a bit like one but it isn't one )

Butter het Motley ( Motley doesn't matter ) X Orange = all orange.. Congrats, you just proved that orange is Amel..

Golddustmotley ( again, motley doesn't matter here )x Orange offspring amel-orange-ultramel and ultraorange
no butter and no golddust

Unless you orange was ultramel you would produce zero ultras.. You produced 50% amels which includes orange and 50% ultramel's including the oranges.. Impossible to create ultra orange with this combination.... Also, no butters were produced or caramels, so it nixs the caramel gene ..

You have now confirmed without doubt, that the oranges are just amels.. The evidence you have provided has confrimed it..

Regards.. Tim of T and J

 

[TandJ]

I suspect in a few monthes this is what your going to see for your ultramel oranges..

Again.. Regards... Tim of T and J

 

[slangenbroed]

Exactly, if they were all normals you might have a new gene, seeing you would have possibly proven that your "Orange" gene isn't compatible with Caramel. So a Butter het Motley x Orange breeding that produced all Orange, proves that Caramel and Orange are one in the same.

Butter het Motley = Caramel, Amel, het Motley
Orange = Caramel

So breeding the two would naturally produce all "Orange" AKA Caramel het Amel, ph Motley, and zero Butters seeing the "Orange" has no Amel gene. Breed the "Orange" babies together and you'll get Butters, then hopefully you'll realize where you're confused.

It's one thing to be confused and ask for help, or even try to explain what you mean. But you are refuting something that seems to be obvious, and it would be unfair to try to sell some new rare gene "Orange" when it's really just a caramel.

Nice babies though!

Please go back to school ore buy some glasses, what you are saying is total off and has nothing to do with the topic.Plaese go furst into this and look at the pictures and than !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[slangenbroed]

Just to clarify for others reading through, you would not get any ultras het caramel from this pairing.



An orange is either amel + a new gene or amel + het caramel. Its not a caramel. Not sure how that changes the rest of your ideas!



I would say, keep back a variety (variety being key here if anyone wants to have a good case in the future IMO) of these hatchlings and see what they look like in a year or so. If there is a new gene here and it is dominant or co-dominant, we identify the following phenotypes:

ultramel
amel
ultramel buff
orange

If your snakes are het caramel and there is no new gene we'd see the following:

ultramel het caramel, which would appear to be an ultramel buff
amel het caramel, which would appear to be an orange
butter
golddust

All of these will be easier to identify after giving the hatchlings some time to develop their yellow colors. Trying to decide what each of these snakes really is is far to difficult at the moment IMHO, especially considering how complex this topic has become. EDIT: Also, I wanted to add, if all that is happening is that these snakes are simply expressing the caramel gene extensively in the heterozygous form, ultramels het caramel may look very caramel-y, making things hard to identify.

And i haven't even thought of what we'd see if you DO have a new gene, and it is on the same locus as caramel.... eek

Maybe we can get this sorted out completely by 2010!

Thanks this is positive talk !!!!!!!!!!

 

[slangenbroed]

I just assumed Caramel seeing he said the pairing of Butter het Motley x "Orange" resulted in all Orange, with no Butter. So wouldn't that make Orange a Caramel, because if there were no butters than Orange either = Caramel or Amel, and I think Amel wouldn't be labeled Orange.

Butter het Motley x Orange = All Orange

So somewhere the Butter has the Orange gene, or the Orange has a common gene that's found in Butter, either Amel or Caramel. So to produce all Orange you would rule out Orange = Amel het Caramel, otherwise the pairing would have resulted in some Butters correct?
Which leads me to believe that Orange = Caramel, because the clutch consisted of zero butters, yet all oranges, and seeing I have no clue what an Orange is, I'm left to assume it's simply Caramel, otherwise they wouldn't have all been Orange.

Buf is the strainger Orange is a amel buf so orange and butter had amel together.
Look at www.slangenbroed.nl
button buf there is the hole story

 

[slangenbroed]

I suspect in a few monthes this is what your going to see for your ultramel oranges..

Again.. Regards... Tim of T and J

Whe will see and i let you now , i will post after shedd the hole clutch here.
And sorry the distance between us is to mutch,outerwise i would give you orange to breed .
Greatings jan

 

[slangenbroed]

Please go back to school ore buy some glasses, what you are saying is total off and has nothing to do with the topic.Plaese go furst into this and look at the pictures and than !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

i take this back, you correct youself.

graetings
Jan