Question about Ultras?

[Serpwidgets]

I think the rule of thumb that might come in handy is a quick and dirty visual test of which animals are "Ultras" and which are "Ultramels". You can pretty much tell by breeding results, but even that is subject to Murphy's Law. But generally with breeding plans, most people prefer not to have to work with hindsight as their only guide.

Yeah, I'm sure there will be instances where crosses of proven ultramel to proven ultramel will produce amels and "a bunch of ultras, but are they ultramels?" ... where it's not possible to tell and we'll just have to go with "best guess." This will especially be true if hypo, sunkissed (and maybe lava) are in the mix.

The one rule I can think of right now is:
IF it is hypo-looking,
AND NOT carrying any mutants at the hypo, sunkissed, and lava loci,
AND it produces amelanistic offspring,
THEN it is an ultramel.

But of course that's the required hindsight you were talking about.

There will definitely be logic needed in some cases, to eliminate alternatives. Hypos, lavas, sunkisseds and amels that are proven to not carry the other hypo-like genes will get a boost in value, too. But I get the feeling that some "hypo" corns will simply have to be sold by phenotype, with a note saying "it's either (1) or (2) or maybe (3) but definitely not (4)."

I think the registry will help out a lot with this, especially for those snakes with registered parents and siblings and half-siblings. It will allow everyone to form a "chain of custody" for specific genes, and anyone can look up all related snakes to see what those have produced, which will hopefully eliminate a good bit of redundant test-crossing that otherwise would have been necessary. I'm sure there will still be plenty of "space garbage" floating around, but the nice thing is that the snakes that do have information will always have that information, instead of it being lost (or altered in the big game of "telephone") every time the snakes or their offspring change hands.

 

[Serpwidgets]

Lacking an easy rule of thumb, the best way to make ultramels will be crossing an ultra/ultra to an amel/amel. Instead of getting a bunch of mixed genotypes, it'll produce all ultramels. The only trick will be first getting your hands on known ultra/ultras.

After that, the next best way is crossing ultramel to amel. The non-amels are ultramels.

Neither of these require breeding trials to prove them out... as long as you are sure of the parents' genotypes at the hypo/lava/sunkissed loci. (Thus amels/hypos/sunkisseds/lavas/ultras proven not het for the other stuff will gain some value.)

 

[Menhir]

The only trick will be first getting your hands on known ultra/ultras.

No problem, Ultra/Ultra will lead to NO Amels in the clutch, Ultramel will give you Amels
:sobstory:

 

[Rich Z]

No problem, Ultra/Ultra will lead to NO Amels in the clutch, Ultramel will give you Amels
:sobstory:

Perhaps.

But how many of the various Hypos that are out there that are also het for Amelanism? How may Amelanistics are out there that are also het for one or more forms of Hypomelanism?

How many people THINKING they may have Ultras but really have Hypos het for Amelanism are going to be breeding them to Amelanistics het for Hypomelanism and turning up a mixture that will fool them into believing they are working with Ultramels? For that matter, statistically, they could even produce ALL Hypomelanistics (that Murphy's Law thing again), leading them to believe they DID have an Ultra.

:dgrin:

 

[Serpwidgets]

Heh, but there's an irony to all of this... people want the ultramel phenotype, because the ultras will be assumed to look like any other hypo version of the same thing. But the ultras themselves are "more valuable" when it comes to "how many ultramels can you produce?"

There is also the fact that people are racing to combine it with other genes, and those combinations are already available as amel versions (blizzard, snow, opal, etc.) and if you breed an ultramel to a non-amel, the non-ultras are only possible hets for ultra. Yet another reason to breed to an amel and make ultramels.

I think a bunch of people are also trying to verify that their ultras/ultramels are just that, so they are crossing them with the amel gene for that reason.

Between these three things (plus Murphy, like Rich said) I'm betting that the mass of "ultra" production this year (the ones with the real gene) will be ultramels. Since they appear in the F1, they won't take years to produce, so they'll probably be everywhere in a hurry.

Meanwhile, people who want to breed them will most likely want to produce ultramels... again, because the ultramel phenotype is the "cool new thing" about this gene. Ultramels will be available, ultras will probably not.

So a lot of ultramels will be produced and bought, very few ultras will be produced and bought, and the next generation will be mostly crosses of ultramel X ultramel, and ultramel X amel. This will keep the homozygous (ultra/ultra) snakes somewhat rare, 25% of the "ultra-related snakes" at most... even fewer if a lot of people take the "economy route" and only buy one ultramel to cross with an amel because they won't produce any ultra/ultras. And even fewer than that, if people are having trouble identifying ultra/ultra from ultra/amel.

And, there will also be people who produce amels from ultramels and sell them as "ultra" somethings. ("the parent was an ultra so it HAS to be het...") There will also be what are really "normals possible het for ultra OR amel" but some or many of them will be bought and sold as "het for ultra" and "het for ultramel" and those types of things... Between those factors, some people who buy into ultra projects will not get any ultra genes at all, and will not produce anything other than amels and normals. There's only a small chance that they will produce homozygous ultras that way.

In effect, I think the end result is going to be that a small percentage of the ultra-related snakes out there will actually be homozygous ultra. Only a few people (those who have the foresight and patience to do the right breeding trials) will have homozygous ultras, and they will be able to produce twice as many ultramels, and easily produce known homozygous ultras.

If you plan to import ultra lines and spread the ultra gene as quickly as possible, make sure you get a homozygous ultra. This will double your output. Only a few people will realize this, and the value of the homozygous ultras will stay higher between those people, and the people who don't realize it will not buy them at the higher prices because "they don't look as cool, and they're a ripoff anyway," so I think they will stay higher priced, and rare, for some time.

Whatever happens, it will be interesting to watch it all. :crazy02:

 

[Kat]

The whole codominance business definitely is going to mix up some people... In addition to everything you mentioned above, Serp, the best way to get a large number of ultramels is to have a MALE Ultra and a bunch of female amels. IMO the males of the ultra and ultramel morphs are the more valuable of the two (kind of a switch, since most people are used to females having that distinction), simply because you can produce many more ultramels by owning one solitary male.

I -do- think Ultra's a good thing overall though, because it's one gene that actually encourages outcrossing. Who knows... we may even see a slight surge in the price of amelanistic morphs, from those looking to produce ultramels.

Should be interesting to see...
-Kat

 

[Menhir]

Perhaps.

But how many of the various Hypos that are out there that are also het for Amelanism? How may Amelanistics are out there that are also het for one or more forms of Hypomelanism?

That argument is the all-destroying killermachine
:flames:
We can do that for nearly every morph out there e.g. Anery and Charcoal, where that problems already popped up. (First Charcoal pairing from Kathy...).

But I agree with you, you can never be sure if the thing you got really is what you got and there may ever be hidden gens that can be really confusing. But you have to start somewhere to "plan" breedings or we can say "we can't say/do for sure, so let's stop predicting".

 

[Rich Z]

I guess the point of what I am saying is that there will never likely be any absolutes with this. That was a luxury we had for a brief period in the past. There is always going to be a wide margin of doubt and a chance of innocent error in all but very limited circumstances. Genes can be present in an animal and hapstance may not make them show up until Murphy is good and ready to smack you alongside the head. Sellers are ALWAYS going to have doubts, unless extremely naive, but buyers nearly ALWAYS demand absolute certainty. It's going to be real tough keeping reputations spotless when honest mistakes are taken otherwise. Generally speaking buyers EXPECT you to be accurate, even when it is pretty much not realistically feasible in some instances.

Sure wish I had room on the labels I put on deli cups for the statement "As best I can determine," above the cultivar names.

I think I am going to be saying that a LOT in the future. Much more so then I have in the past.

 

[stephen]

Ultras

ultramels are MUCH brighter than amels,I will post the proof of that! I was wondering is carmel and anery compatable? 2 years ago I bred a amber male to a ghost,the results were 100% ghost babys! everybody said the amber was het anery.well my eggs from goldust male x ultra ghost females are beginning to pip any guesses on what the heads sticking out are? so far there all ghosts,they do have light grey eyes with red pupils though.I will let you all know what the results will finally end up being. (the pic below is a ultramel carmel and my nicest butter motley)

 

[Rich Z]

ultramels are MUCH brighter than amels,I will post the proof of that! I was wondering is carmel and anery compatable? 2 years ago I bred a amber male to a ghost,the results were 100% ghost babys! everybody said the amber was het anery.well my eggs from goldust male x ultra ghost females are beginning to pip any guesses on what the heads sticking out are? so far there all ghosts,they do have light grey eyes with red pupils though.I will let you all know what the results will finally end up being. (the pic below is a ultramel carmel and my nicest butter motley)

So far, all evidence I have personally seen indicates that 'A' Anerythrism overpowers Caramel. The most convincing evidence of this was the few times I had bred Caramel Motleys together and gotten one or two Anerythristic Motleys in the clutch.

Here's a pic of the first one I ever produced that came from full Caramel Motley parents:

Of course, there is no law that says that Hypomelanism can't upset that apple cart completely!

 

[stephen]

well

if you got anerys from carmel motleys wouldnt carmels have to carry anery a gene? Have you ever bred a anery A to a carmel? I wonder what the results would be? hmmm lol (better reset the genetic calculators) :shrugs:

 

[Rich Z]

if you got anerys from carmel motleys wouldnt carmels have to carry anery a gene? Have you ever bred a anery A to a carmel? I wonder what the results would be? hmmm lol (better reset the genetic calculators) :shrugs:

Obviously those Caramel Motleys are het for 'A' Anerythrism. So what I had were triple homozygous results: 'A' Anerythrism, Caramel, and Motley. I believe I also have some Snow Motleys that are also homozygous for Caramel as well.

And yes, I have bred 'A' Anerythristics as well as Snows, to Caramels and Butters. Results were as expected in that there were no surprises. Breed 'A' Anerythristic to Caramel, you get normals het both genes. Breed Snow to Butter, you get Amelanistics het 'A' Anerythrism and Caramel. The original project I was working on was to try to get snakes with black blotches on a yellow background. A dismal failure, by the way. Most of the Anerythristics that resulted lacked yellow completely, which was rather surprising, to say the least.

 

[Hurley]

"A dismal failure, by the way. Most of the Anerythristics that resulted lacked yellow completely"

LOL, one man's failure is another Hurley's dream. I would have been stoked to get anerys totally lacking in yellow...and if you can make them all totally lacking in yellow and without the browning effect many take on with age, I'd be in 9th heaven.

Yellow and black... uke01:

 

[Serpwidgets]

The original project I was working on was to try to get snakes with black blotches on a yellow background.

Hehe, bumblebees!

(Bumblebee tuna! Nice to meet you... bumblebee tuna!) :grin01:

 

[TBurkeIII]

excuse me sir your ba**s are showing......LOL

 

[Serpwidgets]

LMAO! Great movie. Gotta name one "Ace" someday... I've already got a Shikaka.

Breed 'A' Anerythristic to Caramel, you get normals het both genes.

That's what I've heard too. I'm curious about what is going on in that clutch now. Stephen, definitely let us know what all hatches out and how many.

 

[ChristopherD]

reductant? t- = amel .......t+ has black eyes ect......maybe the possitive thing has thrown me for a loop. please correct me.? GENETICS are like DNA (IMHO).
We as humanoids recognize them and study them.We sometimes think that we are smarter than mother nature(The Educated Scholastics) some are dominant,co-dom,reccesive ect. etc...What i said they could be T+= albino with tyrosinaise.
They being co- dom x simple reccesive I DUNNO .Chris "Holy Crap Marrie" (everybody loves Raymond) LOL...L8r My Friends.Chris

 

[Joejr14]

reductant? t- = amel .......t+ has black eyes ect......maybe the possitive thing has thrown me for a loop. please correct me.? GENETICS are like DNA (IMHO).
We as humanoids recognize them and study them.We sometimes think that we are smarter than mother nature(The Educated Scholastics) some are dominant,co-dom,reccesive ect. etc...What i said they could be T+= albino with tyrosinaise.
They being co- dom x simple reccesive I DUNNO .Chris "Holy Crap Marrie" (everybody loves Raymond) LOL...L8r My Friends.Chris

Well, wouldn't a T+ amel be an oxymoron? I mean, amel means no melanin, so the snake should have no black, right?

 

[Serpwidgets]

t- = amel .......t+ has black eyes ect..

From what source are you getting this "definition" that says "t+ has black eyes?" There is no such definition.

The T+ albino mutant that Dr Bechtel described in black ratsnakes is the same phenotype as the T- albino. That is, he could not tell one type from the other type by visual examination, and got normals breeding the two lines to each other, which is why he decided to perform DOPA testing on it in the first place. T+ albino black rats completely lack melanin, have pink eyes, etc etc... Visually, "T+ albino" can be exactly the same phenotype as "T- albino."

 

[Kat]

We as humanoids recognize them and study them.

If anyone here is not a humanoid, please raise your hand and report to the nearest scientific research facility for dissection.

(Sorry, I couldn't help myself.)

-Kat