Can you ID a het?

[SSSSnakes]

I was under the impression that there is no way of telling if a snake is a het or not. Now I'm hearing that on Balls you can tell by certain markings. Can anyone clear this up for me?

[Aaron_S]

I was under the impression that there is no way of telling if a snake is a het or not. Now I'm hearing that on Balls you can tell by certain markings. Can anyone clear this up for me?

It's been an ongoing conversation for a decade or longer.

Some hets show "markers" and other hets don't. I believe you can't tell visually. If you could the gene no longer is considered recessive but then incomplete dominant.

Now for the more advanced class....

We've (as a whole hobby) have been breeding snakes for enhancing characteristics for decades. More blushing, brighter yellows, richer blacks and so forth. It's called polygenetic traits. Is it far reaching to say if I bred my hets to show more of "markers" that I could increase the likelihood of picking out hets visually?

[millertime89]

There are a few retics like this that show certain traits that may be indicators for being a "het", but I'm of the opinion that it's most a question of what the genetic trait actually is. Is it an incomplete dominant/co-dom gene that just isn't expressed very well or is it a recessive that the hets have their own characteristics. The graniteback/anthrax/shatter/super shatter and citron(het titanium)/Titanium morphs are prime examples.

[smy_749]

Hypo het albino vs hypo shows a significant difference in almost every example ive seen. (talking burmese python)

[Sublimeballs]

Het pied ball pythons are the snake I hear most about the markers( tracks), I've had a het pied with the markers and I've seen some without. I've also read about het clowns that show visual signs. As for the Reticulated python world there's alot of people that claim to be able to tell het albinos and het aneries.

Kyles mention of graniteback/anthrax/etc... Is a great example a perfect example.

I personally don't put too much faith in markers as a whole( minus a few exceptions).

[Aaron_S]

Nobody has attempted to answer my advanced question *cries*

Damn noobs...

[NewHerp293]

Id say that by your own assumption that "identifiable markers" would actually be considered an incomplete dominant trait, wouldnt you then be breeding for an entirely different morph or phase?

[millertime89]

Nobody has attempted to answer my advanced question *cries*

Damn noobs...

I just skim, I didn't even see it. Tl;dr

Anyways. No that is not too far fetched. My question for you in response would be how would you know that the hets are the actual hets? Since we're in the realm of "possible hets" (het to non-het and het to het breedings) at this point we have to consider that animals visually fall on a bell curve. "Ugly" on one low end and "pretty" on the other with the majority of the animals falling in the middle. When you selectively breed you compress this bell curve towards the "pretty" end but you really have no control over what happens when you introduce other animals that haven't been selectively bred into the equation because all animals from that breeding are going to be influenced by the selective breeding process, not just the hets.

[marvelfreak]

It's been an ongoing conversation for a decade or longer.

Some hets show "markers" and other hets don't. I believe you can't tell visually. If you could the gene no longer is considered recessive but then incomplete dominant.

Now for the more advanced class....

We've (as a whole hobby) have been breeding snakes for enhancing characteristics for decades. More blushing, brighter yellows, richer blacks and so forth. It's called polygenetic traits. Is it far reaching to say if I bred my hets to show more of "markers" that I could increase the likelihood of picking out hets visually?
Yes it being done more and more to my understanding.