Leucistic X Normal Results?

[Steve]

Hey, I know someone who has a Leucistic female, he bred it with a normal. What will the babies be like? Sorry I am new at the genetics thing

[HQReptiles]

babies will be normal het for leucistic (patternless).

Matt.

[Steve]

Will they be 100% het for it?
thanks

[Zoe]

yes

[Steve]

Ok, thanks alot
one last thing...do you know roughly what an adult female leucistic costs?

[reptilez]

My friend got one as a baby for about $125 at reptilia. I'm breeding my normal with his right now

[geckoguy157]

i dont think theyd be 100% het they will probably 50% posible het for leusisitic

[Clownfishie]

Nope, they would be 100% hets... if the patternless female was only a het for patternless, then the babies would be 50% hets.

For an adult patternless -- if you're buying from a store, expect to pay at least $125... from a breeder, I'd say $80-125....

[Steve]

The male is a reg thought...so would they still eb 100% hets?

[SnowSnake]

yup, if you have 1 patternless and 1 normal you get 100% het. It doesnt matter if the male or the female is patternless.

[Steve]

Cool, thanks. I'm new in the genetics stuff and was just wondering what he would get. I'm also inquiring because I plan to start breeding soon and would like info.
Thanks for the help

[SnowSnake]

good luck with your breeding plans! :P

[Clownfishie]

Yup, good luck :)

A site that I found really helped me out when I first started researching leo genetics is http://www.geneticswizard.com :)

[Alicewave]

Clownfishie, how do we know if a gene is dominant, codominant, recessive etc? The reason I ask is I wonder if I could get anything but normal babies if I cross a normal with whatever Aurora is...

http://photo.reptilehaven.net/albums/Murtle/Auroracollage.sized.jpg

[geckoguy157]

that dosent make sense i dont think your right breeding a paternless to a regular would not give you 100% hets olny 50% hets and clownfishie that genetic thing is for snakes im pretty sure i tryed it and i dont find it works for lizards and when i was on there last im preety sure it says something about it being for snakes im not 100% sure but i think thats it

[HQReptiles]

Geckoguy157,

If you breed a patternless gecko to a normal all the offspring will carry the patternless gene, but will appear normal. This is referred to as 100% heterozygous for patternless. Same principal applies to any animal; it is referred to as a recessive gene. For a recessive gene to be visible you have to be homozygous for that gene. All hets will appear to be normal. It doesnt matter if we are talking about cats, dogs, mice, snakes, or geckos; the same principal applies if we are dealing with a simple recessive gene.


Matt.

[geckoguy157]

ok well your idea is kinda strange but then how do u get 50 % het geckos and the other ones and you cant tell me there isnt cause i know there is and own a 66%het paternless for blizard lizard

[HQReptiles]

Ok, I’m gonna try and explain this but it’s not easy.

When you breed an animal that is het for a recessive trait to another animal that is het for the same recessive trait together the following would be the resulting offspring:

25% would displays the recessive trait
50% would be normal appearing but carry the recessive trait (100% hets)
25% would be completely normal.

I think what you are referring to as a “66% het patternless for blizzard lizard” is this:

Any resulting offspring that hatch from the above pairing have a 66% chance of carrying the recessive genes; thus they are 66% possible het for what ever.

The term 50% het is the amount of the offspring from the above pairing that statistically carry the recessive gene.

I guess what I’m saying is that there is no difference in 50% hets and 66% hets. It all depends on who you are talking to and how they decide to describe their offspring.

Hope that helps,

Matt.

[HQReptiles]

After reading my post again, it is possible to get a 50% het for what ever gecko. Just like Clownfishie said above, breed a normal to a known het for what ever gecko. The resulting offspring would be 50% possible het for what ever.


Matt.

[MartinW]

I think this is how it works:

To get 66% chance het, considering offspring from two het parents, there's equal chances of the following occuring:

1. Father passes down normal gene + Mother passes down normal gene
2. Father passes down patternless gene + Mother passes down normal gene
3. Father passes down normal gene + Mother passes down patternless gene
4. Father passes down patternless gene + Mother passes down patternless gene

Obviously you'll know through observation that case 4 is a homozygote for patternless. So, if we consider *only* the ones we are not sure of by simple observation (remember het patternlesses look the same as homo normals) there's a 2 in 3 chance, or 66% chance, that a normal looking gecko from two hets is a het as well.

Which is almost what Matt explained, just one step further.

Martin

[SnowSnake]

Alicewave:

What you have is a normal baby that looks different. You can see that as an adult she looks the same as a normal leo so if you breed her to a normal you might get babies to have some crazy designs but the odds are that they will look normal as adults.


Note to all:

What Matt and Martin are explaining are recessive genes and traits. Co-dominant and Dominant genes and traits are a whole different ball game! :P

[Tim and Julie B]

Yes, it's 100% het for patternless. :D

[Clownfishie]

Gecko guy -- it's right :) Ask any knowledgeable breeder out there... if you breed an animal that displays the trait in question to an animal without the trait, all babies will be 100% het for the trait in question. Now if you were to breed a 100% het to an animal without the trait, THAT is when you would get 50% hets... and if you breed 2 100% hets together, you get 66% hets -- because you would get 25% displaying the trait (ie. patternless), 50% that were 100% hets, and 25% without the trait... only there's no way of telling the normals (without trait babies) from the het babies without breeding them to either a known het for that trait, or an animal displaying that trait -- so they're considered to be 66% hets.
Don't know if that helped at all, or just confused you even more :)
Genetics Wizard is not a site for a specific animal -- it's for genetics in general. Would probably work for humans too, although I've never tried it :)

Alice -- to the best of my knowledge, in leos all genes are recessive. Dominant & co-dominant do pop-up in snake genetics, but not in leos... That being said, Aurora is an aberrant pattern (ie. jungle, but with no jungle tail) leo -- and last I heard, people were still duking it out as to whether jungle was actually a recessive trait, or if it's just something that pops up. Like you never hear of a "het for jungle"... I'd say, if you bred her to a normal, you'd end up with maybe some normal looking babies, and some aberrant pattern babies -- she does have quite nice colour to her too, so hopefully she'd pass that along :)

Hope that helps a little...

[Clownfishie]

PS -- if it doesn't, I apologize -- it's late, and I'm a bit out of it... LOL :)

[Steve]

Thnaks guy for the poeple people who broke down the genetics a bit. I can never tell how to know is something is recessive, co-dominant or dominant. The break down that clownfishie just gave helps too, as i was confused on how to get 50% hets and stuff. I understud the 66% het thing thought, but it still helps alot when people clarify things better. Also someone elses way of saying something might make more sense then someone elses.
Thanks

[SnowSnake]

Clownfishie- Not all leo genes are recessive. Tangerine and hypo are Co-Dominant genes. "Jungle", "high yellow" could be considered Co-dominant as well.

[Clownfishie]

Snow -- there are no co-dominant genes in leos that have been identified at this time (according to what I've read/heard) -- I've just double checked my research to make sure.
You are correct in that not all leo morphs are caused by recessive genes though -- some are line bred traits (ie. produced by selective breeding) such as tangerine, snow, jungle, stripe, carrot tail, high yellow, and others. When animals possessing these traits are bred to a normal, you generally get babies that are somewhere in between...
Recessive traits include blizzard, albino and patternless.
Some leos can include both types of traits, such as a tangerine (line bred) albino (recessive)...

[MartinW]

Originally posted by Clownfishie
You are correct in that not all leo morphs are caused by recessive genes though -- some are line bred traits (ie. produced by selective breeding) such as tangerine, snow, jungle, stripe, carrot tail, high yellow, and others. When animals possessing these traits are bred to a normal, you generally get babies that are somewhere in between...


Isn't that last statement saying that they are co-dominant?

Martin

[SnowSnake]

lollllll MartinW I was going to answer to what Clownfishie said but you were faster than me!

Clownfishie- What you said is the exact definition of co-dominant genes. You selective breed to get the best of these co-dominant genes.

[Alicewave]

Clownfishie, thanks for the reply. I thought she was a jungle but I know she doesn't have the jungle tail thing. I was hoping I might get some babies that look like her! *fingers crossed*

[Clownfishie]

You're welcome Alice :) I'm sure that she'll make some lovely babies for you, she's a very pretty girl :)

Snow and Martin -- honestly, I'm a little confused now about the whole co-dominance thing -- so I asked someone who knows a bit more about genetics than I do, and this is what he said:

"I can't really explain co-dom traits using leopard geckos as an example...

I would suggest going to a ball python website, or the ball python forum and look for pics of Pastel Jungle ball pythons (Co-Dom trait het for Super pastel), and super pastel pics.

Basically with the pastel trait (het) you will see something in between wildtype and the "super" trait (homo).

A pastel ball python has more yellow and blushing than a normal, but a super pastel has extreme amounts of vibrant yellow and blushing.

The big difference between co-dom traits and simple recessive traits is that co-doms phenotypically show the het form of a trait, while simple recessive hets will look like wildtype.

As far as comparing co-dom to polygenic traits... like carrot tail. The main difference is that co-dom traits are controlled by one single loci, while polygenic traits are controlled by many different genes.

You can have hets for co-dom, no hets for polygenic.

Hopefully this helped some, if you have any other questions let me know."

[SnowSnake]

Who is that someone you talked to? I'd like to chat a little with him. :)

[MartinW]

Clownfishie, I don't know if you know yet (I can't tell from your last message), but this is what I know co-dominance to be: If a trait is co-dominant then even if it is only present as a het its effects are still visible in the animal. If it is present in both alleles then it is even more visible in the animal. For example, I think hypo is co-dominant. If it is present as only a het, then it has a few spots. If it is present on both alleles then it has even less spots. Basically, the degree at which it is visibly present is none if the trait is not present, in the middle if it is present once, and the most visible when it is present twice. On the other hand, if the trait is just a plain recessive trait, then it must be present on both alleles in order to be seen visibly in the animal, otherwise it's not visible at all.

Does that help?

Martin

[Clownfishie]

Snow -- his name is LeosAnonymous, from the "other" site...

Martin -- that kind of makes sense, but have you ever seen such a thing as a "het" for hypo? (in leos anyways). I know I haven't...

[MartinW]

I might be incorrect, but I think a plain hypo is a het, a super-hypo is a homo. Anyone know if this is correct? I'm just guessing based on the terminology (ie. the "super" prefix).

Martin

[Linds]

Martin,
Yup. Animals displaying co-dom/dominant traits in their first degree are "visible hets"... as both bred together will produce 25% normals, 50% "visible hets", and 25% "supers".

Alicewave,
Yup' you've got a pretty little normal. Last year we had a lot of babies pop out with those patterns, a few with the full jungle tails as well... in the end they all end up looking pretty much the same :) It is my experience that jungles are something that just pops out from time to time... maybe someone with more experience will be able to give you more insight into that.

Clownfishie,
I *believe* you are correct in saying that there are no co-dom/dom traits in leopard geckos. There are however selectively bred traits that act in a similar manner (high-yellows, hypos, etc). First generation breedings will still retain a fair amount from their parents, but this can still be bred down, unlike a true colour or pattern morph.

[SnowSnake]

Ok, I didn't want to make a big post to explain this in detail but now I will since we are now 4 in this discussion.

Here is what co-dominant genes do:

You can NOT have a "het" for a co-dominant gene. A co-dominant gene is "as good" as a normal or "wild" gene on the locii, this meens that when on the locus (where there is place for 2 genes) you have 2 normal genes you get a normal leo. When you have a hypo (for example) and normal gene the hypo gene is "as good" as the wild gene so it will show up a bit on the leos' pattern. When you get 2 hypo genes this is when you get a big difference, since you dont have the wild gene to "put" some black spots on the leo the hypo drasticly reduces the amount of black spots.

Het or Heterozygous (in recessive genes only) is when you have a recessive gene with a normal gene on the same locus, by having one of both the wild type which is homozygous will take over the appearence of the leo and this leo will only be carrierer of this gene and will be able to pass is on to his offsprings.
If 2 recessive genes get on one locus then since there are no wild type or co-dominant genes to "disturb" them (recessive genes) the leo will show that recessive trait.

To come back to the co-dominant genes if you want a little practical definition for a co-dominant gene you could say that the modify the wild type gene without replacing it. "super hypo or super tangerine" is only a bigger modification of the wild type gene.

If you use these deffinitions that makes "hypo" and "tangerine" are co-dominant traits.
You cannot determine what "type" of offspring you will have with co-dominant traits like you can with recessive genes.

Hoping I havent confused anyone too much, have a good night!

later,
SnowSnake

[Linds]

Easy to understand page w/punnett squares on <a href="http://newenglandreptile.com/CareInfo/GenCoDom.html">Co-Dominant Genetics</a>... also has two links on the page for Simple Recessive genetics and Double Het as well ;)