Who would pay this?

[Tim_Cranwill]

I should have know better than to even try to debate a science subject with you!

Want to get into a music debate?!?!?

[Jeff_Favelle]

Yeah, I like Cindi Lauper and the Thompson Twins.

[Tim_Cranwill]

Well then, you lose already!!! In more way than one!

[Jeff_Favelle]

LOL!

[Invictus]

Well, I thought I knew a thing or two about genetics. Now you're telling me het for dominant, and recessive for this, and no such thing as dominant and hets being the same as homo...... I have a LOT of reading to do.

[Dr. Antfarm]

If you guys think that 45k USD is alot, Mike Willbanks and Bob Clark are charging $100 000/pair het leucistic balls. I don't think NERD is in any danger of going out of buisness. They're one of the largest python breeders in the world, and are responsible for alot of the Ball morphs on the market today. I don't think they have alot of trouble selling their stuff.

[Will]

I think it's basically the same stuff as simple reccessive genes(such as albinism) only in reverse.

I think if I understand it, a dominant trait shows in a het animal('spider'), as opposed to a recessive trait being hidden in the het form('normal' in this case...?). So an animal that was het-spider and het-normal would show the spider phenotype, no...? And an animal that was homo-spider, would look just the same, only it would have that 'extra' spider allele and would only throw spider babies(in the het form).

Basically the same thing as albinos, only in this case the 'normal' gene is recessive and the 'spider' is dominant...?

I think that's how it works, but could be totally off...

[Dr. Antfarm]

This series of articles should clear everything up for everyone.

http://www.newenglandreptile.com/genetics_intro.html

[Will]

Oh and back on the original topic, I gaurantee that whoever plunks down the 45g isn't working a 9-5 job, plunking twoonies into a piggy bank saving up for that girl.

The money that pays for that snake has been made, and re-made many times over in other breeding projects in the past, and the money that goes into that snake will be made and re-made and spent on other projects in the future. For sure.

The reason I decided to get into snakes in the first place(and I think alot of breeders start out like this) was first and foremost a fascination with the animal, but I quickly realized that this hobby has the potential to pay for itself.

At this point in time, for me it is like many other people's non-snake hobbies - I hemmorage money left, right, and center to do what I do. I scrimp and save for new breeding stock and put off buying other things for myself, just to have some extra scratch to spend on my hobby. And like other people's hobbies, I would likely be doing it, even if the money constantly flowed out the door.

Hopefully in the next couple of years, for me, the hobby will start to pay for itself though. I can continue doing what I like to do in my spare time, but it won't cost me a thing. My 9-5 will pay for the bills and for Will - and the snakes will pay for the snakes. How many hobbies out there have that potential...? Not many that I can think of.

That 45,000 is exactly the same thing, only on a much larger scale - and those breeders have better jobs than I do...

[hhw]

I find NERD's genetics guide a bit misleading on some issues. Particularly, their explanation of dominant genes using super pastels, as the pastel gene is not dominant.

[Derrick]

Originally posted by hhw
I find NERD's genetics guide a bit misleading on some issues. Particularly, their explanation of dominant genes using super pastels, as the pastel gene is not dominant.

I'm glad I'm not the only one who thought that. It cpnfused me at first

[RandyRemington]

I took a quick look at the NERD genetics page and looks like they put in a lot of work and it's a pretty nice page. My minor critique would be that they seem to be making a mistake I see a lot in the snake hobby, they are sometimes using the morph type terms "dominant" and "co-dominant" where they should be using the genotype terms "homozygous" and "recessive".

The genotype refers to the types of the two genes for a specific trait. Except for the gender chromosome (and sometimes even then I think) there are two copies of every gene. It can get a little complicated if you start talking about multiple mutant alleles of the same gene but lets leave that possibility out of the discussion for now.

The possible genotypes are homozygous normal (two normal copies of whatever gene we are talking about), heterozygous mutant (one mutant copy and one corresponding normal copy), and homozygous mutant. These possible genotypes apply to all mutations we have seen so far (i.e. no sex linked yet). Here are some simple rules for breeding outcomes based on genotype:

1. Homozygous normal X homozygous normal = 100% homozygous normal

2. Heterozygous mutant X homozygous normal = 50% chance heterozygous mutant, 50% homozygous normal

3. Heterozygous mutant X heterozygous mutant = 25% chance homozygous mutant, 50% chance heterozygous mutant, 25% chance homozygous normal.

4. Homozygous mutant X homozygous normal = 100% heterozygous mutant.

5. Homozygous mutant X heterozygous mutant = 50% chance homozygous mutant, 50% chance heterozygous mutant.

6. Homozygous mutant X homozygous mutant = 100% homozygous mutant.

These rules apply to all mutations, regardless of the mutation type (recessive, co-dominant/incomplete dominant, completely dominant). The mutation type just helps you correlate the genotype with the appearance (phenotype).

With the recessive mutation type, the heterozygous genotype has the normal phenotype and only the homozygous mutant genotype has the mutant phenotype.

With the co-dominant mutation type, or some prefer the term incomplete dominant mutation type, the heterozygous genotype has a mutant phenotype but the homozygous genotype has a different mutant phenotype.

With the completely dominant mutation type the heterozygous genotype and the homozygous genotype both have the same mutant phenotype.

The key is to remember what the tree ways of categorizing a mutation mean and keep them separate. The genotype (heterozygous, homozygous) describes the genes and the same rules apply to the inheritance of the genotype for all non sex linked mutations. The phenotype describes the appearance of an individual animal relative to a mutation (albino, pastel, super pastel). The mutation type (recessive, co-dominant/incomplete dominant, completely dominant) describes the interaction between the genotype and the phenotype for a mutation. The mutation type doesn't change depending on if you are talking about a heterozygous or homozygous animal for the same mutation (i.e. the super pastel phenotype is homozygous genotype, NOT the dominant form since the mutation is still the same type (co-dominant/incomplete dominant) as when you where looking at the heterozygous genotype pastel phenotype animal.

Also, regarding "There's 2 alleles for every gene, so of course there can be homo spiders." Does anyone have an estimate of how many potential homozygous spiders (i.e. from spider X spider breedings) have been produced and for how many years? I'm wondering how many of these are old enough that they should have been breed by now. Are there any that have breed and produced only spiders so far? I'll agree that in theory there should be a homozygous spider. Maybe not enough of potential homozygous spiders have been grown up and bred to prove any of the 1/3 that should be homozygous. However, if there where lots of potential homozygous spiders produced in the last 2 – 4 years and lots of those have been bred but none have yet produced only spiders then I would start to look at a theory to explain this (like maybe the homozygous embryos die soon after conception). I have almost no data on what has been produced and when but until a homozygous animal is produced any morph is potentially homozygous lethal.

[hhw]

Excellent explanation Randy!!! I'm glad you brought up the issue of codominance vs incomplete dominance.

[TexasAggie04]

Purchasing a bumblebee spider for breeding should also be looked at like any investment: potentially risky.

Scenario: Breeding projects lead you to increasingly valuable morphs, eventually netting you the 45k needed to purchase this fine animal. It croaks for some strange reason before you can breed it. You are very sad.

I would just be very hesitant to count my baskets before they hatch, or put all my eggs in one chicken.

[nita]

Originally posted by Corey Woods
Most of the people who complain about the price of the Ball python morphs can't afford them. The people who aren't afraid to invest the money make the money.

Corey
PS......I've spent close to that on one animal......actually.....on multiple animals.

LOL, at the Red Deer show a friend commented that when you talk about your animals you sound like money is no object. After pointing out the animals you had on display and the cost of those animals I mentioned that I didnt' think it was when it came to your animals. I'm saving this thread so I can show it to my husband when he complains that I want to spend $1500 on a pastel.