Did a quicky web search. Below is the most interesting site I looked at. It had pictures from three tiger x normal matings.

You can almost guarantee that web site information is incomplete. So I'm going by the pattern that it shows. Like calling a colon followed by an end parenthesis a face that is smiling.

Apparently, mating a tiger to an unrelated normal snake produces all tigers. Or at least all the babies are not normals even if not good tigers. This is consistent with a snake with two tiger mutant gene mated to a snake with two normal genes producing all babies with a tiger mutant gene paired with a normal gene. And I kept tripping over the word "variable". There seems to be enough variation in the babies that often you can't tell whether a snake has two copies of the tiger mutant or one.

So, in my opinion, the information for tiger best corresponds to a dominant mutant gene with variable expressivity. That opinion may change some with more information about the variablility. But I'm pretty sure tiger is not a recessive mutant gene.

As for the claim that tiger is a codominant, I've already given my opinion on how poorly most herpers understand the term.

I found less information on jaguar than tiger. Very tentatively, I lean towards the opinion that jaguar is also a dominant mutant with variable expressivity.

Paul Hollander

Anthony Caponetto Reptiles - ACReptiles.com

[ Reply To This Message ] [ Subscribe to this Thread ] [ Show Entire Thread ]