I'm seeing "Het. for XXX pattern trait" boa Morphs...cases that would indicate simple recessive genetics, if in fact "het. for" were the case.

Some of the morphs I'm referring to...I thought were Polygenetic, Codominant, or simply specifically bred lines.

Can I get some opinions on some of the genetics, primarily for the different "pattern" morphs on the market today?

A lot of these morphs have degrees of expression, so simple recessive doesn't make sense to me. Some have defined identifiable "Super" forms and some don't seem to.

Any help?

jsc
-----
"As hard as I've tried, just can't NOT do this"

John Crickmer

[ Hide Replies ]

• GENETICS - jscrick, Sun Dec 14 11:23:57 2008
• RE: GENETICS - rainbowsrus, Sun Dec 14 14:22:13 2008
• RE: GENETICS - jhsulliv, Sun Dec 14 15:54:23 2008
• RE: GENETICS - jscrick, Mon Dec 15 09:12:26 2008
• RE: GENETICS - natsamjosh, Mon Dec 15 10:25:22 2008
• RE: GENETICS - Paul Hollander, Mon Dec 15 11:24:55 2008
• RE: GENETICS - Paul Hollander, Mon Dec 15 14:21:02 2008
• RE: GENETICS - jscrick, Mon Dec 15 15:51:16 2008
• RE: GENETICS - LarM, Mon Dec 15 16:49:46 2008
• RE: GENETICS - Paul Hollander, Mon Dec 15 17:52:48 2008
• RE: GENETICS - LarM, Mon Dec 15 21:59:35 2008
• RE: GENETICS - 13joshsilva, Tue Dec 16 20:32:11 2008
• RE: GENETICS - 13joshsilva, Wed Dec 17 00:54:18 2008
• RE: GENETICS - Paul Hollander, Wed Dec 17 13:59:39 2008
• RE: GENETICS - Paul Hollander, Mon Dec 15 14:25:47 2008
• RE: GENETICS - rainbowsrus, Mon Dec 15 14:33:29 2008
• Great example - LarM, Mon Dec 15 14:36:45 2008
• RE: Great example - Paul Hollander, Mon Dec 15 17:07:13 2008
• RE: Great example - LarM, Mon Dec 15 17:40:34 2008
• RE: Great example - 13joshsilva, Wed Dec 17 01:10:48 2008
• RE: Great example - LarM, Thu Dec 18 20:31:12 2008
• RE: GENETICS - jscrick, Mon Dec 15 15:55:49 2008
• RE: GENETICS - Paul Hollander, Mon Dec 15 17:21:25 2008
• RE: GENETICS - LarM, Sun Dec 14 16:54:31 2008