Posted by:
hkt2000
at Tue Sep 14 06:51:06 2010 [ Email Message ] [ Show All Posts by hkt2000 ]
Hi Mike,
I don't think the lack of aneries/ghosts is that shocking...I've seen this so many times both in the lab and in my own personal experience in breeding fish/parrots (and to a limited extent reptiles).
What is surprising is the two aneries produced in the initial pairing. One possible explanation I can think of for this would be gynogenesis (otherwise known as pseudogamy) in which the sperm from the male's only role would be in stimulating the egg to develop into an embryo, but does not pass on any genetic material to the embryo. The only problem with this theory however, is that the two aneries you produced were females. If gynogenesis was responsible for these two anomalies, you would expect them to be males. (The egg either possessing a Z or a W sex chromosome). The egg(s) containing the Z chromosome of course, would develop into a failed embryo. The egg(s) containing the W chromosome however, would develop into a viable embryo, however, it would be WW, and hence a male. And in the same vain, any form of parthenogenesis would run into the same problem... you would expect any offspring produced from parthenogenesis to be males.
And again the fact that you saw this twice, makes this scenario even more unlikely given that it is relatively rare.
Another possible explanation would be that your hypo male is het for anery, not through ancestral inheritance but through spontaneous mutation. The rate of mutagenesis in snakes seems fairly high, in part due to what I can gather through a precursory research of the literature a fairly simple DNA repair mechanism.
This scenario would explain the lack of anery in the father's background and the production of the two anery females. However, it's my understanding that a similar situation happened with Ken, however, he produced two unexpected hypo offspring. The likelihood that a similar event happened with his animals seems a little unrealistic as well.
I've actually emailed an old genetics professor of mine, who has much more years of experience than I do. So we'll see what her thoughts may be.
Ralph
[ Hide Replies ]
- Boo! - flavor, Mon Sep 13 20:16:32 2010
- RE: Boo! - brick1, Mon Sep 13 20:55:20 2010
- RE: Boo! - flavor, Tue Sep 14 06:11:48 2010
- RE: Boo! - hkt2000, Mon Sep 13 21:01:10 2010
- RE: Boo! - flavor, Tue Sep 14 06:16:37 2010
RE: Boo! - hkt2000, Tue Sep 14 06:51:06 2010
- RE: Boo! - hkt2000, Tue Sep 14 09:46:56 2010
- RE: Boo! - Jeff Clark, Tue Sep 14 09:53:04 2010
- RE: Boo! - flavor, Tue Sep 14 18:26:26 2010
- RE: Boo! - amazondoc, Tue Sep 14 08:59:50 2010
- RE: Boo! - natsamjosh, Mon Sep 13 21:23:30 2010
- RE: Boo! - flavor, Tue Sep 14 06:17:27 2010
- RE: Boo! - samuraiken2, Mon Sep 13 23:24:11 2010
- RE: Boo! - flavor, Tue Sep 14 06:18:58 2010
- RE: Boo! - waspinator421, Mon Sep 13 23:45:02 2010
- RE: Boo! - flavor, Tue Sep 14 06:21:00 2010
- Congrats Mike.... - rainbowsrus, Tue Sep 14 00:16:53 2010
- Ooooooooooo.......Aaaaaaaahhhhhhh....... - amazondoc, Tue Sep 14 00:18:06 2010
- RE: Boo! - DanL, Tue Sep 14 08:32:55 2010
- RE: Boo! - Z_G_Reptiles, Tue Sep 14 08:52:25 2010
- RE: Boo! - amazondoc, Tue Sep 14 08:56:59 2010
- RE: Boo! - Jeff Clark, Tue Sep 14 09:04:40 2010
- RE: Boo! - natsamjosh, Tue Sep 14 15:52:36 2010
- RE: Boo! - hkt2000, Tue Sep 14 18:19:00 2010
- RE: Boo! - amazondoc, Tue Sep 14 18:53:01 2010
- RE: Boo! - hkt2000, Tue Sep 14 19:12:19 2010
- RE: Boo! - amazondoc, Tue Sep 14 19:02:26 2010
- RE: Boo! - Jeff Clark, Tue Sep 14 18:51:53 2010
- RE: Boo! - hkt2000, Tue Sep 14 19:17:12 2010
- RE: Boo! - flavor, Tue Sep 14 18:36:36 2010
- Hey Robert Seib...... - rainbowsrus, Tue Sep 14 11:43:18 2010
- RE: Boo! - AS_Exotics, Wed Sep 15 17:30:00 2010
- RE: Boo! - flavor, Thu Sep 16 06:15:18 2010
- RE: Boo! - curaniel, Wed Sep 15 23:03:29 2010
- RE: Boo! - flavor, Thu Sep 16 06:19:36 2010
|