I have seen multiple people post pics of animals that have the genetics for Hybino but are labeled as possible or unproven.



What do you mean by "have the genetics for" hybino?



If you mean the POTENTIAL of having those genes, then they're labeled as possible or unproven because that's an accurate expression of the facts. It would be dishonest--optimistic, perhaps, and a tool for selling them, but dishonest nontheless--to call them otherwise.



If you mean they HAVE the genes that make an animal a hybino--TWO hypo genes and TWO albino genes--then the posts were probably misleading: To the best of my knowledge, no one has produced an animal yet that BECAUSE OF ITS PARENTAGE HAS TO BE THAT. The ones produced so far come out of parents with that capability--or potential--but until we know how to distinguish them visually (as you suggest; see further observations below) there's no way to say, "that's one" and "that's not."



This year i'll be breeding from hypo het/albino x hypo het/albino. Both parents are hypos so all babies will be hypos. Both parents are het albino so 1/4 of babies will be albinos. And because all the babies are hypos, those albinos will be albino AND hypo. And that's what makes a DEFINITE hybino. And they'll be visually identifiable-- all the albinos will BE hybinos. So there will be no need to say possible or unproven.



All of the pics I have seen are very similar to each other and different from albinos.



HOW do they "look different"? I've been producing potential or POSSIBLE hybinos for at least 3 years now and I've seen dozens of those "possible or unproven" specimens and they sure don't all look different to me. So you're gonna have to post back and be more specific--how, exactly, do all the albinos in those pix look different from other tangerine albinos that have no genetic chance of being hypos and thus hybinos? Maybe you've spotted something we haven't, or maybe you haven't seen a lot of tangerine albinos.



Now, about "UNPROVEN":



All those albino babies from prior breedings people have done -- double het for hybino x double het for hybino, for example, which was the earliest pairing with the potential to produce hybinos, or the more recent breeding i've done the past two years, albino het/hypo x double het, produce those babies i referred to that might or might not be hybinos. Some probably are, statistically. Most of them are not.



But you CAN PROVE one to be a hybino: Breed one of those albinos that MIGHT be a hypo X a hypo, and if you get ENOUGH babies, ALL of which are hypos, it could be argued that the parent is, then, a PROVEN hybino.



The problem is, HOW MANY babies do you have to get, ALL of which are hypos, before you can draw that conclusion? Most of us have had clutches hatch that were supposed to be half male and half female, but maybe all six were males. That wouldn't prove the parents were animals that could only produce males (I know, that's nonsense, but remember that if the adult we're testing is HET hypo instead of HYPO then when bred x a hypo (as proposed for this test) HALF the babies would be hypos, instead of all of them--the same 50-50 ratio we should see with genders. So the "how many babies have to be hypos" rhetorical question does relate to our experiences with getting clutches of babies that don't conform in gender to what will happen in a larger sample, so the analogy is, i think, a fair one.



So--if I produce ten babies from such a test, and they're all hypos, does that PROVE the adult is a hypo (and hybino, because it's albino)? No, but statistically it comes very close, just as the odds of getting 10 babies -- all of them male -- is statistically rare, but possible. So, 20 babies? still doesnt' prove it. But at some point, people will generally agree, "ok, with that many babies, and they're all hypos, I'm satisfied it IS a hypo (and thus hybino) parent. So that's why we say "unproven" and that's how one might be "proven" someday. Obviously it'll be far easier to produce babies that HAVE to be hybinos, from the parentage.



So the only way anyone should sell something as a hybino is either:

a) it's produced from parents who can ONLY produce identifiable hybinos;

b) the results of the testing are cited and the buyer is satisfied by them;

or, of course,

c) if we do eventually spot a visual difference eventually and learn how to designate hybinos on sight.



SEEING a number of animals we KNOW are hybinos will help: So if I produce definite hybinos this year and they vary in appearance the way POSSIBLE hybinos vary, then we'll have to conclude there's no visual way to identify them. IF in fact they all show some characteristic we didn't notice before, but that's seen only on SOME of the POSSIBLE hybinos produced in the past, then we can TEST breed THOSE possibles that showed that characteristic, and if THEY all PROVE to be hybinos, maybe we'll ahve estalbished a way to "know by looking".



Just fyi, the first of those possible hybinos that i test bred (because it had the cleanest, boldest colors--a description that could fit hypos, right?) was bred x several hypo females. The first 3 or 4 or 5 babies WERE hypos, I forget the edetails, i was getting excited, but it all became moot when finally a non-hypo hatched. That single animal was all it took to DIS-prove the animal was hybino. It only takes one to prove an animal's NOT homozygous, but it takes a very, very large number to prove it IS, by test breeding. That beautiful tangerine albino het/hypo is now the patriarch of my hybino project, ahving replaced the original double het males. But he's not a hybino. (rats!)



This year I hpe to test breed another male. It's tangerine albino. It's POSSIBLE hypo. And it's very pale. I'll try to post a pic later. ANyway, maybe THAT-- the paleness--is the visual clue, rather than brightness. I've got a hypo female or two set aside to breed him to, and of course will post the resutls. I've held back a pair of similar "pale" tangerine albinos from 04, just in case. But that may prove to be no more an indicator than the cleanness-brightness theory proposed.



I am asking because I may produce some and what to label them correctly. I understand not wanting to misrepresent your animals but they seem to be different looking enough to warrant it.



What are you breeding that "may" produce some? What are the genetics of the parents? You want to be real sure you are 100% sure when you sell something--and i realize that's why you've asked this question here.



Terry and anybody else do you have pics of yearling or older possible hybinos?? Hopefully Shannon chimes in to.



As I said, I'll try to post a pic or two.



peace,

terry

[ Show Entire Thread ]