Reptile & Amphibian Forums

This whitesided brooks deformity was found in a clutch of eggs that it should not have been in. I bred my flame male to a normal female. The normal female, I bred last year to a whiteside and produced all hets. No whitesides in that clutch. The flame male is not even closely related to the whitesides. So what are your opinions?

So what are your opinions?
>>

that looks like 40 miles of bad road...

i have found through some inquiries that a number of morphs/hets were bred into the ws trait during its development but offspring weren't always sold as het or possible het. for example, i bred an extreme orange albino male to a whiteside female and got 7 albinos and 4 normals. when i acquired the female as a hatchling, she was sold just as white side. also a pair of DH whiteside hypos produced two nearly totally opalescent hatchlings, i assume to be white side hypos, but they don't "look" like the hypo breeding stock (red/orange). no hypos were hatched from the clutch for comparison.
lots of interesting things with the ws trait...

daveb

I don't think either one of these are het for whiteside. I think it just happend. As for the whitesided hypos. I think the whiteside gene is taking away the red. I hope through selective breeding we can get some red or orange in there.
thanks
Jeff

My opinion is that one shouldn't read too much into what a deformed snake looks like.
-----
3.0 WC; 0.1 CB L. getula californiae
0.1 CB L. pyromelana pyromelana
0.1 WC; 10 eggs (7/11) Elgaria multicarinata multicarinata

Most of the time I would agree with you on this, but this one is not just some crazy pattern or a weird color. It is an exact replica of a whiteside.
thanks
Jeff

a)It could be a spontaneous mutation.
b)It could also be that part of whatever made that hatchling deformed also made it a whiteside.
c)The parents could both be het for a different whiteside gene than the one already known from Florida kings.
d)The parents are both het for the whiteside trait already known in Florida kings, and prior breedings were statistically unlucky and didn't produce any just because that was the way the dice rolled.

I like option C the best.

could this be the W/S gene proven????????C

I think it was b.
If it was c, then I'm guessing there would have been a non deformed hatchling with it. I guess that depends upon the clutch size.

Kings get their color late in the egg, do they not? if it was growing deformed, then perhaps the aquisition of color was also not right.

If/when they are bred again, perhaps more will be revealed.
-----
3.0 WC; 0.2 CB L. getula californiae
0.1 WC; 10 eggs (7/11) Elgaria multicarinata multicarinata

It was a small clutch and only 2 of them went the distance. One was a normal(alive) and the other is the whiteside(dead). I will do the breading again next year to see what happens. I think what ever made him deformed may also be what made him a whiteside. I do know the first whitside brooks that was produced was a little deformed. He had one eye.
thanks
Jeff

Weird that looks like a Whiteside to me especially with that head pattern being solid. Is the Father that Flame male I sent ya a couple years ago ?

Keith
-----

Yes, the flame you sent me. He is doing great.
Jeff

I think you have proven that your "normal" female might have something else going on. Even if it was the result of the previous year breeding to the whiteside (retention?), it shouldn't have been a whiteside unless she's het or the whitesided is related to other recessive traits. You may not have enough production from her to know what she's hiding, and you might only find out from breeding the survivor back to her someday. Makes your "normal" alot more interesting! Good luck.

Is sperm retention a possibility? After all, she had bred with a WS--and if so, maybe the passing of time contributed to this one's demise. Just guessing.