Reptile & Amphibian Forums

Okay, first off, I understand that if you breed 2 locales together, none of the resulting offspring (or any of their offspring and so on) will ever be "pure." That being said, my question pertains to animals such as the 50% suris, 50% guyanas and 50% hoggs, etc..
Okay, say you got an animal that was 50% suri. If you breed it to a pure 100% suri, are the babies then 75% suri?
If they are and you breed one of them (the 75% suri) to another 100% pure suri, are those babies then 87.5% suri. Is that how it works?
Do you just average the percentages of suri (or whatever) together to figure the percentage of the offspring?
Does this question make any sense?
Do you see what I'm getting at?
Please let me know what you think!
Thanks!
Aaron

When dealing with locales (vs. morphs) it's the same as humans. If an Italian and a German have a child, the child is 50/50 Italian and German.

If that child reproduces with a pure German, their offspring are 75% German and 25 % Italian.
-----
2.1.0 Kidletts
1.0.1 Ball Python
0.0.1 Okeetee Corn
2.2.0 BCI
0.1.0 Cat (Ginger)
1.0.0 Pughuahua (Ranger)

and sounds like every think you said is right.

You've got it right, look at it this way:

100% suri contributes 1/2 the makeup of the babies or 50% suri
100% ca contributes 1/2 the makup of the babies or 50% CA

50%/50% suri/ca contributes 1/2...or 25%/25% suri/ca

No take any two and combine:

100% suri x 100% ca = 50% suri plus 50% ca

100% suri x 50%/50% suri/ca =
50% suri plus 25%/25% suri/ca or 75%suri/25% ca

and so on
-----
Thanks,

Dave Colling

www.rainbows-r-us-reptiles.com

0.1 Wife (WC)
0.2 kids (CBB)

LOL, to many snakes to list, last count:
10.22 BRB
10.15 BCI
And those are only the breeders

lots.lots.lots feeder mice and rats

That's what I thought.
so first generation = 50%
2nd = 75%
3rd = 87.5%
4th = 93.75%
5th = 96.875%
6th = 98.4375%
Hmmmmmmmm...
I thought I remembered somebody saying that by the 6th generation, they were almost "pure."
Imagine a hypo 98% surinam...
The first generation's already done. You could even pick up something like a 75% argentine Salmontine already if you had the money. I know there are probably already 75% suri, guyana and hog crosses as well.
I know I keep bringing this idea up. I'll probably never do it anyway! That's for humoring me!
Aaron

the 7th generation would be over 99%

Think of it as a morph.

Suri X Hog Isle for instance. The F1 are 50%/50%

Now breed one of the 50-50 to a pure Suri.
Some of the babies could get NO Hog Isle genes from the cross and actually be 100% suri. However there is no way to know. As a result the babies are labeled as 75% Suri.

If you look at litters or clutches from two F1 animals, the F2 offspring usually have some that look like the F1, some that look almost like the pure of the patriarch (or more traits) and some look like a pure example of the matriarch (or more traits).

So say you wanted a Hypo Suri, and started by breeding Salmon X Suriname. Take Hypo babies with the most Suriname traits and keep breeding them to Pure Surinames each generation, eventually you would not be able to tell it from a true Suriname Hypo.

That's another thing I was thinking. A lot of the hypo crosses look like "normal" hypos. I was thinking that it was partially due to this and partially because the hypo gene would destroy some of the pattern traits that are the signature of suris. The widow’s peaks, for example, may be reduced or deleted in the process of the reduction of pigment in the saddles.

I would love to have a hypo with widows peaks. The only hypo I have is a Gee line, she has very blocky saddles, and they are broad. I think useing hypos like her will give the best shot at getting some with Widows peaks. The Gee line are the Hypos that produced Hypo Motleys with a full Motley pattern, vs. the broken stripes of Salmon Motleys. Maybe it will work the same way.

That's EXACTLY what I'm talking about. In suris, honestly, I think I get really wrapped up in the pattern really almost even a little more than the tail color. I really like thin evenly spaced saddles with moderate widow's peaks. I was thinking if you could have a 98 % hypo suri that has thin reduced saddles but still maintains the widow's peaks and then has the killer tail from both the red of the suris AND the red of the hypos that would be the end goal.
I also wonder if the “hybrid vigor” that might result would strengthen up the suris and help them thrive in captivity a little more-not that they really need it anymore, but I wonder if it might make them a little less finicky. Know what I mean?
This idea is driving me crazy. I'm really considering hunting up a little female 50% hypo suri at Daytona. If anyone will have some for sale, please feel free to pm me. I've also thought of doing this with hypo hoggs, Salmontines and hypo guyanas. Also, does anyone know where I might at least find some pics of a u suri cross (hopefully hypo)?
I don't know. I may just take the long way and make the first generation myself. I have a REALLY killer 04 male hypo that I got from Mike at Basically boas (what a nice guy with awesome snakes and GREAT customer service!.)
I figure thought that if I went with a hypo/whatever cross, that would give me a 1-2 generation head start.
Anyone have contact info for people doing this already-especially with 75% crosees?
Thanks again to everyone for the dialogue! I REALLY appreciate it. The discourse from this thread has really helped me put my thoughts in order on teh whole thing (while simultaneously driving me crazy to proceed with this project! I think my heads going to explode.) Last night, my girlfriend looked at me and said "this has really got you wrapped up, hasn't it?"
...and she's USED to my normal obsessing about boas!
Sorry for the ramble. Thanks again, guys! Please keep it coming!
Aaron

Just a slight correction; Actually, it is not possible that on a second generation that some offspring could be produced with no Hogg genes. There are literally millions of genes and about half would be contributed by one parent and half by the other. So regardless of how the resulting offspring "appear', in the breeding described, approximately 25% of the genes would in fact have come from the Hogg. If you are talking about one specific gene, then yes, some offspring will not have any Hogg genes for whatever that one characteristic that you are keying in on, but overall, it is just statistically impossible that on the second generation that no Hogg genes would be inherited. Also keep in mind that many many genes may control whatever characteristic that you are keying in on.

It's a little bit like this, sort of. My Dad was full blooded Norwegian. My Mom is half Norwegian and half Swedish. This makes each of their kids, I of course being the eldest, smartest and best looking of the bunch, 3/4 Norwegian and 1/4 Swede. Now, it is not possible that any of us could have been born without any of the genes originally contributed by my Mom's Father. He was the Swedish person in the bunch. It just is not possible that any of us do not have any genes that originally came from him. It is just statistically impossible given the numbers of genes involved. I hope that makes sense.

That being said, some crosses have been done and on the second generation the offspring look completely like one type or the other. However our eyes do not see down to the genetic level. It is also possible through selective breeding to "make" Boas that "look" like some other type of Boa though there are no genes from that other type of Boa.

The whole thing is just a lot more complicated than things often seem on the face of it.

I see what you mean.

The F2 may have the genes from say the Hog side that make it look like a hog, but there are other genes that will make up the animal that would have come from the Suri. Perhaps adult size or something.

Thanks, Jeff.
I agree with that also. To take it a little further and continue with your analogy, I think you may even carry some Swedish genes that you're not expressing. This can be seen with multiple children from the same parents. They NEVER look exactly the same and often show traits that the parents don't. For instance, we often see in humans something like this:
an individual has a child that doesn't look anything like them but the offspring of that child look like the original individual (their grandparent). You can find cousins that look more similar to each other than they do to their siblings. I believe that the genes are often there but simply not expressed AND not governed by the same rules that govern traits that are simple recessive, dominant, etc.. I believe that some genes are simply just random. You can get kids that are taller than BOTH of their parents. They can be there hidden and sometimes express themselves and sometimes not either because they're governed by rules that are not yet capable of understanding or that they're just simply random and not governed by any rules at all. Does that make sense?
You can even see this variation in litters of snakes. You can breed to suris together and get a great deal of variation within the same litter. Some may have big peaks and bright tails while others don't. They don't all look the same, but the "ingredients" still seem to be there.
Thanks again, Jeff!
Aaron

In my opinion on paper yes, in reality no.You don't get a clean genetic split .That's why many times when snakes are crossed the litter is so varied with some looking like the dame and others looking like the sire and the rest looking like a mix. The percentage of genetic traits passed on from ether of the parents to the individual varies. The real answer is 100 % mutt. Ernie Eison
Link