Reptile & Amphibian Forums

If ChrisGilbert's suggestion (that Sharp albino and Moore caramel are different versions of the same gene) pans out, we can predict the breeding results. In the following list of matings, I will use (name1)//(name2) for the genes involved. The "//" symbolizes a pair of homologous chromosomes, with gene (name1) located on one chromosome and gene (name2) located at the same position in the second chromosome. In other words, "(name1)//(name2)" is a single chromosome pair.

normal//normal x caramel//Sharp albino (paradigm) -->
1/2 normal//caramel (AKA het caramel). Looks normal
1/2 normal//Sharp albino (AKA het Sharp albino). Looks normal

caramel//caramel x caramel//Sharp albino (paradigm) -->
1/2 caramel//caramel. Caramel
1/2 caramel//Sharp albino. Paradigm.

Sharp albino//Sharp albino x caramel//Sharp albino (paradigm) -->
1/2 Sharp albino//Sharp albino. Sharp albino.
1/2 caramel//Sharp albino. Paradigm.

normal//Sharp albino (het Sharp albino) x caramel//Sharp albino (paradigm) -->
1/4 normal//Sharp albino. Het Sharp albino. Looks normal.
1/4 normal//caramel. Het caramel. Looks normal.
1/4 Sharp albino//Sharp albino. Sharp albino.
1/4 caramel//Sharp albino. Paradigm.

normal//caramel (het caramel) x caramel//Sharp albino (paradigm) -->
1/4 normal//Sharp albino. Het Sharp albino. Looks normal.
1/4 normal//caramel. Het caramel. Looks normal.
1/4 caramel//caramel. Caramel.
1/4 caramel//Sharp albino. Paradigm.

caramel//Sharp albino (paradigm) x caramel//Sharp albino (paradigm) -->
1/4 caramel//caramel. Caramel.
2/4 caramel//Sharp albino. Paradigm.
1/4 Sharp albino//Sharp albino. Sharp albino.

normal//caramel (het caramel) x normal//Sharp albino (het Sharp albino) -->
1/4 normal//normal. Normal.
1/4 normal//caramel. Het caramel. Looks normal.
1/4 normal//Sharp albino. Het Sharp albino. Looks normal.
1/4 caramel//Sharp albino. Paradigm.

caramel//caramel (caramel) x Sharp albino//Sharp albino (Sharp albino) -->
all caramel//Sharp albino. Paradigm.

Paul Hollander

Gnats! "(name1)//(name2) is a single chromosome pair." That should have been gene pair, not chromosome pair. Wonder what other typos I made.

Paul Hollander

write that out.

So far the breedings that have been done do follow those results.

normal//normal x caramel//Sharp albino (paradigm) -->
1/4 normal//normal
1/4 normal//sharp strain (het sharp) looks normal
1/4 normal//caramel (het caramel) looks normal
1/4 sharp strain//caramel (double het) paradigm

not half het sharp half het caramel?

-Eddie Kim

I think you may be looking at things wrong:

normal/normal x caramel/sharp albino

it would be as Paul stated, 1/2 het caramel and 1/2 het sharp albino.
The normal individual would give a normal allele to each of its offspring, and the other individual would give either a caramel OR a sharp albino allele, NOT both.

The results you posted would be true for this pairing:

normal/caramel x normal/sharp albino
-----
- Jason F.

ohhh ok. my mind was still thinking in terms of double het. thanks for the clarification.

i guess all it would take to prove if it is a visual double het or if they work on the same allelle is to breed a paradigm to a normal and see if any of the offspring turn out paradigm or if they all come out normal het for sharp or caramel?

This is true, but ...

It would take two breedings to do so and in the end you would be left with average animals.

The same thing can be figured out in two breeding that you would be left with much better quality animals. If you bred to paradigms together and then bred that possible 'super paradigm' to a normal you should result in a litter of paradigms. That is if things work out for the best. Additionally even if they didnt you would still be left with animals that would not only be more valuable but additionally much easier to sell.
-----
- Jason F.

Don't bet your shirt on there being any super paradigms.

Paul Hollander

I would not. I was trying to keep my opinion out of this.

I feel that both the caramel and the sharp mutation are slightly different mutations of the same allele (or at least on the same chromosome). The presence of both genes in the dna voids any wild type gene from taking dominance over the two recessive alleles. Additionally since to me the paradigm phenotype is strikingly similar to that of the caramel phenotype, I think that the caramel is the dominant of the two recessive alleles thus its expression (wording on that sentence might be tough so read it carefully). In sum I feel that the 'paradigm' is a visual double heterozygous phenotype and that there is no possible 'super' form. I feel that concerning these mutations there can only be sharp albions, caramels, and 'paradigms'. I suspect that a paradigm x paradigm pairing will result in 1/4 sharp albino, 1/4 caramel, and 1/2 paradigm. Of corse this is only speculation and the best proof will come from breeding trials (wish I had the money/luck to prove out some of these mutation trials for the boa community .. any donators?). If I am correct and there is no 'super' form, there is still another phenotype to add to the boa hobby and a great addition to the many amazing forms these animals can take on.
-----
- Jason F.

The original post read as follows:
>normal//normal x caramel//Sharp albino (paradigm) -->
1/4 normal//normal
1/4 normal//sharp strain (het sharp) looks normal
1/4 normal//caramel (het caramel) looks normal
1/4 sharp strain//caramel (double het) paradigm

Here is the corrected mating:
normal//normal x caramel//Sharp albino (paradigm) -->
1/2 normal//sharp strain (het sharp) looks normal
1/2 normal//caramel (het caramel) looks normal

Thanks for catching the mistake, Eddie.

Paul Hollander

Sorry, everyone. I misread the post I just replied to. The original was correct as written.

Paul Hollander

I believe that was your original post. I was thinking in terms of double het for both caramel and sharp and what I posted was how I thought the results would be.

His breeding with a motley and jungle should show if they work as a double het or if sharp and caramel are two versions of the same gene. If there are paradigms in the resulting litter the paradigms would be considered a visual double het and if the litter is all normal then they would be considered as two types of the same gene.
Is this correct?

I am willing to be wrong on the understanding of all this...but the way I see it is there are 2 alleles ...one a sharp albino allele and the other one is a T positive allele...this is what I think is trying to be proved....and that some how what this is showing is that the sharp Albino is the homozygous and ALSO the T positive is the Homozygous ...to me it seems like a 3 step genetic process instead of a normal 2 step recessive....now I don't claim to know genetics ....so go easy on me....but if you breed to make sharp albinos then the T positive gene gets reduced in a sense... that it would take 2 more steps to show back up in a homozygous state.....does that make sense? Or am I loosing it...LOL???

Andy
-----

I think you've bumped your head....not so long ago, you were comparing your hypos to Jungles and stuff, then your anery is something..maybe het for lucy, and now you have something comparible to T positives....yup, you've bumped it for sure!
-----
Chris & Alliey
www.bloodyleopard.com
E-mail Us

Hope your doing well buddy...Take care, Andy
-----

>I am willing to be wrong on the understanding of all this...but the way I see it is there are 2 alleles ...one a sharp albino allele and the other one is a T positive allele...this is what I think is trying to be proved....and that some how what this is showing is that the sharp Albino is the homozygous and ALSO the T positive is the Homozygous ...to me it seems like a 3 step genetic process instead of a normal 2 step recessive....now I don't claim to know genetics ....so go easy on me....but if you breed to make sharp albinos then the T positive gene gets reduced in a sense... that it would take 2 more steps to show back up in a homozygous state.....does that make sense? Or am I loosing it...LOL???

I'm not entirely sure that I understand what you are asking. If I'm off, please tell me. I flunked Clairvoyance 101, you know.

Off hand, I don't know how far back you started reading these paradigm boa discussions. So below is the link to an earlier post that may help, too.

You wrote "the sharp Albino is the homozygous and ALSO the T positive is the Homozygous". To me, this means that you are saying that there are two pairs of genes. One pair is made up of two Sharp albino genes, and the other pair is made up of two T-positive (AKA Moore caramel) genes. I've read other posts where I thought the poster meant that, anyway.

If this is what you mean, then this is the point where you and others have gone off the right track.

I want to be as plain and understandable as possible, so I'm going to use as little genetics jargon as I can. And I'll probably repeat sometimes. Anyway, I'm going to try to just use the members of the gene pairs. Or in this case, pair. Because there is only one gene pair, with two genes making up the pair.

Chris Gilbert suggested that the paradigm boa was produced by one Sharp albino gene and one T-positive (AKA Moore caramel) gene, which make a gene pair. Not two Sharp albino genes and two T-positive genes; just one Sharp albino gene and one T-positive gene.

Let's say you mate a paradigm boa (one Sharp albino gene and one T-positive gene) with a Sharp albino (two Sharp albino genes). All of the babies get a Sharp albino gene from the Sharp albino parent. Half of the babies get a T-positive gene from the paradigm parent. The result is a pair of genes made up of one Sharp albino gene and one T-positive gene, making those babies paradigms. In other words, that half of the litter is made up of paradigm boas. In the other half of the litter, the babies get a Sharp albino gene from the Sharp albino parent. And they got a Sharp albino gene from the paradigm parent. As these babies have two Sharp albino genes, they are Sharp albinos. In these Sharp albino babies, the T-positive gene is not reduced; it is totally absent. Unless the T-positive gene is reintroduced in a later mating, none of these Sharp albino babies will ever have a paradigm or T-positive descendent.

To get a T-positive baby both parents must have at least one T-positive mutant gene. If one gene is a T-positive gene, it does not matter what the other gene in the pair is. That other gene could be a normal gene. Or it could be a Sharp albino gene. Or it could be a T-positive gene.

A paradigm boa has a T-positive gene paired with a Sharp albino gene. If we mate a paradigm to a boa with at least one T-positive gene, then some of the babies will get a T-positive gene from the paradigm parent and a T-positive gene from the other parent. Such babies will have two T-positive genes. They will be T-positives and not have even one Sharp albino gene.

To get a Sharp albino baby both parents must have at least one Sharp albino mutant gene. If one gene is a Sharp albino gene, it does not matter what the other gene in the pair is. That other gene could be a normal gene. Or it could be a Sharp albino gene. Or it could be a T-positive gene.

A paradigm boa has a T-positive gene paired with a Sharp albino gene. If we mate a paradigm to a boa with at least one Sharp albino gene, then some of the babies will get a Sharp albino gene from the paradigm parent and a Sharp albino gene from the other parent. Such babies will have two Sharp albino genes. They will be Sharp albinos and not have even one T-positive gene.

Hope this helps.

Paul Hollander

Earlier post on paradigm

What you explained here and before I do understand....and I thank you for being patient with me....
What I was trying to put into words may best be explained by just saying ...What if the T positive and the Boawoman Hypo are not the same gene? I hope that says where I was coming from with what I was saying...It is very hard to try and put this stuff into words....Thanks Andy
-----

The T-positive is not related to the morph.

Mike did however note that the Paradigm is a form of T-positive (as a visual descriptor at least).

Some people think that the Caramel is a T-plus, I do not. I also do not think the same results will occur in the F1 of a VPI T-plus X Sharp.

That will open up an even bigger can of worms....Most thoughts seem to have been that the VPI T positive and the Carmel Hypo or Boawoman Hypo are the same type of animal...

If they are different...then what? Thanks Andy
-----

a full phenotypical level, which means something chemically is different. They both have differences among adults and neonates. The largest difference is red eyes in the VPI T-plus, but traditional eye color in the Caramel.

The Caramel has bee viewed as a recessive Hypomelanistic. The VPI is a form of Albino.

I won't lie, when I first saw the Caramel/Boawoman Hypo I thought it was a form of T-positive Albino as well. However certain breeders working with them pointed out the differences, especially the lack of red pupils.

Until chemical testing is done, we tack the label of Albino to those mutations with red pupils.

I have Paradox Sunglows with one or two normal colored eyes and they are no doubt albino. I think if that is the only thing you are basing your opinion on you may find yourself wrong. There are so many other markers and especially given the breeding results with the Sharp strain I would find it hard to believe that anyone doesn't see them as a T positive strain now. I still and always have believed them to be T positive regardless of eye color.

Do you meen previous to the results of the Paradigm breeding you thought Sharps were a T pos strain? If so why did you not say anything about this? Thanks Andy
-----

No I thought the Boawoman Hypo was a T strain. I had no idea about the Sharp strain though I know others who have thought that for some time now, I just didn't buy into it. Vinnie

but especially after I got mine and compared it to my Kahl, I thought one was T-positive and one T-negative. We'll have to wait for test results to know which is which.

We define our morphs by phenotype. Caramels have a Hypomelanistic phenotype.

my post above. Thanks Vinnie

Quote- "We define our morphs by phenotype. Caramels have a Hypomelanistic phenotype."

Hypomelanistic pretty much covers everthing from pastel to all types of albinos and whats actualy called hypos. I could say hypo and be talking about a handfull of different morphs and be right going by the definition of hypo.

The thing is we could call any morph anything descriptive of it's phenotype and be totaly off base in several ways if testing was done to find what made that morph tick.

Are you in school Chris? Man you should use that with the fact you seem to be a boa nut and get some real tests done. I think there would be more than enough folks that would be interested to see the results, for that matter be a good base for a book.
-----
Ed Lilley, www.constrictorsnw.com
www.reptileinsider.com

and I do have plans to get some of those tests done. I just need more time. Hmm... speaking of which I have some work to do, lol.

If you have interested Vet patholgists where you are you could do an interesting study with density of melanocytes in tissue. Salom hypos clearly make normal apearing black but it is greatly reduced. Is this due to the paucity of melanocytes compared to normal or a defect in melanin sythesis. It would be interesting to histologically examine tissue from the skin of hypos, T- and T albinos and the Moore Caramel and see what the melanocyte distribution is. This would be interesting in combination with the biochemical tests in melanin sythesis that you are planning.
Bill

Cornell. Not only do they have a highly ranked herpetology program, but their vet school is one of the best if not the best. One of the girls I went to high school with is in the vet school, and she should be able to find contacts for me there.

That is something to consider. I'm holding off on things right now since this is my first year and I'm still getting a feel for college. Also I am an engineering student, so this doesn't fit into any research credits for me, so it is going to be tough to find the time.

>What I was trying to put into words may best be explained by just saying ...What if the T positive and the Boawoman Hypo are not the same gene?

That can be checked. Boawoman hypo (AKA Moore caramel) and the two? mutants commonly called T-positives are supposed to be recessive to their respective normal genes. A boa with a pair of genes T-positive//T-positive is mated to a boa with a pair of genes Boawoman hypo//Boawoman hypo. If the babies turn out to be normal, then the two mutants are not related.

Paul Hollander

I personaly think that the Sharps and Moore Carmels are both types of T positive. Making the Paradigm a homozygous T positive type boa morph. Here is why..

When bred together you get a whole litter of visual T positive (looking boas) from 2 traits that are recessive in nature.

Now if you breed a paradigm to a sharp line of course you are going to get more sharp type looking albinos. I think the look of being more yellow or less may be polygenic at that point with the paradigm coming from both sharp and Moore carmel animals you could go one way or the other.

If you bred a paradigm to a het sharp you should get some sharp and some paradigm looking boas as well as 100% hets but the end result of the litter should be about 50% visual and 50% het (normal colored) Now we all know these numbers could go either way in reality you could get more hets, or more visuals.

If the paradigm's worked as being a visual double het then when a homozygous paradigm was produced you would be able to breed this animal to a normal and get a full litter of paradigms. I don't think that will happen, could just be me, but theres an opinion on it.

I think the paradigms are awesome looking and have exelent potential to make all types of sweet designer morphs, as well open the gene pool making it possible to make visual t positive boas from truly unrelated animals. I think this type breeding will make the strongest albino type lines there are.

I feel pretty good about that theory, and would be willing to pick up the normal colored "possible hets" if they are possible het prices.. But I'd hold on to them if I were Mike.
-----
Ed Lilley, www.constrictorsnw.com
www.reptileinsider.com

is the fact that you can make a T-positve Albino from 100% unrelated stock.

Let's pretend the Paradigm was the end point, I'd still make it just because it would be the stongest T-positive Albino. Forget outbreeding, you NEVER inbreed!

That made this alot easier to understand!!! Thanks for taking the time to go through that. Thanks Andy
-----

Before we get too excited about the Caramel and the Sharp being two different versions of the exact same gene, is there any precedent for suggesting this possibility? It does not make sense to me that two alleles on the same gene that though not identical, would result in any visual outcome whatsoever. The possibility that one could cancel out the other and express itself does computer, but these are much much more than just Carmel Boas. But for these two visually not even remotely similar in visual appearance to together team up to make something unlike either the Caramel or the Sharp T-Negative Albino just does not make sense to me. That just is not sinking into my more abnormally thick skull. Is there any other example where this has ever been the case ever with anything?
-----
Boaphile Home
All Original/Boaphile Plastics
The Boa Network

When you think about how these animals were produced a phenotypicaly (visualy appearing) different double heterozygous animal is the most logical option.

If these mutations did not 'occupy the same space on the genetic puzzle' then the result would be visually the same as that of a pairing between an albino and an anery.

A quick search on google came up with this:
http://www.springerlink.com/content/r68phf3qy35w7qn0/

In short it is about two different mutations effecting enzyme activity that are located on the same allele. The genetic make up of the individual results in a coresponding degree of enzyme redution.

When we compare this to the case of the paradigm boa this is how I see it:

The caramel mutation and the sharp mutation are different mutations from one another, but they both are mutations of the same allele. That being said there are six possible genotypes (gene combinations of the animal) and also four possible phenotypes (visual apperence of the animal):

1 normal : normal = this results in full black pigment production

2 normal : sharp = this results in full black pigment production because the normal allele is dominant

3 normal : caramel = this results in full black pigment production because the normal allele is dominant

4 sharp : sharp = this results in full reduction of black pigment production (albino)

5 caramel : caramel = this results in a partial degree in redution of black pigment (may not be tecinacally correct description of condition but for the sake of explanation it will do.)

6 caramel : sharp (ie. paradigm)= thie results in a partial degree in redution of black pigment that is NOT the same degree as in the case of a homozygous caramel.

In sum if you were to say the sharp and caramel alleles caused similar diseases the different combinations of alleles cause the individual to have different degrees of disease severity. Homozygous sharp albino would be the worst case, homozygous normal would be healthy, caramel would be some where in the middle, and paradigm would either be inbetween normal and caramel OR between caramel and sharp (not able to determine which).

or

-----
- Jason F.

and after talking with some Bio Majors here at Cornell they all feel multiple genes are at hand with the mutations.

So something from the Sharp and Caramel do pair up. I don't want to get ahead of myself, so I'll stop there.

Come on Bro...seems like I like what you are saying...its out of the box thinking and I think this Morph just does not fit the box mentality. Andy
-----

Things have been clearified with outside input but basically...

Something in the Sharp and Caramel match up. So that the Paradigm is actually in a homozygous state, this part I'm not sure if I have worded properly.

So that there is no Double Homozygous. Paradigm x Paradigm will give you Paradigm, Sharp, and Caramel. Paradigm X Caramel will give you Paradigm and Caramel. Paradigm X Sharp will give you Paradigm and Sharp (proven). Sharp X Caramel will give you Paradigm (proven).

Think of the Sharp and the Caramel having the same genotype, but different phenotypes. When bred together all the offspring have matching pairs, same genotype as Sharp and as Caramel. However the phenotype is altered slightly and becomes a combination of Sharp and Caramel traits.
This isn't exactly how it works, but for a simple explaination makes sense, and isn't exactly wrong to say. Though it isn't exactly right (comes down to terminology).

Yeah, I just saw it....Thanks Andy
-----

"So that the Paradigm is actually in a homozygous state, this part I'm not sure if I have worded properly."

I wouldnt say that the paradigm is in the homozygous state because that would mean that there are two identical alleles and this is not the case. I would say that the paradigm condition functions as a homozygous state but is not truly homozygous.
-----
- Jason F.

because it does ACT like it was Homozygous. Until we know more about the relationship between Caramel and Sharp I don't know if we can say any more on that.

in the paradigm x Sharp albino and paradigm x het Sharp albino in the www.paradigmboa.com web page. If it was not heterozygous, how could the mating produce any Sharp albinos?

Paul Hollander

The Paradigm x het for Sharp demonstrates that. This argues against there being some kind of genetic combination or new mutation in the Paradigm.
Bill

When I stated that the paradigm ACTs like homozygous I was also trying to clearly state that it functions as double heterozygous. By acting homozygous, I ment that the two alleles (one sharp and one caramel) take up the available positions which prevent an animal from being say homozygous sharp and heterozygous caramel or the opposite homozygous caramel and heterozygous sharp.

Hope this clears up my statement.
-----
- Jason F.

A double het has two gene pairs that are heterozygous. A paradigm has only one gene pair that is heterozygous.

In my opinion, "in a paradigm boa, the genes in the gene pair are Moore caramel//Sharp albino" says it all. And without torturing the genetics jargon.

Paul Hollander

You are right, that is twisting the deffinition of heterozygous.

I am unaware of what the true title is for this particular condition. I called it a double het because it has the same potential to give either the caramel or the sharp allele to its offspring as it would if either were paired with a normal allele. Figuring out what the true title for this condition would be benificial.
-----
- Jason F.

heterozygous.

Here is the definition of "heterozygous" found on the Boa Genetics web site (http://reptiliandreams.com/BoaGenetics/terms.php):

Heterozygous (slang - het) Having two different genes within a gene pair. Most commonly one normal and one mutant gene but could be two different mutant genes.

Paul Hollander

We don't KNOW that it isn't a double het yet and won't till Mike breeds a Paradigm to an animal that is not het for Caramel or Sharp Albino. I don't have a hard and fast "opinion" on it. I think it is a double het but this is based upon the fact that, though we now know there is "precedent" for the possibility that the Paradigm is carrying one of each of these alleles on the same gene, for me and my thick skull, it is easier to accept that these two traits on separate genes are causing this mutation. That may certainly be entirely because of my lack of understanding of genetics to be sure. I have a hope and that the Paradigm is in fact a Double Het as that means more really cool animals much more quickly and a whole lot more fun. I hope I hope I hope...
-----
Boaphile Home
All Original/Boaphile Plastics
The Boa Network

Some part of the genotype for the two mutations matches up, but the phenotypes vary.
When combined and you have half from each, the phenotype is again altered.

This is the only thing I can think of to explain 100% mutation in all F1 offspring of a Homozygous Sharp X Homozygous Caramel breeding.

don't look alike! Look at Ed's site and see just how much they do look alike. Kinda like breeding pastels, depending on the line you'll get a varing degree of looks.
But, they are all the same T ....LOL

A T negative albino. Thats just what it was labeled because of the bright yellow color.. Color or the lack of it alone does not govern the T positive trait. Lets look at whats different about Sharp from Kahl, a lot of sharps have a more burnt orange saddle color and some have some lavendar markings as well. They are not compatible with a Kahl albino (stamped T negative), and finaly produces a visual morph (F1 generation) when bred to a Moore carmel (or hypo as some call it). If colombian T positives could have a so called "leaky gene" that allows them to gain pigment couldn't a sharp have a leaky gene that allows them to lose it? Sharps very well could be, and seem to be a T positive IMO.

The Moore carmels look like T postives as babies and gain pigment with age, as do the colombian T positives, just not to the extent of the Moore line carmels.

This is all speculation, but seems to be more likley than 2 simple recessive traits showing a visual albino morph in het form. If the Paradigm boas were a visual double het than a homozygous Paradigm boa would throw all paradigms (visual double hets) when bred to a normal. That would mean the simple recessive traits would have to mutate to "co-dominant or dominant" by pairing the 2 traits.. Not saying it's not possible but it's not likley, for a whole single litter, let alone 3 litters.

Just my 2 cents..
-----
Ed Lilley, www.constrictorsnw.com
www.reptileinsider.com

First, please ready my reply to Jeffs post.

I think the problem many people are having is that saying the paradigm is a visual double het does not mean that it is like a double het snow. A double het snow has one allele for two different traits. These alleles do NOT occupy the same position in the genetic code.

In the case of the paradigm, it is considered a double het because it has one sharp allele (by deffinition heterozygous for sharp) and one caramel allele (by deffinition heterozygous for caramel). The problem people are having difficulty understanding is that in order for a visual difference (phenotypical difference) to occur with this combination of known recessive genes the two different traits must be a mutation in the same position in the genetic code.

Maybe this example expanded from Paul H. will help:

Assume this sentence represents a segment of genetic code:
Big beautiful boas bring big bucks.
*each word in the sentence represents a pair of alleles

Assume the Hypo gene for example alters the code like this:
Big beautiful bo(y)s bring big bucks.
*the () highlight the 'mutation'.

Assume the sharp gene alters the code like this:
Big beautiful boas bring (p)ig bucks.

Now here is the kicker ...

Assume the caramel gene alters the code like this:
Big beautiful boas bring bi(n) bucks.
*Notice the sharp gene and the caramel gene work on the same word.

This is what the paradigm gene would do to the code:
Big beautiful boas bring (P)i(N) bucks.
*The sharp gene and the caramel gene are working on the same pair of alleles.

The sharp and caramel alleles are competeing for the same two allele spots. Thus when an individual has both spots filled with one caramel allele and one sharp alele it is by deffinition a double het which is visually(phenotypically) different because there is no normal or wild type gene in that allele position to override the mutant alleles and produce a normal looking animal such as in the case of a double het snow.
-----
- Jason F.

If they are a DH in the terms you layed out there wouldn't there have to be a homozygous form possible? If there is no homozygous form possible how can there be a DH form?

Sorry, I know that sounds like which came first the chicken or the egg? but it seems like a valid point.

I don't see why 2 visualy different apearing animals of the same type couldn't be the awnser.

It seems it could be easily possible for all types of T boas to be interbreedable with visual F1 offspring among the different phenotypes of t positive boas.

My other question is what color are the eyes of a Moore Carmel at birth? Is it not also possible that they could gain pigment as their body color does with age?

All good stuff here..
-----
Ed Lilley, www.constrictorsnw.com
www.reptileinsider.com

the Paradigm acts like a Homozygous (if it isn't in fact homozygous).

As Bill Kirby mentioned there may be something along the melanin strain that links between the two. Say the Sharp has a full missing segment, and the Caramel has a partial missing segment, when the two segments found each other they matched partially and created the new phenotype found in the Paradigm.

Caramels are born with normal colored eyes.

Quote-"As Bill Kirby mentioned there may be something along the melanin strain that links between the two. Say the Sharp has a full missing segment, and the Caramel has a partial missing segment, when the two segments found each other they matched partially and created the new phenotype found in the Paradigm."

Couldn't that be true of many types of albino boas though, it's the defect that is the trait it's self.

Quote-"Caramels are born with normal colored eyes."

I only have one pic I found and I can't see the eyes close enough to tell.. anyone have a link (you could eamil it to me..) to a better description and pics of new born Carmels?
-----
Ed Lilley, www.constrictorsnw.com
www.reptileinsider.com

of newborns. Mike was the one who mentioned that. When I first saw them I though T-plus Albino, he corrected me in saying that they had normal color eyes.

Through all of this I still can't help how much I like the Paradigms. The one in the bottom left from the Sharp X Paradigm breeding is my favorite. Sorry I just had to put that in.

don't you think that particular one bears a strange resemplence to the Stone T Motley?

Caden

Jeremy bred a Motley to a T-plus and produced two random T-plus neonates. Possibly out of parthenogenisis.

I like that one because it holds the pattern characteristic of classic Sharp Albinos and VPI T-Positive Colombians. Just a natural pattern varient, likely due to geographic origin of the mutations/lineage of the mutations.

However, as I have contended with the Kahl bloodline of Albinos, I think these may not be simple recessive but incomplete dominant traits. Regardless of the difficulty of identifying such, or our inability to do so because of the high variability of Boas, vs. Ball Pythons for instance, if the heterozygous form does cause certain changes from the wild type, these are not or should not be classified as simple recessive traits. Any alteration from the wild type should technically classify these as incomplete dominant. That being said, breeding two incomplete dominants such as a Pastel Ball and a Spider result in a visually new animal, the Bumble Bee Ball. Bumble Bees reproduce all three. So there IS precedent for this to be the case genetically. So my logical question remains the same; Is there ANY precedent for believing that two distinct mutations occupying the same position in the genetic code? Especially two completely different Albino or Melanin reduction types, one being the Tyrosinase Negative Sharp Albino and the other being the relatively slightly altered Moore Caramel Hypo.
-----
Boaphile Home
All Original/Boaphile Plastics
The Boa Network

in the past and even more so now.

I will go back to the ONLY known test I am aware of to determine if an Albino was Tyrosinase positive or negative. It was done in Rat Snakes after two Albinos were bred together and all resulting offspring were wild type.

Both of the snakes "appeared T-negative", with closer similarities than Kahl and Sharp Albinos.

I am one of those people that have both a Kahl and Sharp Albino, I only have one of each so I can't say too much in comparissons. However, the Kahl has much darker red pupils than the Sharp. I have been told by another breeder who has both strains that this is because my Kahl is a stripeline. Now my Sharp has lavender colors around her tail blotches that my Kahl never had. I will say this, there is an enzyme that one of the morphs has that the other does not. I don't know what it is, but I intend to find out. Be it tyrosinase or something else, there has to be a reason for the differences.

I still think that the Moore Caramel/Hypo is not a form of T-plus Albino.

I agree that it is extremely unlikely that we are looking at two different mutations of the same gene. I think that the phenotypic difference between the Sharp and Boawoman morphs would indicate that the defect occurs at different points in the melanin sythesis pathway or melanin incoproration into cells. How do we know that the defect is in the melanin sythesis pathway for both morphs. The Boawoman morph or Sharp could be the result of a defect where less melanocytes arrive in target areas resulting in different pigmentaion. Even if the melanocyte numbers are adequate the activation of the melanocytes may be down graded or the integration of melanin in the cells may be altered. What if the Sharp albino has no functional melanocytes and the Boawoman morph has a defect in the melanin sythesis pathway; then you would predict you would get an appearance like the paradigm and that the Sharp Boawoman homozygous animal would just look like a Sharp strain.There are so many different possibilities.

What further supports your assertion is that there are currently a number of different morphs with apparent defects in the melanin sytnesis pathway and they all have a different appearance. I posted several years ago that I predicted a wide range of animals will emerge that have some variation in melanin appearance and I think this is only the beggining. I would encourage anyone who thinks they have a new morph to do the breeding and prove if it is indeed genetic.

Another whole area that I think may be overlooked is the mechanism of melanin expression over the lifetime in snakes. Clearly there can be a great range of melanin incorporation into the appearance of snakes which can vary dramatically from neonates to adults. What if some of the defects we are seeing is in the natural pattern of melanin expression over time. What if animals get genetically locked into a certain level of melanin production while other phenotypic factors develop normally. Given their propensity to color change I think the most dramatic changes of melanin expression morphs will be in insular boas that show the normal capacity for a wide variation in color change.

I think the dicussion of the possible genetics of the Paradigm is important because it encourages people to really learn and understand genetics. I think this is a good point in time for people to learn applied genetics as we should see animals expressing 4 or even 5 different mutation traits in the next few years.

Finally let me say that the Paradigm is another example of how humbleing working with boas is. This is not a breeding I would have done because the final animal should look like the T- phenotype. I never really put thought into the possibility of creating an animal where two different mutations would result in the partial expression of one. This reminds me to be open minded about projects and how little I really know about these mutations.

As usual I think your instincts are correct.

Bill

np
-----
Boaphile Home
All Original/Boaphile Plastics
The Boa Network

Quote-"But for these two visually not even remotely similar in visual appearance to together team up to make something unlike either the Caramel or the Sharp T-Negative Albino just does not make sense to me. That just is not sinking into my more abnormally thick skull. Is there any other example where this has ever been the case ever with anything?"

Ball pythons.. All of the different visual het for white or (leucistic balls) when paired even though they look different can produce white ball pythons. Now these are "co-dominant" traits but the only real difference is the hets are visual. I believe RDR has some other morph types that are working similar to these geneticly.

Another interesting thing is if you breed one of the white ball pythons produced from the 2 different traits back to a normal they will not produce any mixed visual hets you get one type or the other in about a 50/50 mix.

I don't know if thats how it will go with the paradigm boa, I think they are the same or close enough trait with different phenotypes that while they may look drasticly different probably aren't as different as they appear geneticly.
-----
Ed Lilley, www.constrictorsnw.com
www.reptileinsider.com

Of course the differece between starting with Co-dominant mutations versus recessive does change the visual results in some cases.

The real test would be if Paradigm to Wild Type produces offspring that are either Het Caramel or Het Sharp and nothing else. It will be very hard to prove this without a LOT of breeding trials though. In the Ball Python morphs by breeding the White ball from two different co-dom mutations to a wild type you can tell that all of the offspring are hets of one of the two simply because the hets are visual.

This is one thing I like about boas and the people on this forum, and working with boas in general. We have a bunch of ideas here and we are working together to piece it together.
Meanwhile these ball morphs have been bred much more, and people are still argueing over the relation of certain alleles, they aren't going to learn that way.

Always a good example to look at either way.. I am not a big ball python fan myself, but I have worked with a few here and there for long enough to look into the genetics of their morphs. Pretty amazing that a white ball with parents of diffent phenotypes bred to a normal is like a having the genes of 2 ball pythons rolled into one that don't blend unless in homozygous form.
-----
Ed Lilley, www.constrictorsnw.com
www.reptileinsider.com

if you went to the Ball Forum right now and said that the Blue Eyed White Snakes from say Mojave X Lesser are in a Homozygous state, you would be ripped to pieces.
Heck I posted that there was no such thing as a Leucistic Ball Python (used an alias name RedArgentine). The only people who attacked me, didn't even have what it took to produce them. I never heard anything from any of the breeders who had them, except from some who agreed with me. Look at the big names, they will refer to them as lucy just to make it short, but if you talk to them they explain how it is a Super Mojave, or a Super Lesser, or a Lesser X Phantom, etc. We have a few ball pythons, the morphs are fun, but I just don't like how things are being handled in that arena.

I do know that I was shocked when the results from a Mojave X Lesser Blue-Eye only produced Mojave and Lesser, I expected it to work like other double co-dominant mutations, and produce each part, the cross, and wild type.

I actually think it is easier to visualize the similarity with the Sharp X Caramel because the results are so unexpected that there isn't much else to explain it.

What precedent is there?

What two Ball Python mutations make a white Ball Python that are different mutations? I have never heard of that. I know of "Super" forms of some make the white snake. Even if they do; I certainly have not heard that anyone has had time yet to prove that these white snakes do not make more white snakes. I am certainly willing to be corrected, but until then my question remains, what precedent is there to believe that these are two different forms on the same gene that express neither of those two alleles but something different. It is more logical to think that these are two separate genes each making their own contribution making something different from both.
-----
Boaphile Home
All Original/Boaphile Plastics
The Boa Network

Why does there have to be a precident??? Is it impossible to think this is the first time this has happened in our small little corner of the world called snake breeding. I am sure if you were to do a little research on your own you would find many cases of this in all sorts of different animals. It is not such a far fetched idea. I think you just don't want to open your mind to it... maybe because you didnt think of it first?

Thank you for your insightful responce.
-----
Boaphile Home
All Original/Boaphile Plastics
The Boa Network

that make Blue-eyed White Snakes when combined include:
Butter, Phantom, Lesser Platinum, Mojave, Vin Russo hets.

Super Mojaves have a Purple cast to them, different from the White with a stripe from Russo hets, different from the near all white of the Lesser or the Butter, while the Super Phantom is a completely different mutation.

The White snakes produced from two different mutations, have all produced only the two mutations when bred back to a normal.
The best example (because it has been bred so many times) is the Mojave X Lesser. Both mutations are very phenotypically different, and every offspring is either Mojave or Lesser.

Multiple alleles occur in the black rat snake, corn snake, lab mouse, ringneck dove, pigeon, chicken, fruit fly, human, and cat. These are just the species I don't have to look up. With a little bit of digging, I have no doubt that many more species could be added to the list.

Paul Hollander

Is there a specific example you can site where an animal has been produced that is double het for two simple recessive traits (Or Homozygous (Caramel//Sharp) for two different mutations on the same gene. If that is the correct terminology.) that then expresses a new morph such as this one does? Then when that animal reproduces it does not reproduce any of the three possible mutations?

By the way, I have never said that it is not possible by the way. I have just asked the question about whether or not there is an analogist example already known to exist. If there is, then obviously it would have already been proven possible whether this is true in this case or not.
-----
Boaphile Home
All Original/Boaphile Plastics
The Boa Network

In the laboratory mouse, at the c locus, there is a mutant named chinchilla that has around 2/3 as much melanin pigment as a normal mouse. At the same locus, there is also a mutant named albino, which is pink eyed and has white fur.

If a chinchilla (genotype chinchilla//chinchilla) is mated to an albino (genotype albino//albino), the books say that the babies (with a chinchilla//albino gene pair) are more or less intermediate between the parents.

Mating a chinchilla//albino to an albino produces 1/2 albino and 1/2 chinchilla//albino. Mating a chinchilla//albino to a chinchilla produces 1/2 chinchilla and 1/2 chinchilla//albino. Mating a chinchilla//albino to a normal produces normal-looking babies. Half of the babies are normal//chinchilla, and the rest of the babies are normal//albino.

Paul Hollander

Thank you! Now that is what I call "precedence". So that PROVES it is possible. Time will tell. I hope it doesn't work that way because if it is on two separate genes, a one in four "co-dominant" or "incomplete-dominant" will be much more quickly interesting than will an animal that will not reproduce itself on the first generation regardless of what it is bred to.
-----
Boaphile Home
All Original/Boaphile Plastics
The Boa Network

and analogist too. N/P
-----
Boaphile Home
All Original/Boaphile Plastics
The Boa Network

Isn't there an example in albino Pythons where you can get three phases of purple, lavender and non purple albinos? or something like that?

Caden

http://www.bobclark.com/d_learn.asp?id=22&cat=learn

It says in part:
"Surprisingly, the first clutch of hatchlings contained three very different looking types of albinos. The first hatchling was lavender with orange blotches dorsally with dark orange, almost reddish markings on the sides. In the second type the lavender was replaced by a dark purple color and the orange markings were a darker, richer orange. The third type exhibited the orange markings on a clean bright white background. All three types are attractive and can be produced from the same parent animals."

Isn't this an example of what the Boaphile has asked? I don't know that much about all these genetic things, but this seems to me like an example.

Caden

Kind of like Kahl Albinos. You can have plain Albinos, Corals, and High Contrasts. Three phenotypes under one mutation.

My guess on the Paradigm, is two mutations with the same (or partially same) genotype. Where as the three versions of Clark Albino Retic are random phenotypes from one genotype.

This is one of the first examples of what I was takling about earlier.. Probably a few pages back now...LOL... I think a Kahl normal albino vs coral etc... is an apples to oranges comparison against the color phases of the retics..

Now take that retic example and you have white phase, lavendar and purple. The purple really is purple, take a look.

I think these retics are the closest thing to the Paradigms so far. Different phenotypes among the same trait, all born in the same clutch. Now if you breed white to white you can expect more white in the clutch polygenicly, or purple to purple expect more purples polygenicly.

Similar to breeding paradigm to sharp and sharp het..

Those white phase retis sure do look like a T negative, but can breed with the purples and produce a full clutch of assorted colored albinos.

Lets replace the retic traits with boa traits
purple- Moore carmel (hypo)
lavendar- Classic T positive
white- Sharp

Now if these traits in the retics would have been found seperatly we'd have the perfect example but thats not the case...LOL... So we get to wonder for a bit longer..

That, and the fact that visuals were produced in the first pairing is what I am basing my whole theory off of.
-----
Ed Lilley, www.constrictorsnw.com
www.reptileinsider.com

Think of that first albino retic pulled from the wild as the starting point. Now what if in comparison the Paradigm albino is the same type of albino as that first albino retic. If the paradigm were the starting point for T positive ( no sharps or any kind of T had been found) then it would be possible to get all of these color phases via your founding animals.
-----
Ed Lilley, www.constrictorsnw.com
www.reptileinsider.com

idea entirely.

Why? Because you can still harness either the Sharp or Caramel component of the Paradigm. Where the Clark Albino Retic is random. The first one bred produced hets, and the hets produced three different albino phenotypes.

I can see some of what you are saying. But that will only hold if this theory pans out that they are related mutations.

untill more breedings are done we can't do anything but speculate..

You can go both ways with the retics. It's all selective breeding after you have a certain colored pair or 2..
-----
Ed Lilley, www.constrictorsnw.com
www.reptileinsider.com