Reptile & Amphibian Forums

A thread below got me thinking about how you could prove stripes were or werent reccessive. You could breed a stripe to normals get "hets" and see if you get stripes from het breeding, couldnt you? Wouldnt that prove it once and for all or no? Somebody mentioned tests you can get done to scientificly see if its a het, but that would cost alot of money, and I'm guessing people wouldnt be willing to pay big money just to prove stripes are reccessive. AFT stripes are reccessive, whos to say leo stripes arent either? Input is apprecciated, Later
Mac

It only costs fifty bucks for mammals but since you can not use a fur sample for reptiles and blood is needed. they are probably more expensive. I was thinking about getting my jungle tested for mutant alleles but I won't be doing it any time soon unless I stumble into some extra money.

breeding a stripe to a normal and then breding hets together wouldn't prove anything as line breed traits often skip a generation and then turn up in a normal looking geckos offspring. For instance normal looking geckos with tangerine parents often produce tangerine babies but I have never heard anyone claim tangs were genetic mutations.

of the genetic stripes that we sold to them? We are aware that pattern abnormalities can create stripes, aberants, jungles etc. but true stripes do exist! Rich Z owner and moderator of another site has had them available for years!!!!! They are for real and we have proven them ourselves.

Brian Hamel
Tribal Propagation

that there are two kinds of stripes

1) Genetic stripes- stripe x stripe= stripe Recessive trait
2) "Accidental" or "Abberant" stripes- from geckos with pattern abberances that just happen to form a stripe, but Astripe x Astripe matings do not necc. create stripes

Is this what you are saying?

I would love to see pics of the two kinds if anyone has them.

The only possible way to know for sure is genetic testing. Even if you get all stripes from stripe to stripe breeding this doesn't prove anything as when similar gene abnormality loci are combined they breed true even if they are polygenetic and the loci is inheritable.

The 1st eggs from this group is in the incubator right now. The male is from Tribal and the gals are from rich z of s%rpen$o.

-----
Monte Meyer
Powergeckos[/url]
Email

Mealworms . . . .you can't eat just one

Monte, is the one standing up the male?? they are all very nice, esp. the bold one on the bottom!!
-----
Josh
My Email

Yep, the one on the left standing up is from Tribal.

The abberant patterned one is not a stripe - just my daughters pet. I thought that the boy might be shy - but I guess the striped girls were just acting married . . . .
-----
Monte Meyer
Powergeckos[/url]
Email

Mealworms . . . .you can't eat just one

Yea, I was wondering why you had the abberant in with the stripes. You should produce some awesome bold babies!
-----
Josh
My Email

The 1st eggs from this group is in the incubator right now. The male is from Tribal and the gals are from rich z of s%rpen$o.

-----
Monte Meyer
Powergeckos[/url]
Email

Mealworms . . . .you can't eat just one

here is the male....

here is the female.....

all of the babies have been 100% striped (very bold ,both body and tail) from this paring
here are some examples..

my first pair of hatchlings just hours old.....

One of the first hatchlings at a couple of months old "Eenie"

my first male "Toughy" now owned by Kelli Hammack @ H.I.S.S

another of my females i produced from this pairing now owned by justyn and marcy @ Intense Herpetoculture, this is her as a hatchling

in my opinion these stripers are genetic and recessive in nature. does that mean all stripers are? not necessarily. however i think im some cases abbarant patterns from some striped lines MAY be a het. form. I think jungles (striped tail and all) and stripers are possibly the same gene working, which is the stripe, meaning jungles (true jungles which are genetic)or the pattern the have are a type of striping, abbarant as it may be.Now i do think that abarant body striping or abbarant patterns can occur in any line and not be genetic in nature at all.
maybe this helps and these are just my observations and experience

-----
-robin day
Geckoheads And Geeks

We hope that this helps the people on the forum that ask "Are stripes genetic" the proof is right there for all to see. We understand that further questions can and will come up on this subject and some may view this and still doubt the existence, but we know that they do exist. Thank you again!

Brian & Laura Hamel
Tribal Propagation

I'm sorry if it sounds like I'm trying to argue with you and I respect the fact you are probably much more experienced then me and have some beautiful stripes but just because an opinion is written down by more than one person this does not make it proof and just because a trait breeds true it does not mean it is a recessive trait in a controlled enviornment evoloution takes place at a faster pace and an opposite direction then in the wild if jungles popped up in the wild and there breeding together caused a stripe and this stripe was proven to be beneficial this would after years of evoloution allow stripes to breed true even if it is not a recessive trait because the loci can match up. In an enviorenment were the breeders is controlled the loci can match up thousands of times faster then in the wild. You said yourself you do not believe all stripes are genetic but if you found the right pair of these nongenetic stripes all of the babies would be stripes and this would breed true. Now if you breed some of your stock to someone else's stock who you have proven unrelated to yours and the other person claims to have genetic stripes chances are not all of the offspring will be stripes, but the only way to prove you have a recessive trait is to get a DNA testing for mutant alleles and there can only be two of those. Unlike an opinion the only way to change a belief is through proof and it is rarely changed with that but I promise you if you or someone else proves stripe to be a recessive trait I will eat my words and admit you are right. I'm sorry for the rant but I don't feel you are even listening to my argument.

i understand where you are coming from but if you are saying to be recessive it has to be tested in a lab then, in your opinion most reptiles morphs are not true proven morphsso blizzards arent recessive nor patts? what abut hypo boas? genetics co-dominant? tiger retics? co-dom? albinos, all strains recessive????? piebald ball pythons, pastel ball pythons ??? proven mutations but because they have not been tested in a lab, only been bred to prove the mutation, and found to be either recessive, co-dom dom or line bred. i understand your scientics reasoning, i do. but through captive breeding efforts most morphs can be proven out and when proven genetic can be identified as dom , co-dom, recessive or whatever also one has to realize that different strains can occur with in a "general" mutation , breed different strains and get nothing but dbl hets for both breed the same strain to each other and get morphed offspring..science is not only about theories not about testing not about the EQUATIONor question at hand but also the ability to prove it out.. through in this case breeding.
my soon to be husband, is a machinist. he has the engineers that design and write programs to make certain things. its all on paper been calculated and everything. this is what they want. now russ will get these prints and computer generated programs and have to take them back to the engineers because even though it works out on the computer digitally and technically, in the real world be particular products can not be reproduced exactly as the programers and compters say so. therefor russ must change the program to fit the real life aspect and make it work. i am not saying we have to change the geckos but what i am saying is that we can not solely base a genetic morph on a dna test alone it must asl be proven to if this can really be replicated.... im just rambling now and i hope my little ramble made some sense
-----
-robin day
Geckoheads And Geeks

I agree with your first statement we have not proven any of the morphs to be true mutations however I feel they are more likely to be mutations as there is less variation. Also the reasoning I used was not only a theory it has happened in other animals including on many different traits in humans, especially in isolated portions of the world where something was passed down from generation to generation but suddenly stopped when someone with a similar affliction had kids with someone from the original group. Also you are still using the word proven when you have not proven anything. Sorry to annoy you like this but no matter what either of us says we will both continue to believe what we already do unless credible evidence is provided.