Reptile & Amphibian Forums

I recently saw coastal carpets described as 100% het tiger. It's my understanding that the tiger gene is co-dom, and the only other mention I've heard of the term "het" to describe them has been Anthony Caponetto's reference to his first generation tigers (tiger X normal). His snakes were obvious tiger offspring, which he commented may be visual hets due to the broken striping, which when bred together may produce "textbook" tigers.
The other coastals I saw looked perfectly normal, w/ the exception of some increased side striping, and a tiger-like head pattern. They are reported to be the offspring of a normal X tiger pairing, all of which had the same visual appearance.
Does anyone have any thoughts or theories about this? Could this be the result of pairing a first generation "visual het" to a normal? Thanks.

In my personal opinion, if the Tiger gene is a Co-Dom, where there is a visual "het" then the offspring from a TigerxNormal would produce all "Hets", Now the controversy from what I have seen, is there are some "Hets" that might apear "Tiger" but are actually really nice "Hets", and when a "Het" tiger is bred with a Normal, you would get 50% "Visual Hets" and 50% Normals...right???

So I am guessing, is there are more Visual Hets being bred to normals, and when normal looking offspring are sold, they are actually that...Normal coastals, and are not het for Tiger.

The Tiger gene is simular to the hypo gene in Boa Constrictors, as many times, a Hypo will look Super Hypo, but the only way to prove it out is by breeding it....Like I said, many people think they have a "Super Form" and when bred to a Normal, not all the offspring will carry the gene, because what they thought was a "Super Form" was actually a nice "Visual Het"...

Did I explain that the right way?...At least thats what I think is happening...
-----
Executive Reptiles
Amanda Kingsbury & David Kendrick
www.executivereptiles.com

That's kind of what had me questioning it. It doesn't make sense for all of the offspring of a normal bred w/ a co-dom to ALL appear (for the most part) normal, or even the same for that matter. My limited understanding of co-dom genes is that 50% of the offspring display the gene, and 50% do not display or carry it.
I've also heard that the tiger gene is "dominant" and that the "het" offspring are the "co-dom" result of pairing a tiger w/ a normal. To me, this sounds like co-dom genes are being confused w/ simple recessive genes, and words are being interchanged incorrectly.
Regardless, I may have to invest in some future breeding experiments.....I've seen some Tigers out there that are absolutely HOT!

In my personal opinion, if the Tiger gene is a Co-Dom, where there is a visual "het" then the offspring from a TigerxNormal would produce all "Hets",

No, if its Co-Dom (Incomplete Dominance), then it works like Pastels, Hypos, Jags, etc etc and when you breed a Tiger (heterozygous for Super Tiger), you get 50% Tigers, and 50% normals, and the Tigers express themselves as Tigers.

I think what the debate is many of the breedings of Tigers to Normal coastals produce more normal looking babies, when you say you are breeding a Tiger....that implies its the super form, or are people saying tigers are the het form? So far I have yet to see offsrping from a TigerxNormal pairing with babies that come out TOTALLY tiger looking...Most have some degree of striping, but no where near the offsprings tiger parents.....

There seems to be major confusion on what the tiger gene really is, as all the 06 pairings I have seen created alot of doubt as to how the genes are inherited....

People have said that when pairing a TigerxNonTiger the offspring will be somewhat striped, but not as intense as a tiger, but they think that when you breed two of those offspring together there is a chance of producing the same insanely striped snake....So how does that work...???
-----
Executive Reptiles
Amanda Kingsbury & David Kendrick
www.executivereptiles.com

Incomplete dominance is NOT the same thing as co-dominance. In herpetoculture circles the terms are used interchangeably.

It appears that there may be a difference in the homo/heterozygous phenotype.

Yes a heterozygous animal will statistically pass on it's gene to 50% of the next generation. Whereas a homozygous tiger will pass the gene on to 100% of the offspring.

The problem is, which are homo/heterozygous.

Rock on.
-----
Ben Team
Mark Davis
New Paradigm Herpetoculture
Captive Bred Morelia
404-438-2135
chondro776@yahoo.com

Also the term heterozygous does not indicate a normal phenotype. Just as you said, as in Pastels, etc. the heterozygous form has a mutated phenotype in these cases.
-----
Ben Team
Mark Davis
New Paradigm Herpetoculture
Captive Bred Morelia
404-438-2135
chondro776@yahoo.com

This has been quite a confusing subject. Nothing has been concretely deduced yet (to my knowledge).

There are several arguments out there. I personally lean towards AC's concept of highly variable heterozygous animals.

I would not personally purchase normal appearing animals labelled as 'het tiger'.

This tiger below is most likely a heterozygous animal (or so I am thinking at the moment...lol)The other animal is the product of a JagxTiger breeding. I am of the opinion that it is a het tiger as well (obviously a Jag as well...which complicates the visual diagnostic as the Jag trait can produce striped animals).

Bottom line: After the 07 season we should understand it more.

-----
Ben Team
Mark Davis
New Paradigm Herpetoculture
Captive Bred Morelia
404-438-2135
chondro776@yahoo.com

It might have been the way I worded it, but thats what I was trying to say, You say you think that Tiger is a Het Tiger, meaning it has the tiger gene, but is not showing the "Super" form of Tiger...Right?

So if both of those are "Hets" when bred together they should produce the "Super" Tiger...which is the more extreme version of the tiger....

Thats what I was trying to say...That most people who have "Tigers" actually have Het Tigers, which are visually striped, but are not the Super form of Tiger...Kinda like the Tiger retics and Super Tiger Retics...The Super Form is a more extreme striped specimen...Right???

I was trying to say, that they are like Hypomelanistic BCI, in that sometimes the Super Form you might not be able to distinguish from the normal hypos, which is what I think might have been happening, in that many people who thought they had a Tiger (Super Form) actually had "Het Tiger" that happened to be striped as well...and when those "het Tigers" where bred to normal Coastals, not all the offspring would have the Tiger Gene...

Does that make any scense???? or simular to what you where thinking???
-----
Executive Reptiles
Amanda Kingsbury & David Kendrick
www.executivereptiles.com

Yeah, we're on the same page Dave. It's all just language (what most of my nit picking is about...but it is important-lol).

Het/Homo has NO bearing on the pattern of inheritance.

A trait is phenotypically expressed based on it being inc. dom, dom, simple rec. etc.....
Het/Homo just refers to one copy of the altered allele, or two.

(Clarifing for the whole thread's sake...)

I think that part of the problem is that in herp circles, technically accurate terminology is not always what is the conventional wisdom.

(And I know nothing about 'real' genetics...just that inc. dom and codom aren't the same).
-----
Ben Team
Mark Davis
New Paradigm Herpetoculture
Captive Bred Morelia
404-438-2135
chondro776@yahoo.com

I was a bit skeptical of what I was seeing (just didn't make sense), and some of those thoughts were echoed here. I've also gotten some feedback from Paul Hollander in the morph forum, which has been somewhat helpful, but reaches the same conclusion of more breeding will answer more questions.
We'll talk more about tigers, Ben - "Snatch" and "Simmons" are doin' great. (Gene x Thunda - think KISS)
Mike

Glad they are doing well!
(ahem....pics por favor...)

Hope this helped.
-----
Ben Team
Mark Davis
New Paradigm Herpetoculture
Captive Bred Morelia
404-438-2135
chondro776@yahoo.com

I'll post some as soon as I figure out how to resize the files. Pics are too big. I'll e-mail you a couple asap, though.