Reptile & Amphibian Forums

hello all,

new to this genetics stuff. i have a hypo brooks male het for "flame" and two regular looking brook's het for hypo and "flame". now i got 4 babies from the first and 4 from the second. 3 were hypo only, 2 flame and three look "regular".

now my question, what does that make the "regular" babies (ie what percentage of what might the "regular" looking babies be het for.

thanks for the help

doug

they are definetely het hypo and 50% possible het for flame.

new to this genetics stuff. i have a hypo brooks male het for "flame" and two regular looking brook's het for hypo and "flame". now i got 4 babies from the first and 4 from the second. 3 were hypo only, 2 flame and three look "regular".

I did not follow your post to well but I can tell you a "Flame" is not a recessive trait. Its a simple trait that is passed on. Each clutch can still have a wide spectrum of yellow to high reds in a single clutch.

Now back to your post. Are you saying you bred a male hypo to 2 het females and got two clutches, right? and from those two clucthes you only got 8 babies total of which were 5 hypos and 3 normals?
-----
"Yeah ya told me, and ya wrote it down too. But how the hell am I supposed to remember!"

yes on the second question. your numbers are correct. just wondering what does that make the ones that are not visual hypos.

all non viuals will be HET hypo, no fractions 100% het, since the dad was HYPO

I shouldn't assume traits are recesive when I answer genetics posts.

Since my mom is beautiful, I must be het for beautiful, right?
-----
11.14 L. getula californiae (Cal. King)
2.3 L. getula nigrita (MBK)
1.0 L. getula floridana (Brooksi)
1.0 Pantherophis guttatus guttatus (Corn)
0.1 Pituophis catenifer catenifer (Pacific gopher)
4.2.14 Elgaria multicarinata multicarinata - (Cal. Alligator Lizard)

thanks everyone for the help. u guys are great. answered all my questions.

thanks again