Reptile & Amphibian Forums

Has anyone here any experience with breeding paradigms to het sharps or het caramels and visual albinos or BW Carmels?

Any % of each type of babies you want to share?

Reason I ask, is my reeeeaaaly bad saturday:

I breed a paradigm to what I was promissed to be Het BW carmel.
She was due about the 25th and gave birth on saturday the 08/21/10.

I came in when she was giving birth and I was standing there waiting for paradigms and Boa Woman Caramels...

No BoaWoman Carmels and ONE paradigm, long time since Iv been so depressed to be hounest.
Total was 12-13 normals 7 albinos and one paradigm.

Has anyone had any similiar results from breeding a paradigm to het sharp/BWC?

Atleast it was a nice paradigm:

Thanks.
Bård

Sorry about your poor odds Bård, but that is the reality of breeding animals. We don't always have the best of odds possible. Still it seems like a pretty good litter. I do have a question for you though. You are in Europe right? How were you able to get your hands on a Het BW Caramel? There are very very few of those around that are breedable. Where did that come from and what year was that het BW Caramel born?

Nice Paradigm though. Congrats on that one!
-----
Jeff Ronne Sr
The Boaphile
Director USARK

Originator of Boaphile Plastics
The Boaphile Boa Site

how can you have albinos from a paradigm x het caramel??? those albinos must be paradigms or caramels can't have albinos its impossible.

You can't. Only with a het Sharp.
-----
Jeff Ronne Sr
The Boaphile
Director USARK

Originator of Boaphile Plastics
The Boaphile Boa Site

i know this i was just saying that to point out his 7 albinos are actually caramels or paradigms or both

If there was Albino's, his het BWC was really het Sharp correct !

. . . Lar M
-----
Boas By Klevitz

I Support USark.org

very true I didnt think about it that way.

I think I have it now maybe...

Maybe the animal you referred to as a het BWC was actually a Parahet. Is that Possible? Parahets are either het BWC or het Sharp, but it is impossible to know with 100% certainty which mutation a Parahet is het for.

Is that the case Bard?
-----
Jeff Ronne Sr
The Boaphile
Director USARK

Originator of Boaphile Plastics
The Boaphile Boa Site

Jeff,

Im not shure if you know it was me, But I know you migth have heard about it and all the ruccus that has followed.

But I put money down for what was supposed to be the worlds first and only paradigm( 0.1 parahet) for sale in 2006 before it was even born, full asking price.
And from there this now whole 4 year story just get less than funny pretty quick.

In the "end" I was kindly given what I would could call a small change of the deal.

And a total of 0.2 parahets that where to be selectivly picked to be BWC hets because the seller could select BWC hets from Het sharp/parahets from experince.
Tough as soon as they arrived in Europe, that "promiss" didnt seem to be recalled when I uttered questions about my parahets to be BWC hets.
I was asked to send pictures of my 2 select parahets so they could be re-examind(thats darn the only email I have about this topic)

Respond was: one was het sharp and the other het BWC. And we now know thats not the truth.
So am I lying? Is he lying, is it possible to spot BWC hets?

I do not know, but I was made a oral promis and whereas the problem lies for me. Its been a problematic deal almost from the start this just make the dot above the I so to say.

I do however think it's like you can find het Kalhs, Im pretty decent to spot het granite carpet pythons for instance. Some people dont belive me, but I feel Im positiv!

I even saw a add on kingsnake a month back where a seller said, this about his pos het BWC "looks like the real deal 100% het", meaning that there is more people who belive there is some signs to tell theme apart.

Its much more to the story, but then this is will results in a post best fittet at the BOI or something similliar.

But for paradigm ratio, I just pulled the shortest straw. Maybe next year it will be the other way around... tough not likely

But thanks for the comment on the lone Paradigm, Id realy love to keep it. But things didnt pan out at all with the litter, so its gotta go.

But to the core of my post have you breed paradigm X sharp albino? If so what kind of ratio did you get if you want to share please?

I do belive the other unproven parahet is het sharp, I think it looks like it to be hounest. But If its a normal, Im gonna keel over and die if get a litter of all normals.
So I rather breed my paradigm to my albino female if the "wannabe-BWC" het sharp doesnt put on enough musclemass for this comming season.

BTW how is it possible that a paradigm X sharp albino yields 75% albinos and 25% paradigms?

from geneticswizard.com
Het. sharp, Het. BWC,
x
Homozygous sharp,

25% Het. sharp,(normals)
25% Het. sharp, Het. BWC, (paradigms)
25% Homozygous sharp, (albinos)
25% Homozygous sharp, Het. BWC (paradigms or albinos?)

Thanks
Bård

Hang on there a few moments Bard.

The percentages produced in breeding any mutations are averages that only only true over the long run. A very large number of offspring must be produced in order to be confident of producing the percentages that are simply statistics. They are not hard an fast rules.

I have breed two Het Albinos together before and produced a single Albino in a litter of more than 25 babies. That in no way makes the person that sold me the hets dishonest in any way. Statistics are only averages and not guarantees.

As for Parahets. A Parahet is a baby that must be either a Het BWC or Het Sharp Albino. So in fact you did breed a Parahet and not a Het BWC as you posted originally. Thank you for your honesty. I don't see the problem with that at all though. You in fact received one of the two possibilities in that Parahet exactly as described. You just did not have the other 50/50 possibility you had hoped for.

Further, I do know a couple of us have believed we were able to tell which were Het BWC and which are Het Sharp. Obviously, the educated guess that the breeder made regarding your animal was incorrect. That educated guess could not have been based upon "experience" because your Parahets in fact were produced the very first year that Parahets were produced correct? So your characterization of that prediction being made based upon "experience" is incorrect. It was an educated guess that turned out to be incorrect.

This clearly was not the intent of that breeder. Being one of the very first people to invest in this project, he clearly would have been doing his best to take care to make the best choices in animals for you. Unfortunately, that guess was a mistake. Nothing more than that. To assert that, especially publicly, will not be met with sympathy.

I feel bad for you that the breeding did not work out for you. However, you were not wronged in any way. It was simply a mistaken guess. I hope your public comments will take a turn to simple disappointment vs. the accusatory tone your previous posts have had.

Sorry you did not have the expected result. I too have been disappointed by poor odds and unexpected results. I feel for you.
-----
Jeff Ronne Sr
The Boaphile
Director USARK

Originator of Boaphile Plastics
The Boaphile Boa Site

Jeff,
I again thank you for the sympathy about the bad odds.

That I hit off with bad odds on paradigms, that just life that just blows.
I cannot blame anyone for that.

I just got a litter of jungles, where the ratio seems to be 60-70% jungles. you win some you loose some, some just sting more.
__________

Back to the BWC/Sharp hets,
I can make a theorie, by 2008 there should have been a definitiv yes/no it is possible to pick one out one from another when breeding parahet males from 2006.

Seemingly because I was told my parahets was het BWC late08/early 09.
So if it was impossible to cherrypick, well why hasnt that ever come up?
Not even after I got the snakes and had to send pictures to get a opinion...

We where "good" friend since 1997/8, it's sad its ended the way it has.

thanks,
Bård

I don't really believe in breaking friendships over a mistake. That is not what good people do Bard.

I and the orignator the Pardigm Boas have not ever sold a male Parahet as a Parahet. Only females. We have not kept any for breeders either. They were wholesaled out as normal Boas. I have actually only produced 66% possible Parahets, but have not sold them as such or bred them either. So demanding that the accuracy of guessing hets must have been known simply is incorrect. Also, claiming that a person with a stellar reputation for honesty and fair dealing is not something I would want to do.

So there is no way anyone would have been able to confirm the educated guess or not. To my knowledge, your litter is the very first litter produced from a Parahet.

This all comes down to a mistake in misidentifying markers that turned out to be incorrect. There was no deception or dishonesty. Simply an incorrect guess. Nothing more Bard.
-----
Jeff Ronne Sr
The Boaphile
Director USARK

Originator of Boaphile Plastics
The Boaphile Boa Site

Jeff,

Well sadly I did not tape my conversations, but that is something I will do for the future reffernce when people promis the "skys".
As that would have cleared up everything down to the smallest detail rigth now.

Even as close as early 2010, I was told it was possible to differenatiate the different hets(conveniantly on the phone for that matter).
Even if there was other co-dom morphs in the mix.

So ok, lets say its impossible to differentiate,
Then I was lied to straigth up in the face all up to late 2009.
Because by 2009 it should have been a proven fact if it was possible or not, just from all the parahet females kept from the start.
And when I then asked what the parahets where late 2009, seller should have replied I do not know because of its unshure nature that we have found out about etc etc.
As I realy do not belive he responded A is BWC het and B is het Sharp to be very nice and empathical for my feelings or on his part because Id get upset.. Sorry.
Its one or the other, as Im not making this up!

About breaking up the friendship Jeff, when one part doesnt want to respond founded questions. Well isnt much more I can do.
What I can say: economy friendship=crap
Ill try to stay out of that pithole for the future.

Alain,
I agree totaly, I could have had all normals for that matter.

About visual hets, there are said to be pied markers, Jeff's flashligth eye het kahl albinos, BWCs het markers, het granite carpets etc. Ligth white scales in adult het albino boas etc.
Iv heard alot if it fits genetic books, I do not know.

But that ratio thing is not realy the bad thing, the problem is : there was no BWC. I was promised 0.2 parahets het BWC, and I got albinos.
And to be hounest its about money for me too, I invested alot, was promised alot, and well see what I got albinos @ 220euros each, and Ill tell you thats not very fun.

There would not have been a base for me to start this post if it wasnt for the promisses I was made, thats the center of the issue.

If at any time afte the intial promis the seller would have said: Sorry there is no way to see a difference between the hets OK then.
But I even have a email dated sometime in the last half of 2009 where its says A is het BWC B is Het sharp. Thats a fact I can prove. And if someone is now going to say, well "we proved that hets cannot be differantiated after january 1th 2010".

Well thats nothing I can disprove, but Id take a polygraph on what I was told any day.

Or does that mean het B is still uncertain het?
Im willing to bet alot its a het sharp, Ill post here next year when/if she goes!!!

And that followed up with what I wrote above, I can hardly belive this is just a meer small incorrect guess.
Guessing about hets should have been ruled out in 2008/09, and seller should have made buyer aware that promise could not be forfilled. And then back to the point about conflict/emapthy/feelings etc.

Lesson is probably take everything in writing or tape it.

Take care,
Bård

Hey Baard, sorry for you, bad odds. Genetics wizzards are 100 % right on the ‘high number law ‘ (not sure how you call it in english). In statistics, it’s a Gauss curve, it means that you could even have had zero paradigme or 100 % and the average is still 25 %.
I have seen over the years, many dicussions on forums with people claming that they were able to tell hets from non hets. There are been theories on albinos, anerys, T positive... and actually there are even some new fancy theories on leopards.....
Since, none of those theories were proved, no surprises in that ! If such a thing had happened, it would have proved that, for example, het albinos had 'markers', if such a thing had happened, it would have ment that albinos are not a recessive mutation but a co-dominant one, no more than a scientific revolution !
I don’t know any doctors/professors able to tell that a human, a dog, a cat, a bird is het for albinism (T positive or T negative) without genetic tests, are reptiles different ?
I would like to know if in the ‘live world’, there is one case of a recessive mutation with proved markers in it’s heterozygote form. If there is one documented case, we can stil try to look after markers, if not just forget about it.
For me hets for a recessive mutation are only hets, wild type, it means that there are no way to tell by their phenotype which recessive genes they are carrying, it can only be acheived with genetic tests or breeding.
My 2 cts.
Excuse my English !
Thanks for reading.
Alain.

I agree that you cant prove 100% het when looking at poss het animals, but I disagree that their arent any markers. I have spoken with many long time breeders who have been able to pick out the 100% hets "most of the time". Obviously these animals need to be sold as such poss hets, para hets....... I myself had a litter from a het bw caramel X het sharp , and the normals could have easily be separated into two different piles. The lighter prettier ones were probably het bw caramels and the others were normals or het sharp albino. No way to prove out , but when you can see a whole litter in front of you , an educated guess may help you pick the 100% hets.

I would HOPE a breeder can pick out poss hets most of the time! Because if it's a het to normal breeding, 50% of the babies are het. So, they have a 50% chance of being right if they cover their eyes and point. If it's a het to het breeding, they have a 66% chance of getting it right by covering their eyes and pointing!

lol

If there is an actual marker for whatever trait is in question, I'd hope their odds would be drastically better.

I'm not trying to give you a hard time Dan, you're a cool @$$ dude in my book Just wanting to shed light on the fact that picking out hets should turn out right at LEAST 50% of the time, and more often, at least every 2 out of 3 should be right. So if a person claims to be good at picking them out, let's hope their odds are in the 90 percentile range or they get no kudos from me!

jb
-----
What's written above is purely my opinion. In fact, MOST of what you read on the internet is someone's opinion. Don't take it too seriously

Jonathan Brady
DeviantConstrictors.com
Deviant Constrictors picturetrail

>> I would like to know if in the ‘live world’, there is one case of a recessive mutation with proved markers in it’s heterozygote form. If there is one documented case, we can stil try to look after markers, if not just forget about it.

If we mate two hypo boas and each has a salmon (AKA hypo) mutant gene paired with a normal gene, we expect 1/4 normal, 2/4 hypo (salmon mutant gene paired with a normal gene), and 1/4 super hypo (two salmon mutant genes). The posts on this and other forums say that the breeders can separate some hypos from some superhypos but cannot separate all hypos from all superhypos. So the salmon mutant gene falls in the gray area between the ideal dominant mutant gene and the ideal codominant mutant gene.

The question is whether there are mutant genes that fall in the gray area between ideal recessive mutant genes and ideal codominant mutant genes. The answer is yes.

I've worked with ringneck doves for a number of years. Most ringnecks with a pied mutant gene paired with a normal gene look normal. Some of these het pied doves develop a few small white spots on the head.

The African fattailed gecko breeders tell me that there is a mutant gene that produces a white stripe along the center of the back. When there are two mutant genes, the gecko has the stripe. Most of the geckos with one mutant gene look normal, but some have a white dot in the middle of the head.

That two examples of recessive mutant genes that sometimes show a marker when heterozygous.

If they're showing some sign of a mutation, wouldn't that mean it's not recessive?

And as for co-dominance, just because WE can't pick out the difference, doesn't mean there isn't one. We just aren't perceptive enough... perhaps?

jb
-----
What's written above is purely my opinion. In fact, MOST of what you read on the internet is someone's opinion. Don't take it too seriously

Jonathan Brady
DeviantConstrictors.com
Deviant Constrictors picturetrail

>> If they're showing some sign of a mutation, wouldn't that mean it's not recessive?

In both cases I listed, the mutant acts like a recessive in MOST of the heterozygous animals. Such cases do not fit any of the three categories perfectly. Instead, we have to pick the category that fits best. Those two cases fit the recessive category better than the codominant category.

>> And as for co-dominance, just because WE can't pick out the difference, doesn't mean there isn't one. We just aren't perceptive enough... perhaps?

We just aren't perceptive enough, definitely. There are lots of cases where a mutant is recessive to the normal gene if one uses one test and codominant if one uses a different, more sensitive test.

Paul Hollander

>> from geneticswizard.com
>> Het. sharp, Het. BWC,
>> x
>> Homozygous sharp,
>>
>> 25% Het. sharp,(normals)
>> 25% Het. sharp, Het. BWC, (paradigms)
>> 25% Homozygous sharp, (albinos)
>> 25% Homozygous sharp, Het. BWC (paradigms or albinos?)

This is wrong. The mating here involves two gene pairs, but the real mating only involves one gene pair. The het Sharp, het BWC boa (better would be het Sharp//BWC boa) has a Sharp albino mutant gene paired with a BWC mutant gene. The homozygous Sharp has a pair of Sharp albino mutant genes. There is no normal gene in either snake in the gene pair we are interested in.

Result:
1/2 (50%) homozygous Sharp albino (two Sharp albino mutant genes)
1/2 (50%) heterozygous Sharp//BWC (one Sharp albino mutant gene and one BWC mutant gene) = paradigm boa

The genetics wizard gave the wrong answer because it is not set up to work with multiple alleles.

Paul Hollander

Ill then breed my paradigm to the sharp albino I have, to not produce any normals pos het.

Bård