Reptile & Amphibian Forums

So my Woma has managed to charm and lock up with my large Cinnamon female. I'm excited for some Woma Cinns, even though a Pewter locked up with her a half-dozen times before this. Who knows?

In any case, it got me thinking, what is up with Super Womas, the Pearl? I know the few original Pearls had failure to thrive issues. I know back on 2005 the Lesser Pearl seemed to be doing well. Is the Lesser Pearl still alive? Have their been any additional outcrossing attempts to create this Super form?
-----
Lincoln, NE
0.1 Pastel, 1.0 Pastel het Pied, 0.1 Pied, 0.1 Cinn, 1.0 Black Pewter, 1.0 Woma (hidden gene?), 0.1 Yellowbelly
2.1 Normals, 1.0 Thayeri, 0.1 Thayeri X Alterna, 0.1 Whitesided P. catenifer sayi, 0.1 crazy cat, 1.0 husband

woma is dominant
hg woma super = pearl
-----
www.bamreptiles.webs.com
www.facebook.com/bamreptiles

Oooh, ok, so that is the breakdown. Nice. So I could reasonably be hoping for a clutch of all Womas and Cinnamon Womas?
-----
Lincoln, NE
0.1 Pastel, 1.0 Pastel het Pied, 0.1 Pied, 0.1 Cinn, 1.0 Black Pewter, 1.0 Woma (hidden gene?), 0.1 Yellowbelly
2.1 Normals, 1.0 Thayeri, 0.1 Thayeri X Alterna, 0.1 Whitesided P. catenifer sayi, 0.1 crazy cat, 1.0 husband

Heard Kevin say just recently that the Super Woma just fails as a morph!

So is Woma codominant or dominant? I'm aware that the Hidden Gene Woma (HGW) is codominant, but I didn't realize only it produced the Pearl. What is correct?
-----
Lincoln, NE
0.1 Pastel, 1.0 Pastel het Pied, 0.1 Pied, 0.1 Cinn, 1.0 Black Pewter, 1.0 Woma (hidden gene?), 0.1 Yellowbelly
2.1 Normals, 1.0 Thayeri, 0.1 Thayeri X Alterna, 0.1 Whitesided P. catenifer sayi, 0.1 crazy cat, 1.0 husband

Woma and HG Woma are 2 completely different morphs. Woma is known to be dominant, and the HG woma is co-dominant producing the pearl as a super. There has not been a visual super produced using the standard woma gene. That breeding would give you approx 25% normal, 25% woma, 25% cinny, and 25% cinny/woma. There is alot more info on the NERD site about these morphs. Hope this helps.

Those percentages would only work if I have a Heterozygous Woma, but I was told he came from a Woma X Woma breeding (this was all before the Hidden Gene paradox entered the equation). I assume he may have been trying for the elusive Pearl as well. So I may have a 100% chance of Womas and 25% of Cinns if he's homozygous. In the end, it is all moot though. I'll just be happy to have a rack of babies before the end of 2011.

I'm quite good at punnet squares. I was just looking for confirmation from other breeders whether the Woma was dominant or not.
-----
Lincoln, NE
0.1 Pastel, 1.0 Pastel het Pied, 0.1 Pied, 0.1 Cinn, 1.0 Black Pewter, 1.0 Woma (hidden gene?), 0.1 Yellowbelly
2.1 Normals, 1.0 Thayeri, 0.1 Thayeri X Alterna, 0.1 Whitesided P. catenifer sayi, 0.1 crazy cat, 1.0 husband

The hidden gene woma shouldnt even be in the equation. It has the same name, but is a completely different morph then what you have. The hidden gene woma has a super which is the pearl. You have to think of true woma's as the same as spiders. There is no such thing as a woma that when bred to a wild type would produce all womas (unless you seriously hit great odds). Like wise with a spider. There is no spider in existence that will produce all spiders when bred to a wild type. When you breed two spiders together you get all spiders, but the offspring when bred will act like every other spider and produce half spider half normal babies. Two womas together you get all womas. The resulting babies would also be like every other woma and produce half womas and half normals. There is no such thing as a super spider or a super woma. There is no such thing as het. woma or het. spider. When you breed your woma to a cinny you will get 25% woma 25% cinny 25% woma cinny and 25% normal. If the breeder of your woma misled you with what you have then I am sorry, but anyway you look at it there is no such thing. I think I have told you this before in previous discussion about spiders? Anyway hope this helps.
Will

Hidden Gene is not the same thing as Woma. I got it. However...

The issue still remains that if Woma is dominant, then an visual Woma may carry 1 or 2 copies of the Woma-gene.

Using a simple punnet square, your statements about Womas and Spiders do not make sense. As I am sure you know, a Dominant gene will be expressed when there are 1 or 2 copies of the gene in an individual. 1 copy and the snake is Heterozygous.

Let's try to find the communication problem here. Couple of questions.
Do you consider ALL homozygous animals to be "Supers"?
Do you believe the homozygous form of the Woma gene to be fatal? (Trying to understand WHY you believe there can be no homozygous Womas)
For clarity, I did a few simple punnet squares. What about these are inaccurate in your opinion?

-----
Lincoln, NE
0.1 Pastel, 1.0 Pastel het Pied, 0.1 Pied, 0.1 Cinn, 1.0 Black Pewter, 1.0 Woma (hidden gene?), 0.1 Yellowbelly
2.1 Normals, 1.0 Thayeri, 0.1 Thayeri X Alterna, 0.1 Whitesided P. catenifer sayi, 0.1 crazy cat, 1.0 husband

It's an uphill climb to get most long time snake people to think of spiders and other visible codominants as hets. Early on we learned of recessive hets and mistakenly think of “heterozygous” as meaning normal looking gene carrier rather than the correct broader definition of having an unmatched pair of whatever gene you are talking about.

I think now that pinstripe has been proven the first dominant ball python morph it really would be best if people did think in terms of the genotypes heterozygous and homozygous rather than terms like "super" which isn't well defined. We could start seeing possible homozygous pinstripes offered for sale and I think we’ll need to talk about heterozygous vs. homozygous pinstripes more and more. Also understanding that most (maybe all) woma X woma pairings are het X het you see the 25% chance per egg of containing a normal.

I've only recently come to understand the difference between the HG woma and the "regular" woma mutations and haven't been following close enough to comment on if enough woma X woma breedings have been done to say if woma is likely co-dominant with a conspicuously absent homozygous form like spider or dominant like pinstripe with the non normal offspring of woma X woma being 33% chance homozygous animals with the potential to produce 100% woma bred to normals.

I have to agree. If the HG woma is the only one with a super form, then is the "hidden gene" only attached to the woma gene? In HG woma combos, is it possible that this hidden gene could be passed along to a non-woma offspring? It's kind of confusing to have two snakes with the same name, but act completely different. If the hg only belongs to the woma, then the non hg woma should be called something else, unless anyone can prove or disprove the ability to pass the "hg" along to other morphs. I realize it is fairly new and there is work to be done, but I'm curious to see how this all pans out.

I think the general consensus now days is that "hidden gene woma" is NOT a combo of two genes as originally thought. It's just the name of a single mutation. I believe it was originally thought that the hidden gene woma was the same mutation as just woma but plus something extra (hidden). But my understanding is it's now believed “woma” and “hidden gene woma” are two separate single gene mutations with some naming baggage.