Reptile & Amphibian Forums

To some this wll not be news. It should not be to most of you by now, but there are still some that think there is some huge conspiracy to hide the truth from everyone. This truth will not be so nefarious or sordid as that other morph you were all told the truth about. This truth is what has been stated over and over by people who would know the truth. These are the breeders of this morph. Not Dr Do little but post on forums about snakes he does not breed. Not by the so called genetics wizzard that does know his stuff, but is confusing everyone with his graphs and images trying to show everyone just how much smarter he is than everyone else.

The TRUTH IS. These morphs are sex linked. There are male makers. There seems to be some confusion about them changing every generation by some, but these are confused people that are not reading EXACTLY what the people that know THE TRUTH are saying. If you breed a female producing male that came from a female of the morph and you get a male IT WILL BE A MALE MAKER. Simple right? To me it is. I don't know why this is so, it just is. To think that all these LARGE breeders would lie about this is just plain stupid. Even snake breeders are not that dumb, they will get caught in time. They're not that dumb people.

I can see some of the reasons people are still confused. Some of the people breeding this morh are confused and are implying others are lying. One of them needs to stop eating his oranges and wake up from his dream. I don't believe he is trying to mislead anyone. He does believe what he says. He just needs to realize what the truth is and stop with all the dreams. Dreams can be awesome though.

There is one other breeder that has said that he is getting a 50/50 ratio in his breeding. I'm not 100% sure how many he has produced though. We'll have to see what happens with him in the future. There may actually be a 50/50 male in the future. I can't say for 100% sure myself, but that would be really weird considering the results everyone else is getting.

I hope this clears things up for many of you. Hopefully this post will remain to help the uninformed. Since the place that states all these other conspiracy theories does nothing but attack this forum this post should stay here for that reason alone if nothing else.

Hope you all enjoy this post. I'm just one person(never said I was male) trying to help you all out. Talk to you all soon.

Looks like The Truth got his ass burned again!

Np
-----
Best regards,
AlanColesReptiles

Last time I checked pythons are a ZW genetic sex determinated species. Therefore you could never have a "female producing male" or a "male producing male" since males don't determine gender.
-----
Tosha

nihil facimus sed id bene facimus

that does NOT hold true.

PERIOD!

Actually what the Truth is saying is what I am "finding" true.

It does not seem to genetically make sense, even speaking with a person trained in genetics it does not appear to make sense.

Rather crazy.

SATAN

>>Last time I checked pythons are a ZW genetic sex determinated species. Therefore you could never have a "female producing male" or a "male producing male" since males don't determine gender.
>>-----
>>Tosha
>>
>>nihil facimus sed id bene facimus
-----
"Satan™" is a registered trademark of NERD, Inc. Any copyright infringement is punishable by ETERNAL DAMNATION and some other terrible stuff.

That's kindof the point, it doesn't make sense. BUT! That is the way it is working.

Will Slough bred the original female banana several times without producing a male banana. He even had enough time to make bananas het clown and make female banana clowns before a male was produced.

The "White Smoke" was a male, but he didn't breed for a while and when he did, he only sired one clutch and died. If he had lived I think this would have all been figured out sooner. The white smoke is the founder of the coral glow for any that have not kept up with CG/Banana. I believe there were only 2 CG offspring and I also believe they were female as well.

So... everything from that moment forward has begun with females.

Females breed and produce females...but every now and then they produce a male. That male then breeds and produces females...and again occasionally produces a male...THAT male is known as the "Male Maker" the male maker obviously makes males and they are also male makers, these males will also occasionally make a female then the cycle repeats. I heard this information prior to it being public knowledge and it has held true ever since I heard it.

Genetics is not exact, you really can't say "this is this and this is that so it's not possible" because this is the way this particular gene is working. Nothing is impossible.

Calico cats are sexed linked, almost all are female. Males exist but are very rare.

Calico reticulated pythons... same thing

Parthenogenesis is another great example. A viable male isn't around so the snakes crank out little carbon copies of themselves. It's documented in Timber Rattle Snakes and Burmese pythons and many species of whiptail lizards in the SW, I have also witnessed it in reticulated pythons.

These breeders that are producing bananas and coral glows have nothing to gain by lieing to the rest of us. Is there ANYONE out there that has a male maker banana or CG that is not experiencing these results?

>>
>>Females breed and produce females...but every now and then they produce a male.

No, not exactly.

A female can produce both males and females equally I believe. Then that male is your female maker.... and the next generation is your male maker as you are saying.

Rather funny that people think that there is some kind of conspiracy or lies being said about all of this.... This is nature playing a BIG JOKE on us breeders!

IT may have something to do with SATAN.

(back to your post)
That male then breeds and produces females...and again occasionally produces a male...THAT male is known as the "Male Maker" the male maker obviously makes males and they are also male makers, these males will also occasionally make a female then the cycle repeats. I heard this information prior to it being public knowledge and it has held true ever since I heard it.
>>
>>Genetics is not exact, you really can't say "this is this and this is that so it's not possible" because this is the way this particular gene is working. Nothing is impossible.
>>
>>Calico cats are sexed linked, almost all are female. Males exist but are very rare.
>>
>>Calico reticulated pythons... same thing
>>
>>Parthenogenesis is another great example. A viable male isn't around so the snakes crank out little carbon copies of themselves. It's documented in Timber Rattle Snakes and Burmese pythons and many species of whiptail lizards in the SW, I have also witnessed it in reticulated pythons.
>>
>>These breeders that are producing bananas and coral glows have nothing to gain by lieing to the rest of us. Is there ANYONE out there that has a male maker banana or CG that is not experiencing these results?
-----
"Satan™" is a registered trademark of NERD, Inc. Any copyright infringement is punishable by ETERNAL DAMNATION and some other terrible stuff.

Why do people keep saying they are sexed linked and then when they explain what is happening with these morphs, they explain something that completely contradicts the definition of sex linked?

These morphs are not sex linked, what we are seeing does not come close to any definition of sex linked. So can we stop saying they are? We don't need any more wrong definitions in this hobby.

Actually that does make it sex linked. How can you say it isn't?

Then what is the correct definition or term to use?
-----
Jason Amos

Ball Pythons
6.40
Dogs
1.1 Staffordshire Bull Terriers

Sex linked means the trait is linked to a sex chromosome, this is not what we are seeing.

With ball pythons, you have two options IF you have a sex linked gene. If it is linked to the W chromosome, only females could have the gene. Obviously not the case. If it was linked to the Z then When a female banana/CG would breed EVERY male would be banana, no ifs ands or buts about it. Females would be the weird ones, not the males. Obviously this is not the case either. If it was sex linked it would follow a simple pattern, we are not seeing anything close to it.

So there it is not sex linked.

what is the proper term? hell I got no idea, only person I have heard put a name to it called it "Paternal grandparent influenced inheritance pattern" I haven't seen anything similar anywhere that is like what we are seeing with the banana/CG, it appears to be truly unique. Cool as hell isn't it?

but yea can we stop calling it sex linked?

Despite what you want to believe, it IS sex linked. There is no way around it. I wish people wouldn't try to make such definitive statements about genetics, especially when its laymen's genetics. How knowledgeable are you with actual genetics? I don’t mean in most of "our" understandings of it, I mean in actual genetic doctrine.

layman's terms - means you take a complex word and explain it using OTHER much simpler words. You do NOT take the complex word and give it a a whole new definition.

layman's genetics - is still genetics. You do not go changing theories and definitions. you explain it using simpler words.

What is next? Layman's spelling? I think we already see that. A LOT, unfortunately.

Why are we resisting the use of proper terminology?

There is absolutely nothing wrong with injecting a little education into the reptile industry. What is wrong with showing the world that we know what we are talking about? What is wrong with showing that some of us have at least a little education?
-----
Ritchie

Tess it is not set linked, i dont understand how you can say that. I mean honestly, if a b = c and what we are seeing is d e = f yet you are on repeat that d e = c. Sex linked does not have a loose definition like "super". What we are seeing is not described by sex linked. Also why don't you back up your statement instead of personally attacking me, your persistence with this shows a lack of knowledge.

For whatever reason, the male producing gene needs to have two copies to produce males from a male.

So the female produces the first male....
That first male produces females.
When a male is finally produced it now has the 2 genes required to make males.

That makes perfect sense as most sexed linked genes DO skip generations. The reason they skip generations is because they need the double copy of the mutated SEX linked gene.

As far as "attacking" you, it just really burns me that you "Know it all for FACT". That is the way you come off. Well you don't. I don't. None of us do. None of us are geneticists working in a nice big lab, where we can prove/disprove any of these "theories". Sorry if that bothers you.

Sorry if you think I come off that way, as you said none of us know it all, but you don't need to work in a big lab to see what this is not. Sex linked has a definition, what we are seeing does not fit that definition.

To even know how to respond, you are going to have to clarify for me. Are you calling Banana/CG the male producing gene or are you implying that there is another gene at play some how related to all this?

What I am saying and what the people working with the CG/Bananas are saying, is that it appears to be sex linked. Why else would/could this be happening?

There are different types of sex linked traits/genes. The one that is most likely the culprit is a recessive sex linked gene. Or so it would seam.

This link goes into detail how some sex linked inheritance work.

Sex linked inheritance

I hope this can shed some light and understanding on how this is possible.

I'm sorry but that link explains exactly why this is not a sex linked trait...

It is completely understandable to think it was at the start. If snakes were the XY type (which most seem to agree they are not). it would completely explain how a male could make all female bananas. The trait being linked to the X and he could only pass the X and make females and never a male. How ever as soon as he would make 1 male banana, it throws it being sex linked right out the window, it no longer fits the definition. Also most seem to agree snakes are of the ZZ and ZW type, so this isn't the case anyways, it never fit in the first place.

Also you did not answer my question. In your explanation are you calling the banana/cg "the male maker gene" or implying something else?

How are you NOT understanding the concept on sex linked recessive traits? I picked that link specifically because it explains it in XY and in WZ and gives a pretty good example of both. There are many sex linked traits out there that work pretty much the same as the CG/Bananas are working. They tend to skip generations.

Hypothetically speaking:

The female caries Z1W1 and the male ZZ. The female makes females Z1W1 and males Z1Z. This F1 male can now produce females Z1W1 and when he does produce a male it will be Z1Z1. This F2 Z1Z1 male can now produce F0 males ZZ and females Z1W1.

This is sex linked and so far this is how it appears to be working. I could be wrong as far as the 3rd generation males. I don't think anyone knows yet whether they produce male makers or just het males.

I don't see how your example correlates to what we are seeing, but even in your example I don't understand this.... "This F2 Z1Z1 male can now produce F0 males ZZ and females Z1W1." Also I am under the impression you are saying this male maker is homozygous gene correct? what about the super CG the evilmorphgod himself made? Why does one chromosome follow a gene regularly, then flop in the next generation. I fail to see where any of this is explained by being classified as sex linked.

Sorry I should have explained that a little better. The 1 denotes the male making recessive sex linked gene.

So we all understand that female balls as ZW and males are ZZ.

Now CG/Banana females, we think so far, seem to carry a recessive sex link that creates males.
Lets assume that the female carries both genes as they can create males.

so a female would possibly look like this Z1W1, and males ZZ as they don't typically make males.

So a female Z1W1 breeds and creates a male who now caries 1 copy of the sex linked gene. Z1Z.

This male we shall call an F1 male as he is a first generation male carrier.

This Z1W1 female now breeds a Z1Z male and he finally creates a Z1Z1 male. This new male is now a 2nd generation male so he is now an F2. He now has 2 copies of the male gene. Now he has the key to make males as he now caries the needed 2 genes.

Genes can do funny things and don't always stick to the norms. Genes can become attached to other genes to fuse and become completely different ones. That’s one way genes can mutate. They can also mutate due to environmental factors. Female boas have proven to be able to produce genetic copies of themselves without mating with a male, producing WW females instead of ZW. Genetics is not as simple as we ball breeders like to think. That’s why I use the term lightly that we use laymen’s genetics in our hobby. I admittedly use these same terms. It's something that we can understand. They aren't correct, but they are easy to understand. The codominant/dominants that we know, are not how true genetics work.

Your example shows the gene on both chromosomes, that would make it not sex linked. But I am not trying to nit pick, I'm only arguing terminology, not concept. so to clarify, you are suggesting another gene is the sex linked one and linked someway to the CG gene? The concept still has holes, honestly I think we are at the point this isn't worth going through.

I never said the concept of the gene was clear cut or simple. Genetics isn't simple at all, but some concepts about it are. Then there are the weird and at the time unexplained things. More goes into sex than just X and Y or Z and W. There are female humans that are XY (no they are not trannys or anything). Then there is epigenetics to add a whole new world a crap going on. Believe it or not I am aware of this

Think about in humans how balding has been linked to females passing it down. Is it 100% no but even breeding supers and 100% hets doesnt always give y ou what you expect.

I don't quite seem to understand your point.... Sex Linked is not explained in a few simple sentences. That paper is EXACTLY the kind of thing that shows it does not have to follow some classic definition!!!

How is it NOT SEX LINKED!!!!!!!

Take a look at Abraxes!!!! It even goes to point about about entire clutches being female and occasionally a male!!!!

Good stuff Tessa!!!!

SATAN
-----
"Satan™" is a registered trademark of NERD, Inc. Any copyright infringement is punishable by ETERNAL DAMNATION and some other terrible stuff.

Due to an odd chromosome, how does that explain the male maker/female maker?

I am not offering and EXACT explanation since I do not know. But it certainly appears like some form of Sex Linking......

The paper shows all sorts of "strange" things that can happen like a missing Chromosome. Entire litters females or the occasional male....

So maybe we could call it Sex Inheritance..... which seems certainly like Sex Linked. W/O a doubt some weird stuff is going on for sure...the more I do with it the more I wonder.

SATAN
-----
"Satan™" is a registered trademark of NERD, Inc. Any copyright infringement is punishable by ETERNAL DAMNATION and some other terrible stuff.

The paper was just addressing abraxas and the anomaly that was observed during the experiment. The explanation offered for it explains why a female would throw unusual sex ratios and could possibly explain why a male could do the same in theory. But I don't see where it correlates with what you are reporting, as normal sex ratios, just nearly all of one sex is the CG.

It is quite an interesting gene. I'm just arguing that I don't see sex linked being the correct terminology. The holes in the the theories kinda point to that. Hopefully, the "F3" males and some more supers will hopefully gives us some more information.

Honestly I thought the gene was more simple in the fact that if the male got its gene from a female, it made females. If it got its gene from a male, it makes males. Interested to see what the "f3" males mostly make and see if it holds true. Might be able to simplify this gene a little bit.

SATAN
Copyright Infringement only preformed out of pure curiosity of what the other terrible stuff is.

In the case of a Female making a Male F1, that making a Male F2 and that F3 Male being bred and making what looks like mostly males.....but a few girls. One clutch had two visual females with no other visual males. The amount of babies from these clutches is too small for me to make any real conclusion. I am leaning on the male side though.

I am also having a weird feeling that odds from lets say a F1, F2 CG/Banana MALE are not 50% for visuals. It seems I keep coming up "short". Well, I do feel I seem to have that "terrible" luck on odds too and it could just be ME!

SATAN
-----
"Satan™" is a registered trademark of NERD, Inc. Any copyright infringement is punishable by ETERNAL DAMNATION and some other terrible stuff.

So would you agree that we could drop all the "F's" and make a blanket statement that

if the male CG came from a female CG, that male will make mostly female CG
if the male CG came from a male CG, that male will make mostly male CG.

Would be interesting to see a big sample size of your sex ratios, I always herd it was near 50/50.

No...not yet...... we need more clutches to know.....

I have never made 2 females(in same clutch) from a F2 or a clutch with only girls like I did with an F3.

Too early, I think we will need another season under our belt before we can say such a thing...

SATAN
-----
"Satan™" is a registered trademark of NERD, Inc. Any copyright infringement is punishable by ETERNAL DAMNATION and some other terrible stuff.

btw what was the sex of the super CG?

>>btw what was the sex of the super CG?

Well, A male on the obvious one. I am not sure of the sex of the Super Bananas that were made over the past few years..... I was thinking that there may be both sexes. I have done little breeding on the CG x CG so I have lots more to learn as far as if there can only be one sex for a Super.

SATAN
-----
"Satan™" is a registered trademark of NERD, Inc. Any copyright infringement is punishable by ETERNAL DAMNATION and some other terrible stuff.

Sex linked is NOT the correct term.

Just like we keep using the incorrect term "co-dominant"

I completely understand what you are saying though.

I wish there was a proper term for "the sex will be the same sex as the grandparent banana but only if the parent banana is a male"
-----
Ritchie

semi-masculinally inherited???

(spelling may even be off....LOL...just throwing words out there)...
-----
........JY