Reptile & Amphibian Forums

If there co-dominant so how can you produce hets?
Red Axanthic if breed to another red axanthic should produce super reds..right ...Red Axanthic breed to a normal should produce reds and normals ..right... again?[lol]
like the pastels ?
Het Pastels sounds funny
There something Nemo[ fishy] about this
later Dre

From what I have read, the Red Axanthic is the Super. The het is the black back.

Corey, please correct me if I am wrong.

The red axanthic is the equivalent of a super pastel.
When you breed a red axanthic to a normal you get black backs. (Just like when you breed a super pastel to a normal you get all pastels) These are the animals that Corey calls het red axanthics. They are different than most black backs in the sense that they are genetic and can make red axanthics. They are also different than the black stripes he is working with. SO......my guess is that he decided to call them het red axanthics to distinguish them from other genetic and non genetic black backs. After all...they act just like visible hets. (Just like a pastel can be said to be "het" for super pastel) If you contact him, I am sure he'll get back to you and give you the whole scoop.

Corey Woods is a honest person and the black backs and the red axanthic morphs are legitimate morphs.

I hope this helps.
Joe
Joe Compel Reptiles

Well, Since Corey is the one who originated these (first to prove them reproducable)... He can pretty much call them whatever the heck he wants to....

VOT

Obviously you don't know much about this morph. If Corey and Ralph call the black backs het for Red Axanthic, who are you to argue?

Before downplaying the hard work Corey has put in proving this trait, why didn't you do a bit of research....

Now YOU look/sound like you don't know what you are talking about.

Read, listen and learn before sticking your foot in mouth...

Thanks Joe for clearing thinks up for me
medusah and vot I careless about you and the snake you rode in on and who calls what!
My question was I should had put it differently
Het for a co- dominant trait? all the books and mags said there no such thing.
With all the lowlifes out here we all have to be careful with trumped up names for normal balls[reptiles]
Later Dre'

Ok, hope remember this correctly. There is such a thing as het. for a co-dom trait. As everyone stated above, heterozygous for a co-dom trait would be animals that are showing only half of the gene such as pastels and blackblacks. When they show the entire gene the gene is then homozygous such as super pastels and red axanthics. Everyone is so used to seeing heterozygous being used for simple recessive traits, but the truth is you can also apply the same principle to be used with co-dominant traits, but not dominant traits (which would be just homozygous). I can go into more detail if you wish, let me just crack open some genetics books first!

>>Thanks Joe for clearing thinks up for me
>>medusah and vot I careless about you and the snake you rode in on and who calls what!
>>My question was I should had put it differently
>>Het for a co- dominant trait? all the books and mags said there no such thing.
>>With all the lowlifes out here we all have to be careful with trumped up names for normal balls[reptiles]
>>Later Dre'
-----
Justyn Miller
Intense Herpetoculture

Dre,

As the people below have explained already (thanks guys!) the Red Axanthic is a Co-Dominant mutation. The Red Axanthics are comparable to a Super Pastel and the "het" Red Axanthics (which are abbarent black backs) are comparable to a Pastel.

Some people have a hard time with a name "Red Axanthic" as they don't understand how an Axanthic can have Red pigment. However, when these guys are born they are purple in appearance and at about a year old they turn pink (about the colour of the palm of your hand) and then revert back to their Axanthic colouration into adult hood. Their have only been 4 Red Axanthics produced to date. I produced 2.0 in 2001 and 0.2 in 2002. So, the oldest animals in exhistence are only 2.5 years old.

As far as naming the "Het" Red Axanthics, just that...."het" Red Axanthics well Ralph and racked our brains to try and name these guys. We tried to find a name to include all of their traits. They are visible black backs with a very abbarent side pattern. On top of that they are not normal colour. The only way to discribe this is that they appear to be the inbetween stage of Red Axanthic and normal. It's hard to photograph this quality but everyone who's brought hets and when Ralph produced his own hets they all said "they are a different colour". We thought about the name "Black Pastel", howerver, this name sometimes refers to the Cinnamon Pastels. After about 6 months we both decided that the best name would just be to simply call them "het" Red Axanthics.....and in theory that is exactly what they are.

When people first started bringing in recessive mutations out of Africa they would breed them to normals and produce all normal offspring. They would then call these animals "hets" and when bred back to their parent or bred back to one another they would produce exact copies of the original WC parent. So, for example when you breed an Albino to a normal you get "het" albinos (who appear to be normal). When you bred the Het Albinos together you get Albinos, hets and normals. However, since the hets and normals look the same (normal) you just say you have possible hets.

Now, when people started bringing in Dominant and Co-Dominant mutations they didn't know how they were reproducable so they instinctavely gave them a name (such as Pastel, Butter, Mohave.....etc). When they bred to Dominant mutations together they produced the Co-Dominant form. Such as breeding 2 Pastels together you get "Super" pastels, pastels and normals. Since the (I'll use Pastels for an example) Pastels already had a name they called the Co-Dominant form "Super" pastels. But, had the Super Pastel been collected out of Africa and bred to normals producing all Pastels I'd bet my bottom dollar that they'd call them "Het" Super Pastels and not "pastels".

Anyways, here are some pics to try and explain the Red Axanthics and "het" Red Axanthics a little better.

Red Axanthic male with a normal sibling (2001)

Both Red Axantic males with a normal sibling (2001). I kept one male and sold one male to Ralph Davis.

"Het" Red Axanthic male (2003). As you can see these guys are killer black backs!

A "Het" Red Axanthic beside one of his normal siblings. This pair was produced from breeding my original "Het" Red Axanthic male to a normal female. You can clearly see the difference in the 2 animals. (2002)

A female "het" Red Axanthic beside one of my male Black Stripes. Both lines are different and unrelated. You can see that both animal look totally different.

A yearling Red Axanthic female (2003)

I hope this helps,
Corey Woods

Posted by: dre at Fri Dec 26 20:55:58 2003 [ Report Abuse ] [ Email Message ]

If there co-dominant so how can you produce hets?
Red Axanthic if breed to another red axanthic should produce super reds..right ...Red Axanthic breed to a normal should produce reds and normals ..right... again?[lol]
like the pastels ?
Het Pastels sounds funny
There something Nemo[ fishy] about this
later Dre

Thanks for clearing up this misunderstanding there are truely sweet animals.
But do you understand my point too .... I've seen tons of W.C. blk backs over the yrs. and now that you prove them ...I can see guys selling w.c. blk backs for double if not triple there value because there possible het for red axanthic ..when there nothing more than nice snakes .
take care and stay strong
later Dre'

Dre,

What you are describing is not just a localized problem but a problem that plagues the whole industry. I'm sure their are countless numbers of people on this very forum that have bought hets (and possible hets for that matter) that didn't prove out and the person they bought them from has up and vanished. It basically comes down to buyer beware.

Corey