Reptile & Amphibian Forums

I'm a long time breeder of colubrid morphs. Ready to move into boids. Could someone please explain the hypo gene in boas. Specifically Columbians. Eeverything is so simple in colubrids. Tthis new stuff is confusing me. Thanks.

have a look here it will tell you all you need to know
http://www.reptimania.co.uk/boare.htm
Link

The genetics are the same with boids as they are with colubrids.

I have heard both of the following about hypo boas....
1. Hypomelanism is a codominant trait.
2. Hypomelanism is a dominant trait.

I couldn't tell you one way or another which is true, but its not a big deal. (maybe someone else can say for certain)

Codominant or domininant, it works the same as a codominant or dominant morph in corns (sorry don't know corns well enough to give an example).

Basically breed a hypo to a normal and you will get 50% normals & 50% hypos (heterozygous). When breeding 2 hypos together you will get 50% hypos (heterozygous), 25% normals, and 25% hypos (homozygous). The homozygous hypos may look more intense than the heterozygous hypos depending on whether the trait is dominant or codominant. I would tend to believe that they look the same (dominant trait) because most people say a homozygous hypo has to be bred to be proven homozygous. Also, I have never heard of a super hypo.
-----
mark

Sorry m8 thats not true, there are NO heterozygous hypo's the supper hypo is dominant. This means if you bred it to a normal then you get all hypo's (codominant) and if you breed a hypo (codominant) to a normal then 50% will be normal and 50% will be hypo's (codominant). If you like to look at it this way codominant is a homozygous form of heterozygous.sort of lol
-----

Actually you are not quite correct.
Even dominant and codominant traits come in heterozygous and homozygous forms.

The term "Dominant" is NOT interchangeable with the term "super" even though it is commonly done in the reptile industry. Just because everyone does it doesn't mean it is correct.

Your statements are correct, but your terminology is not. As you say, a super (homozygous) when bred to a normal produces all hypos (since they are not supers they are heterozygous). But as I said above a Super is not the same as a dominant. You are also correct that a hypo (heterozygous) will produce 50% normal and 50% hypos (heterozygous).

Sorry I don't understand this statement...

"If you like to look at it this way codominant is a homozygous form of heterozygous.sort of"

The terms dominant, codominant and recessive refer to the way a trait is passed on. Because of this, the same trait (ie hypo) can not be associated with both dominant and codominant. It is either one or the other, never both.

It sounds like you understand codominant traits (just change your "codominants" to heterozygous and your "dominants" to homozygous.

Dominant traits are passed on the same as codominant traits with the only difference being that the heterozygous forms look the same as the homozygous forms (ie supers are not distinguishable from a litter of morphs).

Hope that helped some
-----
mark