Reptile & Amphibian Forums

This is just my two cents. Does anyone think the pyro double morphs would be better served if we produced some more single homozygotic animals first to get a better look at what those genetics are going to do on their own after several generations. Will the Hypoerytheritic gene get paler with succesive breeding. Lets face it there are'nt too many around and no large sample has been seen yet. Will jumping to the double morphs create animals that are tied too closely genetically to each other? Yeah, I am probably crazy and I know it would add time to these projects but would the animals actually be better if a wide array of genetics were mixed in? JMO Input welcomed.

Matt Woodhall

>>This is just my two cents. Does anyone think the pyro double morphs would be better served if we produced some more single homozygotic animals first to get a better look at what those genetics are going to do on their own after several generations.

well, it took 6 or 7 years or so of producing the much more prolific hypo hondurans before significantly diff specimens showed up--the "extremes" that are being wondered about now. So even if there would be some advantage to keeping the pyro morphs separate, i doubt anyone would wait the ten or 15 years it might take to say, "ok, now we've waited as long as with the hondurans (relatively speaking) and it's ok now to start breeding toward pyro double morphs."

besides, we're not talking about crossing ALL single morphs with a diff morph, just sometimes--a homozygous albino male, for example, can be bred X several normals, a hypo, and an albino or het/albino, for ex., only one ofl those 4 or 5 pairings being to a different morph.

Plus, the barczyk hypo x falcon (extreme) hypo cross is one of the steps necessary to deduce the genetics of those two types of animals, to determine whetehr or not they're the same allele.

On the other hand, you're right--having animals that carry or MIGHT carry BOTH hypo genes (assuming they're different genes) does make it harder to sort out the differences.

Unfortunately, that cross happened with the two hypo phenotypes very, very early, at brian's, so there are some animals of uncertain genotype to sort out; similarly, falcon's extreme hypos came out of a traditional hypo line, so an extreme might be het for "regular" hypo even if they ARE two diff morphs--and in the worst case, an extreme being test bred now might be double-homozygous for both types of hypos--again, IF they are two diff morphs--so that will make it harder to achieve conclusive evidence as to the two hypos' identities. But it can be sorted out--it'll have to be--just as you could start with a snow but breed back to produce animals you knew were pure anerythristic, on the one hand, and pure albino, on the other.

But bottom line, crossing the two hypos could be very revealing: if you breed a "sentz" or extreme pyro hypo x a barczyk or initial hypo, and get no hypo babies, you've proved the morphs are two unique alleles. That's a significant discovery to make in a first generation cross.

a question or two of mine, for clarification...

You wrote, "Will jumping to the double morphs create animals that are tied too closely genetically to each other? " can you be more specific about whatyou mean by "tied too closely genetically"?

and can you be more specific, like give an example, of what you mean by, " would the animals actually be better if a wide array of genetics were mixed in?"

you've raised interesting questions, i've tried to give my thoughts on a few, but i'm not exactly sure what was meant by those last two.

peace
terry

what?
I know a few people have them but I don't know that anybody wants to burn one or the other (per say)to find out?
I wish I had one of each cause thats exactly what I would do.I think its very important that its done.

shannon

Hi,
To my knowledge no one has a sentz hypo and a BHB hypo both in their collection-(except Brian, and I've treid numerous times to get ahold of him with no luck at all. Faxes, e-mails, phone calls and never a response) but I wanted to do a breeder loan with terry this year by putting his BHB hypo male here with my sentz hypo female, but he needed him for some females he had planned to breed x him. If jason baylin keeps his sentz hypo at Terrys again for next years breeding maybe you should think of doing that terry. Well shannon, maybe sometime soon we'll see a sentz hypo x BHB hypo breeding-(I think it will produce normals really, but dh for 2 hypo lines i guess could lead to a double homo hypo that is much lighter or brighter ...?, who knows)
Jeff Teel

Jeff,
Maybe you should have sent your female sentz to terry instead of breeding your het anery to her?
Anyways.Time will tell.

Later shannon

Hi Shannon,
First of all, sorry to repsonding to a question that was directed to Terry, i didnt realize at first. But yes, I had thought of it, but I sent her away in 2002 to Frank memmos to breed x his hypo-which it did, then he said his hypo male died, so he used a back up het male x her and her sibling which is a poss. het-hypo-(I sent him her too) but both of them laid 5 eggs, and all the eggs were bad from both breedings. But I didnt want to send her away again. I wasnt even planning on breeding her x a het-anery., I wanted to breed her x a nice looking normal male just so there will be more het-hypo sentz line animals out there-(since there isnt many really) but after talking with Terry and depending on what him and jason split from that pairing of jasons sentz hypo x terrys anery and if terry has a high male count then I'm in line for it- so poss. dh ghost babys will be a nice female for test breedings. i know its far and wishful thinking, but who knows, maybe something could happen. For Terry and jasons sake i hope they end up with 2.5-( I think its 7 eggs that jasons sentz hypo laid..?). But yeah, thats where my breeding the het-anery male x her came into play.
Jeff

Thats cool,
I hope somebody does it next year.

shannon

My points first of all were directed at pyros not hondos and more specifically the DH ghost project. It is my understanding that there are very few hypoerytheristics and there is definately some questions to work out with the hypos. It is my feeling that some more single homo animals should be produced first to get a feeling for the stability of the genetics and give some time to outcross new genetics through various normal animals into the project. As I stated this is just my opinion but I think it can be said that a broader based gene pool in any specimen or group of specimens is more likely to create longevity within those animals. I too am very excited about the thought of seeing a 'ghost' pyro WOW or a 'snow' for that matter. I just hope that the mad dash to be first is'nt deflecting thought away from producing the strongest healthiest animals around. Anyway, thanks for your input and I look forward to much more discussion and to all that is still to be discovered!

Matt Woodhall

Hi Matt,
I too would like to see more hypoertyhristics and snetz line hypos produced. Or even hets for that matter. But by the time that Terry has some Dh babys ready to breed-(or anyone for that matter) I think there will be more hypoerythristics and sentz line hypos around then, plus more out crossed hets too. There will be more BHB hypos too, as Troy Whittacre produces them each year. But I do see your points-(as I've told you before over phone conversations-we think alike on the issue. I think you may be more into greater gene diversity than me, but thats ok,lol) take it easy,
Jeff Teel

Hi Matt,

I understand, hope it didn't sound like i was arguing. I think you've raised two diff points--1) maintaining "pure" specimens of each of the two lines of hypos to make it easier to determine subsequently whether they are the same, or different, morphs, and 2) breeding prudently to maintain healthy stock for the future.

When you say "some more single homo animals should be produced first to get a feeling for the stability of the genetics" I'm guessing that by "stability of the genetics" you mean to know whether or not they are simple recessives? (simple recessives being "stable" in the sense of predictable breeding results?) If you meant something else, by "stability of the genetics", please clarify.

But if that IS what you meant, consider: we've proven the amelanistics and hypoerythristics to be recessive morphs; and i THINK--jeff, jason, anyone confirm?--that EACH type of hypomelanistic animal--the barczyk, and the sentz lines--have bred "true" and produced babies confirming that they're recessive? Is that right, guys? I THINK the only unknown at this point is whether the two hypo lines are the SAME allele, just showing different characteristics within the range of natural variability, or whether they're two unique morphs. Which jeff t addresses well in his post in this thread. You're right, there are some serious considerations to this, which i try to address farther down in this post.

Your second point, about diversity, is the concern that we take time "to outcross new genetics through various normal animals into the project(s) (because) it can be said that a broader based gene pool in any specimen or group of specimens is more likely to create longevity within those animals."

Genetic diversity is good. Inbreeding can lead to problems. But an outcross could also INTRODUCE a problem that would weaken some of the resultant animals. So it's not an all-or-nothing, good-or-bad kind of proposition.

Because these morphs are so new, there's been almost NO inbreeding so far: the original hypoerythristic was wild caught so it is the result only of whatever "inbreeding" happened in the wild; the sentz line hypo female i bred to him was the granddaughter of what was apparently the original het male, the mother being an apparently unrelated female. So these are almost wholly free of inbreeding.

More importantly, crossing two different morphs is an almost ideal outcross--those two lines are highly likely to be unrelated. So there's likely nothing in that cross that would undermine the genetic diversity & presumed genetic strength of any of these animals.

But back to your other point:

I agree thoughtful pairings will be essential in determining whether the two hypo types are the same or different. One of the essential pairings in that investigation is the cross of an animal that is ONLY homozygous for the sentz line X an animal that is ONLY homozygous for the barczyk line. You're right, animals that might contain genes for both could impede that investigation. But I'm confident we currently have "pure" (sentz-only) homozygous animals; identifying "pure" (barczyk-only) homozygous animals is the other necessity, and i think brian can help us identify some of those animals, by telling when he first introduced a sentz animal into any of his breedings, and which animals are the result of that. I suspect my hypo/albino male will prove to be one of those, but i'll confirm that with brian.

More thoughts...?

peace
terry

By stability I do understand that it is recessive. Is what I mean is the survival of the animals possesing the gene solid. Why are'nt there more already in existance when I have seen pics back to 92 showing "anery" pyros. My concern is if there were problems with the animals would we be able to ascertain if it lied within their genetic make-up and where? Just a thought, I think it would be nice to work with the individual genetics first over a few generations and then mix things up. As far as out-crossing, selective strong eaters etc. would be my considerations. Again thanks for your guys time, I was abit rushed in my response but we can talk again soon.

Matt