Reptile & Amphibian Forums

First off thanks to all for responding to earlier posts. It seems a common theme that a few of us are leary of the "Tiger" gene. It looks like the term tiger has a wider scope in boas than I thought. But since I'm expecting to sell offspring this year I really need to clarify how I should go about marketing these babies when and if I get them. I've bred a Honduran "Tiger"
Male to several normal females. Now if roughly 50% of the offspring carry the same visual , missing saddles semi reverse stripe look, as the father can we assume that the trait is co-dominant or not? Is that not the proof in the pudding so to speak. I'd like to be able to market them as genetic and it seems to me that would be proof enough. Also how much aberrant "tiger"like pattern is enough to identify the gene, I think therein lies a real dilemma. It looks like the neonates with barely visible signs of tiger-ism wouldn't be worth much more than a normal if any. HELP....

Hi there, so what do you mean by 'normal' females?
Normal hondurans? normal mix/wild type central americans? normal colombians?
If they are normal hondurans, are they normals from the litter the male came from? or unrelated?

If approximately 50% of the trait carries aberrancies, then it is obviously working in a codominant or incomplete dominant fashion, but can only be gauranteed by further breeding.
Another thing that would need to be done with that, and also for the reason of pricing and determining genetic value of the normal or less aberrant offspring, is breed those to normals..
You would need to breed each, the less aberrant, and normal lookings to normals, and to each other, and only then can you know for sure how the gene works.

Another thing is that if the gene 'proves', then you can safely say it is genetic to some extent, but you would still not be able to justify the 'Tiger' brand until you saw the aberrancies of all, and they were consistant in some way or another.

My honest opinion.. what do you all think?

later - Joe

-----
Thanks and take care - Joe Rollo
'Tis not the stongest of the species that will eventually survive, nor the most intelligent, but the one most responsive to change' Charles Darwin

Just to clarify he was bred to normal colombians. And there will be some holdbacks ,I'm sure , so eventially I'll be able to go further with this particular gene.I'm not one hundred percent on the Honduran's origin but I believe he was a wild caught neonate.
To Joe,
Appreciate the input.I agree with you. We'll have to see what pops out.
Steve Beamer
Primeval Beauty

>I've bred a Honduran "Tiger" Male to several normal females. Now if roughly 50% of the offspring carry the same visual , missing saddles semi reverse stripe look, as the father can we assume that the trait is co-dominant or not?

Even if we assume that tiger is caused by a mutant gene, you can tell practically nothing about the genetics from this sort of cross alone.

Tiger might be a recessive mutant gene, and you simply had the good fortune to mate it with heterozygous females. Not likely, but not impossible. Testing this would require mating tiger x tiger and normal x normal from the present crop of babies.

If tiger is a dominant mutant gene, then you are crossing normal females with a heterozygous tiger, which has a tiger mutant gene paired with a normal gene. This would result in around 50% baby tigers, which would have a tiger gene paired with a normal gene like their father.

If tiger is a codominant mutant gene, then you are crossing normal females with a heterozygous tiger, which has a tiger mutant gene paired with a normal gene. This would result in around 50% baby tigers, which would have a tiger gene paired with a normal gene like the father.

The only way to determine whether tiger is a dominant mutant gene or a codominant mutant gene is to produce homozygous tiger boas, with a pair of tiger mutant genes, and see how easy it is to distinguish homozygous tiger boas from heterozygous tiger boas.

Paul Hollander

Nick from boasark was one of the first if not the first to introduce the tiger gene .. i am currently working with him and he has bred several generations and their offspring and has produced supers as well ...there is still more to be known about the gene but yes its confusing now with everyone calling any boa with missing saddles a tiger .. Nick has got to have one of the best and most extensive collections of tiger boas and i would contac thim if u had more questions as well .. he truely knows the gene the best.. i hope this helps
adam