Reptile & Amphibian Forums

So what do people think about the Co-dom hypo?
I think if the genetics prove out it will make hypo's a lot easier, but to be honest the phenotype of the het hypo doesn't seem that amazing.
Im sure it looks better in person, but I am wondering if there is a homozygous co-dom hypo out there yet.

Amir, do you have a homo co-dom hypo yet? I am guessing if you did you would have posted pics by now. How about pics of the adult next to a normal.

I am also wondering if it will be compatible with the recessive hypo forms out there. Will there be a double hypo?

Wait I'm confused, or maybe its because it's 7 am and I have one eye open.

Is that snake a het hypo, or an actual hypo?

It sounds like it is het for a new gene where the heterozygous genotype is a hypo like phenotype. It's probably too early to know what the homozygous genotype will look like so as to determine if the gene is the co-dominant/incomplete dominant type or the completely dominant type or if it has anything more than a superficial relation to the simple recessive hypo/ghost we are used to.

Ok...to clarify............the snake Amir has listed is not a HET HYPO....it is a visual HYPOish snake.....it is not compatible with recessive hypos......looks similar to Yellowbellies...........I wonder what the super is?????? :^)

Jared H

Hey Jared,

Considering other Co-dom morphs that produce supers, Cinnamon's, Pastels Etc it should be pretty interesting. Take care.
Living Art Reptiles

>>Ok...to clarify............the snake Amir has listed is not a HET HYPO....it is a visual HYPOish snake.....it is not compatible with recessive hypos......looks similar to Yellowbellies...........I wonder what the super is?????? :^)

Well, he claims it is a co-dom hypo, then the one he has posted is a het hypo, just not the normal het hypo people normally talk about (Het-meaning heterozygous or one gene copy which has nothing to do with the dominance of the gene). If the homozygous form is a another white snake you can count me out.

I'd really like to see pics of the adults, babies, and some normals for comparison.

The snake he has listed in the classifieds is not a "HET"......it is a visual morphs........as it ages it will completely loose all the black pigment and end up looking like the adult.

I hate refering to co-dom animals as "HETs" for this and that...........it confuses people.......newcomers especially.......they dont know what the heck they agr buying......and it leaves a huge door open for scam artists and the like to take advantage of uneducated herpers.....

Yellowbellies for example........when bred to each other make an Ivory.....the Ivory is a super Yellowbelly.....

No one calls Pastel Jungles "Hets" for Super Pastels......No one calls Cinnamons "Hets" for Super Cinnamons and so forth......I just think its a bad idea.......

Anyway........back to the point........the snakes he has are wicked!!! I saw them just out of the eggs.....and I can tell you this........they are going to be STUNNING ADULTS!!!!!!!!!

Jared H.

While I agree there is a lot of confusion right now I respectfully disagree on the cause and the best solution.

True, there aren't a lot of us that talk about hets for co-dominant genes but I think the sooner the snake community gets educated on genetic terminology the better. I think it's the exclusive use of phenotype terms with dominant type mutations that has contributed to people thinking that "het" means something like "normal looking gene carrier" just because it works out that way with recessive mutations. If they understood that heterozygous really means having a pair of unmatched genes they could quickly grasp that a hypo that produces half hypos with normals is heterozygous for some new dominant type hypo gene. There where some normals produced too right? It sounds like it hasn't technically been proven co-dominant yet as it could turn out to be completely dominant. For now we just know it's some type of dominant although I would also bet on a white phenotype for the homozygous "flame hypo". But then I happen to think white snakes are darn cool regardless of how many people might be able to produce them. Even if there where only one line we would all EVENTUALLY be able to get one.

The nice thing about learning to use genotypes is that the genotype inheritance applies to all mutation types - recessive, co-dominant/incomplete dominant, and completely dominant. I think it will simplify thing in the long run.

Chris
-----
(insert something profound with a touch of humor here)

Think maybe some people on here are jealous of the white snakes being produced. If anyone does not appreciate a white/off white morph of ball pythons they need to be doing something other that being a bioligist. Rwoodyer if AMIR says he has a co-dom hypo then you better bet your A** on the fact that he has done the work and proved them before offering one for sale. Just look at everything NEW Amir produced last year, then tell US that he claims to have a Co-dom Hypo. Just my opinion. Thanks David
-----
1.0 Pied(04)(RDR)
1.0 Albino(04)(RDR)
0.1 Spider(04)(RDR)
4.2 Pastels(03's)(04's)(ASF,Graziani,Bell lines)
0.1 Yellow belly(unproven)(04)
1.3 Yellow belly(unproven)(02,03,04's)
2.0 100% HET CLOWN(04's)(MHMR)
3.3 100% het albinos(03's)(high contrast bell line)
0.1 poss Het Albino(03's)
2.0 100% het pieds(03's)(Vin Russo,CRE)
0.2 100% het pieds(03's)(04's)(RDR,TWL)
1.2 Poss het pieds(03's)(PETE KAHL)
2.1 Poss het pieds(00's)(01's) hoping to get PIEDS this year(Vin Russo, Pete Kahl)
25 Normal adult females
60 04 females
15 normal mixed 03's
20 Assorted weird ball pythons 04's
11 baby 2005 PASTELS just HATCHED...4-8-05

Hello folks!
The co-dom hypo is from an adult female that came in as a hypo.
I have two adult females and the first one was bred to a yellowbelly last year.
I got five eggs.
With one week to hatch, I got so distracted with the Daytona show that my incubator wend dry and killed the top three eggs.
When I came back from the show, I opened all the eggs and found one female Hypo, one female normal, two dead hypos and a grey/purple snake that was also dead.
I assume that one was the yellowbelly and hypo cross.
The female went to Ralph Davis and he has the animal today.
This year I hatched 9 eggs from the new snake and 4 were hypos.
The second clutch will be from a "Sunset" pastel to the Hypo mom.
I also bred her to a yellowbelly as a back-up.
The reason I call them hypos is because the two moms and 7 babies so far have been hypos, and the reason I call them Co-dom is because they produce hypos first generation and the cross with a yellowbelly, eventhough it was dead, was different from both the mom and the dad.
As far as those who want to tell me the baby in the egg was not fully formed, I can tell you this. The yolk was all gone, the baby just got dried up in the egg. Also the two dead sibs were fully formed and had their color and no yolk left.
I will have pictures of the adults and the entire clutch as well as pics of the new clutch when they hatch.
As far as selling them, the pair has been sold as well as an extra male that I did not want to sell.
So let me have it if you got something to say!!!!
Goodnight.

Hi Amir,

I do not think you would say you produced Co-dom Hypos unless you had a strong foundation to present your case from. At this point in time they are and should be what you say they are. Take care.

Best Wishes,

Tony Pappalardo

Living Art Reptiles

Thanks, Amir!

So there are two adult females and a number of first-generation (F1) juveniles. At this point, I would say that hypo is PROBABLY some sort of dominant. I would not say that it is DEFINITELY anything, yet. Because there is a chance that hypo is a recessive mutant gene and all the sires just happened to be heterozygous for hypo. I think the odds are pretty high against that, but every few weeks somebody wins a lottery against higher odds.

Proving that a mutant gene is a dominant is a lot harder that proving that it is recessive. To prove a dominant, you need to breed at least twenty F2 babies from one or more pairs of F1 normals. (More is better.) And every one of those F2s must be normal.

In addition, F2 hypos from an F1 hypo x F1 hypo mating must be raised and bred to normals. A normal baby proves that the hypo parent is heterozygous (with a hypo mutant gene paired with a normal gene). These matings continue until at least one produces 20 hypo babies (or more) and no normal babies. That result gives a probability of over 99% that the hypo parent is homozygous for the hypo mutant gene (with a pair of hypo mutant genes).

Proving a codominant is even harder. In addition to detecting some difference between the homozygous hypo and the heterozygous hypo, it must be shown to be reliable. Nature is sloppy, and if even a good sized minority of the heterozygous hypos cannot be distinguished from the homozygous hypos, then the mutant is better called a dominant mutant gene with variable expressivity than a codominant mutant gene. Salmon (aka hypo) in boa constrictors was originally called a codominant mutant gene, but even experienced breeders say they fairly often can't call the genotype. So salmon is better called a dominant with variable expressivity.

All this requires a lot of breeding. It is no wonder that the pro geneticists like to work with creatures that have short generations.

I look forward to more data as this hypo project continues. Good luck.

Paul Hollander

You seem to have mistaken Ball pyhtons for drosofila.

I meant pythons and drosophila.
Its late.

It bites that it does take so long to be sure about things with ball pythons. I did a 3 gene Syrian hamster combo in about a year (calico, nothing new to figure out). It probably would have taken at least a decade to do something similar with ball pythons.

I think you are right to be stoked about the apparent yellow belly and flame hypo combo but I'm not sure it really proves flame hypo to be co-dominant vs. perhaps still being completely dominant. And of course as Paul points out it could even still be recessive. Still, if I had any money I would bet on co-dominant.

I can't wait to see what pewters and ebonies produce with normals to get a feel for if the unexpected synergy in each combo is an indication of any sort of relation between the combined genes in each case.

The principles of genetics are the same in pythons and Drosophila. The pythons just have fewer eggs and longer generations. But it could be worse; we could be trying to do genetics with elephants.

Paul Hollander