Reptile & Amphibian Forums

**I am just trying to figure out if my snakes are actually a genetically spotted mutation or if they are an aberant mutation that happens to have spots.**

Is it genetic? - yes.
Is it predictable? - no, not in the same respect as recessive genes.
Is it genetic? - yes.
Is it an aberrancy - yes.

They have occurred in the wild naturally. The spotteds are also found where striped cal kings are found. The spotteds came from broken stripers. Both striped cal kings and spotted cal kings ARE NOT RECESSIVE GENES. Aberrancy is defined as not being "normal". "Normal" in cal kings usually refers to bandeds, but stripe also occurs "normally" in the wild. Aberrancies also occur in the wild, especially where bandeds and stripes are found. In California that may be the norm, but in Arizona we just have bandeds. So a striped cal king found in Arizona would be an aberrant by definition.

**The naming only maters if the trai breeds true.**

Not true. Naming describes a mutation or trait on how a cal king looks. Whether or not it "breeds true" is irrelevant. Especially for described names from aberrancies (ie - AZTEC)

**All of the high white animals that I have seen have a tendancy to have black markings in some random pattern that run along the spine.**

Totally not true. I have produced many High Whites that have very little black markings anywhere on the body.

**This trait has been selectively bred for in kingsnakes by breeding adults with the most white to produce even whiter offspring. Even if your parent animals did not look like the white offspring, they almost certainly come from a high white bloodline and are both heterozygous for the traits that you see in your snakes.**

This is not quite correctly stated. Although breeding selected High Whites will increase your chances of producing more of the same, it is still not 100% predictable. You can produce some awesome High Whites from some butt-ugly parents! And High White IS NOT A RECESSIVE GENE.

**The spotted pictured below hatched from an F2 banded male (het for albino and het for stripe) and a striped female (het for nothing).**

Again, you can produce spotted cal kings from just about any cal king that is aberrant. And stripe in cal kings IS NOT RECESSIVE.

**Renegade reptiles is the only other breeder that I can find who claims to have a proven spotted bloodline.**

Although I have bred that spotted line (Renegade stock) a few years ago, there are others that are not related. Newports, etc... Brian Hubbs has pictures of wild-caught spotteds that were taken years before they hit the herp trade.

Kerby...

The comment that I made about naming traits was clearly erroneous and not what I meant to say at all. Having consistant ways to name different color patterns is clearly important even if the trait is not genetically predictable. What I meant was that naming this trait was not the question I was asking. What I wanted to know was more about the inheritability of this trait.

As for the high whites issue. Originally when high whites were first coming onto the scene there were no perfect screamers that had no black at all, it was a slow selective proccess to get to the quality of high white animals that exist today. But the fact is that many (not the really good ones but most) high white cal kings still have traces of black on them. In the few bloodlines that I have worked with, I have noticed that the black is usually close to the spine especially at the neck and tail. (but you are right, I should have said most, not all) Sometimes I have seen animals that had black along the sides of the body (where the bely scutes meet the doral scales) and occasionally I got snakes that have the black randomly possitioned all over.

Clearly there is some variance within the trait. Breeding high white animals doesn't give you a litter of even whiter ones, but if you want really high whites you breed the whitest anmals around and hope to get a few that are even nicer.

The point I was trying to make, which I think you agree with, is that the snakes in the pictures above are nice normal high white animals but not spotted. Thats just how high white animals with black on them look.

As far as the gentics I have some questions. I have not been breeding cal kings for very long nor am I an expert on the inheritability of different patterns etc., but I am a genetics student and I have noticed a few things within my collection that make me question some of your statements.

***Both striped cal kings and spotted cal kings ARE NOT RECESSIVE GENES.***

For example I had two unrelated perfectly banded, black and white kings (unknown local) that both came from breeding 1 banded parent to 1 striped one. When bred together they prduced mostly bandeds, a few perfect stripes, and rarely an aberant looking one. Since both banded parents had one striped parent themselves, and then they throw a small percentage of striped offspring, In my mind that would make them het for stripe. Unfortunately I lost the records that I kept of this pair and I can't tell you what the exact proportions of the different patern types were.

Now maybe this trait isn't SIMPLE recessive, so you can't just work out a 4x4 punet square and predict all of your offspring. But the trait has to be recessive to some degree because both parents are banded yet they have striped babies sometimes. The genes have to be there somewhere, recessive just means that the parents don't have to show the phenotype.

Again I do not have extensive experiance with high white bloodlines but it would seem to me that if FR got those snakes above from parents that were not high white animals then there are only two explainations. Either the trait is somewhat recessive or FR has spontaneously found a new mutation that codes for high white animals.

So, now having never bred spotted animals before I have no idea what to expect from this trait. Do you think that if I bought a renegade spotted male to breed to the below female that they would throw some spotted offspring, or do you think that the babies would have random paterns all over the place??

I didn't mean to step on any toes with the last post, admittedly it was quickly and carelessly written. Sorry.

***Both striped cal kings and spotted cal kings ARE NOT RECESSIVE GENES.***

"For example I had two unrelated perfectly banded, black and white kings (unknown local) that both came from breeding 1 banded parent to 1 striped one. When bred together they prduced mostly bandeds, a few perfect stripes, and rarely an aberant looking one. Since both banded parents had one striped parent themselves, and then they throw a small percentage of striped offspring, In my mind that would make them het for stripe. Unfortunately I lost the records that I kept of this pair and I can't tell you what the exact proportions of the different patern types were."

What you just noted is true, but they are not het/recessive genes. In corn snakes, stripe is a recessive gene, just like albinism. You can use a Punnet square and predict an outcome. In cal kings it is a dominant gene and the Punnet square has no bearing on the outcome. Stripe in cal kings is not recessive, but dominant.

**Again I do not have extensive experiance with high white bloodlines but it would seem to me that if FR got those snakes above from parents that were not high white animals then there are only two explainations. Either the trait is somewhat recessive or FR has spontaneously found a new mutation that codes for high white animals.**

Terminology, there is no such thing as "somewhat recessive".... There are lots of genes that are passed on that are not recessive. Dominant genes show up on the first generation. Recessive genes on the second. The High White has been developed by selective breeding over quite a few years. Today, they are available fairly easy and the breeding results can appear quicker.

**So, now having never bred spotted animals before I have no idea what to expect from this trait. Do you think that if I bought a renegade spotted male to breed to the below female that they would throw some spotted offspring, or do you think that the babies would have random paterns all over the place??**

I have bred spotteds from Renegade stock. Although the pair were really nice evenly spotteds, they didn't throw 100% spotteds. They also never produced any bandeds. They always produced partial stripers and partial spotteds. I also bred the male spotted from Renegade stock to a female striper (black & white) and produced mostly stripers and aberrants. I also bred the male spotted to a female Newport striper and got all aberrants. I also bred the spotted male to a female High White (Osborne stock) and out of the 6 babies, one was really white with black spots/dashes symetrically placed down the back, one was black with white spots, and the rest were aberrants. One had black with white bands, spots & a partial stripe. Weird. Aberrancies are not predictable.

Recessive genes are predictable. Dominant genes are not, although when breeding dominant genes within the same gene pool, it is easier to predict. When breeding with another gene pool, then all bets are off. LOL

Kerby...

>> Stripe in cal kings is not recessive, but dominant.

Kerby, to have this statement have any real meaning don't you need to specify WHAT something is dominant to? in other words, is striped dominant to banded? and does that conversely mean banded (ringed) is a recessive trait, since it would be recessive to the dominant striped? and i realize these are both PATTERN morphs versus COLOR morphs but it might need to be stated that neither pattern morph is dominant nor recessive to the color morphs. Does that all make sense?
terry

**Kerby, to have this statement have any real meaning don't you need to specify WHAT something is dominant to? in other words, is striped dominant to banded?**

Not sure what definition you are after?

**and does that conversely mean banded (ringed) is a recessive trait, since it would be recessive to the dominant striped?**

Absolutely not. Banded is not a recessive gene as albinism is. That is what I meant by recessive.

**and i realize these are both PATTERN morphs versus COLOR morphs but it might need to be stated that neither pattern morph is dominant nor recessive to the color morphs.**

That is not true, IMO. Stripe will take over banded in breeding projects and yellow will take over white. That is my experience with breeding cal kings and trying to breed for certain morphs. Even the thousands of cal kings that I have produced is a very small niche in this big science fair project. LOL

Kerby...

First, you have to be right about recessive and co-dominates. We do understand that albinism is recessive, yet it pops up many generations later in a bloodline??????? so its not exactly a simply recessive. It may be a complicated recessive. Also, co-dominates are not simply co-dominates or wild kingsnakes would not have areas of mostly(dominate) and other areas of mostly banded(dominate) where they occur in nature. Instead, they would be an even mixture of abberent patterns and color that are co-dominates. At least with the hatchlings(pre-selected)

There is a thing called random variation. I was reading an articule about the first cloned cat. The kitten did not look anything like the adult female. Hmmmmmmmmm. then I read a little note, with cats color and pattern can be a random and not directly genetic. I wonder if that is true?

But even before I read that, I had already come to the conclusion that color and pattern in snakes(reptiles) has some degree of migration(not genetically set) I would imagine Kingsnakes have taken this to a fairly high degree. Such species as mexicana and cal kings, cannot seem to hold a pattern or color, even at one local, much less over a wide area. Opposite of this is the arizona brown vinesnake, that has the same color and shape and size, from here to argentina.(no random variation)

I have many more nice stories. For instance, I bred alterna for decades, I also built zoos. To build zoos, you have to move to where the zoo is. So I would spend a couple years at a local. The STORY, I had a pair of Juno Rd. alterna, I bred them here in tucson, the offspring where normal and what I would expect(base results) I moved to Seattle, and the offspring were consistantly like river road alternas. I then moved to New Orleans, and the offspring were altogether different(unknown local) Then I moved back to Tucson, the offspring were back to base. Now how funny is that? All the offspring were indeed alterna types, but indeed, there was enviornmental influence.

The problem is, we label things, then go by the label. Only, the label did not exactly fit to start with. So with such things as simple mendallian genetics, it may have worked great for fruit flys, but not so great for snakes. Close, but not great. Why do we think these grab bag labels are suppose to fit perfectly, nature is perfect in that its not perfect. Its pretty darn egotisticial of us humans and of some individuals to believe that we are right about everything.

Back to color and pattern migration. If one looks long and hard enough, you can see patterns, even in such simple things. Like hunting west texas(where I should be now) Some years, there was a dominace of dark phase, some years lite phase are more common. While that could be luck, after decades of seeing this, its not so much luck. Could slight changes in enviornment cause slight changes in pattern? hmmmmmmm maybe.

I have populations of different reptiles that I have watched for decades(without interference) and they too migrate. I do have examples of many species.

Lastly, I read about how high whites were developed, but I have to laugh, cause I developed high whites and high yellows, what happened to the yellows? Sorry but thats very true. Ask Steve O, he bought them from us. And it did not happen like you tried to explain. FR

>>First, you have to be right about recessive and co-dominates. We do understand that albinism is recessive, yet it pops up many generations later in a bloodline??????? so its not exactly a simply recessive.
What, about the fact of its' showing up generations later, argues that it's not a simple recessive? I could easily posit a scenario in which an albino trait (simple recessive) is passed thru generations, one gene at a time (thus hets, no albinos appearing) before a baby gets the necessary two genes. Or did i misunderstand what you were saying?

>>I had a pair of Juno Rd. alterna, I bred them here in tucson, the offspring where normal and what I would expect(base results) I moved to Seattle, and the offspring were consistantly like river road alternas. I then moved to New Orleans, and the offspring were altogether different(unknown local) Then I moved back to Tucson, the offspring were back to base. Now how funny is that? All the offspring were indeed alterna types, but indeed, there was enviornmental influence.

I think it's a huge leap to conclude the differing results were the result of environmental influence. First of all, you're dealing with an extreme small data set. Based on that, it's cool to propose the hypothesis--we need always to be thinking of such alternate explanations, keeping our eyes (and brains) open--but to conclude that environment explained the different looking clutches you got over different years (and in different locations) is a huge leap genetically, i think.

I'd like to hear more from some of the genetic experts who visit the forum occasionally!
terry

Kerby...

I am sorry Terry, But I think when someone says, as an example, that means there are lots of examples, but to save time, one will portray what was being explained. At least thats why I limited it to those few examples.

Also, I do feel sorry for you if you believe math over living animals.

I do understand simple genetics, as you should know, I did develop many lines of snakes and lizards using genetics.

Unfortunately, over the last 40 years, I have seen many exceptions that makes one doubt how perfect our difinitions are. I do understand math is perfect, but as it applys to animals is not.

For instance, I am sure everyone here understands simple recessives. Like with an albino bred back to a het. You should recieve /- 50% albinos. And While that was true. I had many het females consistantly produce a set percentage of albinos. Some a very low percentage and others a high percentage. What you should consider here is, this was over their entire reproductive life(15 yrs).

What I feel your problem is, is is is, your a believer of numbers/percentages, etc, lots of nice rules. I have done this long enough to understand, there is some Chaos. I hope you have fun thinking about that, because the fun is the thinking and not the knowing. FR

Understood. Good points. My "problem" i think is in trying to marry the mechanics of the genetic pass-along to the theory: IF you accept that a het has two genes on a gene pair, one of which is, for example, an amel gene, and one of which, for purposes of this example, is a normal gene, and it's bred to an animal of the same genetic makeup, then--based on the principle that each baby gets one gene from one parent, and one from the other, and that thtat happens randomly--it's pretty easy to see WHY 25% of the babies would get two genes and be homozygous, why 50% would be hets, and why 25% would be "normal". So to suggest that over HUGE statistical samples the numbers wouldn't approach those percentages, leaves me wondering what's wrong with the mechanical explanation. So far, I haven't seen any hypothesis for anything else that's happening, like somehow a snake is programmed to contribute only one of the two genes it has, or whatever. It does seem like this simple genetic principle is applicable to numerous human characteristics, for example, and to medical conditions--cystic fibrosis, for example--and thus has been studied in great depth. Maybe the evidence & theories to counter the "math" are out there, I'm just not aware of them. I'm always glad to learn more, i just get a burr when results that don't conform to expected statistics are used as an argument that the theory is wrong. I think 15 seasons of breeding is a huge store of experience in breeding techniques, etc., but i'm lnot sure the results from 200 or 300 eggs from a particular female are a big enough data pool on which to base throwing out the principle. Even breeding amel x amel and getting no amels doesn't refute the theory, it suggests maybe there are amel morphs occuring on two diff alleles. There's a guy here on hte forum who i drive crazy every time I say "back when i used to breed birds" but..."back when i used to breed birds" there were examples of the same phenotype being produced from two different genotypes, or incompatible genes (sorry if i mis-use any terms here, hope my meaning's clear) and it certainly seems possible that could occur with snakes too. So where one person looks at results not corresponding to stat expectations and sees a flaw in the theory, someone else (me?) just says well, those things happen and as the sample size grows it'll approach expectations. Who among us hasn't hatched a clutch comprised of all males, or all females? That kind of result is worthy of hypothesizing that environmental conditions might have determined the gender, but to the best of my knowledge such hypotheses have been disproved.

Sorry i got so long winded. Bottom line, the opinions expressed are merely based on what i know when i write them. I'm always willing to be pointed to new discoveries that change my understanding of what happens, and why.

At least we can all agree on our appreciation for the animals themselves!

peace
terry

>> Unfortunately, over the last 40 years, I have seen many exceptions that makes one doubt how perfect our difinitions are. I do understand math is perfect, but as it applys to animals is not.
>>
>> For instance, I am sure everyone here understands simple recessives. Like with an albino bred back to a het. You should recieve /- 50% albinos. And While that was true. I had many het females consistantly produce a set percentage of albinos. Some a very low percentage and others a high percentage. What you should consider here is, this was over their entire reproductive life(15 yrs).
>>
>> What I feel your problem is, is is is, your a believer of numbers/percentages, etc, lots of nice rules. I have done this long enough to understand, there is some Chaos. I hope you have fun thinking about that, because the fun is the thinking and not the knowing. FR

Hi Terry, again, your Prejudicing your reading, with whats already in your mind. If you reread what I said, I said, I had lots of females have consistant percentages of albinos produced, then used an example of one. One = 300 eggs, lots equals 300eggs times lots. Lets say 20 for another example. Thats 6000 eggs, a decent statistical number to see a trend with, wouldn't you say. I had far more then twenty.(ask my wife)

I mentioned a friend of mine bred Bearded dragons, he recieved lite colored individuals(consider, he had been breeding them for years) He kept and bred the lite colored individuals to each other, and produced true albinos. This is an interesting example. Why would het for albinism show up with liter colors individuals and not with darker colored individuals?????

I believe this was done with kingsnakes as well. Breeding for lite individuals ended up with true albinos.

Just to murk up the waters a tad, I produced blackheaded pythons, and I recieved some very lite individuals, then one day after one was about 3 years old, it turned into an albino. hmmmmmmmmmmmm I do have pics.

So sir, on offense, but the point is, if you keep an open mind and do not discard information because it does not fit what you were taught, then sir, your truly learning. The real truth is, was you were taught was not exactly right, but it was not exactly wrong either. For all intents and purposes, albinism is a recessive trait. But there are exceptions. Co-dominace is not always co-dominate. There are also underlying factors. Why humans make labels, then allow the label to control the reality is odd.

Of course if you are working with captive produced animals, they are already line bred(purifyied) before you get them. When finding wild caught oddballs, they are not so very simple.

I do feel the need to ask, have all your eggs hatched out and were what you expected them to be. Or were there some exceptions. If there were exceptions, what happened to them. Did you not include them in your thoughts? Thanks FR

"Why would het for albinism show up with liter colors individuals and not with darker colored individuals?????"

One hypothesis would be repressors. These repressors act as partial inhibitors to some part of the melanin pathway and result in the lighter colored individuals. Combine enough of these repressors and you might completely turn off the production of melanin.

Lets not even get started on paradox albinos.
-----
Rick Staub
R&R Reptiles

>> For instance, I am sure everyone here understands simple recessives. Like with an albino bred back to a het. You should recieve /- 50% albinos. And While that was true. I had many het females consistantly produce a set percentage of albinos. Some a very low percentage and others a high percentage. What you should consider here is, this was over their entire reproductive life(15 yrs).>>

There are other plausible explanations for why your percentages did not match the expected math that have nothing to do with the inheretance of a simple recessive trait. One example would be the viability of sperm carrying the genetic mutation. Maybe these sperm were weaker because of the mutation. Maybe the mutation has other mutations with it or chromosomal breaks, all of which could account for some discrepencies in the numbers. To assume straight out that the genetics aren't true is a big assumption.

Previously you posted

"Also, co-dominates are not simply co-dominates or wild kingsnakes would not have areas of mostly(dominate) and other areas of mostly banded(dominate) where they occur in nature. Instead, they would be an even mixture of abberent patterns and color that are co-dominates. At least with the hatchlings(pre-selected)"

Actually dominant and recessive has little to do with the main phenotypes observed in a population. Just because a trait is coded for by a dominant gene does not mean that it will be the primary or even half the observed phenotype in a population. This is determined by selction pressures and the frequency that the individual genes occur in a population. The two populations you characterized above would simply have different frequencies of the two (or more) genes as determined by the selection forces within those populations. The striped gopher snake here in Northern Calif is coded for by a dominant gene yet the striped phase represents only about 30% of an isolated population. 30 miles in any direction and all you will find are normal blotched individuals. Read up on the Hardy Weinberg Theory for population genetics if you want to get a better understanding of gene frequencies.
-----
Rick Staub
R&R Reptiles

Hi Rick, I believe I excluded natural selection in the very begining. As we should understand, that is the driving force in what lives in any givin area.

Also, there are many many variables with genetics, not simple dominate and recessive or co-dominance. There are local genetic barriers. An example, in San Diego, where bandeds and stripes occur together, abberants are rare. If you bred them in captivity, it takes several generations to increase the percentage of abberents. Yet, if you breed a S.D striper with an Oregon banded, they can all come out abberant from the first breeding. I have found this useful in many ways. For instance with monitors, I have crossed Gouldi/flavirufus/panoptes, in captivity. In nature all three can and do occur in the exact same place. Yet do not cross. They have developed genetic behavioral barriers. Yet if you introduce individuals from locals where the other species do not occur, they loose they barriers.

Some interesting thoughts, when inbreeding, most people think they are getting something new, that is, a new pattern or color. Even with crossing they think this. I on the other hand do not believe this. I think genetics is history, it contains the codes that were expressed thru out the history of that species. Inbreeding uncovers what was already expressed in the past. Simply put. If it hasn't already been done, it would not be in the genes. What do you think? FR

I agree that many in the hobby tend to place things in simplistic terms of dom, rec, co-dom etc. Just look how quick people are to call a new trait one of these with little data, often only one breeding. What probably controls pattern and color is more than one gene and this explains the results you observed when outcrossing to distant pops. In addition to the genes that code directly for color and pattern, there are probably a wide range of regulatory genes that control the color and pattern genes like a reostat. Hypomelanism is a mutant that I believe acts in this fashion. The complexity of genetic control is mind boggling. We are merely guessing for most instances.

>>Hi Rick, I believe I excluded natural selection in the very begining. As we should understand, that is the driving force in what lives in any givin area.
>>
>> Also, there are many many variables with genetics, not simple dominate and recessive or co-dominance. There are local genetic barriers. An example, in San Diego, where bandeds and stripes occur together, abberants are rare. If you bred them in captivity, it takes several generations to increase the percentage of abberents. Yet, if you breed a S.D striper with an Oregon banded, they can all come out abberant from the first breeding. I have found this useful in many ways. For instance with monitors, I have crossed Gouldi/flavirufus/panoptes, in captivity. In nature all three can and do occur in the exact same place. Yet do not cross. They have developed genetic behavioral barriers. Yet if you introduce individuals from locals where the other species do not occur, they loose they barriers.
>>
>> Some interesting thoughts, when inbreeding, most people think they are getting something new, that is, a new pattern or color. Even with crossing they think this. I on the other hand do not believe this. I think genetics is history, it contains the codes that were expressed thru out the history of that species. Inbreeding uncovers what was already expressed in the past. Simply put. If it hasn't already been done, it would not be in the genes. What do you think? FR
-----
Rick Staub
R&R Reptiles

**First, you have to be right about recessive and co-dominates. We do understand that albinism is recessive, yet it pops up many generations later in a bloodline??????? so its not exactly a simply recessive.**

Yes it is a simple recessive gene. And NO, it does not "just pop up" many generations later. There are a lot of hets out there. And even breeding hets together does not always produce albinos(as an example). I've been breeding a certain pair of High Whites that I got from Osborn which are het for albinism. And one year she laid nine eggs and none were albino. But every year before and since they have produced albinos. In the long run the numbers do even out (Punnet's square). Sometimes I get a high % from a pair of hets. Evens out in the end. There are a lot of het(albinism) cal kings out there and when paired together will produce albinos. It does not "just pop up".

**then I read a little note, with cats color and pattern can be a random and not directly genetic. I wonder if that is true?**

Every species is different and comparing what happens genetically in one species to another is irrelevant. Even in colubrids, the genetics are different from different species. Corns & cal kings for example (stripe).

**The problem is, we label things, then go by the label. Only, the label did not exactly fit to start with. So with such things as simple mendallian genetics, it may have worked great for fruit flys, but not so great for snakes. Close, but not great.**

Agreed there, LOL Some things we have figured out, and obviously others we haven't.

**Lastly, I read about how high whites were developed, but I have to laugh, cause I developed high whites and high yellows, what happened to the yellows? Sorry but thats very true. Ask Steve O, he bought them from us. And it did not happen like you tried to explain.**

Then please enlighten us on how High Whites were developed. Are you saying that what Steve Osborne has on his site is not how they came about? He does not mention getting them from you, but rather from wild-caughts from 2 different locales. He's had that information on his site for at least 7 years (could be longer, that's just when I read it).

Kerby...

I have no idea whats on Steves site. But I do know the history very well. What does Steve say?

The line was started with high yellows, I gave that stock to my good friend here in Tucson, John C. From my parent stock, he produced the higher yellows, these were bred from newporter stock(lemon yellow). I kept that line and bred it into the albino line only I went for high white(using a wild caught Cal. city high white abberent). The part that may have allowed the high white was a melanistic LAX abberent(like a Medona(sp)This was all before Steve got into them.

Steve bought all Johns excess high yellows. What he did with them is after we already started the line. Steve also bought lots of kings from me. Whether he used these or not, I don't know. But without question, the high yellow/white, went from me to John to Steve. Please we did not develop it to a point of losing all the black on the back, but close. Losing all the pattern was developed later. I imagine an extension of the same high yellow/whites. Consider, many other people bought this gene line as well. Including a young Don Shores.

Shortly after that, I moved to other species. But I had already excessed many many hundreds of Cal kings carrying the genes for high white and albino.

Now Steve may have used the High yellows he bought from us(I also set up the deals) and developed a high white using those yellows and his own stock, but without question, the lines Steve developed where from the high yellows, which came from here.

I guess this is what happens when an old timer pops in. FR

His site is Professional Breeders on the home page of K-snake.com Check out what he says and let us know if that is your interpretation.

I bought a pair of High Whites from Steve Osborne in 1998. I bred them in 2000 and produced High Whites plus this Albino High White (pictured). I have produced numerous High Whites and Albino High Whites since then.

Just a note, Steve does not call them High Whites but rather an incorrect term of "Snow". Snow in other species is a combination of 2 recessive genes (amel & anery). Now that there are anery desert kings and amel desert kings, soon we will have SNOW desert kings. The use of the term "Snow" in cal kings should be dropped, as it is inaccurate and misleading.

Kerby...

Here is the pic of an Albino High White that I produced in 2000.

Kerby...

Kerby when you say anery desert kings do you mean anery splendida or anery desert phase cal kings? I had not heard of anery yet in either subspecies, except for there is pic in the Vivarium many years ago of an anery cal king owned be Lloyd Lemke but I never heard of them making it to the market.

Don Shores has some, his web site is now listed on K-snake.com (Shores Enuff Snakes). He got them from Deptula. The picture is pretty cool. Check it out.

Kerby...

If you would notice, I mentions "high White Calkings" I also mentioned that the all white ones (snow) came long after I was out of kingsnakes, I mentioned they may or may not of derived from high yellow/whites.

To be clear, I consider high to be over 90% white or yellow. Up to 99% lacking black or brown, on the body.

I do not go to private reptile sites, I have no complusions too. If fact, I do not go to any private websites. I come to KS and thats enough for me. Thanks FR

When dealing with large breeding populations of a trait with a known inheritance pattern (simple recesive, co-dominant, dominant, etc.) the math doesn't lie. Mendelain genetics does work most of the time, WITH A LARGE SAMPLE SIZE. If you do a statistical analysis on a population they are almost always within acceptable parameters (95% confidence) to support the genetic theories(and trust me I have done a bunch).

Idividuals however can vary quite a bit. There are always outliers in the above mentionede populations. There are many factors involved in how a gene is expressed. Different protiens, new recognition sites, crosslinking, spontaneous mutations, and possibly even environmental conditions, can all effect how many of which genes are expressed at a given time. Some individuals just won't fit the mold, but most will.

Very interesting post. I agree that patterns and colors migrate in captivity. Something I have noticed is that the Black Gap and the Sanderson graybands when cb for multiple generations produce variations very similar to each other, ie both localities have produced anerythristic and patternless and both localities have produced Blair's with orange-centered alternates and gray dots, dashes and stripes in the primary red bands. Of course any locality can be brought in any direction sometimes with only one animal as the main founder. Jon Hollister told me he collected a Grayband on 277 once that looked just like a River Road.
I know of a study with zonata involving the effects of different incubation condions on the color & patterns of diffent localities & subspecies. It has not been published yet but he did tell me the study indicates incubation can have effects such as reducing or inceasing amount of black and band count so I think there is something to that. My animals however being that I incubate them all in the same conditions and have not moved to different climates by and large have produced animals mostly similar to the parents usually with some a little darker and a little lighter but I have not been doing this very long and I usually hold back animals that are most similar to the wild caught parents anyway.

I know that in Corn snakes it has been reported that high incubation temps has caused some aberrancies in pattern that are not heriditary.

So what did you think of Don Shores anery splendidas?

Kerby...

Same thing occurs in Sinaloans too. At high temps they come out looking like pueblans. Incubation conditions may play a much larger role in color and pattern for some species than was initially considered. And it might be from just minor differences at the correct window of incubation. How constant is your incubator? That was a general question.

>>I know that in Corn snakes it has been reported that high incubation temps has caused some aberrancies in pattern that are not heriditary.
>>
>>So what did you think of Don Shores anery splendidas?
>>
>>Kerby...
-----
Rick Staub
R&R Reptiles

I used to use an incubator set at 82 degrees, constant 99% of the time in the 1990's. Snakes seemed to hatch pretty much at 60 days. For the past few years I've been just using my snake room's temps, so the temps vary from high 70's to low 80's. Snakes are taking longer to hatch but I haven't noticed any aberrancies from incubation temps in either case. Of course I'm not incubating at high temps.

Kerby...

Rick I just use a Hovabator at 80. It usually stays within plus or minus 1 degree however the background usually a few days a years gets in the mid to high 80s due to outside weather.

Those anery splendida are neat.

holdback from lastyear parents were both 50/50 black&white calis out of 12 eggs only 2 were 50/50 banded all others were stripes partial stripes abberants and spotteds i had no prior info on parents but it sure was fun watching the different one hatch!,,,,,,,,,thomas

this abberant was from the same clutch as the spotted funny looks like some newportish type maybe but parents were 50/50 black&whites,,,,,,,,,,,thomas