Reptile & Amphibian Forums

It doesn't help my sleep schedule much either! These things are just INSANE! sooo many possibilities!!! "You GO boy"! *LOL* (Photo courtesy of BCI by Design.)

That would give me a pretty good case of insomnia too. Solid pinks, solid yellows, solid oranges, solid salmons, solid corals, solid rustys.....no wonder why the guy can't sleep!

Wow!! Where is that from?
-----
Beth Morrell

1.1 Ball Pythons
1.1 Black Milks
1 1/3.5 1/3 Boas, various morphs
3.4 Honudran Tangerines, various morphs
1.2 Leapord Geckos
0.1 Red Tegu
1.0 Suriname Red Tail Boa

Up at night, day dreaming, dizzy spells, lightheadedness... I get it and I don't even own it!!! LOL

I just can't imagine all the possiblities.. too much..

Excited to be a part of it, and can't wait to see what else pops out (AND what else you're hiding!!!) !!!

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

Tim,
Do you think this is related to whatever is going on with the harlequins. If so, it seems like you would have popped one of these out sooner. To me, it seems more likely that both parents were just het for this patternless trait and randomely met up at your bros place. Just my thoughts and I'm curious to here your and other's opinions on this.

Thanks,
Matt Crabe

"Million dollar question" isn't it?...The coolest thing about genetics is,that sometimes we're "served" with the sum of an equasion before we have a value assigned for one,or more quotiant.To put it in simpler terms,it can be like having to work a math problem backwards. I'm probably the world biggest skeptic,yet I don't see how it couldn't have something to do with a direct influence from the Harlequin father? to me it's like saying that the "purple patternless" has nothing to do with the Motley genetics. I'm not interested in jumping the gun on speculating that this is a "super Harlequin",or anything of the sort.There are only a handful of F3 harlequins in existence,and,this represents the very first results of breeding ANY of them...So I'm kind of curious how anyone could assume we could've produced something like this sooner? some people may be under the impression that there's been an extensive amount of breeding done with this bloodline,and,though it might seem that way,we've barely started to breed first generation gene carriers back to each other...I believe there are some other cool things locked up in here,(within this bloodline.) and,I equate my work with them to trying to pick a combination lock with a random list of numbers,it takes diligence,patience,and,persistance...but,most of all the faith that you're on the right track...the fun is all the things you stumble over on the way!

that this was the first time an F3 was bred. I can't wait to see what comes of this.
Matt

It doesn't make sense to me that this patternless boa would be the Super Harlequin because the male F3 Harlequin was bred to a "normal", unrelated female. If these patternless babies were the result of an F3 Harlequin x F3 Harlequin, I would say, okay, yes, this is very possibly (if not definitely) a Super Harlequin.

As unlikely as it is that the F3 Harlequin and the unrelated “normal” female are both carrying some unknown gene and just happened to be paired up together to produce these patternless babies…it is far more unlikely that what we are seeing here is the Super Harlequin because of the breeding that was done. The reason I say this is because, if this were true, what sort of genetics are we talking about? It wouldn’t seem to fall under any of the categories – simple recessive, co-dominant, or dominant.

For example, with the Jungle Boa, if you breed a Jungle to a normal, 50% of the litter will be Jungle and 50% will be normals. When you breed a Jungle to a Jungle, statistically, 25% of the litter should be Super Jungles, 50% Jungles, and 25% normals. These are co-dominant genetics at work. Another example with Ball Python genetics would be the Pastel Ball Python. If you breed a Pastel to a normal, you get 50% Pastels and 50% normals. If you breed a Pastel to a Pastel, you get 25% Super Pastels, 50% Pastels, and 25% normals; clearly, a co-dominant morph.

Take the same example and apply it to the Harlequin Boas and the Patternless Boas. If we say that the Patternless Boas are a super form of the Harlequins, then in order to get the super form, wouldn’t we have to breed a Harlequin to a Harlequin in order to obtain the super? How would a Harlequin x unrelated “normal” yield a super form? In essence, a Harlequin x normal producing a super form would be the equivalent to a Pastel Ball Python bred to a normal and producing a Super Pastel – we just jumped a step.

Another thing I was just thinking of…would it matter if this was an F3 Harlequin or not? Does the F3 matter in this particular case? If the Patternless are in fact the Super Harlequins, then why would it matter if the Harlequin that produces them is an F3 or an F2 or an F6, etc? It shouldn’t matter. An F3 Jungle and an F1 Jungle and an F5 Jungle will all give you the same results…shouldn’t they?

It seems to me that this Patternless Boa is either one of two things…

1.) The F3 Harlequin and the unrelated “normal” female are actually, miraculously both het for an unknown, mystery gene.

OR

2.) The Patternless Boa is a random mutation from the breeding. As unlikely as that may be, it has happened in the past. Look at Arabesque Boas. The first one was a spontaneous random mutation from a breeding between two normal boas that never produced another Arabesque.

I personally think that #1 is more likely than #2 and I say this because of the number of Patternless Boas that were produced in the litter. We’re not talking about just one Patternless in the litter…we are talking about several.

Anyways, the above are just my (way too long) ramblings. I don’t know what’s going on here and I can’t wait to see Tim and Brendan figure it out! All I do know for SURE is that I WANT some of those boas!!!

Thanks,
Celia
-----
Celia Chien

www.BoaConstrictorMorphs.com

Celia Chien Photography

www.ExoticsByNature.com
www.BallPythonMorphs.com
www.CornsnakeMorphs.com

Good post Celia, I agree but genetic is much more complicated then the simple recessive genes and co-dominant we are used to and to easy to understand. Some involve multiple allele combination like color and pattern !! Not so simple as albinos .

Wonderful post,it's all very logical,but again We're not interested in assuming,or even suggesting these are "supers" though.Addressing the part about "if it matters that this was produced using an F3 animal,or,not"...I'd have to say,based on the initial results,YES,I believe it does.The "why" is still not perfectly clear,maybe we'll know more as we breed other F3's.It will be interesting to see how & what the patternless animals produce themselves...It's always good to make comparative examples,but,it doesn't always lead to the correct conclusions,if it did,it would seem there should be only one way to produce leucistic ball pythons,when in fact,there are several?...also,about your Jungle analogy...do you know of any F5 Jungles? has this actually been done? if so what were the results? has a litter of 100% supers been produced,if so,how did the combination affect the appearence ratio in an all homozygous litter?(I believe most of these questions remain unanswered,I may be wrong? I'd be very curious to know though! )

Yes, I agree. I think it will be very interesting to see what the Patternless Boas produce. I am very anxious/excited to see the offspring from them! Are you/Brendan planning on breeding the same parents to each other again (the F3 Harlequin x “normal) or maybe one of the Patternless back to the dam? I think once a Patternless breeding is done, that will hopefully reveal a lot more.

I understand that genetics is not always black and white and does not always fit into predisposed categories. However, of the hundreds of different morphs we have in reptiles (I don’t mean only Boas, but all reptiles) a large majority of those genetic mutations fit within the main three categories – simple recessive, co-dominant, and dominant. So I believe it is natural that we look to these forms of genetic inheritance first. However, while those methods of genetic inheritance usually come to mind first, they should definitely not be the only possibilities considered.

Zenzinia brings up a very good point about alleles. I know in Corn Snakes, the Motley and the Stripe morphs are a prime example of this. In Corn Snakes, the gene responsible for the Motley pattern and the Stripe pattern are the same gene. One allele of the gene produces Motley Corn Snakes while the other allele produces Striped Corn Snakes. When you combine the two, you can get get both in the clutch (i.e. some babies that are Motleys and some babies that are Striped all in the same clutch) as well as an intermediary form – Cubed. The Cubes appear to be an in between pattern. The circular pattern of the Motleys is elongated by the Stripe and you end up with square-ish/rectangular looking patterns.

What does this mean? I don’t’ know. I guess it just means that anything is possible. Maybe the Patternless and the Harlequin are the same gene but on different alleles?? I know that this is just the tip of the iceberg as far as genetics is concerned. I certainly do not consider myself a genetics expert to the least. All I’m trying to do is understand how the simplest genetics work and are inherited in these animals that we love. I try to learn as much as I possibly can (and remember it too!) and enjoy these types of open discussions!

As for the Blue Eyed "Leucistic" Ball Pythons, there are several “morphs” that will produce Blue Eyed "Lucys" including (and perhaps not limited to) Mojaves, Platinums/Lessers, Butters, and Phantoms. However, they have bred the different morphs not only to themselves (i.e. Mojave x Mojave) but to other morphs (i.e. Mojave x Lesser). Most of the time the results are – Blue Eyed "Lucys" with varying degrees of white. Does this mean that Mojaves, Lessers, Butters, and Phantoms are all the same gene but in varying degrees? Is a Mojave a darker looking Lesser and the Phantom a still darker looking Mojave? If this is true, why does a Phantom x Phantom produce a purplish Ball Python with ivory yellow/beige colored markings? What is going on here????

As for the Jungles, I do not believe there are any F5s. I was just using that as an example. I know that an F5 Jungle may not necessarily be equivalent (as far as genetics is concerned) to an F5 Harlequin – but would an F5 Jungle bred to a normal produce anything different than an F2 Jungle bred to a normal? Honestly, I don’t think so. I mean, they might produce nicer looking Jungles, but I don’t believe that they would produce anything “crazy”. Of course, I would be thrilled to be proved wrong on this! I believe Pete Kahl just produced the first Super Jungles in the U.S. from a breeding between a Salmon Jungle and a Jungle (please correct me if I’m wrong). We should hopefully see litters of all Jungles and more Super Jungles in the near future! I can’t wait!

The issue of “possible” Jungles is a tricky subject. I believe, when a litter of Jungle Boas is born, you can go through the litter and pick out which are Jungles and which are not. Most of the time, the difference is incredibly obvious. However, there may be one or two babies that make you doubt the obvious. Perhaps one that does not have the Jungle coloration but has the wide, cookie-cutter shaped saddles. I can see why some breeders are offering individuals at a reduced price as “possible” Jungle boas. I have not had this problem with any of my regular Jungles YET. However, I do have this problem with my Hypo Jungles. Throwing in another gene, especially the Hypo/Salmon gene certainly does not help the situation since the Hypo/Salmon gene has already been shown to alter the pattern in boas. I have 3.3 Hypos from my Hypo Jungle litter that I am “unsure” about. The females – not a problem, I’ll keep every last one of them, raise them up, and prove them out (or not). The males on the other hand…I’m not quite sure what to do with them. I will probably keep them another couple of months before I make my decision. If I feel that one or two of those guys has a good chance of carrying the Jungle gene, I might offer them at a discounted price as “possible” Hypo Jungles.

It is ALWAYS “pleasant when things fit nicely into the convenience of theory”. It is always VERY interesting when they do not………………………………….

Thanks,

Celia

Yikes…that was WAY too long LOL…
-----
Celia Chien

www.BoaConstrictorMorphs.com

Celia Chien Photography

www.ExoticsByNature.com
www.BallPythonMorphs.com
www.CornsnakeMorphs.com

Every year there seems to be more interesting occurences of genetic paradox's...they don't always have immediate answers.My first reaction to the news of the patternless Harlequins was,"What in the *$@ does this mean!?!"(among several other expletives which I will leave to imagination ) I've always felt that the first thing to do at the onset of any anomolous occurence,or,results within a breeding project,is to repeat the process,second would be to think of backcrossing the anomoly to either,or,both parents,(separately with opposite sexed offspring if possible,a male back to the mother/female back to the father,etc...)I'm very happy & excited for Brendan,but,also intrigued by what will happen when I breed the two F3 sisters!(???)I tend to analyze things realisticlly,and,I honestly do NOT think that both of the animals he bred were heterozygous for a genetic patternless boa...I also don't (realisticlly) expect to pop out patternless boas when I breed the females...What I do hope for is more extreme variation! I think,based on what we've seen so far,that there is a measure of unpredictability here & my plans are to continue to show the results as we stumble over trying to describe them...can you imagine a patternless solid orange "hypo"?! or, a patternless T positive albino?

..

Most people do not even have much more than a rudimentary understanding of over simplified,very basic genetic theory....every single thing that we currently know about genetics & apply to boa constrictors is derived from a fair handful of conveniently simple mutations that most of us like to capsulate into absolutes...the nature of these things is not bound by the "laws" that we put forth.the "rules" are based only on our attempt to describe what is happening,based on what we perceive to have happened before in other cases,which does not allow for the possibilities of anything new,or,previously unknown. I find it interesting that we now begin to see "possible Jungles",and,what I call "lesser expressive" examples of the trait that are presumed to be gene carriers...I remember raising the possibility of this a few years ago,and,several people quickly discounted it,"oh no,you'll KNOW the Jungles from the "normals"...it's always pleasant when things fit nicely into the convenience of theory,however the simple fact is that with variable traits you will inevitably see variability...

here is a link to our discussion over at redtailboas.com

http://www.redtailboas.com/forum/showthread.php?t=20662

I still dont think that this is simply a harly thing. Dont get me wrong, I love the bloodline, I just dont see how anyone could jump to the conclusion that this was created just because of the harly gene, if so, does that mean that you can take any f3 harly and breed it to any normal female and reproduce these wonderful patternless kids? I highly doubt it.

Regardles, Keep breeding Tim and Brendan! Make more of those puppies so we can all fight over them

Honestly,Our opinion is "who gives a %$!@" *lol* worst case scenario is,it's a new spontaneous mutation involving contributions from both parents,(wouldn't hurt my feelings a bit,I'm just thrilled that the Harlequin is part of the equasion! )...as far as "anyone" being able to breed an F3 to anything else...nobody else can produce an F3 at this point! Brendan & I own ALL of them,there aren't any for sale & I have no immediate plans to make more,(I've got sooo many other pressing combinations to work out,which will require more holdbacks & I just don't have the time,or,space for another litter of F3's.)I believe a healthy amount of skeptiszm is essential in this hobby,and,I've found that no matter what you do there will be throngs of people that step up to talk it down,or,minimize it..."let 'em" we're havin' a good time!!!

Congrats!!

I agree Tim, who cares right now how they were made.......

Now send them all over to me and we can call this silly thing done with

Really though, where is my female to go with my super harly male?

Is Rusty a girl? I could take her off your hands so you can sleep better at night

No end in sight! (heck we're just getting started here! )...I think that since this female/male combination appears to "work",why breed her to anything else,EVER? *lol*,(the days of "breed it to a normal" to convince the rest of the community,are quickly coming to a close for us,we've got sooo many other combinations to try that neither of us are too interested in starting a separate project just to see if the mother of this litter harbors something unusual all by herself.)if it were me I'd breed the same pair every other year & make as many patternless babies as these two possibly could!!!(along the way I can think of at least a dozen interesting scenarios for the babies themselves! separately,combined with other traits,siblings,partially related cousins,etc,etc....)Don't get me wrong,I'm interested in finding answers too,just not too motivated to drive down a genetic "cul de sac" to search for them anymore.As for a match for your male,I'm sure I can put something together ...

.

I put normal in quotations because she appears normal,regardless if she harbors some unknown genetic properties or,not she is absolutely unrelated to the male,so to postulate that both animals might've been heterozygous for this appearence would be equally amazing in terms of statistical odds! we're not discounting the possibility,just putting probability into the proper perspective.

.

not sure I like a uniform colored/patterned boa but it is definately special and the eyes make it VERY special !
-----
Eric Tersteeg
http://www.boaconstrictor.nl

Just wanted to say that is an awesome snake. Good Luck to you in all the possibilities. Hopefully this line is a sure thing so we can see some amazing boas in the future. How many boas came out with this one (including normals)? Anything else unusual? Keep up the good work.
-----
2.3 Salmon Boas
1.5 BCI
23.58 Various Corns
1.3 Albino Sinaloans

You may have your head on straight, but I have a better view!

I just had to do it! LOL!
Those Harli's are just friggin awesome!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I love them!!!!!!!!!!
John
-----
"To be the best..........You must lose your mind."

Thanks Andy

That is DEFINITELY on my list of things to get!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Thanks for the pic!!!!

-----
Linda Hedgpeth
lindafh@frontiernet.net
Sierra Serpents

"There is just as much horse sense as ever, but the horses have most of it".

I do know that's one AWESOME snake (or 4 awesome snakes! lol). It's face kind of reminds me of a shark! Something about it's eyes, I think. Anyway, it's beautiful! Congrats to Brendan!!
-----
Amanda Burke
Email
Burke Reptiles Website