Reptile & Amphibian Forums

In other words is a Super a Homozygeous dominant animal or is it a Heterozygeous /partial Dominant ??? Again I am talking about the Super Pastel, NOT a regular Pastel.. Someone else seems to think that a "Super" is partial dominant , I disagree, I think a Super is a dominant expression and the regular Pastel is the partial or incomplete dominant expression, what do all you Ball Python fans think??? Just answer either "Dominant" or "Partial Dominant" on your posts, thanks for your time , let the survey begin!!! Anthony McCain-McCain's Reptiles.

"In other words is a Super a Homozygeous dominant animal or is it a Heterozygeous /partial Dominant ???"

What the $@#%? Where did that come from? Obviously the Super Pastel is not heterozygous. It is homozygous. What are you talking about?

This is your your original statement:

Super Pastel = Dominant
Pastel = Incomplete Dominant

(This is where the problem lies.)

Chris
-----
1.0 Ball Python
1.1 Chinese Milksnakes
1.0 Whitewater River Snake
0.1 Purple Phase Gorilla Frog
2.3 Sugar Newts

I think your starting to contradict yourself! AS I said there is no possible way that a Super Pastel can be a Partial Dominant as you have CLEARLY STATED you believe several times now... Either way Super is Dominant ,RR, and yes it is Also HOMOZYGEOUS as well, and regular Pastel is Partial Dominant, which genetically is the exact same thing as Heterozygeous or Rr.... Just forget it, your right, good luck to you with your Partial Dominant-- Super Pastels , LOL, LOL.... Anthony McCain-McCain's Reptiles...

I think everyone is taking this way out of proportion. Its just like the yellow bellies. Everyone says HET Ivories , but if its a visible morph that gets passed on to its off spring it should be a co-dom and ivory is the dom. Either way when a pastel is bred to a normal you get pastels back, and when they are bred together you get supers, and when supers are bred to normals you get pastels. it dosent matter what you call it the end result will always be the same.

"Its just like the yellow bellies. Everyone says HET Ivories , but if its a visible morph that gets passed on to its off spring it should be a co-dom and ivory is the dom."

Actually, the Ivory is still a codominant animal. That's what we've been discussing here.

"it dosent matter what you call it the end result will always be the same."

I disagree. I think that if we all start referring to them by different names, the whole scientific aspect of genetics gets lost. For instance, the term "dominant" means that all heterozygous and homozygous offspring look the same. If we then start referring to the Ivory as dominant, someone may purchase an Ivory thinking that when bred to a Normal all offspring will either be normal or Ivory. When they see nothing but Normals and "odd" Normals, they will be very disappointed at the return on investment. The fault would not be their fault. It would be our fault for teaching them incorrectly.

Personally, I would've loved nothing more than to ignore the earlier incorrect explanations of yesterday, but I was reminded of a quote:

"All that is necessary for Evil to triumph is that good men do nothing."

Although, in this case we are talking ignorance, not evil. Same thing, though. If nobody speaks up and corrects the incorrect explanations, then a bazillion people learn things incorrectly. Know what I mean?

I sort of agree with you on the labeling, though. In fact, I have decided that distinguishing between the different forms of codominance is not immediately important.

The important thing is that we distinguish between dominant, codominant, and simple recessive. Along with homozygous and heterozygous. And genotype and phenotype.

Cool?

Good Things,
Chris
-----
1.0 Ball Python
1.1 Chinese Milksnakes
1.0 Whitewater River Snake
0.1 Purple Phase Gorilla Frog
2.3 Sugar Newts

I agree that we should try to use the right genetic vocabulary. The problem with ball python breeders using "dominant" where they should use "homozygous" is not only that the rest of the world will not understand it but that we already use "dominant" for a morph type. It's very confusing to use the same word for two different concepts.

OK from what I've just researched - in Complete Dominates - there is no difference in the pheotype between the het and homo (at least in homo dominante such as the pastel). So by process of elimination this cannot be it. As the het pastel and homo pastel are very different.

Now I've also learned that there is a difference between co dom and incomp dom - in that in an incomp dom there is a lack of a function and in a codom there is a change or gain of a function.

So I'd have to vote for either codom or incomplete dom. Because of the difference between a pastel and super pastel - something is either not funtioning or something new is functioning.

But we all know I such at this kind of stuff.
-----
Tosha

"Stupid is forever, ignorance can be fixed." Don Wood

"Of course, that's only my opinion...and I believe I am God." =) Chris Bianco

7.33.0 Ball Python (Harry and Fluffy and gang)
1.0.0 Angolan Python (Skywalker)
0.0.1 Green Tree Python
0.2.0 Feline (Pippen and Pandora)
0.0.1 Dessert Tortoise (Pope John Paul)
2.2.1 Fish (1,2,3,4)
0.0.0 Pool skimmer rescues for this season

.

DOMINANT (COMPLETE): Heterozygous and Homozygous forms look the same.

CODOMINANT/INCOMPLETE DOMINANT: Heterozygous and Homozygous forms look different.

The Pastel (Heterozygous) looks different than the Super Pastel (Homozygous), therefore the mutant Pastel allele is CODOMINANT/INCOMPLETE DOMINANT.

(Whether an animal carries one or two mutant alleles is irrelevant when discussing DOMINANCE versus CODOMINANCE/INCOMPLETE DOMINANCE. It is only relevant when discussing HETEROZYGOUS versus HOMOZYGOUS.)

You got it, Tosha!

Chris
-----
1.0 Ball Python
1.1 Chinese Milksnakes
1.0 Whitewater River Snake
0.1 Purple Phase Gorilla Frog
2.3 Sugar Newts

Ummmmm...

What...are you doing?

The super is the DOMINANT EXPRESSION..

All resulting babies are pastels.

What do you mean "partial dominant".

You are too funny!
-----
www.newenglandreptile.com

Thank You Kevin, I've been trying to tell him this for the past 2 hours now!!!! Nice to know someone has the balls to step up and speak for the record, take care man, Anthony McCain-McCain's Reptiles.

Oh, Anthony...

Dominance versus Codominance does not apply to one animal's alleles trumping another animal's alleles. It only applies to a single allele trumping another single allele within the same animal.

Your thoughts are a misapplication of the terms.

Sorry.

Chris
-----
1.0 Ball Python
1.1 Chinese Milksnakes
1.0 Whitewater River Snake
0.1 Purple Phase Gorilla Frog
2.3 Sugar Newts

See Paul Hollander's explanation below.

Dominant, co-dominant/incomplete dominant, and recessive describe mutation types and don't change even between different looking animals of the same mutation (i.e. leucistic is co-dominant regardless of whether you are looking at a fireball or a BEL). What does change from animal to animal is the genotype - heterozygous or homozygous. A super pastel is homozygous for the pastel gene and a regular pastel is only heterozygous for the pastel gene but the pastel gene's mutation type never changes to dominant. The mutation type is actually defined by the relation of the appearances of the heterozygous animals to the homozygous animals.

"The super is the DOMINANT EXPRESSION..

All resulting babies are pastels. "

But not super pastels. That's what's causing the debate. One side says if the super is dominant than it should dominate and produce super offspring. Dominance would suggest it should produce offspring of the same phenotype. Like the spider. A homozygous spider produces offspring of the same phenotype. A super (homozygous) pastel producing "normal pastel" offspring suggests codominence (maybe incomplete, i'm not sure) because without that pairing of the gene it does NOT dominate the normal gene but blends with it. It's just a homozygous expression of a codominant trait. Co - you have to have two to see it. It's really not up for deabte. There is a definite answer. Who's actually got it is another question. I know I don't.

For the record I never said a Super Pastel produces all dominant Pastels, actually the only way you could produce all dominant /Homo/ Supers is by breeding a pair of Supers together, again I do know what I'm talking about , perhaps I am not being clear enough for some of you and if so sorry, I intended to educate those who didn't understand and clearly this has started a huge mess, one that I am not going to comment any more on!!!! Anthony McCain-McCain's Reptiles.

I agree that the super pastel is the dominant expression of the pastel gene. However, if the pastel gene was dominant, then the pastel and super pastel would look the same. So, the actual gene is incomplete dominant but it is allowed to express itself fully when the two alleles match up in the super pastel. I don't know how to make it more clear.

I agree 100% with your post, but it still is not possible for the Super form to be a Partial dominant animal since it's makeup is RR, call these terms whatever you want I prefer to breed them myself and I KNOW what the results will be , terms don't do anything but confuse people , just show them the results and they will understand! Then they will agree with me in that a Super Pastel is a DOMINANT HOMOZYGEOUS expression of the Pastel , and all of the SUPERS offspring are visual regular Pastels when bred to normal , these genetically are Rr offspring , and at this level AND ONLY AT THIS LEVEL can NOW be called Partial dominants , end of story!!!! Anthony McCain-McCain's Reptiles.

OK you explained it better than I did and I like the phase "fully expressed" over "dominant expression". Here is my personal road block to calling it "dominant expression" - when bred back to a normal it does not create more supers (which IMO would be more of a so called "dominant expression"

LOL - so why call it dominant anything. Maybe in scientific lingo thats the proper term to use (I dont know) if so then I stand corrected. But what is wrong with just calling it a homo pastel?
-----
Tosha

"Stupid is forever, ignorance can be fixed." Don Wood

"Of course, that's only my opinion...and I believe I am God." =) Chris Bianco

7.33.0 Ball Python (Harry and Fluffy and gang)
1.0.0 Angolan Python (Skywalker)
0.0.1 Green Tree Python
0.2.0 Feline (Pippen and Pandora)
0.0.1 Dessert Tortoise (Pope John Paul)
2.2.1 Fish (1,2,3,4)
0.0.0 Pool skimmer rescues for this season

Tosha, there is nothing wrong with calling it a Homo Pastel as that is EXACTLY WHAT IT IS, you are 100% correct, take care, Anthony McCain-McCain's Reptiles.

We finally agree on something! =)

Good Things,
Chris
-----
1.0 Ball Python
1.1 Chinese Milksnakes
1.0 Whitewater River Snake
0.1 Purple Phase Gorilla Frog
2.3 Sugar Newts

You are right. What I meant by dominant expression is that IF the pastel allele was dominant to the normal allele, then an animal with one pastel allele would look like a super pastel and not just a pastel. So, therefore the super pastel is the dominant expression of the gene, however the gene itself is not dominant. It is incomplete dominant. Just because an animal has two pastel alleles (super pastel), this doesn't change the fact that the pastel allele is incomplete dominant to a normal allele. With the super pastel, it just doesn't have a normal allele to fight against. Hope that wasn't too confusing.
Matt

Exactly! Full expression (homozygous) is VERY different than genetic dominance. The word "dominance" is being thrown incorrectly here.

I sure feel awful for those poor innocent confused newbies. =/

Chris
-----
1.0 Ball Python
1.1 Chinese Milksnakes
1.0 Whitewater River Snake
0.1 Purple Phase Gorilla Frog
2.3 Sugar Newts

>In other words is a Super a Homozygeous dominant animal or is it a Heterozygeous /partial Dominant ??? Again I am talking about the Super Pastel, NOT a regular Pastel..

"Super" has absolutely no standing in standard genetics terminology. In herper slang, a super is an animal that is, in standard genetics terms, homozygous for (has a pair of) either a dominant or a codominant mutant gene. This useage got started from the super tiger reticulated python and has been extended to animals that are homozygous for a dominant mutant gene like salmon in boa constrictors.

Animals are NOT dominant or codominant. Animals are (homozygous or heterozygous) for a (dominant or codominant or recessive) mutant gene. A mutant gene is dominant or codominant or recessive to its normal allele.

"Partial dominant" is a full synonym for "incomplete dominant". For practical purposes, "incomplete dominant" and "codominant" are synonyms. "Partial dominant", "incomplete dominant", and "codominant" are NOT synonyms for "heterozygous" except in herper slang, which has no standing in standard genetics terminology.

If a ball python has two copies of the pastel mutant gene, it is homozygous pastel. If a snake has a pastel mutant gene paired with a normal gene, it is heterozygous pastel. And pastel is a codominant mutant gene because a homozygous pastel can be distinguished from a heterozygous pastel just by looking at them.

In other words, a ball python with two copies of the pastel mutant gene is not a "dominant pastel". It is a homozygous pastel ball python. A snake with a pastel mutant gene paired with a normal gene is not a "codominant pastel". It is heterozygous pastel. And pastel is always codominant to its normal allele. It does not matter whether a snake has two copies of the pastel mutant or a pastel mutant gene paired with a normal gene; pastel is a codominant mutant, period.

Clear as mud?

Paul Hollander

That was the easiest description to understand yet. You are much better at explaining things in a clear and concise manner than I am and than most people are.

If any of you don't know which post to read and believe, this is the one. Ignore all the others, and just try to understand this one.

Thanks Paul!

Matt

Chris
-----
1.0 Ball Python
1.1 Chinese Milksnakes
1.0 Whitewater River Snake
0.1 Purple Phase Gorilla Frog
2.3 Sugar Newts

.

Again...wonderful explanation.

Chris
-----
1.0 Ball Python
1.1 Chinese Milksnakes
1.0 Whitewater River Snake
0.1 Purple Phase Gorilla Frog
2.3 Sugar Newts

post this in the boa forum too. Seems like this gets brought up at least once a week.

Thanks,
Matt

:

np