Reptile & Amphibian Forums

not trying to start a debate, but honestly asking...
as far as different types of hypo/anery etc. - -
i completely understand the concept of a recessive trait proving out, however, i have a question as far as what to think when something like this hypo/hypo debate comes up... what line of reasoning is used to differentiate between line bred traits and different types of related recessive traits - - for instance, how do we draw the distinction that a sunglow corn isn't actually an "amelanistic type b," that has little or no white-and only a line bred amelanistic, yet call an anery with no yellow on the neck an actual different type of anerythrism?
once again, not tryin to start a debate, just wondering for personal clarification - - what kind of breeding results gives us reason to believe the way we do with instances like these?
i think i confuse myself when i think about this stuff! hah

I agree...it can be so confusing sometimes.
I don't think you could start a debate in the corn forum..LOL...I find that people here seem much nicer than in other forums. More open-minded & accepting of all ?'s.

Anyway, I have a sunglow with mystery genetics. I bought her from a reputable breeder however did not ask at the time about its genetics. I am not sure if it is simply an amel selectively bred out, or if it has some hypo in it, OR if it is an amel bloodred...which is my current guess especially since its head is a light whitish color (similar to a regular bloodred's grey head)

Also, the question of which hypo type seems to come up with hypo okeetees more frequently I find. Hypo is tricky since it is visually impossible to differentiate between the two, unlike with anery A, B, or C.

WHO knows? The way I see it, its always nice to be surprised when breeding your corns. I tend to think its better to expect the worst BUT hope for the best when working with corn genetics. And the worst is you'll produce normals which wouldn't bother me since I love them the best anyway.

> what line of reasoning is used to differentiate between line bred traits and different types of related recessive traits -- for instance, how do we draw the distinction that a sunglow corn isn't actually an "amelanistic type b," that has little or no white-and only a line bred amelanistic, yet call an anery with no yellow on the neck an actual different type of anerythrism?

Cross an amelanistic with a sunglow, and the babies come out amelanistic. Cross an anerythristic with a charcoal (anery B, but charcoal is a much better name), and all the babies come out normal. That's the sort of evidence that supports the belief that sunglows are a variation on amelanistic and that anerythristic and charcoal are independent mutants.

Here is the reasoning:

Amelanistic, anerythristic, and charcoal mutants test out recessive to the respective normal allele. If the anerythristic, and charcoal mutants were either identical or alleles, the babies from an anerythristic x charcoal mating would have one anerythristic gene paired with one charcoal gene. There would be no normal gene at the single locus. The babies would look like the male parent or like the female parent or somwhere intermediate between the two parents. But the babies look normal, so the one locus hypothesis is rejected for charcoal and anerythristic. OTOH, an amelanistic x sunglow mating produces amelanistics, which fits the prediction of the one locus hypothesis.

If anerythristic and charcoal are independent, then the anerythristic parent provides an anerythristic gene at the anerythristic locus and a normal gene at the charcoal locus. While the charcoal parent gives a charcoal gene at the charcoal locus and a normal gene at the anerythristic locus. Result -- the babies would be double hets (heterozygous anerythristic, heterozygous charcoal) and would look normal. The result of the anerythristic x charcoal mating fits the prediction of the two locus hypothesis. OTOH, an amelanistic x sunglow mating produces amelanistics, so the two locus hypothesis is rejected for them.

Independent mutants that produce similar phenotypes are called mimics.

Paul Hollander

I would also you the word evidence If Anery X Anery results in normals there is evidence both types of Anery are different.

Marcel
-----
Marcel Poots (Holland)

'Where is your crown King Nothing?' James Hettfield

Marcels snakepage

n/p