Reptile & Amphibian Forums

In Boas what is the difference, if any, between salmons and hypos? I want a hypo to breed to my albino but I see so many labled salmons that appear to be the same thing.

thanks, Ed

Here is my take.

As far as I know, nobody has named a boa constrictor mutant gene "hypomelanistic".

Hypo describes any boa constrictor that has less melanin than normal. Salmon is the name of the mutant gene that causes the hypo appearance in a line of boa constrictors that Rich Ihle established.

All salmons are hypos, but not all hypos are salmons. My belief is that Rich named his mutant "salmon" in part to distinguish it from the other hypos around. IMHO, this is good.

My understanding is that sunglow is the combination of salmon and albino. It sounds like that is what you want to produce. If so, pick out a pretty salmon.

Hope this helps.

Paul Hollander

Salmon's were named for the salmon orange tint they have over their entire bodies.

b1r2 is correct.

I have talked to a breeder, I will leave him nameless, he mentioned that both Rich Ihle's "Salmons" and Jeff Gee's "Hypos" are both off of the same original founding female from Ihle.

I am not positive about this, as it is also believed they are two seperate lines, although 100% compatible.

These boas are Hypomelanitistic, not just in less black but a true genetic mutation. They are a co-dominant trait, that works as a heterozygous animal for the homozygous or dominant "Super" Salmon/Hypo.

Basically the only diferrance is in color, the majority of salmons tend to have more pink and orange, while the hypo has more red (there is also the orange tail line).

Both of these morphs are really the same, they have just been line bred differantly. In Boa Contrictors they have four pigment layers of melanin, and in the hypos they are "lacking" 3 (as described by Jeff Ronne in Pastel Dream definition, pastels [his line] lack 2), in other words, you can't see them.
DNA testing would later reveal if they are there and not expressed or if they are truly missing.

You can use either to create a Sunglow.

I believe there are a leat two other lines from wild origin of hypo boas, one is much like the ones we see, I do not remember the founder name. There is also a new line produced in captivity for the first time this year and has yet to be definately proven, the "Silver" Hypos.

I hope this helps.

All correct except your use of the term co-dominant. It is a simple dominant gene. Co or incomplete dominance is displayed if a homozygous animal looks different than a heterozygous animnal, which is not the case with this mutation. It is commonly thought of as a codominant gene because of the term "super" given to homozygous salmons, but it was given wrong and early on in the morph game that it has kinda stuck.

It was used in refferance, as it is elsewhere.
An example of co-dominance in Boa morphs would be the motley trait, where the super is patternless.
The hypos should be refered to as visable hets, and homozygous.

If you don't know whether the snake is homozygous or heterozygous, you just call it salmon. That's the name on its birth certificate -- Rich Ihle's paper in the Journal of Heredity.

If you can't tell the difference between a homozygous salmon and a heterozygous salmon except by breeding test, how is the heterozygous salmon a "visible het"? A "visible het" should be visibly different from both normal and the homozygous mutant form.

Paul Hollander

Was written in pencil? (*lol*)...Most forms of dominant genetic traits will/should produce "visible hets"...this is the key determining factor that separates both "co-dominant & dominant" traits from recessive ones,is it not? visible results in the first subsequent generation moving outward from the hypothetical source is our first evidencial clue in any breeding trial...reliable visual distinction between hets & homozygotes doesn't negate the ability to reliably distinguish expressive recipients from non-gene carriers within the litters,at all...If we cannot find reliably determining criteria between hetero & homo after "umpteen" generations we might want to get out the eraser,and,do away with the "co-" prefix on that "birth certificate"???