leucistity...little help please

Ok, here's a chance to prove that this site is better than kingsnake. I am trying to figure out the leucistic gene(s) as they apply to pituophis, more specifically to pines. I have posted this question on several of their forums and haven't gotten a straight answer yet. It seems that if someone posts a question on kingsnake such as "what kind of snake should I get?" fifteen people jump toanswer but as soon as a real question pops up, seems like everyone doesn't want to share their know;ledge. So far I have figured out that this is not a single simple recessiv gene like it is rat snakes. So does anyone know how it works. I guess my kingsnake counterparts think I am going to steal their business or something because they are very guarded about heir answers. If anyone has any info on this or knows where I can get the info I would be eternally in their debt. Thanks in advance.

Wish I were smarter

Marshall,
I wish I were a little smarter on this topic, but actually, I'm of no help here. However, I'd love to learn this answer as well since the leucistic genetics are so strange across the boards regarding about every species. Perhaps nobody really understands the genetics, but once we can learn them, they should be able to be applied, generally, to a lot of different species. I suspect that regardless of the species of snake, the basic principles will apply. I'm just anxious to hear what others have to say so that I can hopefully learn right along with you.

David

I am curious to learn about this as well. I was not aware that leucism was not a simple recessive as it is in most other snakes(Texas Rats for instance).
And I don't mean to be offensive, but are you sure you are talking about actual leucism or patternless pines? I have seen patternless pines sometimes erroneously labeled as luecistic, but of course, unless you know the genetics of the animals in question, from what I've seen of both morphs, they are not THAT easy to tell apart(although the "patternless" I've seen tend to be pinkish brownish white color while the "leucistics" tend to be more white or pinkish).

But definitely, hopefully someone more versed in Pituophis morphs could join the discussion and teach a thing or three

Well, here's where I am at so far. My hypothgesis is this: leucisxtic in pines is made up of these traits. First patternless, second hypomelanistic, and third is that one that means no red. I'v had a little help on this but no one seems to be sure. It is difinitely more than just a patternless animal because these are way darker and they tend to have a darkness gradient along the length of their body. Anyway, I intend to breed a leucistic with a normal and if my hypothesis is right I should be able to prove it just by all the crazy morphs that would come out if it is correct.(expecially if i breed the multiple hets together) This should only take 3-5 years so I'll let you all know then.

New term

Why don't we jst come up with a different term for leucistity. Since leucistic already means somethiung that these snakes are not. Any ideas?

It seems sort of far out to me that a snake would have a morph comprised of three seperate traits and no one would be sure about it. It's REALLY hard to concentrate three different homozygous recessive genes all in one animal.
But when you breed the leucy to a normal, you'll get all wild types in the first generation, it's when you breed these together that you'll find out if it's made out of seperate genes.
By the way, the name for 'no red' is axanthic. Anethyristic means basically the same thing, though.
Erin B.

wild types

Yes, I understand I will get all normals out of my first croos. I guess I just worded that wrong.

All in all these "leucistic" pines are really nice looking.

By the way, the name for 'no red' is axanthic.

Click to expand...

Uuhhhhhhhh...

Axanthic is a condition where xanthin or xanthophores are not present or functional... This effects yellow coloration, not red.

Really I think these words are interchangeable since, as someone once pointed out to me, I'v never heard of a scientific study to prove that snakes even have xanthin. Same thing with tyrosine.

Really I think these words are interchangeable

Click to expand...

No, they are not.

I'v never heard of a scientific study to prove that snakes even have xanthin.

Click to expand...

... Are you maintaining that reptiles do not produce xanthin... at all... ever? I mean... I could see saying some species didn't or certain captive morphs but... You really need to rethink that if you intended it as a blanket statement applying to all reptiles or even all snakes.

Same thing with tyrosine.

Click to expand...

Tyrosinase doesn't exist?

See, cause here I thought it was an enzyme that was used in the synthesis of Melanin, it's non-existance is a surprise to me.

Same thing with tyrosine.

Click to expand...

You know, it just occured to me that you didn't actually write "Tyrosinase", I just assumed it was what you meant based off the direction the discussion had been going...

Did you mean that you don't believe in the existance of actual Tyrosine, the synthesized, non-essential ammino acid used to strengthen the function of nerve cells?

Most gene mapping has been done in mice and humans. I'm not saying that the same rules don't apply to reptiles, I'm just saying that there is no reason to assume that they do. Genetic studies in snakes have been based on phenotypes not genotypes and most have been done by hobbyists in a less than scientific way.

Oh and your right I didn't tyrosine. And I am not questioning the existence of anything. Simma down now.

What I meant to say was that I didn't mean tyrosine. You're getting me all flustered.

I'm not saying that the same rules don't apply to reptiles, I'm just saying that there is no reason to assume that they do.

Click to expand...

Since Mammals don't have xanthin or the ability to produce it and the word was coined specifically for use in non-mammilian animals... Using the lack of genetic studies done doesn't apply in this instance.

The fact remains that there is SOME form of yellow pigment and associated cells for producing it and the term applies since it was used specifically to describe it...

And axanthic is not the same as anery, they are different terms used to describe different conditions. There really is no reasonable debate about this subject since it's a discussion about a condition that exists in a closed system and the terms are easily defined.

As to flustered... No offense intended here but... Good. It means I'm presenting a strong argument for my end of what has apparantly become a debate.

Touche'

I'm gonna have to throw the towel in on this one. I was kind of talking out of my uh...ear in hopes of getting someone's attention. I'm not sure if I believe your definition of axanthis since you didn't site a source but you seem to know what you are talking about. For the record though:

Thetre is a method of debate that works on lowering the confidence of your opponent by easily dismissing their arguments in a condescending way. This is a very effective method and one that I certainly used to use myself. However effective is not synonymous with ethical or even polite. You seem to have quite a bit of knowledge to share. Don't spoil it by shareing it in a condescending way.

P. S. I'm not saying your posts were rude necessarily but they were getting pretty close to the border. I am certainly not offended but I think if you communicated with some others it would quickly have started a childish fight. Thanks for the input.

I'm not sure if I believe your definition of axanthis since you didn't site a source but you seem to know what you are talking about.

Click to expand...

Please feel free to verify anything I say with whatever additional sources you like, I'm nowhere even close to being an authority and I do make mistakes as well as word things very badly which can lead to confusion with regards to my meaning. There are several examples of it on these very boards.

If you find a credible source that will make the contention that xanthin is responsible for red coloring in reptiles, I'd love to see it.

Thetre is a method of debate that works on lowering the confidence of your opponent by easily dismissing their arguments in a condescending way.

Click to expand...

They were dismissed because I disagreed and I "Know" (lets not get into the validity of universal truths) that they were incorrect. If someone claimed that heloderms were really an amphibian and what we knew was just the larval stage and they eventually grew wings and turned into red tailed hawks... would you give credence to their arguments? Of course not... because you "know" they are incorrect. I said nothing insulting to you and if you found my statements condescending, it was merely your own perception, the statements I made were without bias and were mere presentation of facts as I understand them.

You seem to have quite a bit of knowledge to share. Don't spoil it by shareing it in a condescending way.

Click to expand...

See above...

I'm not saying your posts were rude necessarily but they were getting pretty close to the border.

Click to expand...

I never once insulted anyone or insinuated insult or slight, I fail to see how they were even approaching "rude"... If making a statement that something that has been said is incorrect and then supplying the correct information is "rude", then so be it I guess. I will admit that I am not inclined to baby anyone through a concept nor am I particularly sympathetic to anyone who chooses to argue with me when I am clearly in the right, my frank manner of addressing issues does not constitute "rude" however.

Now... if I had responded with something akin to "What are you, stupid?! That ain't right! And the horse you rode in on!" I could see you finding me less than polite... But I did not and will not conduct myself in such a manner and I'm a bit perturbed that I am being accused of antagonistic posts merely because you attributed meaning to them that wasn't there.

I think if you communicated with some others it would quickly have started a childish fight

Click to expand...

Ah yes, those playground fights of my youth... Arguing over the origination and use of terms to describe reptile coloration until someone gets shoved into a mud puddle with leaves stuffed down their shirt and gravel rubbed into their hair...

Then after lunch underneath the slide, we'd get into terrible fights over the validity of taxonomic changes until someone ended up in the nurse's office with bite marks.

And the moral debates over hybridization out by the bike rack that quickly devolved into a brawl over the basic concept of darwinistic evolution until someone's shirt got ripped and their mother had to write a nasty note to the school demanding we be supervised.

Sorry didn't mean to falsly accuse. You seem pretty civilized. Here's a quote you might be able to relate to.

"I wouldn't argue with you if I wasn't right."

BTW cool name. I used to have a dog named Seamus. Don't take offence to that, I loved that dog more than I love my mother.

Uh oh, I think this might be an off-topic post. Ummmmm........
So anyway, you never did state an opinion on my "leucistic" theory. Unless I missed it. Whatcha think?

So anyway, you never did state an opinion on my "leucistic" theory. Unless I missed it. Whatcha think?

Click to expand...

Well... Leucistic just means "White" and the reasons for the patterning can vary from species to species or even, theoretically individuals of the same species... It's also thrown around a lot when other terms don't really apply properly. Out of the color and pattern terms for herps, it's one of the ones with the poorest application to the displayed trait.

I do sort of question the likelyhood of the animals being axanthic, amelanistic and anery all together though, especially with the descriptions given for how the breedings work out, if it were really a combination of three reccessive traits, crossing the offspring would result in all sorts of heterozygous animals and those displaying just some or one of the traits that would combine to form that all white patternless "leucistic."

What seems most likely is that there is a mutation that has an effect on all pigment producing cells, which would apply to all of the above traits with a single recessive gene... The reasons for an animal to appear amelanistic or axanthic can vary from species to species too and there are different kinds... Take amelanism... there are species with populations of both tyrosinase positive "albinos" and tyrosinase negative "albinos"... The outward appearance is very different, in the first form, melanin is produced but it doesn't end up sequestered in the melanophores so the animal has that dirty brownish look... in the second, melanin is simply not produced at all, so they have a crisper, whiter (where there would normally be brown and black) look.

I'm really not too familiar with the leucistic pitouphis or what they look like superficially, but based off the manner in which is seems the breeding progresses, I'd guess it's either a simple recessive or codominant trait that has an effect on all pigment producing cells, halting production altogether on a physiological level and affecting all pigments...

If someone who breeds them could give a more specific description of how the generations progress when animals displaying the trait are bred, I might have a better guess but no guarantees... this post sat here for a long while unanswered, so chances are good that the underlying cause isn't fully understood (or at least not understood and made readily avaliable to the public).

One other question... do the leucistic pits have functional irridiphores?

Well the thing with these pines is that they have pigment in the eye. A light blue or gray. The young show a lot of pink on top but become whiter as they mature. It just occured to me that maybe they just came from a pink patternless line that just got really light. Then again I don't understand the patternless trait either, let alone the pink part.
I don't know what irridiphores are.