the AMAZING (so called) 16X het

Quote: " " I'm with ya there!

Originally Posted by diablohogs

thats more believable than a 16X het.

Yanno, the phrase he used was "Can produce 16 different morphs" (not 'het for 16 recessive/codominant/incomplete dominant traits')

Now, I don't have anything like the number of geckos he's got, and nowhere NEAR the number of different genetic traits that result in what I know as "morphs" (distinct colour phases, regardless of the particular heritability of genetic origins, be it dominant, incomplete dominant, recessive or polygenic).

I have precisely ten geckos:

2 patternless males, unknown het or visual for anything else, though one male has produced hypo hatchlings two years running, and I believe one of those to be out of a non-hypo albino female.
1 blizzard male het for albino (suspected actually banana blizzard aka homozygous patternless/blizzard).
1 tangerine Tremper albino female, unknown het for anything else.
1 high-yellow Tremper albino female, het for blizzard, poss. het patternless.
1 blizzard female with one 'snake' eye (is the blizzard eye thing actually related to the Eclipse/snake-eye gene?), unknown hets, might be banana.
1 high-yellow probably Hine-line hypo female, unknown hets.
1 high-yellow probably Hine-line hypo female, known het patternless, poss. het albino.
1 tangerine probably Hine-line hypo female, known het patternless

Now, with the geckos I have (and the ability to breed for a couple of generations first to create homozygous multiple-recessive animals) I could theoretically produce the following morphs of offspring out of a single pair of animals of which one was visually tangerine hypo or superhypo, and the other was visually high-yellow hypo or superhypo, both 100% het for patternless, albino and blizzard*:

1. Normal
2. Patternless
3. Blizzard
4. Tremper Albino
5. Banana Blizzard
6. Blazing Blizzard
7. Patternless Albino
8. Hypo Albino ("Hybino")
9. Tangerine Albino
10. Tangerine Hybino
11. Blazing Banana Blizzard
12. Tangerine Hypo
13. Tangerine Super Hypo
14. High Yellow Hypo
15. High Yellow Super Hypo

I'm not counting snake-eyed into the morphs, because I don't know what the exact heritability is or whether 'snake eyed blizzard' is a definite distinguishable morph from 'not snake eyed blizzard'... and as it is, I count fifteen visually distinguishable colour 'morphs'. Isn't it possible that Ron Tremper, who has loads more geckos than me and loads more genetics to work with - like Giant, for example - could produce a largely normal-looking gecko that could carry the potential to make just ONE more morph than I can?

* I'd produce that pair with those traits by breeding a blazing banana blizzard male to a high yellow hypo female and a tangerine hypo female. You'd get babies with variable hypo colouration (and if that one patty male above carries hypo hidden under his spotlessness, I could get a double dose, one from the BBB and one from the mother) and variable tangerine or high yellow colouration - and guaranteed het for the recessives. I could ALMOST do that in one jump, without needing more than a single generation, with one male offspring from my probably-banana blizz het albino male and my albino het blizz and maybe patternless female.

The problem is that you're mixing the logic of 'capable to produce' with the definition of 'het'. You can't count 'high yellow hypo' as different from 'high yellow super hypo' because hypo and super hypo is essentially the same trait in varying strengths. The same goes for high yellow/tangerine. He claimed (I think - he called it the 'Amazing 16X Het', I'm trying to find it archived somewhere) that the animal was het for 16 different traits, not that is was just capable of producing 16 different types of animals.

Originally Posted by Milwaukee Reptiles

The problem is that you're mixing the logic of 'capable to produce' with the definition of 'het'.

I don't think I am. He said "Multiple Het!" and "Capable of producing sixteen morphs!" as two separate sentences. By my count, even if the animal only carries albino, patternless and blizzard - as my theoretical multiple het animals that get me fifteen different visual colour pattern variations - it's still a 'multiple het' because it is het for more than one trait - it's het for three.

You can't count 'high yellow hypo' as different from 'high yellow super hypo' because hypo and super hypo is essentially the same trait in varying strengths. The same goes for high yellow/tangerine.

Funny, the market seems to say otherwise on this. I bought my first super hypo tangerine female for £75. I bought my high yellow hypo female for £25. That says to me that the market thinks they're different morphs - even if the genetics behind them are just variable expressions of the same genes. If a genuine SHTCT is the 'same morph' as a hi-yellow hypo, why don't they sell for the same price? Since Tremper is selling to 'the market' I'd guess that he's counting high yellow hypo, high yellow super hypo, tangerine hypo and tangerine super hypo as four separate morphs (and prices animals of each of those morphs differently), not just one.

He claimed (I think - he called it the 'Amazing 16X Het', I'm trying to find it archived somewhere) that the animal was het for 16 different traits, not that is was just capable of producing 16 different types of animals.

I thought it was quoted on the first page of the thread, and I don't recall that quote saying that the number 16 referred to the number of heterozygous traits carried by the animal - just to the number of morphs it could produce.

He said "Multiple Het!" and "Capable of producing sixteen morphs!" as two separate sentences.

It's quite possible that I misread his site, but I could have sworn it did say 16X het. If that's truly how it read than it was technically correct and I withdraw my previous statment on it, although we could go into discussion about how it was is somewhat misleading.

Funny, the market seems to say otherwise on this. I bought my first super hypo tangerine female for £75. I bought my high yellow hypo female for £25. That says to me that the market thinks they're different morphs - even if the genetics behind them are just variable expressions of the same genes. If a genuine SHTCT is the 'same morph' as a hi-yellow hypo, why don't they sell for the same price?

Well sure the market only says otherwise for line bred traits, but you can take this to the extreme by saying that a line bred 'snow' is capable of producing A+, A, A-, B+, B, etc. In any of those cases you would say that the original animal contains one trait: snow. My SHTCT is also capable of producing high yellow, normal looking leos if bred it with a normal, but I wouldn't list the SHTCT itself as carrying the high yellow trait because the tangering implies it. With line bred traits you can't list every variation of a single trait as a morph, otherwise I would have pumpkin, orange, sunset orange, tangerine, etc, even though it would be the same, single genetic trait. I guess it would depend on the genetics of the trait.

Since Tremper is selling to 'the market' I'd guess that he's counting high yellow hypo, high yellow super hypo, tangerine hypo and tangerine super hypo as four separate morphs (and prices animals of each of those morphs differently), not just one.

Listing those seperately is fine because those are all traits that are outwardly expressed and it's just categorizing the strength of two traits.
I would agree that he probably listed it as capable of producing 16 different morphs because the animal, but I think it's still misleading because it never really gives information as to the actual genetics of the animal.

Just my thoughts.

Originally Posted by Milwaukee Reptiles

Well sure the market only says otherwise for line bred traits, but you can take this to the extreme by saying that a line bred 'snow' is capable of producing A+, A, A-, B+, B, etc. In any of those cases you would say that the original animal contains one trait: snow.

True, it carries one trait, but 'morph' != 'trait'. A blazing blizzard animal is a single morph (not two), but it carries two recessive traits. And I'd call any single linebred snow a 'snow' - it might be a 'grade A' snow, but that doesn't make it a distinct morph.

Conversely, there are two different morph names that describe each of two other line bred traits - hypo/super hypo and high yellow/tangerine. Though there's a gradient between normal - hypo - more hypo - super hypo there is a point where an animal stops being called one and starts being called one of the others. I go with the "no spots between shoulders and tailbase = super hypo, two spot clusters with variable numbers of spots but no overall spotting = hypo and scattered spots all over = nice normal" myself. I know others who won't call it a superhypo unless it is what I would call a superhypo baldy. But there's a general consensus that being a hypo is a different thing to being a super hypo, and that an animal can be one or the other but not both at the same time. That's what makes them distinct morphs in my understanding.

Listing those seperately is fine because those are all traits that are outwardly expressed and it's just categorizing the strength of two traits.
I would agree that he probably listed it as capable of producing 16 different morphs because the animal, but I think it's still misleading because it never really gives information as to the actual genetics of the animal.

I agree with you on that 100%. It's a nice enough giant gecko, but unless I knew WHAT the hidden recessive hets were, I wouldn't myself spend the money on it. Even my theoretical produces-15-morphs geckos would be listed as "Hypo High Yellow 100% het for Blizzard, Patternless and Albino - could potentially produce 15 different morphs!" ... and explain what the parents were to get that animal - and what morphs you might get if you bred two of this animal together.

But then, I wouldn't be likely to sell a 'het' animal as a het, particularly - unless it were being sold as a pair of animals with compatible het traits. I'd be more likely to keep hold of the hets (or sell as hypo high yellows or whatever their visual appearance was) and sell visuals, whereby people know part of what they're getting rather than having to trust that I did breed X to Y and this is the animal that hatched out.

whatever! its a giant high yellow thats probably het for albino. how many traits could it be het for seeing as its a "multiple het"? define "multiple". is it 3 traits? 4 traits? 7?

its very misleading in the verbage and it should be, i suppose. how else are you gonna sell a yellow giant (het for albino?) for $400?

Caveat emptor! and thats all i have to say on the subject.

Ok so this is an old post, but somone brought it from the basement by voting so I am going to add my 2 1/2 cents.

It depends on how you read it, and what you call a different morph. For example let's say it is het for albino, and it is a super giant jungle. And assuming that the giant is a co-dom/incomplete dominant trait, and the jungle is a simple ressesive that can produce stripes through selective breeding. Then you can produce these 18 different morphs, 2 more than advertised.

1) normal
2) jungle
3) stripe
4) giant
5) giant jungle
6) giant stripe
7) super giant
8) super giant jungle
9) super giant stripe
10) albino
11) albino jungle
12) albino stripe
13) albino giant
14) albino giant jungle
15) albino giant stripe
16) albino super giant
17) albino super giant jungle
18) albino super giant stripe

However it's still a stretch, and probably not the most ethical way to advertise.

okay assuming breeding two jungles makes stripes AND normals, sure. AND assuming theres even any such thing as a Super Giant morph or that giants arent just large normals than yes, you can come up with what you've stated. however i believe both of those traits are POLYGENIC. Oh and looking back at the first page i seen i was wrong about the price. it was apparently going for $500!

i brought this subject up (long, long ago!) to point out the misleading tactics Ron Tremper commonly uses in marketing his geckos. not as a competitor but as a customer.

if giant is a codominant morph and jungle is a recessive trait (that makes stripes) than i'd advise anyone out there to simply buy a gecko from petco with an abnormal pattern, find a jungle giant and breed them together. it'll save you about $350 and you'll be able to produce everything that the $500 gecko that ron was selling could apparently create. except that you won't have to buy a female to breed to to your $500 (plus shipping) yellow jungle giant.

oh and if you have $500 plus shipping lying around rather than buy a yellow "multi het that carries the genes for 16 traits" i suggest you head over to A&M gecko or HISSS and see what kinda Jungle Giant Albino (doubt it'll be yellow!) you can get for your money considering it WILL make everything the $500 yellow SUPER giant will make (except maybe normals).