Inbreeding taking a toll on albinos?

Whats up buddy !!

Well, I have to disagree with you. The Albino gene is a weak trait that nature never intended. I think it effects certain species of snakes differently. Example: The Boas one eye, Albino Ball Pythons kinked backs, deformed Albino Burmese Pythons, etc.

Now, I also believe some species handle this genetic flaw better than others, and will only rarly show flaws. Example: Albino Corns, etc. BUT, I still believe that with not enough outbreeding, other somewhat strong species strains to date will fall victim as well. Example: Albino Retics and Albino Sand Boas.

Now you brought up a question about seeing one eyed Sunglows or Snow Boas. Dude, you partied too much in Philly !! Just kidding you buddy, but there was a one eyed Snow Boa at the Philly Show. Thats the 3rd one Ive seen and NO its not the same snake being resold. I also know of a breeder who bred a one eyed Albino to a completly unrelated het female. Guess what ? 10 Albinos. 5 healthy onesand 5 one eyed ones. This proves to me that they can breed and reproduce. This also shows me that bad genetics can flood the market rather quickly with the "get rich quick" breeders.

These are only my feelings on the Albino trait in general. I love Albino's and breed Albino Ball Pythons. BUT, I think a little more care, outbreeding and time will only produce the best possible strains. Get rich breeders will most likely will show defects and less superior animals in my book. This is just my thoughts on the matter and Ill stick to it. Hope to see ya soon. And next time stay longer !! LOL !!

Yea that was a bad weekend.

Im sure we will bump into each other this year, if nothing else at Tinley.

I wasnt aware there were one eyed snows, let alone any were at philly. That is very disturbing to say the least.

As many people know I have a couple of albinos, and plan to get more as time goes on. I personally find them to be amazing animals. However I agree that much care must be taken to keep the line as strong as possible.

One of the good things and bad things I guess depending on how you look at it, is that most breeders are outcrossing by produceing dh's of one sort or another. But if its true that its popping up in snows, then one would assume its only a matter of time before it pops up in sunglows.

So would you say it irresponsible at this point to be breeding with albinos alltogether? Seriously, if you took the money out of the issue, are we doing irreversable damage to the captive bloodlines? Or with all the outcrossing are we likely going to be able to controll it (assuming your buying from a ethical breeder).

Say I breed my albino to hypos, ghosts, or anerys.

Say all my babies that I would be ever soo lucky to produce come out healthy and fully eyed (LOL)

Am I doing harm to captive stock with such breedings.

Or could you argue that unless thoose animals are paired back up with albinos (and granted we know most would be) they pose no harm.


My personal breeding plans at the current time involve all albino x wild type animals (hypos, anerys, ghosts). Only one female in my collection carries the albino trait, and thats a dh sunglow (kahl). I have no sharp females.

I plan to continue to purchase males and females for a few more seasons adding about 10 a season to further my breeding stock to about 30 animals.

Once I am (if I am) lucky enough to produce I plan to breed males from my litters to females I hope to purchase this year, or females I allready have, but none related. However at this stage I woudl of course like to start produceing albinos, ect, so I would hope to be breeding albinos x hets when I start useing my own offspring.

Once my production (again if I am that lucky) is up and running, and I have enough animals of as related as possible bloodlines, I would hope to really start produceing more with animals carrying the albino gene.

However my long term plan has always been to use double or triple het animals. This is why I am so interested in ghost females, as its two traits with one animal. This would also allow me to produce a diverse group of morphs with the least number of breedings (always great to avoid have all your eggs in one basket soo to speak).

So I guess my question is, if I follow the guidlines I set for myself, am I doing harm to captive population? Would I (again if I were that lucky to produce anything) be part of the problem?

Mickey Hinkle
The Lizard King Reptiles

A big part of the problem lies in the complete inability to determine which animals might be carriers for a defective gene (still assuming it's genetic for the moment) unless their entire lineage is known.

As Alvaro has said a few times, your animals might not have eye problems but can you verify 100% that none of their siblings did? Or their parents siblings?

Since it's not even completely known to be genetic, much less been something that anyone has been able to identify the genetic strength of, it's not something which can be easily predicted... The gene might have been inherent in that first captive albino, it might have been introduced early on in the project (I'm going to assume via an animal which did not show any signs of deformity)... But sometimes it's a matter of degree, the gene needs to be reinforced many times over before it begins to display itself fully. Problem is though... outcrossing within albino projects is nearly impossible, since it's not known which animals may be carriers and which aren't. The manner in which the albino genes have been introduced into other projects including other recessive genetic traits makes it fairly likely that, at this point, the other populations have already ben infected to some degree, but since these projects are newer it hasn't had time to work itself up to the obvious problem yet.

Leucistic Texas rats are a great model to look at in this situation, the eye problems in that species were acknowledged as being genetic and undesireable, but the morph was visually impressive and there was a reasonable demand for animals which were leucistic or could potentially be carrying the genes. The problem became more widespread as people, driven to produce as much profit as possible (they were depending on these projects for their living), neglected to inform others when and if the bug-eyes started showing up in their projects, selling clutchmates as being perfectly normal animals and never mentioning the difficulties. The adult pairs which had produced batches of partially deformed neonates were allowed to continue to breed, just furthering the problems.

Nowadays, it's the ones without eye problems, for both leucistics and normals (possible hets which turned out not to be hets but were still carrying the genes for eye problems entered the breeding population of normal animals) that are rare. Normals can obviously still be had, since they are collected with a decent frequency, but finding leucistics without eye problems seems to be a near impossibility these days, they command prices far above those of the bug eyes and are seen as being unusual.

Since the majority of individuals producing albino boas are either unwilling or unable to really start culling their collections to remove the deformity (Remember, it involves culling every snake known to be related to one with an eye deformity, not just the specific individuals) due to financial pressures to produce... and the other end of the production spectrum is composed of people who managed to save up enough to get a single albino animal to start their project and usually buy the first one that's avaliable cheap... The problem is likely to only get worse.

Since there are many individuals who saw the potential for the albino genes to be used in other projects, and the offspring of projects working with two or even three recessive traits are predominantly possible hets, I suspect very strongly that other morph populations have already been contaminated in a manner which can't be altered... Populations of normal animals have likely been infected too, but as has been said, the likelyhood of anyone continuing breeding projects with normals which have deformities is low, as animals without problems are readily avaliable.

All anyone can do is practice good culling procedures in their own collections and encourage others to do the same. If you have animals which throw deformed neonates, ensure that the neonates never enter the breeding population. Euthanization is reccomended unless you want to hang on to thirty boas that will eat for their entire lives and never turn any kind of profit... Giving the animals to people who promise not to breed them simply isn't safe, as animals change hands too many times, even with the kid down the street who just wanted a pet. If the parents have multiple clutches where a deformity is present, then they shouldbe removed from the breeding population themselves, either in your care and never seeing another boa of the opposite gender until time runs it's course or euthanized if the cost or space would be prohibitive. This can be said to be true of any animals, not just albino boa projects. If your cornsnakes routinely throw kinked neonates, then stop breeding them. If your leopard geckos are born with twisted tails and it happens too frequently to be an incubation error, cull them and their parents. It's a concept with is perhaps better understood by people working with fish than most of those working with herps, a lot of herpers anthropomorphize their animals to a degree which might be unhealthy and unrealistic, this, when combined with profit margins, prevents defective genes from being weeded out as they should be.

Yes, I know... I'm a horrible evil mean person for wanting to gas your pet just because it has funny legs. I've heard the moral arguments about the preciousness of living things and I don't buy them, deformed animals are dangerous in the same way hybrids are dangerous, only more so since the health effects on a larger population are immediate and direct. The only way to get something out of a genetic population is to ensure it never reproduces.

So I guess my question is, if I follow the guidlines I set for myself, am I doing harm to captive population? Would I (again if I were that lucky to produce anything) be part of the problem?

It would in a large part depend on which scenario as to the reason behind the deformities is actually true.
Reducing the question to the base options it would seem that either the deformities are a direct result of the albino gene itself, or it is another genetic defect introduced early in the development of the albino lines that gained a solid foothold as a result of inbreeding.

Of course it could be more complicated, involving additional genes, but that would lead the possibilities into an expanding circle.
If the first possibility is true, and the albino gene is responsible, then no amount of outcrossing can solve the problem, and any further breeding of the morph will potentially degrade the lines, since it would be inherent to albinos period. I do not feel this is the case though. However, the apparent lack of one eyed boas not exhibiting the influence of albinism makes one wonder.

Should the second, and more likely option be the case, then a few things are possible. If the eye deforming gene is recessive, then it is likely that there does exist many albinos that are completely free from the condition. If your stock proves to be clear of the gene, then you are well on your way to producing the best quality offspring. If however, you produce some one eyed individuals, then decisions will have to be made according to your priorities and ethical beliefs.

With the number of boas you are proposing to maintain, you are increasing your chances of having good founding stock, but also increasing the possibility of the defect popping up at some point.
If it were me, I'd breed my albinos together and see what happens. If I got a couple of decent sized litters from a given pair with no defects, I would feel good about that pair being in my group, and I wouldn't let them go.

While I don't think the albino gene itself is responsible for the eye defects, it is plausible to me that another gene, in combination with the albino gene can be the cause. This would explain the lack of one eyed hets. If this is actually the case, then the problem is farther reaching than we may realize. Your albinos for instance may not have the gene, but your anerythristic might be the carrier. Once you set out to produce snows using that anerythristic you may have some eye defects arise even though you have repeatedly failed to produce any deformed offspring from your albino to albino breedings.
There are far too many unanswered questions with the genetics involved, and much is still speculation. The majority of the questions will not be answered anytime soon, due to the sheer effort required to explore the possibilities, and the influence of realized or lost profits.
If one were serious about investigating the full influence of these genes, he should acquire a couple of one eyed specimens. Using these, he could conduct a series of controlled test breedings in which most of the offspring would be destroyed, and a few retained for producing the next generation. It would take several years, but could be contained so as not to overly hinder the breeders profitable endeavors, especially if there were a small group of breeders working together and mutually compiling information on seperate avenues of the project.
The drawback would be it would be a complete financial dead end, as nothing produced from the project could be sold. The knowledge gained however would be invaluable. Much like the original genetic experiments that defined dominant and recessive traits, the true nature of the one eyed defect could be discerned with enough time and patience.

Mickey,

I have to agree with just about everything Clay and Seamus has stated. To repeat most of it is a waste of time. The only thing that I could recommened is this:

1) Try to find new blood. I know this is hard for the Albino Boas. But for example, I got a male Albino Ball Python from VPI. It was from breeding a wild caught Albino to a het normal. It ended up being compatable with the Clark strain. I obtained a second male from that breeding. I kept one and sold the other to a customer. This maybe not be a option, but if the chance arises, TAKE IT.

2) Outbreeding is not the "cure" presay in my book, but more or less, a way in which to keep the line stronger. Because the lines started out from the same fathering animal, in every instance, any breeding is inbreeding. Id try and distance myself further away. In other words, dont breed your Albino to the Hypo and breed them back together. OR breed them back to the father or mother. Id get a second male and Hypo female. Pair off the 2 different related offspring together to get your sunglows. ETC. Now we can go on for generations here and simply it does get more complex. But, this is a way to help produce stronger animals in my opinion.

Is this the answer ?? Hell, NO. As others have stated, you may run into it even with the most outbreeding you do. But, Ill bet youll produce stronger animals as a result. Ill also bet youll have customers looking for that dedicated breeder and will spend more for your offspring than from others. I know I would.

Theres no cure. Just preventive maintance pre say. If they do pop up, dont sell them. Though it sounds cruel, I do agree with what Seamus has stated. Until a firm reason behind the defect is discovered, why chance it ? Its always better to error on caution.

Id like to believe a couple of things about myself, but I guess till your faced with them you dont know.

First I would like to believe should I produce one eyed animals that I would destroy them. Anyone who knows me well knows Im not the type of person who sells flawed animals, for one I feel its tacky, and second I just dont feel its good for business to sell sub par animals. As such if they pop up in my breedings I would like to think I would have no problem culling them.

However the tricky part is to say 100% without a doubt that if I were to produce say a litter of 20 boas, 10 albino, and of them 1 animal was one eye, exactly what Id do.

Id like to believe that IF that were to happen I would be strong enough to do "the right thing: but lets be realistic. Thats 10 g your putting down plus hets (on something we can all agree we dont fully understand).

Man all I can say is IF I am lucky enough to produce, please dont let me hit the one eye snakes (besides thats the wifes job....JK)

Mickey Hinkle
The Lizard King Reptiles

The other options are just as hard though, for a moral person.

Selling the animals when you know that there's the potential for making the whole situation worse can't be making it easy for some people to sleep at night.

Culling them is the loss of what must be admitted to be substantial money. With very few exceptions, ten grand is substantial to someone making even part of their living as a herper.

Then there's the idea which Clay put forth... if you do produce albino boas and you know that the parents have... whatever condition or qualification is needed to produce neonates with eye problems, you have a valuable opportunity to set them aside from your sales production breeders and conduct a few generations worth of experiments to isolate the condition. Lot of time, money and effort would have to be invested though... and my personal opinion is that Clay's low estimate might be a bit opptomistic (No offense intended Sir), six or seven generations might start to give you ideas about how to refine your controls and variables but I think a true solution would take much longer, if it can be had at all.

The fact that you worry about it shows that you'd do the right thing though, someone unconcerned with the ramifications of the sale of related animals is the one to watch out for.

Lets say someone put together a few one eyes for experimental breeding and they produce with a number( pick one ) of young with the same one eyed problem. How many babies do you hold back for breeding purposes.

I'd guess 1 0.1 to backbreed to dad ( w/ one eye )

1 1.0 to back breed to mom (w/ one eye )

1.1 to breed together ( one eyed)

1.1 to breed together ( no visibal problems)

1.1 normal looking to backbreed to mom and dad.

I'm just going on what i'm gleeming outta the posts. Inspect the back bred litters for signs. I'm assuming if the trait breeds true it should show up more readily when the babies with the eye probs are back bred. Inspect the litters of siblings bred together and note the numbers and go from where after this?

The idea is interesting and i wouldn't mind doing it except for the money part ( to get the animals neccessary to do this with ).

Bryon Adzic

I'd guess 1 0.1 to backbreed to dad ( w/ one eye )

1 1.0 to back breed to mom (w/ one eye )

1.1 to breed together ( one eyed)

1.1 to breed together ( no visibal problems)

1.1 normal looking to backbreed to mom and dad.

Although interesting it will be difficult to prove the results you obtain are statistically significant. You would probably have to do it with a lot more animals "per treatment" before you can get to any conclusions. Then it really becomes a very expensive experiment but why doing it if the results are going to be of little value. Personally I don't like statistics, particularly when the results of an experiment tell you that an animal gained 1 lb another one 1.5 lbs but yet, there was no difference.

Regards.

Just to keep all the records in one thread. Last year's blind snow boa deal:

http://www.faunaclassifieds.com/foru...t=Bobby+Pruett

Regards.