(Super) Hypo Tangerine = co-dominant?

ive worked with the ray hine line since ive started breeding geckos. it was the morph that excited me the most, at the time. that was two years ago. ive hatched out 30 (i checked my excel spread sheet. thats an exact figure.) ray hines blood neonates since i began. ive kept 6 of the 30 as holdbacks and watched alot of them grow. my friends and family have a majority of what i produced so i get to see how they look as adults.

so does that answer your question? AND STILL I DONT SEE HOW THIS PERTAINS TO HOW MUCH GENETICS KNOWLEDGE I POSSESS!!!! and to continue trying to point out that youve worked with them longer doesnt make you more knowledged on science!! you breed pretty geckos. no doubt. you have the time and resources to spend on a large group of high quality geckos and have been doing it for years. WE ALL KNOW. but that doesnt mean you didnt post incorrect information.

you admitted to having a brain fart. meaning you admitted being wrong. robin missed that part apparently and the both of you have been going on and on about how i dont know anything ever since. give it a rest.

what argument are you even making kelli? what are you trying to say? that it isnt codominant?

where was i wrong? in saying that a heterozygote ray hine hypo would not be a baldy? seriously kelli, whats your argument?

do you honestly think im full of crap kelli? or are you just trying to look right, when you were clearly (and admittingly) wrong? actually i dont care. this is a huge waste of my time. have a nice saturday! out here in california its a BEAUTIFUL 80 degrees, i think ill go herping.

sorry marcia i was proofreading my post for the 26th time probably right about the time you posted.

okay your right. i take a majority of my knowledge from an understanding of genetics and not specifically gecko genetics. i wasnt aware there was a huge (or ANY for that matter) difference in the properties of the exsisting genetic morphs in leopard geckos.

matter of fact im still confused about those differences.

jon who has worked with ray hines CT leopard geckos only a few months less than kelli fully concurred with my previous statements.

i still cant see where i was wrong. unless it was in my delivery. which i would have to say has been pretty calm considering having to put up with robin and her constant badgering. have you read this thread marcia? have you seen all the stabs being made at me? for what? i corrected a post using accurate information that has been concurred my numerous people who have been doing this far longer than i have.

a hybino leopard gecko, a sunglow cornsnake (also a double mutation albino & hypo) and a sunglow red tail boa are all the same color scheme. coincedence? i doubt it.

in all three examples you have wiped out the melanin and the...melanin. wait that doesnt seem so simple does it? but it applies in all three species of reptile. 3 species that are very different from completely different parts of the world that when you cross amelanism and hypomelanism make orange offspring. maybe things aren't so different.

this thread is dead to me.

Originally Posted by diablohogs

this thread is dead to me.

oh man...why? This topic is so interesting. Can't we just have a nice discussion like on the begining of this thread?
I think I understand what you mean:

Originally Posted by SFgeckos

i started reading this thread but then realized it would be a waste of time since i dont like arguing with people...so ill just post what ive seen in MY OWN BREEDING EXPERIENCES

these are from my own breedings working with pure ray hine hypos (got my original male which i STILL have in late '01) i would estimate i've produced in excess of 300+ offspring from hine x high yellows, hine x tangerines, hine x hypo tangerines (albey line and independent lines), of course i kept the best orange hine offspring over the years which makes up most of my tangerine colony today

the "hine hypo gene" is either co dominant or (partial dominant-expression of the heterozygote is intermediate to the expressions of the homoxygous genotypes and more closely resembles the expression of the homozygous dominant genotype), if u dont understand these vocabulary words please look them up in any college genetics textbook. IN MY OWN BREEDINGS from a hypo (no body spot) x normal, in fact produced offspring approximately 50% "hypo" and 50% normal, however since leopard geckos only produce 2 eggs these ratios are almost always 1 hypo and 1 normal from a clutch (if leos produced larger clutches that ratio is still statisically 50/50 but no guarentees just like pastel ball python x normal female). ive also noticed this from the "baldy" (no head spot) gene, baldy x head spots produces about 50% baldy and 50% head spot. however, the phenotypic traits of both the normal and the "morph" have quite a range of varability- meaning usually they are quite different

I bought my Super Hypo female in 2001 as well...directly from Ray Hine.
And what Jon is saying there sounds to me, like the Super Hypo gene is co-dominant

Originally Posted by SFgeckos

however i think there still needs to be alot of test breeding before coming to any 100% conclusions

I think that's right....and I hope to understand a bit more about this topic after this breedings season.

So I'd like to get Kellis opinion again:
Sorry Kelli if you have already posted it...but as I said, my English is just to bad to understand. So I would like to ask you again:
Why do you think, the Super Hypo gene is not co-dominant?

Thx, rhac

have you read this thread marcia? have you seen all the stabs being made at me? for what? i

Of course I have, Chad! Robin got LOTS of warning points has apologized, and from what I know of her was not necessarily the easiest thing for her to do, and was heartfelt. It's time to let it go.

i take a majority of my knowledge from an understanding of genetics and not specifically gecko genetics. i wasnt aware there was a huge (or ANY for that matter) difference in the properties of the exsisting genetic morphs in leopard geckos.

You may very well be right! I think I said this in a different thread... the Leopard Gecko community needs people like you who have a great understanding of genetics. This, combined with the practical experience that the 'vetrans' of LG breeding have, will eventually reveal the nuts and bolts of the various morphs' genetic compositions. The problem is that we do not have access to WT specimens to prove out our theories, and what genetics we DO understand have been diluted (or should I say, 'poluted') by trying to come up with the latest new color phase.

I think we ALL need to try to tap in to each individual's strengths and contributions to LG breeding, and put our heads together if we are going to find the answers to these questions... and this means book smarts as well as the years of experience. Eventually, we will get it!

"jon who has worked with ray hines CT leopard geckos only a few months less than kelli fully concurred with my previous statements."

...wWwhhat?

"i never claimed to know more than you i just claimed to know about ray hines hypos and moreso THE PROPERTIES OF CODOMINANCE."

from reading this entire thread one more time, NO WHERE have i gotten the sense that u fully understand the properties of codominance? i believe u DO understand some genetics but not codominance.

"okay your right. i take a majority of my knowledge from an understanding of genetics and not specifically gecko genetics. i wasnt aware there was a huge (or ANY for that matter) difference in the properties of the exsisting genetic morphs in leopard geckos. matter of fact im still confused about those differences."

sorry chad but there IS a difference. not in the molecular genetic sense, but in the VISIBLE phenotypes produced by codominance. ill just take one of the examples u mentioned.

"a hybino leopard gecko, a sunglow cornsnake (also a double mutation albino & hypo) and a sunglow red tail boa are all the same color scheme. coincedence? i doubt it. in all three examples you have wiped out the melanin and the...melanin. wait that doesnt seem so simple does it? but it applies in all three species of reptile. 3 species that are very different from completely different parts of the world that when you cross amelanism and hypomelanism make orange offspring. maybe things aren't so different."

let me clearify some things for you, please read clearly. the sunglow cornsnake is from a double mutation from two seperate SIMPLE RECESSIVE genes (like a patternless albino leopard gecko). both the hybino leopard gecko and the sunglow red tail boa (sunglow= albino/salmon) are from one SIMPLE RECESSIVE gene (albino) and the other "hypo" gene coming from a CO DOMINANT allele. when u breed a salmon "hypo" (which is the het form of the super salmon) x another salmon "hypo"= 1/4 SUPER salmons (homozygous form), 1/2 salmons (these are hets), 1/4 normals. however the SUPER salmon boa is easily distinguishable from the salmon hypo. basically the "possible super hypo leo" that we have been talking about in this thread is one that is the HOMOZYGOUS form of the hine hypo, meaning that a "super" x normal will produce ALL hypos, and a super x a hypo (het) will produce 50% supers and 50% hets. THE ONLY DIFFERENCE is that the "super" form is NOT DISTINGUISHABLE from the "het" super hypo form. does that make sense to u? only test breeding can determine that conclusion and a large number of offspring must be produced

"so in the past 5 years i have had phone conversations discussing albino and hypo hognose with Richard Evans of albinohognose.com, had reptile genetics and morphs explained to me from terry dunham from albinotricolor.com in a series of emails (in explicit detail... thanks terry...you da man!), and have spent countless hours on kingsnake.com's milksnake and hognose forum not to mention have had the pleasure of being an active part of this leopard gecko forum for 2 or more years. ive kept and bred hognose and have kept a number of wild caught reptiles ranging from gopher snakes to collared lizards that ive collected in my herping adventures. not to mention what i have now."

again, the albino (both normal and pink pastel) alleles, as well as the hypo allele in hognose are SIMPLE RECESSIVE. i too have talked to terry several times (in the late 90s?), from my understanding i believe he is a retired genetics professor? most of the honduran morphs that he works with are SIMPLE RECESSIVE, albino, anerytheristic, "hypo" etc...the only exception being the "extreme" or vanishing pattern hypos which still need more test breedings. he also works with pyros, albino, hypo, anerytheristic and applegate phase which are also ALL simple recessive. in fact, before he worked with snakes he used to work with BIRDS, finches and the like. ive chatted with him about lady gouldian finches because i too used to work with them. i think that your misunderstanding here is that people are trying to attack you. please dont take that as so, i think that we are trying to help INFORM AND EDUCATE each other which is the purpose of this forum. also, several of us, including myself, kelli and others have extensive breeding experiences with OTHER species other than JUST LEOPARD GECKOS. sure that doesnt make us genetic experts or any more knowledgeable than someone that takes a college genetics course but one MAY understand codominance better if they work with several different species of animals that have co dominant morphs. examples being pastel and mojave ball pythons and the like? i hope this helped a bit.

-jon

i found this on the bottom of the web page on this thread. i thought this was interesting...

ad for a SHTCTB X SHT (i would assume not a ray hines gecko or why wouldnt they just say SHTCTB X SHTCT?)

the head spots i would expect. notice how they are somewhat bold? see this animal APPEARS to be a super hypo, but it isnt. its a linebred hypo tangerine crossed to ray hines super hypo (i.M.O.). a heterozygous hypo but through the introduction of linebred tangerine blood has no spots on the back and somewhat bold pigment (and of course orange coloration).

i.m.o. (this is not in reference to the ad i posted above) the old fashioned method of counting spots to determine a hypo from a super hypo is now obsolete. prove your geckos out and if your not sure than sell it as a "possible super". thats what they do with the salmon boas, which is also a codominant/incomplete dominant trait and i feel its the most honest way to go about it.

Originally Posted by SFgeckos

THE ONLY DIFFERENCE is that the "super" form is NOT DISTINGUISHABLE from the "het" super hypo form.

Yes...this is what I wanted to say here:

Something I'd like to add about calling the babys from a Super Hypo to Normal pairing Super Hypos or Hypos:

So....the Babys I showed you on this photo:


look Super Hypo u all said (even if I would consider the ones with spotting on their backs as Hypos)...so from what we see, they are Super Hypos.


But if we expect the Super Hypo Gene to be co-dominant, we have to call them Hypos.

Take the Giants for example (co-dominant as well...as I know)
pairing "Super Giant" to "non Giant" you'll get 100% Giants. But if you have a very large and big Baby of this pairing, you mustn't call that a Super Giant, even it looks lie that...because it is genticly just a Giant!

So...even if the Babys from Super Hypo to Normal look like Super Hypos...they are Hypos.

please read my previous post...im not sure u understand the genetics behind salmon boas

Originally Posted by SFgeckos

please read my previous post...im not sure u understand the genetics behind salmon boas

who did you write to this post?

I understand what you mean.

If the Super Hypo gene is co-dominant all Babys from my Super Hypo x Normal wild caught pairing are Hypos. Even if they look like what we call Super Hypos (No spotting on body...only spotting on head and tail).
Pairing two Hypos together, we can produce Hypos, Super Hypos and Normals...but we do not know, if the Super Hypos coming out of a HypoxHypo pairing are real Super Hypos or just Hypos which look like Super Hypos.

But take a look at my Super Hypo female again...she has less spotting on head than her Hypo Babies....so maybe we can differentiate between Hypo and Super Hypo...maybe the Super Hypos (the "super"-form....we need another name for that...something without Hypo ;-) ) have just less headspotting than the Hypos?