whos in line for a raptor

Ok.. here is what needs to be done to prove or disprove that aptors are a recessive trait. One of you that has a male, breed it to the most normal looking female you can find. Hold back a pair of the normal appearing "hets", breed them to each other. If you get about 25% aptors then it would prove that "aptorism" is a recessive trait. If you do not produce any aptors from the breeding, then aptorism is not recessive, just a selectively bred trait.

Well, I have my view that RAPTORS (and APTORS) are composed of several genetic traits, such as albino, red eyed, tangerine, some sort of carrot-tail, reverse striped, some sort of hypo, and a few others. So if you breed the RAPTORS (or APTORS) to a normal, and breed the hets, hell, you'll get a ton of stuff happening. It's a pure designer trait to say the least. Not to mention that "normal" traits might cover up other traits considered to be recessive, while the genes would be there it might take generations to uncover them. Guess we'll find out more in the next few years. Should prove interesting.

Originally Posted by KelliH

Ok.. here is what needs to be done to prove or disprove that aptors are a recessive trait. One of you that has a male, breed it to the most normal looking female you can find. Hold back a pair of the normal appearing "hets", breed them to each other. If you get about 25% aptors then it would prove that "aptorism" is a recessive trait. If you do not produce any aptors from the breeding, then aptorism is not recessive, just a selectively bred trait.

Also, we need to rememeber that all traits that are selectively bred may not be a simple recessive (like albinos), but they can still be recessive, or even polygenetic.

Originally Posted by KelliH

If you do not produce any aptors from the breeding, then aptorism is not recessive, just a selectively bred trait.

pretty sure the R/Aptor s came from RT`s "Multi-het designer project "...it WILL be interesting to see what happens in 2 years with this line . im sure they will be almost solid-red w/ solid red- eyes ( like little -devils LOL) in just a few short years . Thanks Kelli , i have 1.0 and 0.2 "het" APTORs . So am i right IF it were selective bred or some genetic hypo , that is why i would see around %50 Aptor-babies ?? i will be outcrossing APTOR (and RAPTOR later) into to Red-Stripe line ,the most "normal" geckos i have and will keep a few of the "Aptor X Red-Stripe " ill call them for now just to see what happens .

whatchawannabet, the only "hets" can only come from ron himselfor one other person i wont mention...
and why cant i make "hets" if it is recessive trait? oh wait you can only get het aptors from an aptor x ron tremper "het" aptor or from two ron tremper "het" aptors bred together and that really only gives you possible hets, if it is infact a true recessive. so you have to buy at least one aptor and one of his hets at minimum or two aptors (great marketing there...even though it's rather misleading)
just like kelli said if it is a true recessive animal, breed it to a normal...take those babies and breed them together and see if you get APTORS my guess is not,,, might get some cool hi yellows maybe some tangs maybe a stripe or two or maybe a hypo but i doubt an aptor

Originally Posted by robin s.

great marketing there...

Actually, I don't think you can attribute that to Ron's brilliant marketing... I believe that would be mother natures games.

youde get at least %50 Giant %25 albino , and %25 "patternless" IF that is in fact a recessive trait , OR who knows how much of what else ,say the hypo in it (or "super-tangerine" ) , and if there are any other traits that contribute they would NOT very easily show up (homozygous) on one single animal APTORism ? lol sounds like a cult -thing

oh so not only is it an aptor they are giants to boot.... well crap that just threw the whole things off since even ron himself cant figure out what type of trait it is.... crap you could just have one endless bunches of line bred straits as far as i know...........

Actually, I don't think you can attribute that to Ron's brilliant marketing... I believe that would be mother natures games

mother nature is the actual genetics of the animal... what it looks like, reproduction, and what not but by no mean is it....

why cant i make "hets" if it is recessive trait? oh wait you can only get het aptors from an aptor x ron tremper "het" aptor or from two ron tremper "het" aptors bred together and that really only gives you possible hets, if it is infact a true recessive. so you have to buy at least one aptor and one of his hets at minimum or two aptors

and when i say ron tremper hets i mean only hets directly from himself and that one other person whom shall remain nameless .... that is not mother nature it is great marketing fueled by disception and greed.

ron sold these ALL as from the same "90g. giant" father (non-super Giant) so makes them "possible giants" . my male and one of the 2 "het APTORs" are growing VERY quickly in comparison to the other , and a few non-giants . in about 2 weeks i will record the weight of my first hatchlings from CH Jungle Giant X Giant breeding ( Both Poss. Super-Giants by their size alone ) the eggs are enormous . were 5 grams at time of laying and much longer than my other normal sized geckos eggs . i will have to take another pic to show how much they have swelled (picture: just found them in the box)

im breeding "Raptor" (name of my APTOR) to 3 tangerine striped albinos sold to me as just that . one is a "super-tang" , one is showing slight "super-tang" , and the third is just a striped -tang ....SO if the "Het APTORs " are not hets i would get APTOR-appearing geckos from breeding to them as well