Hypo Snow

[USAGECKOS]

You Ladies are confusing me LOL

Linebreds are "Snows" . And Genetic Snows are "Mack Snows".

There i got it !

Where did I ever say different?

 

[groovygeckos]

Oh , just playing around because there seems to be this "yellow not Snow" thing coming up into the "Mack Snow" . When thats linebred Snow "standards" . Because it doesnt matter if they become orange (and they probably will eventually) they are still "Mack Snows" (Het "Super Snow") because that is how they hatched . It is these ones from SHTCTB`s and Tangs that look different and grow yellow more quickly . Ill agree a "Mack" is more of a Pastel in appearance than a Snow by definition as none are pure white and black , even the adults have the lavenders and pastelish yellow "frost" . But the Super Snow is the true definition of "Snow"

 

[Gekkonida]

Interesting stuff, however I think the snows are named properly. Besides the whole if you produce it you name it policy, here are my thoughts on the naming.

To me the genotype of the animals are pretty important here not just the phenotype. It is easy to look at the animal and say it doesn’t fit this desired naming convention so lets do something, but that would be the wrong thing to do. The genetics of the animal have to help dictate the name as well as the looks of the animal.

The line bred snows are always going to have yellow in them to some extent if breeders are out crossing their animals. That is just going to be the result of the WT that is dominant in leopards. There will be exceptional line bred snows for sure that are black and white without the yellow, and these by all means should be called snows. If I understand the issue here,??? it seems it is in the naming of an animal that is from a line bred snow breeding that has yellow in it. Again, in my opinion it should still be called a snow due to the fact it is carrying the genetics to produce more snows and better snows than itself. I am not sure that calling them something else would do anything but confuse even more people. If a leopard gecko is mostly white and black even if it isn't born out of a snow crossing it likely isn’t genetically carrying the genes(genotype) for making better snows. It may look like it has some of the same traits breeders are trying to isolate in the nice line bred snows but it more than likely ends at the phenotype.

If we called an animal showing lots of white and yellow from a snow breeding a bumble bee for instance, how would it not be confusing to make that a separate name? What happens when those same bad guys start passing off pastel and others as bumble bees and people buy them to breed and produce snows and wala no snows. Wait I just paid xxx for an animal that is called a bumble bee that is the same as a yellowish snow and what I can't isolate the snow traits. Hmm I would have a real issue with that. I'd rather buy the yellow snow or c grade snow from someone who has nice a or b line bred snows and know that I am getting the isolated genes for making better snows. I think this all falls down to this, if you have questions concerning whether you are buying a snow or not go buy from a trusted breeder. If Albey had a c grade snow listed and someone out there I don’t know had a c grade snow you betcha I am buying from Albey 100 out of 100 times. I know the genotype is that of the line bred snow, even if it has yellow in it.

As far as the Mack snows go there is no issue with these animals to me what so ever. They, in my opinion, are one of the best named animals out there. Not only is the Mack part (the originator) attached to the name, but every single time you produce a super it is black and white. No chances of getting a c or even a b grade snow from them. The co-dom snows fall into the category of being het super snows, so I think if it were named anything else there could be a serious issue. The mack co-dom snow is a long name but I think really gets the morphs genetics right. Het Mack Super snows also works but that is even longer. Just my thoughts on the whole naming thing.

 

[Lizard Lair]

My 2¢ worth….

Does anybody know who started producing the Line Bred Snows?

I don’t know who the originator of the line-bred snow is, but I do know that Teri at A1 Reptiles was into them very early in the game.

When I got my first line-bred snows (from A1) several years ago they came graded, and for the most part that seems to be how most of the breeders of the line-breds do business. I advertised once last season without grading, and found that customers were more comfortable with the grading system. Just my opinion – but I think the grading system is necessary. The name “Snow” and “Mack Snow” are for a morph, and is a description of the best of that morph. It isn’t cut and dry, like the descriptive names “hypo”, or “super-hypo”, because you are grading the quality of a color. To give the various shades of white, cream, or yellow within a morph a different name would be to confusing. And I have seen people in the past advertise their yellowed up line-bred snow as a pastel. I don’t think they were trying to be deceptive, but were trying to be accurate based on the color of the gecko. But being yellowed up and perhaps resembling a pastel does not make that gecko a pastel, it is a low grade snow. I hate to use people for an example but it’s the first thing that came to mind. Heck – look around. All races of people come in various shades, but each shade within a race doesn’t get a separate name. I’m not saying I’m right, and I do have an open mind for change. This is just how I, personally see things. I sell my line-bred snows graded, and they are graded based on what they look like at the moment, and my future expectations of them. Can you buy a gorgeous white A grade line bred and have it go completely yellow? Yup. But bear in mind the price you are paying for that grade A line bred. Most breeders are selling them for around $200. You would never see a price like that on that animal if the breeder knew for absolute fact it would always be an A grade. It would cost much much more! Unfortunately with the line-breds, it is possible it will yellow up. But many do not, and the one who don’t are sooooo beautiful. I’m very open with anybody who buys from me on the future quality of the line-bred snows that I sell. I don’t have the luxury of growing them to adulthood before selling, so the grading is based on what you see. But, I let the buyer know that there is the possibility the gecko they are buying may turn yellow with maturity – then they can make their decision if they want to risk the purchase. If I could guarantee permanent whiteness, the price would be much more than $200.

But all of this is what makes the Mack snow so very exciting! There are no guarantees on whiteness on the Mack snow, but finally, a guarantee can be made for whiteness with the Super Snow. For those of us who have been trying to improve the line-breds, but are still unable to make color guarantees the Super Snow is a real blessing. Also as far as the color of the Mack Snow goes – not all turn yellow. I have a Mack female that I bought with my super-snow male that never yellowed. Her white is grayed a little, but there is absolutely no yellow on her. So far I have hatchlings from crosses with SHT, Albino, and line-bred snows and I am seeing a wide variation in the degree of yellowing on them. This is such a new morph – I’m sure the quality of the Mack Snows will improve with time. I’m hoping that my Mack / Line bred snow cross will produce whiter Macks

Shelly
Lizard Lair

 

[Lizard Lair]

I agree with you Gekkonida! To bad I was posting while you were - that would have saved me a lot of typing!

Shelly

 

[KelliH]

I agree with Fred and Shelley. The line bred snows are different than the Mack snows obviously. Of course, we would all prefer the Mack Snows to stay the way the look when they hatch! But they do color up a bit, some more than others. The whole point of getting into them (IMO) is to make supers, and super combos.

Here are some pics of some of my Macks. First is my original Mack male from Alex. Sometimes he looks "whiter" and sometimes darker. Next is a young Mack snow het blizzard. Next a Mack snow het RWPA, and lastly another pic of my Hine line super hypo snow.

 

[USAGECKOS]

To me the genotype of the animals are pretty important here not just the phenotype. It is easy to look at the animal and say it doesn’t fit this desired naming convention so lets do something, but that would be the wrong thing to do. The genetics of the animal have to help dictate the name as well as the looks of the animal.

Well Put!

Wow, my understanding of genetics is getting a lot better! I actually understood this...LOL!!!

 

[KelliH]

Here's three more. First is a Mack Bold Stripe cross, and also a Mack Gourmet Rodent line Super Hypo Tangerine cross. And lastly a Mack het Bell Albino.

They are very distinctively black and white when they hatch, some yellow more than others as they grow. I can't wait to see a Bell Super Snow! And a Super Hypo Hine Line SUper Snow. And etc etc. The whole point of getting the MAcks is to make the supers!

 

[Jeremy Letkey]

The whole point of getting the MAcks is to make the supers!

I agree. It is a very exciting time for leopard geckos.

 

[USAGECKOS]

Kelli-

That Mack Bold Stripe Cross is gorgeous! I love the pattern and coloration, even if it does have some yellowing to it.

 

[groovygeckos]

OMG Kelli that BOLD cross !!!



It is all about Supers and crosses but these Hets sure are perty !

 

[Albey]

Some Pictures

I have to agree with what both Fred and Shelley have already written so I want say too much more. I would like to add that with the line bred Snow’s the lesser grade ones or more yellow ones can produce all white Snow’s and the A Grade ones can produce yellow ones. I am including some pictures to show what I mean. I just took these so they are hot off the press. LOL

These guys had a pure white mother and father. The yellow one has the same genes as the white one and when she is old enough to breed will produce white and yellow babies. Of course you will have a much better chance starting out with a white one though, and the white ones look much better. LOL

These are of course the two forms of Mack Snow's.

Here is a picture of all four of them.

 

[groovygeckos]

Hey Albey , Thanks for the pics . That "Co-Dom" is soooo white !That baby Super Snow is killing me to see LOL I coulda/woulda hatched my own by now .

 

[ShannanD25]

This is great discussion and the snow is getting the attention it deserves. I am talking about both line breds and the co-dom Mack snows. I understand the difference. What I am getting at, is lets say giantism is co-dom. A clutch hatches, one is clearly a giant, the other isnt...can you then call the normal size one a giant? It carries the genes, but it is not a Giant. SO we then say it is het, or from Giant parents, or some other term letting potential breeders know that if bred to the right mate, you will get Giant offspring.
I see Kelli and Jeanne and Albey's pics...and to me...hey those are snows, some line bred, som ecarrying mack snow genes...I see Dan's and hey, those are yellow geckos carrying the Mack snow genes

As the co-doms get crossed with so many other morphs, do you all think then, that generations down through, those offspring should be called snows?
They may have the co-dom in their genetics, but if it is lets say a SHCT, why can't it be just that....a shct het (or what ever term shold be used) for mack snow....or would it be considered proper to call it a snow?

I think this Mack snow is the greatest thing to happen to Leos in awhile. I just think it opens the doors for anyone to label their Leo as snow, regardless of its outward appearance.
I still like Dan's term of snowdom...
Call that SHCT I cited as an example a word like that, hey I get it, it carries the mack gene...call it a snow and it confuses me.

What other morphs/traits are co-doms?
The new snake eyes, are those co-dominant?
If they are, then if a clutch hatches and one doesn't have the snake eyes but the parents and sibling does, would it be called snake eyes?

The example of people is a good one...like these new snows, there is every shade under the sun....but clear lines need to be drawn.Terms like white-ish, or yellowish to the third degree are absurd. But pastel, yellow, and white seem to be more appropriate. FOr line breds the a,b,c classifications is a great idea as there are shades of snow...(line bred)...

I guess bottom line is, I see someone posting a pic of a hypo snow and I get all excited to see a white or even whitish hypo...instead I see what looks to me like your everyday hypo....you say here is a mack hypo, or to borrow Dan's term, here is a snowdom hypo....it seems to fit better.

It just seems like when the first tangerines came out everyone rushed to be able to call their Leos tangerine....when it was not....so when you saw a tang advertised it was like, yeah, another yellow/normal Leo...

I am probably just sounding like a confused a$$ here but my interest lies only in trying to protect the snow term from being slung on anything that carries (but isnt showing) a certain gene.

 

[groovygeckos]

I see Kelli and Jeanne and Albey's pics...and to me...hey those are snows, some line bred, som ecarrying mack snow genes...I see Dan's and hey, those are yellow geckos carrying the Mack snow genes

OK this is what i dont understand . Seems as if you are saying mine are different and not Mack ? (that i am the one rushing to label these Mack Snows ), perhaps im wrong so please dont take offense . We do have one of the first Adult Macks that was available ,purchased from Dan Lubinky. I do have his receipt . And both Shelly and Kelli have vouched for the fact there is much variation and some yellow in the "Sno-Doms" . While im like you i dont consider them "Snows" (by definition) being yellow, but i would consider the Super form a true Snow and have coined our Super Hypo Snow project "Hysno" (Hypo).

Actually to me Kelli`s Snows look just like mine with some yellow on the legs etc . there is a difference in the quality of the pic (thats for sure) and the use of a flash or very bright room lighting in some of those pics while mine were taken in dim lighting (the largest male was) . Also this is a pretty large male ,one of the first Hypo Macks hatched (3-17-05) ever and is quite a bit older than Kelli`s pics of here Hine Line crosses . She had just said that some of them are yellow ,vary greatly, and there is alot of yellow on a few she posted . They are still "Mack Snows" though and almost no two are alike from what im seeing here .

 

[groovygeckos]

Oh, Giants are said to be Co-dom, Super Hypos& SHCT are said to be Co-dom or Dom , Patterns (Jungle Stripe Reverse Stripe) I hear talk of being Co-Dom .

Hard to say really

 

[ShannanD25]

No, yours are Macks, not doubting that. Nice looking Leos too.And I know you are one of the first to have a male Mack that was purchased from Dan who purchased it from Alex...I remember that thread.

What you just said though is what I am getting at....
If Reverse stripe is co-dom.....
we have two RS parents, one clutch...one rs baby, one normal...
Do we call that normal looking baby a Reverse Stripe?
No
Do we call it a normal carrying co dom genes for RS....yes....
If you were to have said here is a pic of my Mack hypo....that makes sense to me....Leo carrying Mack co-dom genes which when bred to antoher Mack gives Snows , a true all white critter....but when you say here is my Hypo snow..........one would, or maybe it is just me, expect to see a white hypo....

Same with Giants....two babies born, one a mutant huge critter, one normal....mutant gets called the Giant as it is displaying the genes...the other gets labelled normal but one tells others it is carrying the co-dom gene of a Giant....

Now if John Mack's name( I hope I have his first name right) was actually Mack Snow....then it makes sense to call them "Mack Snow", but he uses the word "snow"to describe the gene they are carrying, the coloration.....the gene to make a true snow...maybe I should go argue with him....yeah right


As Shelly has said ( I cant ever use the quote feature here so stick with me)
there is much variation in co-doms and SOME yellow....but some of these co-doms that are being posted look like any other non Mack genetic carrying Leo...because they have been outcrossed to some other morph. When the Mack genes get thin (future generations of outcrossing) when will we stop refering to the offspring as Mack Snows and call them by what they appear to be...a SHCT, a Blizzard, a Hypo? If 5 generations from now we have in front of us a tangerine SHCT but it has in its breeding some Mack Snow co-dom genes, is it right then, to call is a Snow?

I am sure it is the quality of the lighting/camera you and Kelli have used that is leading me to see yours as yellow and hers as white. My camera doesnt always do justice either!

 

[Gekkonida]

A clutch hatches, one is clearly a giant, the other isnt...can you then call the normal size one a giant? It carries the genes, but it is not a Giant.

This is incorrect. Giant is co-dom and a NON giant born from a giant parent does not carry the genes for giant. I won't go into what co-dom is, but this isn't how it works.

As the co-doms get crossed with so many other morphs, do you all think then, that generations down through, those offspring should be called snows?

Why shouldn't they be called snows? If you can breed the animals together and produce snows why shouldn't they be called what genetically they are carrying. Just because they are bred for a few generation doesn't make them any less snow?

They may have the co-dom in their genetics, but if it is lets say a SHCT, why can't it be just that....a shct het (or what ever term shold be used) for mack snow....or would it be considered proper to call it a snow?

Sounds to me like your stuck and can't get over the fact a snow cross should have any color in it. Again, you have to look at the genetics of the animal not just how it looks. Might seem trivial but to me this is by far and away the more important of the two factors. A spider cinnamon doesn't look like a spider but it is still a spider and no matter what name you attach to it or how long you breed it. The looks may change but the genetics stay the same. Forget the phenotype, that isn't seeing the whole picture it's just looking at half of it.

I think this Mack snow is the greatest thing to happen to Leos in awhile. I just think it opens the doors for anyone to label their Leo as snow, regardless of its outward appearance.

People will always try to rip other people off and there is nothing stopping people from doing this right now with hets? People could do this right now with bell hets or aptor hets etc etc etc.....

I still like Dan's term of snowdom...

If only Dan would have originated the morph Then half the people out there could have complained with that name.

The new snake eyes, are those co-dominant?

Who knows lol.

If they are, then if a clutch hatches and one doesn't have the snake eyes but the parents and sibling does, would it be called snake eyes?

No, I think you might be confused as to what co-dom means and how a co-dom trait works.

I guess bottom line is, I see someone posting a pic of a hypo snow and I get all excited to see a white or even whitish hypo...instead I see what looks to me like your everyday hypo....you say here is a mack hypo, or to borrow Dan's term, here is a snowdom hypo....it seems to fit better.

A better fit says who, seriously?? I think the name is fine as is. snowdom what exactly is that a snow co-dom snow incomplete dominant or dominant?? Makes very little sense to me. A mack-codom snow hypo yeah that is the ticket. Or if you will a Het mack super snow hypo.

It just seems like when the first tangerines came out everyone rushed to be able to call their Leos tangerine....when it was not....so when you saw a tang advertised it was like, yeah, another yellow/normal Leo...

I think if you are serious about investing in a snow of any kind you should do a little duediligence on the seller. People who ran out to buy a yellow tang should have maybe ask some questions about the animal before dishing out the cash.

I am probably just sounding like a confused a$$ here but my interest lies only in trying to protect the snow term from being slung on anything that carries (but isnt showing) a certain gene.

Confused a bit on the genetics yes an a$$ NO way. I think everyone here understands what you are talking about and I am sure that people will try to get away with passing off bogus animals as snows, but changing the name in no way helps. So the name might change to whatever but they can just as easily turn around a pretend to be selling them. The biggest part again is the genetics. If you over look the genetics you are really missing the most important part in all of this.

 

[ShannanD25]

And again, I am not bashing anyone, or anyones' Leos....
I dont want to upset anyone. The Leos shown here, Dan's Chris's, ALbey's, Kelli's, Jeanne's and anyone else's I missed....are great examples of Macks and line bred " snows" I am jealous as I do not have one....I don't think I do at least...low grade line bred....if I squint and wish really hard yeah


If he would have just left the snow part off.... and called them "Macks gonna produce stunning white baby Leos but may not be white themselves"....

Sorry I started this mess.

 

[ShannanD25]

Mack co-dom Snow hypo is a morph name that makes me happy...
hypo refering to the coloration/morph showing...and Mack co-dom Snow refering to its amazing potential....
That sums up my stubborn under educated about genetics arguement Fred!