• Responding to email notices you receive.
    **************************************************
    In short, DON'T! Email notices are to ONLY alert you of a reply to your private message or your ad on this site. Replying to the email just wastes your time as it goes NOWHERE, and probably pisses off the person you thought you replied to when they think you just ignored them. So instead of complaining to me about your messages not being replied to from this site via email, please READ that email notice that plainly states what you need to do in order to reply to who you are trying to converse with.

  • IMPORTANT! PLEASE READ!! About the Google Adsense ads being displayed

    =====================
    Posted 08/15/2025
    =====================


    Yeah, I know. They are a pain in the butt. But they pay the bills to keep my server running. Just a fact of life, I am afraid.

    Want to get rid of them? Simple. Just become a Contributor level member or above and they will be gone. -> Please click HERE."

    Is that too much for me to ask of you to keep this site running? Well, sorry about that. I too wish I could get everything for free. But alas.....

    =====================
    Addendum: 01/10/2026
    =====================


    Google Adsense ad revenue for December, 2025 was just $30 over the cost of the lease for the server running this site. So, in effect, the money providing the incentive for me to continue running this site is coming SOLELY from the paid memberships and sponsorships here. Which honestly ain't much....

Is 50% possible het, truly 50%

Beyond GenetiX

Beyond GenetiX

Staff
Staff member
Staff
Endowment
Joined
Jun 18, 2014
Messages
1,233
Reaction score
152
Points
63
Location
Raleigh, NC
Is it wrong of me to have an issue with people offering 50% possible hets, when the parent of said het has not been proven?

In the past two weeks I have come across a few threads that have offered 50% possible hets. Upon further questions and investigation the 66% possible het parent had not been proven out for the trait. In the end the supposed 50% het offspring really is a far less percentage, once you factor in the parents "possibility" of het.

I don't know, maybe it's just me...
 
50% poss. het should only be used when one parent is 100% het.
66% poss. het should only be used when both parents are 100% het.
So, you are not wrong in your belief.
 
When I was breeding geckos, if the parents were not proven hets, the babies were not (imo) worthy of being called het. Regardless of percentages. It is far to easy to place the title "poss. het" on something so it will sell.
 
If I produce a gecko/snake/etc., thus knowing what produced said critter, I don't have a problem stating the het percentage of that critter. Same for selling something, that is het, and came from a trusted, and ethical, friend/breeder.

What is wrong is when someone states that an offspring is 50%, or 66%, het when neither parent is 100% het (and, of course, not of that morph) and have never produced something of that het (morph).
 
Hets and possible hets, in my eyes, should always be reported with documentation. For example one of my breeder pastel bels is 66% het ghost, in order to back this up, I have screen shots of his original ID card listing his parents as both 100% hets, tracking back the parent ID'S with that breeder will bring you to the visual grandparent. I do this with every het possible and I have decided that any probability under 66% is too little for the animal to have any significantly increased value; however, it is always worth mentioning. That said, I do personally prefer to either produce visuals and 100% hets vs. breeding het X het or poss. Het in order to keep my projects advancing at a more steady pace.
 
possible het parent's or parents' non-visual offspring are possibly possible het and would drop the probability considerably although there is a possiblity nonetheless since u'd be multiplying one possible outcome (F1 of possible parent(s)) by another possible outcome (progeny).
 
neilg said:
possible het parent's or parents' non-visual offspring are possibly possible het and would drop the probability considerably although there is a possiblity nonetheless since u'd be multiplying one possible outcome (F1 of possible parent(s)) by another possible outcome (progeny).
Click to expand...

If you breed a 50/66% possible het, to a 50/66% possible het, and no visuals are produced, you should not sell the progeny as 50/66% het because neither of the parents have proven themselves as being 100% het.
There is no way to know the het probability of the offspring (since you have not proven either of the parents). Thus, the offspring cannot not be sold as definite 50/66% possible het.

Sure, you can mention that the parents are possible hets and, as such, any of the offspring could have a potential, of being het, but that you cannot guarantee any possibility in any way. Thus, they are being sold as non-hets.
 
Back
Top