• 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 Super Pastel Considered two genes?

mgoblue347

mgoblue347

New member
Joined
Oct 16, 2011
Messages
720
Reaction score
25
Points
0
Location
Houston, TX
I see people listing snakes as being a 4 gene snake..for example, Super Pastel Mojave Yellow Belly. I understand that the super pastel is the super of the pastel, but all it gives you is the pastel gene, nothing else. To me a true 4 gene snake or whatever we're talking about would have 4 different morphs in them, not the super form of a certain morph.
 
Because pastel only requires one gene to be present, a super pastel can be accurately called a two-gene animal. Likewise, a het pied, mojave, yellowbelly, etc. can be considered one-gene animals, whereas their two-gene forms (pied, BEL, ivory) can be named as such. Dominant genes, like spider and pinstripe, can be considered single-gene animals.
 
You sure a pied is considered a two gene? That would mean my caramel albino is a 2 gene. So a caramel glow would be considered a four gene snake, since hypo is also a 2 gene..considered that both hypo and caramel have het forms..
 
The problem with a super pastel being considered 2 genes is that it can only give one of them to it's offspring. But, to coin another member's phrase, it does have a double dose of that trait.
Not all of the lingo makes sense, because it's just a bunch of made up names that aren't applied uniformly throughout the reptile community.
 
hhmoore said:
The problem with a super pastel being considered 2 genes is that it can only give one of them to it's offspring. But, to coin another member's phrase, it does have a double dose of that trait.
Not all of the lingo makes sense, because it's just a bunch of made up names that aren't applied uniformly throughout the reptile community.
Click to expand...

that makes sense too. I think that was pretty well put
 
in my very unscientific terms - all traits are two genes, it takes a pair of genes to express any trait - either two normal genes, a normal and morph gene or two morph genes. The type of morph gene determines the expression.

edit to add - while I can sort of understand why someone would call a 'super' 2 genes, I can't say that I think it makes a lot of sense. :)
 
Technically, it is four genes expressed. It's just not four different genes.

On a semi related note, briefly skimmed over a thread on another forum where people are trying to change pied from simple recessive to co-dom. Really made my brain hurt.
 
Shadera said:
On a semi related note, briefly skimmed over a thread on another forum where people are trying to change pied from simple recessive to co-dom. Really made my brain hurt.
Click to expand...

:rofl:
I'd.. I'd like to know why they would come up with that theory. Interesting.
magic-spongebob.jpg
 
Hah, seriously? That's just silly.

I'm in agreement with April. The one-gene two-gene thing is pretty non-scientific and can lead to confusion. All animals have two copies of a particular gene. Sticking with heterozygous and homozygous is the best, in my opinion.
 
snowgyre said:
I'm in agreement with April. The one-gene two-gene thing is pretty non-scientific and can lead to confusion. All animals have two copies of a particular gene. Sticking with heterozygous and homozygous is the best, in my opinion.
Click to expand...
Yes, but the original question was about how people are labeling combination morphs...it had nothing to do with heterozygous and homozygous. Take a queen bee, for example - it is a 3 trait combination: pastel, lesser, spider. Some sellers use the phrase "3 gene"; and, even though it's not accurate, nobody bats an eye. The question was about people labeling a super pastel lesser spider (for example) a 4 gene snake, and whether it was correct because there are still only 3 different traits. Arguably, the (inaccurate) term should be saved for something like an albino pastel lesser spider, which has 4 separate traits.

Shadera said:
On a semi related note, briefly skimmed over a thread on another forum where people are trying to change pied from simple recessive to co-dom. Really made my brain hurt.
Click to expand...
I didn't read the thread, and have no idea where it is; but I suspect it has to do with visual markers which are supposedly reliable means of identifying hets. It's an old topic, and not limited to ball pythons.

IMO, it's basically coming from people with just enough knowledge to form arguments that convince people that don't know any better. Genetics is its own science, and there are a lot of people dealing with reptiles that THINK they understand it. (I know that my own knowledge barely scrapes the surface - so I don't mind saying what I know...but I bow out quickly, to avoid talking out my :bleep: )
 
hhmoore said:
I didn't read the thread, and have no idea where it is; but I suspect it has to do with visual markers which are supposedly reliable means of identifying hets. It's an old topic, and not limited to ball pythons.

IMO, it's basically coming from people with just enough knowledge to form arguments that convince people that don't know any better. Genetics is its own science, and there are a lot of people dealing with reptiles that THINK they understand it. (I know that my own knowledge barely scrapes the surface - so I don't mind saying what I know...but I bow out quickly, to avoid talking out my :bleep: )
Click to expand...

It's on the BP forum somewhere. Basically, the argument is that in a group of possible hets, if you can pick one out as different in appearance as the gene-carrying animal, then it's a co-dom trait and not simple recessive.

Like I said, left there before my head asploded.
 
The thing is, for that theory to hold true, they'd have to put those hets and possible hets in a group of normals...and be able to reliably identify the hets. If it doesn't work under that stipulation (which it doesn't), then their argument doesn't work.
 
hhmoore said:
Yes, but the original question was about how people are labeling combination morphs...it had nothing to do with heterozygous and homozygous. Take a queen bee, for example - it is a 3 trait combination: pastel, lesser, spider. Some sellers use the phrase "3 gene"; and, even though it's not accurate, nobody bats an eye. The question was about people labeling a super pastel lesser spider (for example) a 4 gene snake, and whether it was correct because there are still only 3 different traits. Arguably, the (inaccurate) term should be saved for something like an albino pastel lesser spider, which has 4 separate traits.
Click to expand...

I completely agree with you Harald. A true four gene, to me, would have to have 4 separate traits, not to include the super form. I believe it comes down to marketing your product (snake) for sale.
 
Technically Super Pastel is the same gene, so that is singular.
Technically Lesser and Mojave are the same gene, so do you really want to get technical and call a Lesser/Mojave BEL single gene also? Different alleles of the same gene.

Mutant alleles are what most people look at. Which Super Pastel has 2. So if you want to call mutant alleles "genes" as many people do, I see no reason you can't call it "double gene". Just another case of hobby lingo and yes it is inconsistent.
 
Back
Top