Super pastel genetic debate

[rcpreis3]

I just lost a huge post because I was stupid and hit the back button, but here's a synopsis.

You're all getting genes mixed up with alleles. You can have multiple alleles affecting one gene (aka two alleles are present for each gene, one on each chromosome). So, many of the "single gene" animals you're talking about are actually "single allelic" animals. Let's keep it simple and talk about one codominant trait and one recessive trait.

Recessive traits by nature are double allelic, because they need two identical alleles for a gene to be expressed (ie. clown, pied). Codominant traits are, by nature, single allelic, because you only need one morph allele present to actually generate a morph.

Let's take pied and yellowbelly, for example.

Single allelic (aka 1/2 gene):
yellowbelly
het for pied

Double allelic (aka 1 gene):
blue-eyed leucistic
pied

Triple allelic (aka 1.5 genes):
yellow-bellied pied

Quad allelic (aka 2 genes):
leucistic pied

Hope this clarifies some things. Sometimes the terminology is what screws people up more than anything. A lot of people mistakenly refer to alleles as genes. One allele is only half of a gene.

Just on a side note, yellowbellies make ivories not BELs.

 

[MrBig]

I think where the OP goes awry is that recessive, codom and dominate "genes" act differantly. I agree that someone who isn't very knowledgeable could be confused by this, but it's been explained here and elsewhere that it's apples and bowling balls, not near the same thing. To me a super is a 2 gene animal, however I wouldn't call it such to avoid any confusion amongst others. A reccesive Hom. is far differant then a co-dom Hom. and a dominant has no Hom. in most cases.

 

[Subdriven]

Queen bee = Pastel x lesser x spider.. 3 "genes" as we like to call it.
Killer bee = pastel x pastel x spider.. Still 3 "genes" ..

Albino = 1 Visual "gene"
Albino Peid = 2 Visual "genes"

Albino Queen bee = Pastel x lesser x spider x albino 4 "genes"


Any questions??

 

[Focal]

I consider it 2 genes.

Now, what if a super pastel is a combo of two different lines? Or a super black pastel? You could have two different lines when bred back to a normal, right?

 

[hhmoore]

When you cross lines, you can't designate the babies as being from one or the other. For example, you can breed a GCR line black pastel x an Ian G line black pastel; but the outcome will not be GCR's and IanG's...they will be black pastels. (no harm in starting that they are GCR x Ian G). If you get a super, and breed it to a normal; the designation wouldn't be used (except as background info) because the super parent was a mixture of the two lines.
Likewise, Bell pastel x Graziani pastel gives you......pastels. You would only continue the line designation if you bed within that line. Of course, some people just use whatever label they think will help sell their snake.....

 

[snowgyre]

Just on a side note, yellowbellies make ivories not BELs.

Ivories have blue eyes, don't they? ;-) If we're strictly speaking phenotypes, it's the same form of leucism. Granted, it's important to make the distinction because the single allelic animals do look very different (e.g. yellowbellies vs. mojave vs. lessers vs. mochas vs. more I can't think of right now). But yes, thank you for the correction.

 

[TheReptileEnthusiast]

A pastel clown or pastel albino has 3 mutant genes. A super pastel lesser also has 3 mutant genes. Calling any of them 2 gene animals is minimizing thier value IMO. They are just as difficult to produce mathematically as an animal with 3 different mutant genes. You could even argue the 3 gene snake that includes a super or visual recessive is more valuable because they will never throw normals. The worst you can throw with a pastel clown is a 100% het clown. A lesser pastel fire can throw normals. To sum up, calling a pastel clown or super pastel lesser(to name 2 examples) a two gene animal is shortselling them and undervaluing them. If you are uncomfortable calling them one or the other, don't list them as 2 or 3 gene, just call them what they are. Most of us in the hobby who would be in the market for a 3 gene snake have a firm enough grasp on genetics to form our own opinion, and as this thread has demonstrated, opinions vary.

 

[Wolfy-hound]

Instead of saying 'two gene' or '3 gene', you could just say 'two morph' or 'three morph' if you want to designate how many DIFFERENT morphs are in the single animal.

Layman terms are always going to be different than the actual scientific terms. Nothing wrong with it, as long as the animal in question is accurately described to a seller/buyer's satisfaction.

 

[LadyOhh]

Basically the arguement boils down to the phenotype versus the genotype. Which one counts?

It really depends on who you are talking to...

But in my opinion and it seems like the general public's acceptance, the Phenotype is the "Gene" or "Morph"... Aka if you can see it, it's a Gene/Morph.