Motley and Stripe interactions

[Buschjs]

It it possible to get stripes from a Motley Stripe X Motley Stripe Pairing? Thanks in advance for any replies.

Justin

 

[ghosthousecorns]

Good question. I just put it through the kornatter online genetics calculator, it said 3/4 motley 66% het stripe and 1/4 stripe. I am sort of puzzled by the results, I don't have that other program b/c it won't work with the mac, but how come you get more motleys? Any genetics whiz step in please!

 

[ultimuttone]

According to progeny (I'm still too lazy to figure it out myself) 25% chance.

 

[ultimuttone]

Beat me to it . I think I was reading somewhere here that motley overides stripe?

 

[Buschjs]

I got the same results from the progency predictor, but was confused by the results, more Motleys? I guess Motley must just override the stripe gene.
The reason I was asking is that I have two butter motleys that I suspect may carry the stripe gene, they should be ready to breed next year. I am curious to see if any stripes come out of the project.

 

[ghosthousecorns]

That;s what confuses me, I thought the 2 were codominant so how come they're motleys het stripe and not motley/stripes? Is the motley just slightly stronger or something? I have a motley/stripe ghost (see avatar) and 2 anery motleys het stripe and ghost, all females and a striped ghost male

 

[Joejr14]

I got the same results from the progency predictor, but was confused by the results, more Motleys? I guess Motley must just override the stripe gene.
The reason I was asking is that I have two butter motleys that I suspect may carry the stripe gene, they should be ready to breed next year. I am curious to see if any stripes come out of the project.

Motley/Stripe x Motley/Stripe = 25% motley, 25% stripe, 50% motley/stripe.

The predictor doesn't give you more motleys. It has been shown that in a lot of cases motley x stripe gives more motley looking hatchlings than a mixture of a middle phenotype.

 

[ultimuttone]

And I do stand corrected. The predictor does give the numbers above. My brain is still in a whirlwind of all this information
So, Joe, motley doesn't really override stripe just tends to have a more dominant appearance? Or is it a hit and miss kind of thing?

 

[snakepimp]

It's either hit/miss, or biased due to observer interaction. It might look more like what you are telling yourself it should look like, that is:
Thoughts such as "I want this stripe/motley to look more stripe-like." will affect the way you perceive the animals appearance, maybe.

Overall, the stripe appearance with the 2 wide dorsal stripes is pretty much reserved for Homo-stripes, and the stripe/motleys look like some variation on motleys, with more or less striping. But then again, a Homo-Motley can be totally striped too... or so I hear, I have not seen one like that.
I neve really liked the stripes as much, but recently (Rich Z's current avatar) I have grown attracted to them.

 

[ghosthousecorns]

OK those predictor results make a lot more sense. I just have a couple more q's, so if snakes are "motley het stripe" does that mean they are motley/stripes that just happen to look more motley? And how would you tell the 'true motleys' from the 'motley looking' motley/ stripes? I hope I'm not flogging a dead horse here but this topic is of interest to me because of the snakes in my collection. When (and if) I produce these morphs I want to be able to ID & label the hatchlings correctly!

 

[Joejr14]

OK those predictor results make a lot more sense. I just have a couple more q's, so if snakes are "motley het stripe" does that mean they are motley/stripes that just happen to look more motley? And how would you tell the 'true motleys' from the 'motley looking' motley/ stripes? I hope I'm not flogging a dead horse here but this topic is of interest to me because of the snakes in my collection. When (and if) I produce these morphs I want to be able to ID & label the hatchlings correctly!

Since motley and stripe share a locus, there is no way for a snake to be a motley het stripe, at least not in the traditional sense of the word---such as like amel het stripe.

I suppose some might say it's a motley het stripe if it looks like a motley and has a stripe parent---if they don't know any better.

Motley het stripe is about as correct as amel het ultra. Same type of thing.

As far as telling the true motleys from the motley/stripes, good luck.

 

[Serpwidgets]

The long story...

If you break it down then put it back together, it will make sense.

Take a look at the genes involved:
M⁺ is the normal allele.
m^m is the motley allele.
m^s is the stripe allele.

This makes the following six genotypes possible:
M⁺ · M⁺
M⁺ · m^m
M⁺ · m^s
m^m · m^m
m^m · m^s
s^s · s^s

The current assumption (based on breeding results) is that motley is (at least generally) dominant over stripe. The reason for this assumption is that motleys hatched from striped parents can have completely typical motley patterns. In an ideal world it translates to "motley is dominant over stripe" but in reality it may vary somewhat. Still, the most practical way to view it is like that (instead of counting on getting motley/stripe patterns, or counting on a stripey-looking motley to be definitely het stripe.)

This means that the only 4-lined stripe corns are the s^s · s^s genotype. This would also mean that the m^m · m^s genotype would produce a typical motley pattern. The assumption is that the striped motleys are a result of selective breeding.

Given all of the above, the six genotypes would be represented like this:
M⁺ · M⁺ - Normal
M⁺ · m^m - Normal het motley
M⁺ · m^s - Normal het stripe
m^m · m^m - Motley (or, to be more specific "Motley/Motley")
m^m · m^s - Motley het stripe (or "genotypically Motley/Stripe")
s^s · s^s - Striped

So... anyway... if you cross m^m · m^s to m^m · m^s you can build a simple Punnett square to find that the results are:
<table border=1><tr><td> </td><td>m^m</td><td>m^s</td></tr><tr><td>m^m</td><td>m^m·m^m</td><td>m^m·m^s</td></tr><tr><td>m^s</td><td>m^m·m^s</td><td>m^s·m^s</td></tr></table>
Which adds up to 25% motley/motley, 50% motley/stripe, 25% stripe/stripe.
Which gives you 75% motley-looking, and 25% stripe-looking.

Simple enough, eh? :santa:

 

[ghosthousecorns]

Clear as mud...
Thanks for explaining, I think I get it now. I just looked at my records, the anery snakes I mentioned earlier, I bought as motleys POSS het stripe, not motleys het stripe. (D'oh!) I guess this means they are either motleys or motley stripes and the breeder labeled them as motleys poss het stripe b/c there's no way to tell. It's gonna be so tough with the het ghost added to the mix since the anerys and ghosts can be hard to tell apart too...

 

[Serpwidgets]

Motley het stripe is about as correct as amel het ultra. Same type of thing.

The problem with calling an ultramel an "amel het ultra" is that it is not amelanistic. This isn't the case with motley het stripe, they are motley patterned. I think it's consistent with the other descriptions, like this:

<table border=1><tr><th>Genotype</th><th>Phenotype</th><th>Wordy genotype</th><th>"Plain-English" description</th><th>Abbreviated Description</th></tr><tr><td>A⁺ · a^a</td><td><b>Normal</b></td><td>Het normal and amel</td><td><b>Normal</b> het amel</td><td>(implied normal) Het amel</td></tr><tr><td>M⁺ · s^s</td><td><b>Normal</b></td><td>Het normal and stripe</td><td><b>Normal</b> het stripe</td><td>(implied normal) Het stripe</td></tr><tr><td>m^m · m^s</td><td><b>Motley</b></td><td>Het motley and stripe</td><td><b>Motley</b> het stripe</td><td>???</td></tr></table>

If you just call it "Motley stripe" or "motley/stripe" this leaves it wide open to interpretation. The snake could be:
motley/stripe pattern and motley/motley genotype, or
motley/stripe pattern and motley/stripe genotype, or
motley pattern and motley/stripe genotype.

IMO if you have a snake that is genotypically motley/stripe and has a pattern you'd find in any motley, the most practical description is "motley het stripe."

As far as telling the true motleys from the motley/stripes, good luck.

LOL, exactly. :crazy02:

 

[magick-bears]

The assumption is that the striped motleys are a result of selective breeding.

If this is the case is it possable to have a Striped Motley that is m^m · m^m?

I have this girl

That I am getting ready to register. I was under the impression that Striped Motleys were only m^m · m^s. So I was going to register as such. I am now wondering if I should list her as a m^m · m^m till she is prooven for Striped. I also have her brother who looks like a normal Sunglow Motley. The mother also looks like a Sunglow Motley with one slightly elongated "Q Tip"

Thanks,
~Jeff C.

 

[paulh]

I was under the impression that Striped Motleys were only m^m · m^s. So I was going to register as such. I am now wondering if I should list her as a m^m · m^m till she is prooven for Striped.

I don't know if the registry allows this, but I would mark such a snake as m^m · ? until proven. The question mark indicates that the second gene is unknown, and that it could be either m^m or m^s.

I would call a m^m · m^s snake either a het motley/stripe or a motley that is het motley/stripe, not a motley het stripe.

 

[ultimuttone]

I would call a m^m · m^s snake either a het motley/stripe or a motley that is het motley/stripe, not a motley het stripe.

Dumb question here, but can you call a motley het motley?
I mean I see amels het motley but not amels het amel motley.
Or am I missing something here, please enlighten me.

 

[MastersHaven]

I would just register it as Motley with a special note added (there is a section for notes).... saying something like *poss. homo. stripe -- to be proven* or something to that effect....

that way it's not registered as stripe when it's not homo (if that is indeed the case) and if it is --- it can be updated when proven and until then anyone that needs to know the info. will see it there on the registry.


That's just what I would do if I weren't 100 % sure.

 

[ultimuttone]

And if the assumption is that the striped motleys are a result of selective breeding than wouldn't they in fact not be het-just selectively bred?
(Can you tell I'm a corn-genetics freshman)

 

[paulh]

Dumb question here, but can you call a motley het motley?
I mean I see amels het motley but not amels het amel motley.
Or am I missing something here, please enlighten me.

You can't call a motley a het motley. A het motley has a motley mutant gene paired with a normal gene and looks normal rather than motley. A motley has a pair of identical motley mutant genes. They are different gene configurations and different appearances.

An amelanistic can also be het motley because we are talking about two locations in the genome. The amelanistic mutant gene has one location, and the motley mutant gene has a different location in the genome. On the other hand, the striped and motley mutant genes have the same location.