• Hello!

    Either you have not registered on this site yet, or you are registered but have not logged in. In either case, you will not be able to use the full functionality of this site until you have registered, and then logged in after your registration has been approved.

    Registration is FREE, so please register so you can participate instead of remaining a lurker....

    Please be certain that the location field is correctly filled out when you register. All registrations that appear to be bogus will be rejected. Which means that if your location field does NOT match the actual location of your registration IP address, then your registration will be rejected.

    Sorry about the strictness of this requirement, but it is necessary to block spammers and scammers at the door as much as possible.

Question on Morphs/Genetics...

H

HadesBP18

Poopsy Woopsy Luver
I've bought the Corn snake manual and have read up, but I'm still having trouble finding out what some pairs would make. I'm waiting on a 1.0 Snow possible het. lavender and an 0.1 Anery het Amel Hypo.

If I breed these I'm assuming their offspring will all be het snow and anery if they aren't already homozygous for it. But what else will it bring possibly? I also understand that there could be hidden genes and to absolutely know would be impossible. With this I know I have no way of proving the lavender out, but I also may get a 0.1 normal het lavender snow to try that.

Any suggestions? I would download the program for it, but this isn't my computer.
 
You sound pretty on track!!

If your budget allows, I'd suggest getting an Opal (lavander and amel) to breed with the snow pos het lav so that at the very least the offspring will be all amels bet anery and lav. Otherwise you'd also get opals if the snow is in fact het for lav.

Be warned, it's hard to see the difference between a baby snow and a baby opal at times so you might not be clear on who's who until a few sheds down the line.
 
Rich has some for $75, but I'd need a lone female so that would bump the price up. I'd have to do some saving, but Opals are really beautiful. Even if the snow doesn't prove out I'd have some beautiful babies.
 
HadesBP18 said:
I've bought the Corn snake manual and have read up, but I'm still having trouble finding out what some pairs would make. I'm waiting on a 1.0 Snow possible het. lavender and an 0.1 Anery het Amel Hypo.
Click to expand...
Here is how I was taught to do a problem like this. First thing to do is to break the problem down into pieces, then solve the pieces, and finally put the results from the pieces together to solve the problem.

Male Snow possible het. lavender x female Anery het Amel Hypo. In other words, the male is amelanistic, anerythristic, either het lavender or normal at the lavender locus, normal at the hypo locus. The female is het amelanistic, anerythristic, normal at the lavender locus, het hypomelanistic.

Second, do a Punnett square for each individual locus, or 4 squares for this problem:

1. Amelanistic x het amelanistic -->
1/2 normal looking (het amelanistic)
1/2 amelanistic

2. anerythristic x anerythristic -->
1/1 (all the babies) anerythristic

3a. het lavender x normal -->
1/2 normal looking (het lavender)
1/2 normal

3b. normal x normal -->
1/1 normal

4. normal x het hypomelanistic -->
1/2 normal looking (het hypomelanistic)
1/2 normal

The hardest part to explain is how to put these together. Essentially, we make a column with the results of the first Punnett square. Then we see how many choices result from the second Punnett square. In this case, one. Draw one line after each entry in the first column and add the results from the second square in the second column.

1/2 het amelanistic - 1/1 anerythristic
1/2 amelanistic - 1/1 anerythristic

There are two results from the third Punnett square. Draw a forked line (<) at the right side of each of the two 1/1 anerythristic entries in the second column. Enter 1/2 het lavender at the top of each fork, and enter 1/2 normal at the bottom of each fork.

There are two results from the fourth Punnett square. Draw a forked line (<) at the right sige of each of the four entries in the third column. Enter 1/2 het hypomelanistic at the top of each fork, and enter 1/2 normal at the bottom of each fork.

Lastly, go from left to right, following each branch all the way to the end, and multiplying the fractions.

I can't do that easily on these forums, but here is a sample:

1/2 het amelanistic - 1/1 anerythristic - 1/2 het lavender - 1/2 het hypomelanistic = 1/8 het amelanistic, anerythristic, het lavender, het hypomelanistic
1/2 het amelanistic - 1/1 anerythristic - 1/2 het lavender - 1/2 normal = 1/8 het amelanistic, anerythristic, het lavender

1/2 het amelanistic - 1/1 anerythristic - 1/2 normal - 1/2 het hypomelanistic = 1/8 het amelanistic, anerythristic, het hypomelanistic
1/2 het amelanistic - 1/1 anerythristic - 1/2 normal - 1/2 normal = 1/8 het amelanistic, anerythristic


1/2 amelanistic - 1/1 anerythristic - 1/2 het lavender - 1/2 het hypomelanistic = 1/8 amelanistic, anerythristic, het lavender, het hypomelanistic
1/2 amelanistic - 1/1 anerythristic - 1/2 het lavender - 1/2 normal = 1/8 amelanistic, anerythristic, het lavender

1/2 amelanistic - 1/1 anerythristic - 1/2 normal - 1/2 het hypomelanistic = 1/8 amelanistic, anerythristic, het hypomelanistic
1/2 amelanistic - 1/1 anerythristic - 1/2 normal - 1/2 normal = 1/8 amelanistic, anerythristic

You can plug the 3b results in here in place of the 3a results that I used.

Each individual square here produced either 1 or 2 types of babies. They resulted in an unbranched line for one type of baby and a forked line (with two branches) for two types of babies. Three types of babies requires a three-branched fork, and four types of babies requires a four-branched fork.

A computer program is helpful. But sometimes there is no computer around, and sometimes there is no program for the species being considered. If you can master this technique using pencil and paper, you don't need to worry when those times occur.

Hope this helps.
 
*passes out*

Wow Paul. I have a very vague idea what you just did but I'm getting the jist of it. That's amazing! I'm definitely going to have some long hours of reading and making up random fake pairs to match together. Thanks so much for that, I'm sure it took you some time to do.
 
paulh - Not sure what you did, but the pairing of a snow het lavender to an anery het amel and hypo is really not that complicated. The resulting offspring will be:
50% anery het for amel
50% snow
Of all the offspring (both anerys and snows) - 25% will not be het for anything else, 25% will be het for lavender, 25% will be het for hypo, and 25% will be het for both lavender and hypo.
 
Susan said:
paulh - Not sure what you did, but the pairing of a snow het lavender to an anery het amel and hypo is really not that complicated.
Click to expand...
Correct. But the original poster was having trouble figuring out what a given pair would produce. I used that problem to illustrate the branching system, the simplest way I know to solve genetics problems without using a computer. The same technique is applicable to any problem with two or more loci. I've done four-locus problems with the Punnett square. :puke01: I'm not enough of a masochist to do problems that way routinely.

Work through the logic there. You may like the method. I'll try to answer any questions about it, too.
 
Yep there are a zillion ways to do these problems, so use whatever is easiest for you. It's a bit easier to see it graphically. ;) First determine the outcomes at each locus (use Punnett squares or FOIL or whatever you prefer)

Then start with one locus and work your way through each locus. Since the Anery locus only has one outcome, start with one possibility:
ForklineStep1.GIF

<hr>
Then since there are two outcomes at the amel locus, make two branches off the original:
ForklineStep2.GIF

<hr>
Then, since there are two outcomes at the lavender locus, make two branches from each existing item in the previous column:
ForklineStep3.GIF

<hr>
Same deal for the hypo locus, two branches from each item on the previous column.
ForklineStep4.GIF

<hr>
Then you can follow each branch back to the root to determine what that particular path produces:
ForklineStep5.GIF


If you had another locus like Caramel where both parents were het caramel, you'd have 4 branches and from each item in the hypo column you'd extend 1 caramel, 2 het caramel, 1 wild-type. (Or you could simplify it to 3 branches if you were only concerned with the possibilities and not how likely each is.)

ForklineAddCaramel.GIF


If your first locus has more than one possibility, you'd just start with more than one (like anery and het anery) and then branch out from each of those, in the same way as before. :)
Forkline2Aneries.GIF
 
Ok, SerpWidgets made a lot more sense because of the visual. I was pretty good with Punnet Squares and such. I used to do it with Ball Python genetics all the time. The branching seems easy enough. So would they be het hypo lav? or het hypo, het lav?
 
Hypo and lav are at two different loci, so they would be het hypo and het lav. But that often gets abbreviated to a list of what it's het for... no point in saying het 20 times. ;)
 
In my opinion, the branching system is superior to the two or more locus Punnett square. I do not have to count boxes and add up the identical ones. Each path from left to right is unique, which means less writing. And a branching system is easier to add loci to.

For those using FOIL, that is a simple branching system.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top