| |
| Author |
Message |
hhmoore
Joined: 24 Nov 2007
Posts: 504
|
 Posted: Thu May 29, 2008 5:29 pm Post subject: |
 |
| NickMyers03 wrote: | | harald you just said what i said more in depth... you can replace the NN with anything you want...make it XX or xx or Xx if you want it still comes out the same.. |
It all comes out the same if, and that is sometimes a very big IF, the people utilizing the tool actually understand what things represent & what is happening. If they are just plugging in letters without a basic level of comprehension, the outcomes will still make them go HUH?? (think Tim "The Toolman" Taylor when you read that HUH??))
*my apologies if I missed that you were saying that...I was scrolling back from the last post, and that NN/Nn thing just caught my eye.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
|
|
|
BP_Lover
Joined: 18 Apr 2008
Posts: 161
|
| Posted: Fri May 30, 2008 12:04 am Post subject: |
|
Ok i i know i got myself confused and redid my punnete square and got it right! thanks allot!
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
arlynos
Joined: 10 Mar 2008
Posts: 703
Location: whitney point, ny
|
| Posted: Fri May 30, 2008 2:05 am Post subject: |
|
hey I was surfing Youtube and one of my subscriptions did something on punnet squares and it made kinda sense to me here it is
http://youtube.com/watch?v=kg3alXbN1Tg
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
dibiz
Joined: 02 Jul 2008
Posts: 177
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 04, 2008 9:15 pm Post subject: |
|
thanks, that was a really helpful video
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
deborahbroadus
Moderator
Joined: 16 Jul 2006
Posts: 6746
Location: Baltimore, MD
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 04, 2008 9:36 pm Post subject: |
|
Ummm the diagram was wrong from the first display, I didn't stay around for the corrections. 
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
dibiz
Joined: 02 Jul 2008
Posts: 177
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
matt31
Joined: 16 Sep 2008
Posts: 21
Location: Fresno, CA
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 18, 2008 11:21 pm Post subject: |
|
Was I reading right when it said pastel X lesser platinum = platty daddy or platinum?
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
NickMyers03
Moderator
Joined: 12 Dec 2006
Posts: 1904
Location: fredericksburg va
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 18, 2008 11:51 pm Post subject: |
|
| matt31 wrote: | | Was I reading right when it said pastel X lesser platinum = platty daddy or platinum? |
i hope you didnt read that because it would be wrong
pastel X Lesser = lessers, pastels, pastel lessers, normals
only way to make a platinum aka platty daddy is to have a platty sib ( het hidden gene) to a platty or lesser
there are also butter daddys and crystals which are thought to be the mojave version but not sure until one is made using a platty sib to Mojave
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
matt31
Joined: 16 Sep 2008
Posts: 21
Location: Fresno, CA
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 19, 2008 12:28 am Post subject: |
|
Thanks Nick, so how would you breed to get a platty if the gene is hidden? Would you just keep breeding lessers together untill you get lucky?
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
NickMyers03
Moderator
Joined: 12 Dec 2006
Posts: 1904
Location: fredericksburg va
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 19, 2008 11:26 am Post subject: |
|
lesser does not contain the hidden gene..if it did it would be a platty.
the ORG animal was bought by a breeder and called the platty... when he bred it to a normal he got "normals" and something that looked like the dad but no where as faded.. he called them lesser plattys aka lessers. he sold some of the normal males and a few females got out before he bred the platty to one of the daughters and produced another platty. when a platty is bred to something anything that is not lesser contains the hidden gene. the snakes with the hidden gene look normal. there have been a few that have poped up in other countries and some have now been sold in the US by the breeder.
if you have 10K you can purchase a platty 
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
matt31
Joined: 16 Sep 2008
Posts: 21
Location: Fresno, CA
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 21, 2008 1:10 pm Post subject: |
|
Oh yeah, I'll do that right after I get done visiting Europe on my private jet.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
matt31
Joined: 16 Sep 2008
Posts: 21
Location: Fresno, CA
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 21, 2008 3:16 pm Post subject: |
|
| deborahbroadus wrote: | | BP_Lover wrote: | | so then the whole punette square doesn't apply because Spider (A,A) and Normal (B,B) would make them all 100% het for spider im confused this is what i read ( well understood from a website deb told me about) |
You are not taking into consideration that there is NO het for Spider. It's either a Spider or it is not. It's not a "possible" Spider, or "I gotta breed it to see if it has Spider genes." |
Nick and Deb I found this on the genetics 101 page at ballpythons.ca. apparently they think that something can be het for spider.
A third mutation type is completely dominant. You will often see this type referred to as just “dominant” but I prefer to add “completely” to avoid confusion as “dominant” is also often used for the super category of all mutations that have been proven non recessive but may yet prove codominant. With the proven completely dominant mutation type, even one mutant copy would completely cover the normal version of the same gene. Some believe that Spider will prove to be completely dominant and that the homozygous spider genotype will have the same spider phenotype as the heterozygous spider genotype. If this is the case you can think of it as one spider gene dominating one normal copy of that gene and being enough to make the snake look just as fully spider like as one that has two mutant copies of that gene.
Chances are you already know these 5 breeding results from the recessive morphs you may well have learned about first. All you need to learn is to break the dominant mutant type phenotypes down to the correct genotype equivalents and you are ready to predict the outcome of crosses that will confound your friends who still think “het” only applies to recessive mutations!
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
NickMyers03
Moderator
Joined: 12 Dec 2006
Posts: 1904
Location: fredericksburg va
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 22, 2008 2:10 pm Post subject: |
|
NOPE, you read it wrong.
they are stating that CODOM could also be viewed as hets. if you have a recessive morph then both animals that are mating have to contian the recessive gene to produce the visual animal aka het albino to het albino = albino.
co dom is a visual het in which has a super. lesser X lesser (can) = blue eye lucy
but the flaw is that if you do albino to albino ( as a recessive gene) then all babies will be albino, if you do lesser X lesser you have a CHANCE to produce the blue eye lucy
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
matt31
Joined: 16 Sep 2008
Posts: 21
Location: Fresno, CA
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 22, 2008 3:09 pm Post subject: |
|
Roger that, thanks Nick!
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
Ball
Pythons for Sale
Ron's
Ball Python Blog
FAQ
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Search
Register
Log in