66%...??

[StatikStepz]

What does this mean? In other words, how is a "66% het" derived from?

Never bred anything to get a 66% het, so was just curious...

I kinda have an idea, can someone tell me if it is correct...

Leo "A" 100% het for gene "1" x Leo "B" = A leo 66% het for gene "1"??? (I think it is this because there is 3 genes coming in to play...?) :/

if not, could someone give an example something like that... Or could even use a real morph name, whatever is simplest for you!

Thanx!

 

[herpencounter]

Het. albino X Het. albino = 1/4 normal 1/2 Het. albino 1/4 homozygous albino.

3 out of 4 geckos will LOOK normal. The 4th gecko will be an alibno.

2 of the 3 remaining geckos will be Het. for albino. The Het. albinos and the normal look the same. So... Each geckos has a 66% chance of being Het. for albino or, 2/3.

 

[ILoveGeckos14]

When you mix two het animals you theoretically get 1/4 showing the recessive trait and 3/4 not showing the trait. Of those 3 that do not show the recessive trait 2 are het and one is homozygous dominant but it is hard/impossible to tell if something is het at birth until later test breeding. So since anything not showing the recessive has a 2/3 chance of being het you label anything not displaying the recessive as 66%(2 divided by 3) chance het (insert trait here) I hope that made sense lol

 

[StatikStepz]

It makes sense now! Got it! Thanx for the info guys!

 

[StatikStepz]

... so u could also label it "possible het", rite?

uz, i mean, either it is het, or it isn't... 66% isn't really any more het than a 50% het animal... cuz either you find out it is, or it isn't...

I guess people just do it that way, as a 66% het animal, to show it came from parents that were both 100% het for it....?

 

[Enigmatic_Reptiles]

Yes you could label it as pos het. Well knowing it is 66% or 50% het to 100% het is very important when purchasing a leo. One IS het and the other may be. Someone selling a 66% het leo should not raise the price much if any from one who is not het at all. I think unless its 100% het for something should price or anything be affected. But to each his own. But it should always be labeled if it even is a pos het...helps keep genetics in order.

 

[StatikStepz]

Yes you could label it as pos het. Well knowing it is 66% or 50% het to 100% het is very important when purchasing a leo. One IS het and the other may be. Someone selling a 66% het leo should not raise the price much if any from one who is not het at all. I think unless its 100% het for something should price or anything be affected. But to each his own. But it should always be labeled if it even is a pos het...helps keep genetics in order.

Well of course... Obviously, i agree there! I feel the same way. I wouldn't raise the price of somethin for it being a possible het, becuase if it turns out that its not, then that would suck. Only if it is 100% and are guaranteed to get those offspring with the right pairing.

 

[GreenKnight Exotics]

Each offspring that does not show the visible recessive trait had a 66.666% chance "theoretically" of inheriting the recessive gene, as far as asking a higher price for possible hets,..definitely.
When I look to purchase animals, and the breeder explains that said animal came from a het X het breeding, I am willing to pay a little more for it,..sure, not as much as I would expect to pay for a 100% het, but definitely more then a guaranteed non-het(i.e. Mack Snow Enigma 66% poss. het RAPTOR compared to a Mack Snow Enigma,...OBVIOUSLY the poss. het RAPTOR will command a higher price).
Dave

 

[imbrad2003]

Each offspring that does not show the visible recessive trait had a 66.666% chance "theoretically" of inheriting the recessive gene, as far as asking a higher price for possible hets,..definitely.
When I look to purchase animals, and the breeder explains that said animal came from a het X het breeding, I am willing to pay a little more for it,..sure, not as much as I would expect to pay for a 100% het, but definitely more then a guaranteed non-het(i.e. Mack Snow Enigma 66% poss. het RAPTOR compared to a Mack Snow Enigma,...OBVIOUSLY the poss. het RAPTOR will command a higher price).
Dave

Hey Dave, How ya doin? Didnt know you were a member here too!:main_thumbsup:

 

[StatikStepz]

Each offspring that does not show the visible recessive trait had a 66.666% chance "theoretically" of inheriting the recessive gene, as far as asking a higher price for possible hets,..definitely.
When I look to purchase animals, and the breeder explains that said animal came from a het X het breeding, I am willing to pay a little more for it,..sure, not as much as I would expect to pay for a 100% het, but definitely more then a guaranteed non-het(i.e. Mack Snow Enigma 66% poss. het RAPTOR compared to a Mack Snow Enigma,...OBVIOUSLY the poss. het RAPTOR will command a higher price).
Dave

Well of course... but i don't think i would...

Take that instance for example... If i had a Mack Enigma, and a Mack Enigma, 66% het Raptor, i mite only charge $20 or so more for it... but i see no reason to charge more than that.

 

[xanderville]

Pricing is completely up to the seller. If the seller wants to sell his gecko then he would have to keep competitive pricing. This would be controlled by the buyers' market.
Poss. hets will vary in price according to what the het is for. A poss. het for Tremper will not fetch a price tag as high as a poss. het Radar or Typhoon. But if someone wants to pay $50 more for a poss. het Tremper then that is the buyers' choice.
Poss. hets can be looked in a positive way in that if you breed the gecko in the frame of mind that the gecko is not het for that, then you may get a nice surprise out of the egg.
Just my thoughts on the matter