My hets are all messed up....clarification, please?

[perfectsoldier23]

Hey everyone,

When someone says 66% het blizzard or 50% het typhoon, that is referring to the clutch of offspring and not the gecko in question itself, correct?
So said gecko, when compared to his fellow clutchmates, has a 66% chance of being 100% het for typhoon and/or blizzard?

 

[favrielle]

Something like that.

I'll use an example from my last year's pairing: a het Bell animal to a het Bell animal.

There are 3 possible results for that pairing: Bell albino (25% chance), not Bell albino (25% chance) and het Bell albino (50% chance). But you won't be able to tell which of the animals that are not visually Bell albinos are het for the trait, and which are not. There's a 2 out of 3 chance that they are (thus they're 66% possible het) and a 1 out of 3 chance that they aren't. And those odds apply to EACH individual animal.

Say I had a clutch with 2 non-Bell babies out of the pair. Each animal has a 2-in-3 chance of being het for Bell, independently of whether the other animal is or is not het for Bell.

 

[perfectsoldier23]

Something like that.

I'll use an example from my last year's pairing: a het Bell animal to a het Bell animal.

There are 3 possible results for that pairing: Bell albino (25% chance), not Bell albino (25% chance) and het Bell albino (50% chance). But you won't be able to tell which of the animals that are not visually Bell albinos are het for the trait, and which are not. There's a 2 out of 3 chance that they are (thus they're 66% possible het) and a 1 out of 3 chance that they aren't. And those odds apply to EACH individual animal.

Say I had a clutch with 2 non-Bell babies out of the pair. Each animal has a 2-in-3 chance of being het for Bell, independently of whether the other animal is or is not het for Bell.

Oh wow, okay. So the percentages don't only apply to the offspring as a whole but are individually applied to each baby.
I suppose I'm a little morally torn between whether I should cross my two then due to their array of hets....
I have an Eclipse Super Snow 100% het rainwater, 100% het patternless female and I'm intending on crossing her with a Mack Snow Rainwater Red Stripe 66% het Typhoon, 50% het Blizzard. Plugging that into the gecko calculator and I get a mass stream of possibilities. Is it really....[and, beg pardon, I don't mean to bash anyone's breeding choices] responsible to be placing these babies on the market with so many poss. hets? Depending upon the outcome, of course.

 

[favrielle]

Personally, I wouldn't pair those two myself, just due to the number of poss hets each animal might end up with. That, and I like things neat and tidy, and want to be sure I know what I'm selling because not everyone down the line might be as honest/have the same level of integrity.
Your SSE het rain and patty female would have a decent shot at proving out the het typhoon (eclipse) on your male, but wouldn't tel you anything about his poss het Blizz. And in the process, you'd get a bunch of babies with up to 4 possible hets, which is a bit messy.

 

[pmkent1]

Oh wow, okay. So the percentages don't only apply to the offspring as a whole but are individually applied to each baby.
I suppose I'm a little morally torn between whether I should cross my two then due to their array of hets....
I have an Eclipse Super Snow 100% het rainwater, 100% het patternless female and I'm intending on crossing her with a Mack Snow Rainwater Red Stripe 66% het Typhoon, 50% het Blizzard. Plugging that into the gecko calculator and I get a mass stream of possibilities. Is it really....[and, beg pardon, I don't mean to bash anyone's breeding choices] responsible to be placing these babies on the market with so many poss. hets? Depending upon the outcome, of course.

Thats exactly right. And kudos to Favrielle (sorry I dont know your real name) for pointing that out since most people forget that. Think of it this way, when your looking at an animal thats already been born and it says 66% that means that that animal has a 2/3 chance of actually carrying whatever that gene is based on the genes of the pairing it came from). In reality it either is het or it isnt, but those are the chances. When your looking at the percentages of a pairing, the % number is the chance that each egg has of carrying any specific gene mentioned (ie 66% het bell, 100% het patternless, 50% het tremper, etc). The key is to keep in mind that those are just averages. A hetxhet pairing in reality can have 1 out of 10 babies be het, or 8 out of 10 be het, and everything in between. And the same applies on the other end, say you have a het bell to het bell pairing. Statistically (by the book) you should have 25% of the babies be visual bells. But in reality you may very well have none that win that lottery if your really unlucky, or you may have half win. And any non Bell babies would all have a 66% chance of being HET Bell.

Hope that helps.

 

[favrielle]

...And kudos to Favrielle (sorry I dont know your real name)

It's Angela.

 

[perfectsoldier23]

Thank you guys so much for breaking that down for me. Really cleared up my ball python genetics as well ;] I appreciate it.
Yeah...the more I think about it the more I think it would be pretty unfair to pair these two together. Kind of sad since the male has such an incredible personality and beautiful markings that I think would make some stunning visual babies. But that amount of unknown hets would just be outrageous.

I suppose I'm back in the market for a quality male. Or, would you guys pair this male with ANYTHING? I suppose I could pair him just to prove him out - pick up a blizzard and a typhoon? Still though...if he proved out to both, the offspring with that SSE female would still be muddy. Hmm...Maybe a female with no known hets? Would knock out a lot of possibles....? I'm really just trying to make this guy work but I realize that may simply not be a smart option to get my breeding established.

 

[DrCarrotTail]

What awesome responses you've gotten so far!! Hopefully my 2 cents doesn't add any misguidance as I'm fairly new to this game as well

I'm assuming your male is a Rainwater (RW) that is 66% het blizzard and 50% het eclipse (typhoon)? Before breeding him I would ask whoever you got him from what the parents were that produced him - just to make 100% sure the het chances are correct. If they are, I might search for a RW Diablo Blanco (that would be a RW eclipse Blizzard - not sure if it has another fancy name). They're not common but I bet they're out there somewhere! Either that or prove out his hets with two different females that are visual eclipses and blizzards. Once you prove the het it is no longer unknown and you can assign reasonable 66% or 50% chance percentages to the offspring. If you don't get a visual eclipse or blizzard offspring out of the pair, proving the het is not there is a bit of a longer process but blizzard and eclipse hets are not seen by the community as being quite as important as albino hetsare. It is nonetheless better to be sure of what you are breeding rather than having loose unknown hets to muddy waters for someone down the line. Whichever you choose, I would be upfront with the folks that buy your geckos and tell them you are in the process of proving if the het is there and be willing to send them updates on percentages and numbers of offspring and whether you've uncovered the het or not if it would be something they would want to know

 

[perfectsoldier23]

Thank you for the contribution! Yes, he is a Rainwater male. And the %'s are backwards - he's 66% het Typhoon, 50% het Blizzard - but those are indeed his poss. hets! ;]
His parents are:
Sire - Rainwater Snow 100% double het Blizzard, Typhoon
Dam - Raining Red Stripe 100% het Typhoon

So, in picking up the Diablo Blanco, it would prove everything except the patternless in the 66% typhoon, correct?
If he were 100% for typhoon, what can I expect from the offspring?
What if he were 100% for blizzard?
And...if he weren't het for either?

 

[perfectsoldier23]

Also, doesn't Diablo Blanco associate with the Tremper strain of albino? Or would I simply have to be specific as to which strain of albinism I'm looking for in my DB?

*edit* after some research, I think I'm looking for a [Rainwater] Blazing Blizzard Eclipse

 

[pmkent1]

Your best bet is always to attempt to prove whatever possible hets you might have. It not only helps you know exactly what your dealing with genetically, but it also helps keep the potential for furthering the muddy waters down the line lower. Which is always appreciated..lol.

 

[DrCarrotTail]

100% agree with what Paul said and Angela gave some fabulous advice too My answers to hopefully most if not all of your questions:

Unless you were told the gecko was het for Murphy's Patternless as well, the patternless stripe that comes along with Typhoon is not a trait that needs to be or can be proved out. It is a polygenic patternless appearance that is often found with the eclipse trait.

Diablo Blanco's were originally Trempers so if you are looking for one that is RW you need to be super careful and super picky about who you get it from to ensure they have proved out any chance of Tremper albino. Like I said, I don't keep up with crazy morph names too well so you're really looking for a gecko that has the Blizzard and Eclipse traits. You either want it to be guaranteed not to have any albino in its background, RW or het for RW would be okay too since you don't really need to prove that trait out. It will probably be easier to find two females that each have one trait rather than one that has both. So either a RW Blizzard and a RW Eclipse or a Blizzard or eclipse that is het for RW. I would look around and see if you can list all the crazy morph names that are being used for blizzard, eclipse and RW albino (or any kind of albino) traits and make sure you keep an eye out for those names too as you search. For example, you'll almost never find a RW eclipse called anything other than a typhoon so if you were looking for only RW eclipse you may find it super difficult to hunt one down.

For both possible hets, to prove they are there, you need only to produce one baby that has either the eclipse or the blizzard trait. For example, if you get one eclipse gecko out of the pairing you immediately know the gecko is het for that trait - it could not have contributed the required recessive gene otherwise. The you can say your male is 100% het for eclipse or proven het for eclipse. Same would go for Blizzard.

Technically you can never "prove" a negative but you can make the chance of one existing so remote that it's almost impossible it exists. I've heard that most folks will accept 20 babies hatched without the trait to "prove" it is not there. That is like flipping a coin 20 times and getting heads every single time. Could it happen? Definitely. The chances of it happening, however, are so slim that most folks will accept the het is "proven" not to exist. Same goes when you are purchasing a gecko. If someone says they "proved" the parents to be free of hets, ask how many babies they produced to prove that statement or who they got their original breeders from and make sure they came from someone reliable and not from a pet store or Craigslist.

Hets are complicated but the possibility they are there opens doors too. You could produce some cool geckos with some traits that aren't often seen in the RW world even though finding them might prove to be a bit of a chore. Good luck!!

 

[perfectsoldier23]

Alright, so sounds like the best and quickest way to prove the males poss hets is to pick up what would be a Rainwater Blazing Blizzard Eclipse?
Then the babies I should expect if he is 100% for blizzard is ....all Blazing Blizzards?
And if he's 100% for typhoon should produce only...eclipse Rainwaters, patternless and blizzards?

That was a complete shot in the dark on my genetics so please correct me if I am wrong.

Sounds like...anything other than those offspring will show that he is NOT het for whatever is lacking?

 

[perfectsoldier23]

Incredible, thank you so much. I'll be looking for RW [or het RW] Eclipse females and RW [or het RW] Blizzard females. They don't have to have any further genetic make up, correct? Then, being as they are both recessive traits, producing just one baby with either Eclipse or Blizzard will show that he is 100% for said trait that shows. Haha, typing it out helps me remember.
Those sound easier to obtain than all the crazy morphs slammed into one female [and cheaper!].

100% agree with what Paul said and Angela gave some fabulous advice too My answers to hopefully most if not all of your questions:

Unless you were told the gecko was het for Murphy's Patternless as well, the patternless stripe that comes along with Typhoon is not a trait that needs to be or can be proved out. It is a polygenic patternless appearance that is often found with the eclipse trait.

Diablo Blanco's were originally Trempers so if you are looking for one that is RW you need to be super careful and super picky about who you get it from to ensure they have proved out any chance of Tremper albino. Like I said, I don't keep up with crazy morph names too well so you're really looking for a gecko that has the Blizzard and Eclipse traits. You either want it to be guaranteed not to have any albino in its background, RW or het for RW would be okay too since you don't really need to prove that trait out. It will probably be easier to find two females that each have one trait rather than one that has both. So either a RW Blizzard and a RW Eclipse or a Blizzard or eclipse that is het for RW. I would look around and see if you can list all the crazy morph names that are being used for blizzard, eclipse and RW albino (or any kind of albino) traits and make sure you keep an eye out for those names too as you search. For example, you'll almost never find a RW eclipse called anything other than a typhoon so if you were looking for only RW eclipse you may find it super difficult to hunt one down.

For both possible hets, to prove they are there, you need only to produce one baby that has either the eclipse or the blizzard trait. For example, if you get one eclipse gecko out of the pairing you immediately know the gecko is het for that trait - it could not have contributed the required recessive gene otherwise. The you can say your male is 100% het for eclipse or proven het for eclipse. Same would go for Blizzard.

Technically you can never "prove" a negative but you can make the chance of one existing so remote that it's almost impossible it exists. I've heard that most folks will accept 20 babies hatched without the trait to "prove" it is not there. That is like flipping a coin 20 times and getting heads every single time. Could it happen? Definitely. The chances of it happening, however, are so slim that most folks will accept the het is "proven" not to exist. Same goes when you are purchasing a gecko. If someone says they "proved" the parents to be free of hets, ask how many babies they produced to prove that statement or who they got their original breeders from and make sure they came from someone reliable and not from a pet store or Craigslist.

Hets are complicated but the possibility they are there opens doors too. You could produce some cool geckos with some traits that aren't often seen in the RW world even though finding them might prove to be a bit of a chore. Good luck!!

 

[DrCarrotTail]

You would ignore the patternless trait since you're talking about the patternless stripe which has no predictable outcome that you can calculate. It will be there to some unpredictable degree no matter what you breed him to since it is polygenic.

If your gecko is het for something approximately half of his offspring should be that trait. The situation with the two possible hets makes it harder to explain but if I take the eclipse het as an example...

If your RW IS het for eclipse and you breed him to an eclipse RW you'll produce half RW that are eclipse and half that are het for eclipse.

If he is NOT het for eclipse and you breed him to an eclipse RW you'll produce all RWs that are het for eclipse.

Substitute blizzard for eclipse in the above statements and you'll have the breakdown for that gene too.

It is much easier to think of them separately when counting percentages for proving a het than together. If you want to think about them together you would get 25% with both traits, 25% with neither trait (het for both), and 25% with eclipse het for blizzard and 25% with blizzard het for eclipse. These percentages would change if he proves to be het for one trait and not het for the other...which is wh y I find it easier to think of them separately.

 

[perfectsoldier23]

I see. So ANY offspring produced that comes out either Eclipse or Blizzard proves he is 100% for said trait.

You would ignore the patternless trait since you're talking about the patternless stripe which has no predictable outcome that you can calculate. It will be there to some unpredictable degree no matter what you breed him to since it is polygenic.

If your gecko is het for something approximately half of his offspring should be that trait. The situation with the two possible hets makes it harder to explain but if I take the eclipse het as an example...

If your RW IS het for eclipse and you breed him to an eclipse RW you'll produce half RW that are eclipse and half that are het for eclipse.

If he is NOT het for eclipse and you breed him to an eclipse RW you'll produce all RWs that are het for eclipse.

Substitute blizzard for eclipse in the above statements and you'll have the breakdown for that gene too.

It is much easier to think of them separately when counting percentages for proving a het than together. If you want to think about them together you would get 25% with both traits, 25% with neither trait (het for both), and 25% with eclipse het for blizzard and 25% with blizzard het for eclipse. These percentages would change if he proves to be het for one trait and not het for the other...which is wh y I find it easier to think of them separately.

 

[perfectsoldier23]

Could I pick up a Typhoon? It would be the Rainwater Eclipse but would have the patternless trait as well. I know it is something to ignore but I wasn't sure if you were referring to my Super Snow 100% patternless or in reference to a new addition and ignoring if it was or was het for patternless.

**edit - I can pick one up. Since that Patternless trait is referring to the polygenic stripe [like you said, CarrotTail], the offspring won't produce the patternless anyhow. Wouldn't matter because that's clearly not the gene I'm trying to breed for.

Ugh sorry I'm so slow at this, haha. I type here, google, ask online and then realize I didn't have to ask this. I just want to make absolute sure though too.

 

[tb144050]

I see. So ANY offspring produced that comes out either Eclipse or Blizzard proves he is 100% for said trait.

Generally, here is something you can always count on when discussing "double-recessive" traits: If a hatchling has a visible trait (like Eclipse or one of the albino strains),....then BOTH parents have ATLEAST one recessive gene.

So, to clearly answer your question directly:
1) If any 1 offspring is visibly Eclipse, then HE, the male, is ATLEAST het for Eclipse.
2) If any 1 offspring is visibly Blizzard, then HE, the male, is ATLEAST het for Blizzard.

However, as a new guy, I had&have trouble telling the difference between the different "plain" morphs, such as "blizzard or Murphy's patternless or raptor-type polygenic so-called patternless (whatever it's called, I forget right now). So my advice there is just to be sure you are thorough when identifying a "patternless" style of morph...because I sure suck at telling the difference..lol

 

[favrielle]

As I understood it, your Super Snow Eclipse is the one that is het for patternless, yes? While everything said above about proving out your male is accurate (not worrying about the patternless stripe trait for your male) you might want to double-check with the breeder on your female. If she is het for Murphy's Patternless (which is a simple recessive gene and NOT the same thing as patternless stripe), you will need to take that into account when breeding her and labelling offspring.

I have an Eclipse Super Snow 100% het rainwater, 100% het patternless female and I'm intending on crossing her with a Mack Snow Rainwater Red Stripe 66% het Typhoon, 50% het Blizzard.

And just for fun, you could always get a male Rainwater Patternless to pair with her, and work on producing your own Mack Snow Cyclones aka Mack Snow Rainwater Patternless Eclipses (the Rainwater form of DB) in a couple generations.

 

[perfectsoldier23]

just emailed the breeder for the Super Snow to confirm the type of patternless - thank you!
Currently in the works with a few breeders on a typhoon female - may end up working out as that appeared to be the morph that was going to be hard to come by. Hoping for a "true" Typhoon and not simply a Rainwater Eclipse but, no matter either way.