snows....confuse me.... just a quick question...

[nevinm]

ok, so i figure all and all theres 2 kinds of snows. co-dom, and line breed, and then there is a couple of each of those. i compleatly understand the co-dom. i know theres like 2 or 3 co-dom lines. my quesions have to do with the gem snows, and the urban gecko snows. urban geckos sais there snows were line breed, and may be axanthic. i understand what axanthic is, and a leo or any other reptile can be born with no yellow or brown just by some freak chance, but that doesnt make it axanthic. so if there leos are line breed then why do they think there axanthic. and as far as the gem snows goes, i just dont anything about them, and i would like to.
thanx alot
nevin

 

[LeosForLess]

There is basically co dom, which is most popular as of right now and creates a super forom, super snow albino.

Then theres the Dom snows, gem snows, urban geckos

Then line bred, they just breed whiter and whiter geckos.

 

[nevinm]

o ok, thank you. well like i said, i know about the co doms. and i must have miss read something on the urbans web page, cause i thought it said they were line breed, and thats what have been confusing me. and the gem snows, and urbans the only dominate ones thats have the doms? where can i find out more about the gems. i did a google search a little while ago and couldnt find anything.

 

[Jeanne]

There are 4 Types of Snows:

Line Bred Snows - Selectively bred for their Black & White Color
Mack Snow - Co DOm Snows with a Super Form
Gem Snows - Dominant Type
Urban Snows - Dominant Type

The Gem Snows were found by Reptilian Gems www.reptiliangems.com

 

[nevinm]

hahahahaha, i really need to pay more attention to what i read, and let less things fly over my head. i have aready seen the reptiliangems page. hahahaha. ok i understand it all now. how meny other types of codoms are there?i kno theres like 2 or 3 isnt there?

 

[cjreptiles]

There is basically co dom, which is most popular as of right now and creates a super forom, super snow albino.

The super form of the Mack/co dom is just a super snow, not albino (unless it also has the albino genes obviously )

 

[Jeanne]

how meny other types of codoms are there?i kno theres like 2 or 3 isnt there?

There is only 1 type of co-dom snow, the Mack Snow.

 

[ReptilianGems]

Hi all,

To put it in a nut shell, going by the correct definition of Co-Dominance, there aren't any Co-Dominant traits in Leopard Geckos that I know of. Which leads me to the term "Super". I am not sure who made up the term, but it is being used in conjunction with an incorrect definition of Co-Dominance by many people. They seem to be substituting it for the word homozygous when breeding the offspring of a particular trait being called Co-Dominant. When in reality, Co-Dominance occurs in a heterozygote, not a homozygote. If you look through any book on genetics, or look at any web page posted by a university or high school, on a course on genetics, you will not find the term Super, because it is not a genetic term.

The main thing to remember when thinking about Dominant, Incomplete Dominant, and Co-Dominant traits, is that these three terms describe the relationship between two DIFFERENT alleles. If an animal has two copies of the same allele, then it is just homozygous for that trait, no different than when a Tremper albino has two copies of of the Tremper Albino gene. I haven't ever heard of anyone calling a gecko a super Albino.

To give some examples, using two parent flowers, one Red, and one White.

Co-Dominant... Red + White = Offspring that are BOTH Red and White, or in other words are White with spots of Red, or Red with spots of White.

Incomplete Dominant... Red + White = Offspring that are Pink. In other words, there is a blending of the two parental phenotypes.

simple Dominance... Red (being the dominant allele) + White = Offspring that are all Red.

I have not proven yet whether my snows are dominant or incomplete dominant. I hate to outbreed a nice animal just to prove a point, but I am pretty sure that mine are incomplete dominant, just because of the blending that occurs as they age when they are outbred to a non-snow. I have some Gem to Gem offspring that I suspect are Homozygous, but I have not proven it yet. They are much whiter than the outbred ones.

I have one question. Is there anybody out there that gets this, or am I just beating a dead horse, lol? I didn't want to come across as a Mr. Smarty pants know it all, but I have spent a lot of time on individual emails, trying to help people on this, and I have yet to have a person that I think really got a handle on it because of anything I wrote. I honestly hope that this helps somebody. Now, let the chastising begin, lol.

Just previewed this post, and that was a rather large nutshell. Sorry, I tend to ramble sometimes. Old age I think.

 

[Sandra]

Which leads me to the term "Super". I am not sure who made up the term, but it is being used in conjunction with an incorrect definition of Co-Dominance by many people.[...]

If you look through any book on genetics, or look at any web page posted by a university or high school, on a course on genetics, you will not find the term Super, because it is not a genetic term.

...And I don't think that anybody thinks 'Super' it is a genetic term. We call the homozygous form of the Snow 'Super Snow' just like the blizzards are called blizzards and the patternless are called patternless. Those are incorrect names scientifically speaking, but help us to remember the morphs.

If the albinism had any kind of repercussion in the appearance of the heterozygous form, I think we would have made up a name for it too.

But yeah, if it was me who decided the name, they would be called 'Mack Snow' and 'Mack snow visible het (or just het)' (I hate when they say 'Super Mack Snow visible het'! Sounds so redundant).

 

[ReptilianGems]

I see your point. I guess the term super wouldn't bother me, if it wasn't being used to try to explain a wrong definition of Co-Dominance.

 

[GroovyGeckos.com]

I had posted this somewhere before, but I was just assuming that: Noone really knew there were these different types, and just like the snake breeders, called it "co-dom", that has a "super" form. I know I thought it was just short for inCOmplete-DOMinance, two years ago, before I actually did some reading on it. Maybe they just made that same mistake.

Of course it is actually short for CO-operating DOMinance.

Jim here is my thought. I agree the Macks fit under the term Incomplete Dominance better, but that would mean the "Gems" are dominant, wouldnt it?

Then again they can produce Super Snows, when bred to Macks. That and the fact some "linebred" Snows can produce them too, just made this thing sooooooo much more complicated.

 

[nevinm]

im sorry reptiliangems, i dont know your name...but haha, wow, i didnt think it would lead to all that. any way i know what you, sandra, and dan were talking about. anyway, what i was asking about the co-doms....i didnt mean there were "differant" ones, what i ment was names. i knew they all lead to the same, but i thought there were like 2 diff people that came up with there own co-doms. like the mack snow, and "insert name here" snow. thats what i was asking. but with the all the other stuff you 3 had said, i do understand all that.

 

[ReptilianGems]

Dan,

With simple Dominance, the animal will look the same whether it has one copy of the gene, or two. With Incomplete Dominance, and Co-Dominance, the Hets (one copy) will looks different than the homozygotes (two copy).

As far as the Gem Snows producing "supers" when bred to Macks, I think that it just means that the two share the same locus. I think that it is possible (don't know for sure of course), that the Macks might have a seperate gene that affects how the snow gene is expressed, and also affects the pattern, and appears to be recessive, since you have to breed offspring together to get "supers" (two copy). In my opinion, all of the snows we are talking about are actually Incomplete Dominant, since there is a blending of the parental phenotypes when outbred to non-snows.

To fit the definition of Co-Dominant, when you bred a snow to a non-snow, you would get an offspring, that would have some areas that were yellow/orange, and some areas that were white. There would be no intermediate color, but both colors would be present at the same time.

Part of what makes it so confusing, is that there is so much misinformation out there, and then there are annoying people like me that don't just go with the flow.

Just when we all had the recessive traits figured out, then these come along, lol.

 

[nevinm]

personaly im glad for people like you. but what you said about the snows with yellow/orange in them...well dont some of the snows have that, or gain that in time. i have a snow that doesnt look snow at all, and accually looks like a normal

 

[GroovyGeckos.com]

Yes, thats the other thing. The even more confusing facts. Some Macks start off w/ some yellow, almost all of them gain some yellow, and some do get some orange in places. I dont remember if Xavier`s Mack Snow Albino was born with it, but it had an orange spot on its head.

 

[ReptilianGems]

Nevin,

The fact that when you breed a snow to a non snow, the babies tend to end up somewhere between the two parents colors, makes it fit the definition of Incomple Dominance much better than CoDominance. You have a dark yellow parent, and a white parent, and the babies turn out a very light yellow. This is a blending of the two phenotypes (or an intermediate phenotype), which is what occurs with Incomplete Dominance.

Dan,

You mentioned that you did some reading on it. I am so glad to hear somebody say that. Most people are just taking the word of a few people, and don't bother to find out if they are correct or not.

On my web page, I have links on all of my genetic terms and definitions, that will connect you to Wikipedia, Answers.com, and thefreedictionary.com. You can get to them from a link on my About our Snows page, for those who think I am just making this stuff up as I go,lol.

 

[GroovyGeckos.com]

Jim I know you are`nt making this up. lol

Well sure, Albey called them Incomplete Dominant, and the others were calling the "Co-doms", so I had to try to figure out more about them.

I will say the difference between the two types is still confusing me. Especially when you say they should be either blended, or combined in appearance. It is hard for me to say that the Mack Snows and MSA`s I have are one or the other.

Because like I said:

1. they start out WHITE (which isnt a blending)
But then:

2. they gain some yellow, but not all of them (even more yellow as more normal genes are added)

3. some even have orange in places

It is not as if all of the Macks are completely yellow, I mean some have it in placesw/ areas of white still, others are just covered in it, throughout.

Every time I try to think for myself and decide which it is, I think: Is #2 and #3 a blending or a combination? Seems like it depends on how you look at it.

 

[ReptilianGems]

Dan,

Here are the definitions as posted on my web page. The key part of the definition for CoDominant, is the part where it says FULLY expressed. I don't see how they can be fully white, and fully yellow/orange at the same time.


Incomplete Dominance: When there is a blending of the two parental phenotypes, producing third phenotype different than either parent. One classic example of Incomplete Dominance, is when breeding some flowers, crossing a red flower with a white flower, produces a pink flower. In this case, one allele dominates the other, but only partially, producing a third intermediate phenotype, intermediate between those of the parents.

Co-Dominance: Is when both parental traits are FULLY expressed in the offspring. An example of Co-Dominance often given, is in cattle when one parent has red fur, and the other has white fur, the offspring is born with both red and white fur. As with Incomplete Dominance, a third phenotype is produced, but there is no blending. In other words, the red fur is still red, and the white fur is still white, but they are both present together. There is no blending with Co-Dominant traits. Because neither Allele dominates the other, they are both expressed fully in the first generation. In the example of the red and white cattle, the red hair is still red, and the white hair is still white, but they are both present together (hence the term Co-Dominant). You don't have to breed offspring together to get a Co-Dominant trait.

 

[nevinm]

wow!! for the first time in 7 years i understand the diff between co-dom and incomplete dom. ive heard that explination SO MENY times, and it just hit me now. the incomplete dominace (and pretty much the only part of genetics i didnt get) part was what i never really understud. im sorry if this also went over my head...but why can a compleatly white snow come and stay white through adulthood from a mack that turned out looking compleatly normal?

 

[preacherman]

Jim I know you are`nt making this up. lol

Well sure, Albey called them Incomplete Dominant, and the others were calling the "Co-doms", so I had to try to figure out more about them.

I will say the difference between the two types is still confusing me. Especially when you say they should be either blended, or combined in appearance. It is hard for me to say that the Mack Snows and MSA`s I have are one or the other.

Because like I said:

1. they start out WHITE (which isnt a blending)
But then:

2. they gain some yellow, but not all of them (even more yellow as more normal genes are added)

3. some even have orange in places

It is not as if all of the Macks are completely yellow, I mean some have it in placesw/ areas of white still, others are just covered in it, throughout.

Every time I try to think for myself and decide which it is, I think: Is #2 and #3 a blending or a combination? Seems like it depends on how you look at it.

Somehow I missed this thread until just now. Anyways, very good discussion. Dan, I've wondered the exact same things.