Super Stinger White Out

[Carinata]

Looks like you did get some Zeros.....
http://geckoforums.net/showthread.php?t=67582

 

[OhioGecko]

Looks like you did get some Zeros.....
http://geckoforums.net/showthread.php?t=67582

The zeros you see are from the female I got after I hatched 20+ non zero babies. They are from a Super Zero X Zero sibling (no identifying markers).

 

[Carinata]

Thanks for clearing that up, Thad. I'm a little confused as to how you're saying it's a recessive but has a super form. Are you saying I have to breed Het. Zeros together to get a Zero and then breed those Homogzygous Zeros together to get a Super Zero.

 

[Carinata]

If you produced no Zeros (missing on the odds) by breeding it to normals, but produced offspring when breeding it to a Zero sibling. It makes more sense to say it's actually a Zero Patternless. If it was a homozygous Zero it would make 100% Zeros.

 

[OhioGecko]

Ok, so on JMGs AFT care sheet they list Zero as Co-dominant.
http://jmgreptile.com/fattailcare.html
On 2/21/2009 They say they've proven a super form
http://jmgreptile.com/morpharchives002.html [/QUOTE}

They have since proven it to be recessive and they have not updated the genetics on their website, I talked to Jeff and he is getting the verbage together.

The thing about Zeros is, sometimes you get true Zeros from Zero to Normal or Zero to Zero/Super Zero pairing. Sometimes you get very dark animals often labeled as Zero Siblings that are in fact Zeros. From what we can gather Zero Sibs usually won't make nice Zeros. So one could say, that yes Zero occasionally acts as a recessive type trait. When it is really a co-dominant. Like I said, I'm not trying to start a flame war, but I want to get the facts sorted out

If you will consider this a co-dominant trait than you should say patternless is a co-dominant trait also. They have almost exactly the same het markers.

Now my good friend Alex Estrada (Imperial Geckos), bred Whiteout X Zero a few years go and got several Whiteouts. Most all of them are very dark, ugly Whiteouts, and those are the ones that are Whiteout Zeros. That's what Jeff told Alex.

A couple of years ago the genetics were not as much understood as now. I would have Alex call Jeff back and re-confirm. I would bet that the ugly muddy white out's carried the zero gene, like a het marker, but did not display the full pattern of the zero or stinger.

I talked to Pat, and he confirmed he popped a Zero out of a Patternless clutch.

Where did he get the parents from? Was he doing any other zero/stinger breedings at the time?

David, I agree the genetics on these are definately not the normal to what we see in the gecko world. They seem to be following more for the ball python genetics. That is where some traits are compatible with other traits and some traits can unlock traits when combined with other morphs.

I'm going to stand strong that these act more recessive than co-dominant. The reason being, if you breed a super to a proven normal girl you will not get any stingers or zeros. You will have about 50% that display a het marker similiar to patternless, but not the full backs like the zeros and stingers. Now if you breed them to het patternless or patternless geckos, the genetics will combine to make Patternless geckos. If you breed two het zeros/stingers together you will get zeros, stingers, and the supers.

The goofy part of these is when you breed the 1st generation babies back to the super dad. So far I'm 50% with supers and 50% zeros. So what does that mean. A double recessive? Co-Dominant second generation breeding? I can't anwser this without more data. It will be interesting to see how it all pans out.

 

[OhioGecko]

Thanks for clearing that up, Thad. I'm a little confused as to how you're saying it's a recessive but has a super form. Are you saying I have to breed Het. Zeros together to get a Zero and then breed those Homogzygous Zeros together to get a Super Zero.

I don't believe I did say there is a super form I did use the name given to them, super zero/super stinger or super for short to include both. My pervious post talks more about the genetics on the "Super" form.

 

[Carinata]

Thad, I understand what you're saying, but it really sounds like there is something else going on in your Super Zero. The Zero het Patternless I had from Pat came from a Patternless X Normal I believe. This stuff is really difficult to understand and I hope that down the road it becomes more clear. I'm very fluent in Ball Python morphs, and it sounds to me like you think they're like the Blue Eyed Leucistics. Many different morphs will make a Blue Eyed Leucy, such as Lessers, Mojaves, Butters, etc. You breed any of them together you'll make more BELs, BUT you can't have a Lesser Butter or Mojave Lesser. I really hope we can continue to figure out what the exact genetics behind this animal is, and we can continue to see new and exciting morphs pop up in the market.

I too have a shot at Super Stinger Whiteouts this season and hopefully we can compare results. I've talked to Jeff over the last year and he's told me Zero is co-dominant. I still maintain my statement that I think something very strange is going on with your Super Zero.

 

[OhioGecko]

If you produced no Zeros (missing on the odds) by breeding it to normals, but produced offspring when breeding it to a Zero sibling. It makes more sense to say it's actually a Zero Patternless. If it was a homozygous Zero it would make 100% Zeros.

Why would you say it is a patternless? Does homozygous Amel produce 100% Amels? Now on the other hand a homozygous Mack Snow (Super Snow) does produce 100% Mack Snows. Again the reason they are not co-dominant and hetrozygous at stage 1 of the breeding.

STAGE 1
Super Zero x Normal = all hetrozygous and some het markers
Zero/Stinger x Normal = I don't know, but I will be adding this project soon.
Zero/Stinger x het Zero/Stinger = I don't know, but I will be adding this project.
Zero/Stinger x Zero/Stinger = eggs in the incubator right now.

STAGE 2
Super Zero x Zero/Stinger hets = 50%Supers 50% Zero/Stingers (so far)
Super Zero x Zero/Stinger = eggs in the incubator right now.

Zero/Stinger x Patternless
I have no experience with these but if someone has, please post their results. I have heard that they are compatible. I will be talking with Jeff Jr. and Sr. this weekend to find out more about their results with this crossing.

 

[OhioGecko]

Thad, I understand what you're saying, but it really sounds like there is something else going on in your Super Zero. The Zero het Patternless I had from Pat came from a Patternless X Normal I believe..

David, this might be where you are having issues. I know my reptiles are not het for anything else. This could be throwing you off becuase you got a patternless het zero or zero het patternless. If that is the case then of course you are going to get the results your getting.

This stuff is really difficult to understand and I hope that down the road it becomes more clear. I'm very fluent in Ball Python morphs, and it sounds to me like you think they're like the Blue Eyed Leucistics. Many different morphs will make a Blue Eyed Leucy, such as Lessers, Mojaves, Butters, etc. You breed any of them together you'll make more BELs, BUT you can't have a Lesser Butter or Mojave Lesser.

I know very little about ball pythons and I don't know what genetics you are explaining above so I really cannot comment.

I really hope we can continue to figure out what the exact genetics behind this animal is, and we can continue to see new and exciting morphs pop up in the market.

Me too

I've talked to Jeff over the last year and he's told me Zero is co-dominant.

You will see him tomorrow at Hamburg, ask him there and reply back with what he tells you

I still maintain my statement that I think something very strange is going on with your Super Zero.

You are simply wrong You have a multi genetic reptile that you admitted but are denying, lol. My genetics were clean from the start and that is why we have different results.

Good luck on your Super Zero White Out, I can't wait to see what it looks like!

 

[Lecko my Gecko]

I cant seem to get pics up, have plent on my FB but I got one of the first patty pairs in the states 5 yrs ago from urban I since have been hatching battmans and zeros from my male to normals. this started before jeff released his stuff, so we just looked at the battmans and zero stuff as het markers. so I got a zero male from jeff and bred it to one of the het patty zero females and have now hatched six eggs 3 stripe normal 1 battman 1 zero and 1 patternless animal that I dont know if its patty or super zero. I personally cant tell them apart LOL I believe they are related in some way however in the ones I produce, they do act different for example in the jmg zero and battman the patterns fade out and the color over takes it but the het patty zero patterns stay dark. also the JMG ones seem to produce like a co dom producing 50% but the het patty ones do not. unfortunately the only way we will evr trully know is if someone gets wild caught zero and breeds it to patty.Mike R does have zero het pattys and a bunch lol as for pats amel het patty it does or did exist. Ive hatched 3 amels from patty x (virgin)amel but 2 died with in the first week, the third is still alive but has not produced any eggs yet. only time will tell there is still tons that can be done with these awesome lil geckos!

 

[Carinata]

I'm not denying anything, so please don't accuse me as such. I wasn't sure where that Zero came from and I confirmed it. Sadly, he passed away sometime ago. So I never bred him.

 

[specialtyreptile]

I'm not really sure how to explain the Supers. Here is what I know from our breeding.

1st year
Super Zero x 5 females = no zeros or stingers but few have batman markers (similiar to patternless)
**some of these may have been low quality zeros or supers but not where I would feel comfortable calling them that.

2nd year
Super Zero x offspring = 6 supers and 6 zeros
**I have over 40 eggs in the incubator with these pairings. I will post them as they hatch.

Hey guys. It would appear to me that there are 2 seprate traits at work here... 1) Super Zero/Stinger = Patternless (Recessive).. 2) Stinger/Zero = dominant or linebred type trait..

Follow me on this for a second. If the Stinger/Zero trait is line bred, it can explain the variation in pattern and how some have the look and some not so much. But when bred within the same line the more visual appear more often... Now it is completely fiesable that this line bred trait has locked itself to one of the "Patternless" lines, thus the illusion of a co-dom trait.

The other option, Zero/stinger being a highly variable "Dominant" trait. Dominant can pass down to offspring 50% visuals. As many traits they can be highly variable and sometimes the markers cannot be seen but through the trained eye... Again I believe the Zero/Stinger would have somehow attached itself to the Patternless line.

Assuming that the Zero line patternless and the Recessive Patternless are 2 seprate lines from Africa, I am more inclined to believe from the breedings above that the Linebred theory is more accurate and what we are dealing with is an extreemly vairable marker attached to a seprate line of Ressive Patternless. This can also be seen in the case that beginning reports were that "Zero Siblings" were creating "Zero offspring". This would lead me to believe that lightly patterned siblings were in fact low end Zeros that passed there trait to offspring... Thus, using Super to discribe the Homozygote is confusing to say the least. A better description may be "Zero line Patternless"... This can be verified by breeding "Het" to "Het" (Sib x Sib). You should of course get Patternless, Visual Hets(Zeros) and Normal.

 

[snared99]

Guess i should throw my 1.5 cents here since my name has been brought up...lol

I got a trio in from TUG(het patty) back when they were first released, and in the 3-4 years they were bred i hatched 3 zero and 2 stinger looking animals from them, and countless batmans. I believed them to be markers at the time. The whole aspect of the zero/stinger has always and will prob always confuse me. I have never purchased a zero/stinger, but rather worked with the ones that popped up here. Whether they are recessive or codom, I will leave that to JMG, because they have the most work in it out of anyone world wide. IT is my opinion that throwing around the 'super' term when talking about these morphs will only confuse the masses even more.

And yes i did hatch out a amel het patty male and it is in daves possession at this moment. It was hatched from a patty to het amel virgin, so obviously my male was het amel.

As far as pics go for these animals, there are plenty around the archives and on fb for any of those whom wish to see.

 

[OhioGecko]

Hey guys. It would appear to me that there are 2 seprate traits at work here... 1) Super Zero/Stinger = Patternless (Recessive).. 2) Stinger/Zero = dominant or linebred type trait..

Follow me on this for a second. If the Stinger/Zero trait is line bred, it can explain the variation in pattern and how some have the look and some not so much. But when bred within the same line the more visual appear more often... Now it is completely fiesable that this line bred trait has locked itself to one of the "Patternless" lines, thus the illusion of a co-dom trait.

The other option, Zero/stinger being a highly variable "Dominant" trait. Dominant can pass down to offspring 50% visuals. As many traits they can be highly variable and sometimes the markers cannot be seen but through the trained eye... Again I believe the Zero/Stinger would have somehow attached itself to the Patternless line.

Assuming that the Zero line patternless and the Recessive Patternless are 2 seprate lines from Africa, I am more inclined to believe from the breedings above that the Linebred theory is more accurate and what we are dealing with is an extreemly vairable marker attached to a seprate line of Ressive Patternless. This can also be seen in the case that beginning reports were that "Zero Siblings" were creating "Zero offspring". This would lead me to believe that lightly patterned siblings were in fact low end Zeros that passed there trait to offspring... Thus, using Super to discribe the Homozygote is confusing to say the least. A better description may be "Zero line Patternless"... This can be verified by breeding "Het" to "Het" (Sib x Sib). You should of course get Patternless, Visual Hets(Zeros) and Normal.

Don, Very well put. I do believe you first theory is what I'm experiencing in my breedings.

 

[Imperial Geckos]

I just don't see how it can be considered Recessive now...When JMG first bred the Zero to normals, they either got Zeros or didn't, since they did apparently produce Zeros from that, they considered at the very least Dominant...When they bred Zero x Zero later they produced a Super Zero...leading it to be Co-dom... How can it go from being considered Co-dom to Recessive? That is just mind boggling, to me....

 

[OhioGecko]

Guess i should throw my 1.5 cents here since my name has been brought up...lol

I got a trio in from TUG(het patty) back when they were first released, and in the 3-4 years they were bred i hatched 3 zero and 2 stinger looking animals from them, and countless batmans. I believed them to be markers at the time. The whole aspect of the zero/stinger has always and will prob always confuse me. I have never purchased a zero/stinger, but rather worked with the ones that popped up here. Whether they are recessive or codom, I will leave that to JMG, because they have the most work in it out of anyone world wide. IT is my opinion that throwing around the 'super' term when talking about these morphs will only confuse the masses even more.

I would be interested seeing the stingers/zeros you produced from Urban's stock. When did you hatch these out? I checked your facebook site and website and couldn't find anything on them. I did see some babies labeled stinger/zero on your facebook in 2010 but I'm assuming they came from stinger/zero lines because they don't have any details about them. I agree with you on the Super term but that is what JMG initially thought they were.

And yes i did hatch out a amel het patty male and it is in daves possession at this moment. It was hatched from a patty to het amel virgin, so obviously my male was het amel.

I'm very skeptical on these so I apologize. Many people have said they have created them, but no one has created a visual. Hopefully we will see one someday, maybe from your guy you gave to David.

As far as pics go for these animals, there are plenty around the archives and on fb for any of those whom wish to see.

Please post links, this is like a treasure hunt and I'm doing horrible I found some stuff but nothing saying this is from patternless to patternless and produced a zero/stinger. Thx.

It was good seeing you last weekend, your two headed baby looks wicked.

 

[Wild West Reptile]

If the stinger is recessive, I don't see how there could be a super form. Maybe we should try clearing up that part of it before others get mislead any further.