Visual x 100% het = ?

[KashMoneyExotics]

I know that if you breed a visual recessive to a normal all the babies will come out normal, 100% het albino

(visual x Normal = 100% het

also

Het x Het = 66%
Het to normal = 50% het

So I was wondering what would the babies be if the adult pairing was visual x 100% het.

 

[Music City Geckos]

Visual x normal makes 50% het unless you prove it out then it is 66%. You can't ever have a 100% het. Think of hets being chances. Even visual x visual won't always equal the visual. Hets can get very tricky, like when your dealing with Mack snows.

 

[indyana]

Yes you can have 100% het. >_< It's the probability of the gecko being het, not the radio of genetic material.

Visual recessive x normal makes all the offspring normal het the trait, so there is a 100% probability of the gecko being het. You could also just call that "het whatever" with no probability listed.

Visual x het = 50% visual, 50% het (100%)

 

[Music City Geckos]

Technically true but, no one plans on the probability of the babies being 100% het, that's a given. In his/her last sentence they say, "what would the babies be if it was visual x 100% het?" Which is a question of "genetic material". Never seen on a gecko for sale, 100% het ever.

 

[acpart]

I find it hard to comment because I don't understand the terminology. What does "visual" mean? Do you mean a gecko that has 2 recessive genes so it looks albino, for example? What does 100% het mean? Does that mean that it's guaranteed to have 1 recessive (albino for example) gene?

Aliza

 

[DrCarrotTail]

If you breed an albino to a normal you get all babies that are het for albino. They are definitely het since the albino parent contributed a recessive albino gene to every single baby. You can say 100% het but it is redundant. If you are sure it is het then just say het. If, for example you breed a known het to a normal you'll have a 50% chance of each baby having a copy of the recessive gene and so you say 50% het. If you breed two hets together you have a 25% chance of gett a "visual" albino. If you produce a non-albino offspring it has a 2/3 chance of getting a copy of the recessive albino gene and so it is called 66% het. Try messing with the punnet squares. It may make the outcomes easier to understand.

Normal (TT) x albino (tt) = 100% Tt
Normal (TT) x het albino (Tt) = 50% TT and 50% Tt
het albino (Tt) x het albino (Tt) = 25% tt 50% Tt and 25% TT

 

[geckolabs]

People do label animals as 100% het. But it is typically animals that originated as possible hets, and have since been proved out. If you look around, you will definitely see some.

 

[Music City Geckos]

Kinda false advertising. Sounds like some of the snake oil salesman that go to Repticon. By this logic, if I were to buy 2 normals 100% het Tremper. When I bred them and I got 2 normals, I would deffinately be expecting a refund. "You said they were 100%". In my eyes the only 100% is the animal that visually shows the mentioned trait.

 

[geckolabs]

Kinda false advertising. Sounds like some of the snake oil salesman that go to Repticon. By this logic, if I were to buy 2 normals 100% het Tremper. When I bred them and I got 2 normals, I would deffinately be expecting a refund. "You said they were 100%". In my eyes the only 100% is the animal that visually shows the mentioned trait.

It's certainly not false advertising. If someone understands the basic genetics and inheritance of the animals they are trying to breed, then they know what they're looking at and what to expect.

Just because you have two animals that are het, or 100% het, tremper, doesn't guarantee you will ever hit a visual tremper offspring from said pairing. It just means each baby will have a 25% chance of being visual tremper.

 

[Music City Geckos]

I bet you sell insurance or cars

 

[geckolabs]

I bet you sell insurance or cars

No, but 'A' for effort. I am actually a geneticist.

 

[Music City Geckos]

No one is arguing with you about the 100% het thing. We all understand it, unfortunately the majority of people that buy Leos are young and run into the hobby half heartedly. So a simpler explanation is normally what's used. If someone sells a good and guarantees it 100% to 50% look like something comes across as quite confusing. That's why most people don't say 100% het because we already know that. I checked, none of the breeders that advertise here say 100% het. Tremper, Sasobeck, Geckoboa, Lonestar Geckos, or Davids Fine Geckos don't use the term 100% het. Most breeders are saying now is "het" no % at all because saying a certain % against an uncertain variable isn't possible. So that's my 2 cents on this subject.
I'm sure OP got more than he bargained for on this subject, lol.

 

[geckolabs]

unfortunately the majority of people that buy Leos are young and run into the hobby half heartedly. So a simpler explanation is normally what's used.

I completely agree, sadly, most people do come into the hobby blindly purchasing, which is a shame. There should be more advocacy for researching and getting all of that down before purchasing, or at the very least, certainly before pairing. It is something I will certainly be pushing for in my potential clientele. It has become far to easy for people to go on to FB or sites such as this and post, and have all of their questions answered as they ask them, so its nearly become unnecessary for them to do the research (*not saying that is necessarily the case with the OP*), and it is a shame. Once the people who actually know the basic, or advanced genetics are gone, the hobby is going to be left with very select few that genuinely know what they are doing.

I checked, none of the breeders that advertise here say 100% het. Tremper, Sasobeck, Geckoboa, Lonestar Geckos, or Davids Fine Geckos don't use the term 100% het. Most breeders are saying now is "het" no % at all because saying a certain % against an uncertain variable isn't possible. So that's my 2 cents on this subject.
I'm sure OP got more than he bargained for on this subject, lol.

It's not necessarily an uncertain variable. Every animal does have a certain statistical probability of inheriting one allele versus the other, which it seems you are certainly aware of. I think the issue with giving buyers the X% chance that Animal 'A" is het for Gene 'Y' is that people confuse it for the animal containing X% of one allele (i.e. an animal labeled as 66% het Tremper containing 66% of one allele, which is impossible, but I could see how many can get confused.) The 'possible het' scenario is exactly why we are making a big push to get a genome project started (see recent thread posted by myself: http://geckoforums.net/f125-morphs-genetics/101668.htm )