| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| jonoandapril |
Posted - 26/12/2010 : 11:04:35
has anyone else heard of this morph? apparently its new (according to the iphone app) and id love to know where to get one/ how to breed them? |
| 20 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| eeji |
Posted - 10/02/2011 : 22:37:01
give it some time and tessera prices will bomb, just like ultramel did a few years back |
| n/a |
Posted - 10/02/2011 : 19:35:37
I have 1.1 Tessara Motleys of breeding age and 2.1 2010 "Normals".
They are absolutely stunning with saddle and top marbelling/stripes.
They were all bred in and imported from the US.
I paid £2500 for the adult pair and £1400 for the babies and that was a very good deal.
The adults are currently in final stage of cooling and will be bred together.
The male will then be put to a hypo Lavender Stripe, a Butter Strip, a Ghost and an Opal.
There are not many of breeding age outside of the US so very scarce for the present.
Like all new Morphs they are bound to come down in price as more are bred BUT the possible variations with this dominant gene seem endless.
May seem expensive but this is the current top end Corn morph so compare this with what one would expect to pay for the equivalent Royal morph.
They are not kept at my home but at a secure breeding facility with my rare Trans Pecos morphs.
I would rather not publish photos at this time.
I know little of genetics but my business partner does so he selected the animals and is running the breeding programme.
If the breeding is successful we will be selling some of the babies in late summer at a price to be determined once we see what is produced.
Kind regards,
Rob
|
| vetdebbie |
Posted - 09/02/2011 : 22:34:11
quote:
Originally posted by mikerichards
A dominant or co dominant isnt 2 different alleles, the 'normal' is simply being masked by the dominant trait.
That doesn't actually make any sense!
Dominant and co-dominant, and recessive describe how 2 alleles react with one another at the same locus. Doesn't really matter whether you are talking about "normal", "wildtype" or "fluffy pink gene" |
| mikerichards |
Posted - 08/02/2011 : 23:41:20
A dominant or co dominant isnt 2 different alleles, the 'normal' is simply being masked by the dominant trait. |
| eeji |
Posted - 08/02/2011 : 23:36:41
quote:
Originally posted by testdasi
And for eeji, you used the terms wrongly but the ideas are right.
A heterozyous dominant morph (i.e. one dominant gene, 1 normal) bred with a normal will give you 50/50.
A homozygous dominant morph (i.e. both genes are dominant) bred with a normal will yield 100% dominant morph.
In both cases, assuming the normal gene is completely recessive to the dominant gene.
thats what I said  |
| testdasi |
Posted - 08/02/2011 : 23:05:31
quote:
Originally posted by mikerichards
quote:
Originally posted by eeji
thats wrong Mike.
If you breed a dominant morph that is heterozygous to a normal, you will get 50/50
If you breed a dominant morph that is homozygous to a normal you will get 100% morphs
Not really, the true meaning of the words are being missed.
heterozygous means that there are 2 traits involved, one expressed and one not expressed.
Homozygous means that the trait is being expressed, be it a recessive dominant or co dominant.
A het only applies to recessive traits, not to something like tessera which is a dominant or co dominant.
What you said 'If you breed a dominant morph that is heterozygous to a normal' is not using the right words, a dominant morph cannot be het to a normal, hets only apply to recessive traits, not dominants.
Both of you get the words wrong. In genetics:
- heterozygous simply means 2 different genes for a trait (e.g. skin color)
- homozygous simply means 2 copies of the same gene for that trait
So for mikerichards, you got it wrong firstly because in case of heterozygosity, whether the 2 genes exibit complete/partial or co-dominant is completely irrelevant in term of using the word. Both traits can still be expressed (in the case of co-dominant) or one expressed and one not (complete dominant) or something in between. As long as the genes are different, it's called heterozygous.
I believe you also mistakenly assume that once a gene is dominant, it cannot be recessive. The concept of dominance is relative. Gene A can be both dominant over gene B and recessive to gene C. In this case you can consider A to be Normal, B to be amel and C to be tessera. So your idea is still right in a way because now Normal is actually the recessive gene.
And for eeji, you used the terms wrongly but the ideas are right.
A heterozyous dominant morph (i.e. one dominant gene, 1 normal) bred with a normal will give you 50/50.
A homozygous dominant morph (i.e. both genes are dominant) bred with a normal will yield 100% dominant morph.
In both cases, assuming the normal gene is completely recessive to the dominant gene. |
| mikerichards |
Posted - 08/02/2011 : 22:01:08
quote:
Originally posted by eeji
thats wrong Mike.
If you breed a dominant morph that is heterozygous to a normal, you will get 50/50
If you breed a dominant morph that is homozygous to a normal you will get 100% morphs
Not really, the true meaning of the words are being missed.
heterozygous means that there are 2 traits involved, one expressed and one not expressed.
Homozygous means that the trait is being expressed, be it a recessive dominant or co dominant.
A het only applies to recessive traits, not to something like tessera which is a dominant or co dominant.
What you said 'If you breed a dominant morph that is heterozygous to a normal' is not using the right words, a dominant morph cannot be het to a normal, hets only apply to recessive traits, not dominants. |
| eeji |
Posted - 08/02/2011 : 19:10:20
thats wrong Mike.
If you breed a dominant morph that is heterozygous to a normal, you will get 50/50
If you breed a dominant morph that is homozygous to a normal you will get 100% morphs |
| mikerichards |
Posted - 08/02/2011 : 14:33:39
Just to be clear on the dominant co dominant thing, if you breed a dominant to a normal, you get a 50% split in the clutch.
if you breed a co dominant to a normal you also get a 50% split, however, if you breed the super form of the co dominant, you get 100% of the clutch as the co dominant form. Some describe the super form of a morph, say a Super Hypo boa, as a dominant, again, its wrong, its not.
If you breed a super hypo boa to a normal boa, you get 100% hypos, if it were a dominant gene, then only 50% of the litter would be hypos.
Hopefully i am making some sense!! |
| mikerichards |
Posted - 08/02/2011 : 14:30:10
If thats the case, then its not a single trait morph. If the trait is both a het and a dom, then its a 2 trait morph. If the Tessera is a dominant morph, then you will only ever get a 50% split in the clutch, unless you breed to another tessera.
If the trait is producing 100% tessera babies when bred to a normal, then its a co dominant, with a super form that looks the same as the normal form, thats where 100% tessera babies come from when bred to a normal.
If the trait was a het and homo, then the result from a pairing would be essentially different, to reflect the visualisation of the het gene.
As the het form is the same as the dominant form, which is the same a super form, then something else is going on with it, its not a straight het, or a straight dominant, or even a straight co dominant. You cant be visual one thing, and het for the exact same thing.
My only other guess is, its a co dominant morph and the result from breeding a pair is something not discovered yet.
Saying its a het is misleading, its not a het morph, its either dominant or co dominant, thats implying that its a recessive morph, like saying a het amel corn looks the same as a visual amel corn.
Saying that a co dominant is a het is also wrong, there are no hets with a dominant or co dominant morph, but with co doms you do get a super form, so i understand the use of the word het, buts its used incorrectly, and could be misleading.
For example, in boas, a moonglow is a triple combination, hypo, albino and anery, yet Hypo is co dominant, albino and anery obv recessive, however, if you have a hypo het anery albino, its commonly referred to as a triple het moonglow, which is wrong, its only a double het!!
Using the wording Het when describing a co dominant morph is wrong, there are no recessive genes with co dominants. |
| eeji |
Posted - 26/01/2011 : 22:30:20
one homozygous tessera parent will give 100% tessera babies |
| rick1894 |
Posted - 26/01/2011 : 21:56:14
Which would it have to be for all Tessera's then? Homo or hetro.
Cheers in advance. |
| vetdebbie |
Posted - 26/01/2011 : 16:52:33
yes - you'd either get all anery tessera or 50% anery 50% anery tessera depenging on whether the parent tessera was homo- or heterozygous for tessera. |
| rick1894 |
Posted - 26/01/2011 : 10:32:47
Good thinking as suppose if silva was male, I could always buy more that are female ;)
As your an expert, would a anery a x anery Tessera result in anery Tessera because it's dominant? |
| eeji |
Posted - 25/01/2011 : 21:15:55
males are the ones to go for, then breed them to everything you have! :D |
| rick1894 |
Posted - 25/01/2011 : 19:55:44
quote:
Originally posted by eeji
I know someone that recently paid £600 for one that came in on an import from the US
Will have to make sure i get the right sex then, only seen one picture of them but look special.
Cheers. |
| eeji |
Posted - 25/01/2011 : 19:27:48
I know someone that recently paid £600 for one that came in on an import from the US |
| rick1894 |
Posted - 25/01/2011 : 10:24:59
Anyone know how much a Tessera anery would be and how easy to get hold of. |
| Tiffany-x |
Posted - 02/01/2011 : 23:05:14
What would we do without you! :P
Tiffany-x |
| eeji |
Posted - 02/01/2011 : 23:00:54
that will only become true if more prople breed tesseras than normals which I can't see happening. If you look for a parallel in other species that have dominant morphs, eg. pinstripe royals or hypo leopard geckos there are still more normals produced :) |
|
|
