• Posted 12/19/2024.
    =====================

    I am still waiting on my developer to finish up on the Classifieds Control Panel so I can use it to encourage members into becoming paying members. Google Adsense has become a real burden on the viewing of this site, but honestly it is the ONLY source of income now that keeps it afloat. I tried offering disabling the ads being viewed by paying members, but apparently that is not enough incentive. Quite frankly, Google Adsense has dropped down to where it barely brings in enough daily to match even a single paid member per day. But it still gets the bills paid. But at what cost?

    So even without the classifieds control panel being complete, I believe I am going to have to disable those Google ads completely and likely disable some options here that have been free since going to the new platform. Like classified ad bumping, member name changes, and anything else I can use to encourage this site to be supported by the members instead of the Google Adsense ads.

    But there is risk involved. I will not pay out of pocket for very long during this last ditch experimental effort. If I find that the membership does not want to support this site with memberships, then I cannot support your being able to post your classified ads here for free. No, I am not intending to start charging for your posting ads here. I will just shut the site down and that will be it. I will be done with FaunaClassifieds. I certainly don't need this, and can live the rest of my life just fine without it. If I see that no one else really wants it to survive neither, then so be it. It goes away and you all can just go elsewhere to advertise your animals and merchandise.

    Not sure when this will take place, and I don't intend to give any further warning concerning the disabling of the Google Adsense. Just as there probably won't be any warning if I decide to close down this site. You will just come here and there will be some sort of message that the site is gone, and you have a nice day.

    I have been trying to make a go of this site for a very long time. And quite frankly, I am just tired of trying. I had hoped that enough people would be willing to help me help you all have a free outlet to offer your stuff for sale. But every year I see less and less people coming to this site, much less supporting it financially. That is fine. I tried. I retired the SerpenCo business about 14 years ago, so retiring out of this business completely is not that big if a step for me, nor will it be especially painful to do. When I was in Thailand, I did not check in here for three weeks. I didn't miss it even a little bit. So if you all want it to remain, it will be in your hands. I really don't care either way.

    =====================
    Some people have indicated that finding the method to contribute is rather difficult. And I have to admit, that it is not all that obvious. So to help, here is a thread to help as a quide. How to become a contributing member of FaunaClassifieds.

    And for the record, I will be shutting down the Google Adsense ads on January 1, 2025.
  • Responding to email notices you receive.
    **************************************************
    In short, DON'T! Email notices are to ONLY alert you of a reply to your private message or your ad on this site. Replying to the email just wastes your time as it goes NOWHERE, and probably pisses off the person you thought you replied to when they think you just ignored them. So instead of complaining to me about your messages not being replied to from this site via email, please READ that email notice that plainly states what you need to do in order to reply to who you are trying to converse with.

Is Super Pastel Considered two genes?

mgoblue347

mgoblue347

Resident Demon
Resident Demon
Joined
Oct 16, 2011
Messages
731
Reaction score
25
Points
0
Location
Houston, TX
I see people listing snakes as being a 4 gene snake..for example, Super Pastel Mojave Yellow Belly. I understand that the super pastel is the super of the pastel, but all it gives you is the pastel gene, nothing else. To me a true 4 gene snake or whatever we're talking about would have 4 different morphs in them, not the super form of a certain morph.
 
As far as I know all the super form does is take away any chance of normals, correct?
 
Because pastel only requires one gene to be present, a super pastel can be accurately called a two-gene animal. Likewise, a het pied, mojave, yellowbelly, etc. can be considered one-gene animals, whereas their two-gene forms (pied, BEL, ivory) can be named as such. Dominant genes, like spider and pinstripe, can be considered single-gene animals.
 
You sure a pied is considered a two gene? That would mean my caramel albino is a 2 gene. So a caramel glow would be considered a four gene snake, since hypo is also a 2 gene..considered that both hypo and caramel have het forms..
 
The problem with a super pastel being considered 2 genes is that it can only give one of them to it's offspring. But, to coin another member's phrase, it does have a double dose of that trait.
Not all of the lingo makes sense, because it's just a bunch of made up names that aren't applied uniformly throughout the reptile community.
 
hhmoore said:
The problem with a super pastel being considered 2 genes is that it can only give one of them to it's offspring. But, to coin another member's phrase, it does have a double dose of that trait.
Not all of the lingo makes sense, because it's just a bunch of made up names that aren't applied uniformly throughout the reptile community.
Click to expand...

that makes sense too. I think that was pretty well put
 
in my very unscientific terms - all traits are two genes, it takes a pair of genes to express any trait - either two normal genes, a normal and morph gene or two morph genes. The type of morph gene determines the expression.

edit to add - while I can sort of understand why someone would call a 'super' 2 genes, I can't say that I think it makes a lot of sense. :)
 
Technically, it is four genes expressed. It's just not four different genes.

On a semi related note, briefly skimmed over a thread on another forum where people are trying to change pied from simple recessive to co-dom. Really made my brain hurt.
 
Shadera said:
On a semi related note, briefly skimmed over a thread on another forum where people are trying to change pied from simple recessive to co-dom. Really made my brain hurt.
Click to expand...

:rofl:
I'd.. I'd like to know why they would come up with that theory. Interesting.
magic-spongebob.jpg
 
Hah, seriously? That's just silly.

I'm in agreement with April. The one-gene two-gene thing is pretty non-scientific and can lead to confusion. All animals have two copies of a particular gene. Sticking with heterozygous and homozygous is the best, in my opinion.
 
snowgyre said:
I'm in agreement with April. The one-gene two-gene thing is pretty non-scientific and can lead to confusion. All animals have two copies of a particular gene. Sticking with heterozygous and homozygous is the best, in my opinion.
Click to expand...
Yes, but the original question was about how people are labeling combination morphs...it had nothing to do with heterozygous and homozygous. Take a queen bee, for example - it is a 3 trait combination: pastel, lesser, spider. Some sellers use the phrase "3 gene"; and, even though it's not accurate, nobody bats an eye. The question was about people labeling a super pastel lesser spider (for example) a 4 gene snake, and whether it was correct because there are still only 3 different traits. Arguably, the (inaccurate) term should be saved for something like an albino pastel lesser spider, which has 4 separate traits.

Shadera said:
On a semi related note, briefly skimmed over a thread on another forum where people are trying to change pied from simple recessive to co-dom. Really made my brain hurt.
Click to expand...
I didn't read the thread, and have no idea where it is; but I suspect it has to do with visual markers which are supposedly reliable means of identifying hets. It's an old topic, and not limited to ball pythons.

IMO, it's basically coming from people with just enough knowledge to form arguments that convince people that don't know any better. Genetics is its own science, and there are a lot of people dealing with reptiles that THINK they understand it. (I know that my own knowledge barely scrapes the surface - so I don't mind saying what I know...but I bow out quickly, to avoid talking out my :bleep: )
 
hhmoore said:
I didn't read the thread, and have no idea where it is; but I suspect it has to do with visual markers which are supposedly reliable means of identifying hets. It's an old topic, and not limited to ball pythons.

IMO, it's basically coming from people with just enough knowledge to form arguments that convince people that don't know any better. Genetics is its own science, and there are a lot of people dealing with reptiles that THINK they understand it. (I know that my own knowledge barely scrapes the surface - so I don't mind saying what I know...but I bow out quickly, to avoid talking out my :bleep: )
Click to expand...

It's on the BP forum somewhere. Basically, the argument is that in a group of possible hets, if you can pick one out as different in appearance as the gene-carrying animal, then it's a co-dom trait and not simple recessive.

Like I said, left there before my head asploded.
 
The thing is, for that theory to hold true, they'd have to put those hets and possible hets in a group of normals...and be able to reliably identify the hets. If it doesn't work under that stipulation (which it doesn't), then their argument doesn't work.
 
hhmoore said:
Yes, but the original question was about how people are labeling combination morphs...it had nothing to do with heterozygous and homozygous. Take a queen bee, for example - it is a 3 trait combination: pastel, lesser, spider. Some sellers use the phrase "3 gene"; and, even though it's not accurate, nobody bats an eye. The question was about people labeling a super pastel lesser spider (for example) a 4 gene snake, and whether it was correct because there are still only 3 different traits. Arguably, the (inaccurate) term should be saved for something like an albino pastel lesser spider, which has 4 separate traits.
Click to expand...

I completely agree with you Harald. A true four gene, to me, would have to have 4 separate traits, not to include the super form. I believe it comes down to marketing your product (snake) for sale.
 
Technically Super Pastel is the same gene, so that is singular.
Technically Lesser and Mojave are the same gene, so do you really want to get technical and call a Lesser/Mojave BEL single gene also? Different alleles of the same gene.

Mutant alleles are what most people look at. Which Super Pastel has 2. So if you want to call mutant alleles "genes" as many people do, I see no reason you can't call it "double gene". Just another case of hobby lingo and yes it is inconsistent.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top