Super Spider? (Royal Python)

Mujician · #1 (**permalink**) 03-01-2008, 11:53 PM

I've only heard about people with spiders - never super spiders. Surely they must exist (even if only in the genes as opposed to a visible difference) Has anyone got pics of a super spider (compared to a spider?)

markhill · #2 (**permalink**) 04-01-2008, 12:01 AM

theres a Spider Super Pastel (AKA Killer Bee Spider)
NERD - New England Reptile Distributors - NERD's Ball Python Collection

NBLADE · #3 (**permalink**) 04-01-2008, 12:10 AM

a super spider is the same as a normal spider in looks, the only difference is normal spider to a normal royal would get half normals half spiders, wheras a super spider to a normal all spiders, but breeders can't sell the babies as superspiders because to find out if they are super they would have to be grown on and bred from, which would be a very long way round for the breeder,

also the spider super pastel, is the result of a spider being bred to a super pastel, not involving a super spider

Ssthisto · #4 (**permalink**) 04-01-2008, 12:17 AM

"Super" is not strictly speaking synonymous with "homozygous".

The way herpers tend to use Super is to describe the homozygous form of a codominant morph. By definition, a homozygous codominant "super" animal looks different to a heterozygous codominant....

As far as anyone knows, a homozygous spider looks the same as a heterozygous spider (or at least, no 'different looking' living animal has ever been produced). This means that Spider appears to be true dominant (not codominant) and thus doesn't have a "super" form. I don't know if anyone's proved out a homozygous spider yet, however - most of the time, people who buy spiders do not bother breeding them to OTHER spiders (thus making it unlikely they'll get homozygous spiders) since you only need one to make the morph.

NBLADE · #5 (**permalink**) 04-01-2008, 12:41 AM

but spider to normal will not yield all baby spiders, there will be normals, so not dominant, as all babies would be spiders for it to be dominant

Ssthisto · #6 (**permalink**) 04-01-2008, 12:44 AM

Dominant is not the same thing as 'homozygous'.

Dominant means "Animal looks the same whether it has one copy of the gene or two - whether it is het or homozygous".

Homozygous means "Animal has two genes that are exactly alike at that gene locus."

In order to get 100% visual offspring from a pairing, you need the animal to be homozygous... but an animal who has two copies of the gene for albino is still not "Dominant" albino. Albino, as a gene, is recessive to normal not-albino.

Spider, as a gene, is dominant to normal not-spider. Just because the animal is heterozygous for a dominant gene and won't produce 100% offspring with that gene does not mean that the gene itself is not dominant.

snd geckos · #7 (**permalink**) 05-01-2008, 03:05 AM

as far as i know there is no spider het's so breed a spider to a normal you should get 50% spiders and 50% normals that dont carry the spider gene

Young_Gun · #8 (**permalink**) 05-01-2008, 03:11 AM

There are Homozygous spiders about and you find out whether you have one or not by putting it to say a normal 50% 50% you have a Spider 100% spider hatchlings you have a homozygous.

The KillerBee is a super pastel x spider, not super spider x pastel.

No dominant or co-dominant morphs have hets, and 'siblings' are genetically the same as normals.

Ssthisto · #9 (**permalink**) 05-01-2008, 12:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Young_Gun

There are Homozygous spiders about and you find out whether you have one or not by putting it to say a normal 50% 50% you have a Spider 100% spider hatchlings you have a homozygous.

No dominant or co-dominant morphs have hets, and 'siblings' are genetically the same as normals.

You've contradicted yourself there.... if you get 50% normal hatchlings from a Spider parent that Spider is a het itself - it is heterozygous for the Spider gene.

"Het" does not mean "carries the gene invisibly" - it just means that the two genes of a pair are different.

If someone tries to sell you a "het spider" that looks normal, it is a normal and is not het for the Spider gene at all.
If someone tries to sell you a "het spider" that looks like a spider, it is quite probably a spider with only one copy of the gene.
If someone tries to sell you a "spider" that looks like a spider it's STILL probably heterozygous for the gene - having only one copy - unless BOTH of its parents were visual spiders.

arkreptiles · #10 (**permalink**) 05-01-2008, 12:48 PM

Ssthis to is right again!!

As far as I'm aware the Spider morph is thought to be Dominant - in other words it will 'look like a spider' whether it has one or two genes for spider. However since not many people breed spiders together (if at all) then most available spiders in the market will be 'hets' - i.e. carry one gene for spider not two.

Hopefully someone who reads this will know if anyone has paired two Spiders together. This would answer the question of its dominance or not - I still suspect however that it is dominant and therefore there is no 'super' form.

This is similar to the Enigma issue in Leo's hence why we are breeding two Enigma's together to produce certain Homozygous Enigma's before introducing other genes from different morphs into them.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode