?? The Jag gene is a proven co-dom mutation....
This is a cut out from some of the first ever original Jag to normal matings.....
......................................................
The following year I managed to produce approximately 50% normals and 50% Jaguars from two unrelated mcdowelli females. This suggests that the Jaguar gene is of a co-dominant trait.
One female (#2 on the Coastal page) laid 49 eggs, whereas 4 were non-viable. 22 Jaguars and 23 normal sibs was the result from this clutch. Perhaps not so astonishing since the female at the time was 11 feet long and weighing close to 22 pounds, but still a pretty impressive sized clutch.
Thanks to the founder Jaguar male.
......................................................
Not interested in any arguments, you are free to your opinion. Just think you should know a little about an animal before you bag it with 'facts' on an open forum.
Are we talking Hybrids or designer morphs now?
And are we starting from the beginning bredings (as I suggested) or with an already established Jaguar?
BTW Jags have nada to do with my comments, I think you have missed my point completely.
You should do some research first then come back with a valid argument:
I dont give a crap about Jags (as I already stated)
I am discussing hybrids of 2 pure species ok (as I stated)
Put a coastal over a Jungle and tell me if you get a clutch of 100% lookers.
Take Jags out of the equation for a minute as I have clearly (several times now) made it apparent (obviously not clearly enough) that I am trying to discuss HYBRIDS IN AUS.
Is my comments any clearer yet? I am discussing HYBRIDS NOT DESIGNER MORPHS, NOT JAGUARS AND NOT GOLDFISH.
But if defending Australian hybrids with overseas Jag morphs is your go then so be it.
Not once have I said Jags are ugly ok, I have said Hybrids are and I stand by that comment.
So as I am clearly not even arguing anything remotely close to Jags, why do I have to research them?