Yes this. And ernie your black con could not have been pure if it produced leucistic fry it would have to have recessive pink genetics.
Pink Convict X Texas Cichlid
- Thread starter ErnieG
- Start date
- Status
Brandon, dude you dont have to believe me lol do u know how many people that are doing this on a larger scale then me and they live like their basket ball stars. whether you believe it or not i dont care.
Honesty it was pure, i brought him from my buddy george he has tons of pure black cons i swear he will tell you his self. Thats why when you guys said that the pink gene was recessive i was lost, but if you guys say its recessive i believe you.
I have a question, I knw the marble/calico gene is recessive but never got a chance to breed it. If you breed a marble/calico to a pink i will get all pink het for marble/calico?
Firstly, I never said that the fading gene(s) was recessive. It could be dominant, and hence easily show in F1. It could also be controlled by multiple genes, hence showing in some and not in others.
Secondly, a recessive gene can actually show in a hybrid. The reason is because when crossing different species, there can be locations on the chromosome where a gene is present in one species and not in the other. So in a hybrid, even though the gene may be recessive on one chromosome, the fact that there's no equivalent in the corresponding chromosome means that the gene would not be masked anyways, and hence expressed.
The thing is with the 'pink/white/albino/leucistic/blah' gene, it would seem to be related to the presence/absence of body color as a whole, so the texan body color will probably mask the 'absence' gene.
Lemme explain Convict genetics a bit:
The reason why the leucistic gene is recessive is because it's actually just producing a mutant version of the pigment, which does not actually show up as any sort of color. That's why when you have a Convict with the stripey allele and the leucistic allele, stripes are still produced, because whilst the leucistic allele produces mutated pigments that doesn't show up, the stripey allele still produces the normal amount of pigments, and hence the heterozygous Convict is still stripey. But when it has two version of the leucistic allele, all it is producing is the mutated pigment, which does not show up as stripes.
When you cross a texas and a pink convict, well, to be honest it doesn't really matter if the leucistic gene is located on the same locus as whatever is producing the texan coloration - even if it is on a separate locus, the texan will still have one allele producing its normal body color, and so that's why I would assume that the texan x pink convict will still have a normal body color. Simply because stripes, pearlings, body color and all that are one sort of trait - coloration. I'm not gonna say that they're definitely on the same loci or not (though I'm quite sure they're not).
In the case of the fading gene(s), it is a separate type of trait, it's the control of coloration. So when it's passed down, chances are there's nothing on the corresponding's chromosome's loci to act against it, so recessive or dominant or otherwise, it'll get expressed. Why there's different level of expressions though, and this is what I'm pretty sure about, is that it's either a trait controlled by multiple genes, or a gene but with multiple regulatory elements. When a parent passes down their half of their genome, recombination occurs before that, and any combination could be passed on to the child, so some may have er, 'more fading' in them, whilst other not.
Basically imagine ABCDEFGHIJ as genes and/or regulatory elements affecting fading. In say, a red devil, it may have ABCDEFGHIJ on one chromosome and ABCdefgHij on the other, and let say the more 'capitals' it has, the 'better' it fades. So because of recombination, some of the offsprings would receive say, ABCDEFGHij, whilst some may receive ABCdeFgHiJ for example, and therefore the latter will have 'worse' fading than the former.
Etc. etc.
[EDIT]
P.S. It's not THAT hard for recessive genes to arise from dominant genes. A lot of times it may take just a single point mutation to mess up a gene (and its product) completely, and therefore produce a recessive version of the gene.
Wow Azedenkae, well put man well put and thanks for this education and healthy conversation bro, you really know your stuff. I didnt know Pink convicts were recessive because everytime i bred a pink convict x black convict i produced some pink offspring as well as black but others say that the black convict had to be het for the pink gene.
Ernie I would suggest a convict breeding project if you want to breed something. They won't outgrow 55 gallons and you can have a lot of fun experimenting with crossing strains and color morphs. I enjoyed breeding marbled cons and trying different combinations. The inheritance of the marble patterns is interesting stuff.
Yeah, the black convict definite will be het for the pink gene. Not saying your buddy lied to your or whatever, but it's possible he might have got the one he gave you mixed up or something, so then you received a het rather than a pure.
I know they dont get big lol i was just confused on the pink but i always knew the marble was recessive. I love convict tho alot of people hate them, i dont know they just do something for man. You have inspired me to do a little project bro, im going to gather all the strains of convicts i can find which is surprisingly big lol there are alot of convict related strains. I have a HRP female breeding a pure black male now, I want some sajicas, pink convicts, and marbles the hunt is on lmao.
It's a nice learning experience. 
And if Ernie likes Convicts enough to do it, then why not. If it gives him satisfaction then that's all that's needed, eh?
And if Ernie likes Convicts enough to do it, then why not. If it gives him satisfaction then that's all that's needed, eh?- Status
