Het means the gene doesn't show?

I was wondering about Het, i guess it’s a gene that doesn’t show? If it doesn’t show how do you know it has the gene? Do all genes pass on to offspring from both parents? So for example my female Rosy is Albino Matrix Het Picasso ( meaning the Picasso is not expressed? ) my male is Albino Limburg Coastal Snow

So for something to be expressed you need the gene from both parents right? So offspring would be Albino Matrix het snow?

Im trying to understand genes but its a bit confusing.

ok so het is a gene that doesn’t physically show, the only way to know if it has a het
(most of the time) is to know the paring
examples of animals that have something do do with hets,

oh and also their are “percentages of having a het” which I think means this animal has insert percentage of being het zero, (percentages can only be 50% 66% and 100)

1 Like

oh forgot to answer this yes het picasso means the gene is not expressed it also needs to be paired to an animal that also has het picasso/ a visual picasso to produce any visual picasso animals, also if he is a 50% het picasso there’s a chance of having no picasso babies.

1 Like

So a het Picasso without another Het or expressed she will or will not pass on the het Picasso?

Well so no she will pass on the het but the offspring will only have a 50% chance of it having the genetic
(Any1 who is a pro at this feel free to correct me)
She needs a visual/het to produce ANY visuals (please note for HetXhet pairings some Babies will only be 66%het Picasso)

1 Like

Recessive genes need to have 2 copies of the gene in order to have a visual expression.
Heterozygous are animals with one copy.
Homozygous are animals with two. The visual.

A visual albino for example will pass one copy to each offspring making them het for albino.
In order to have an albino hatch from that clutch, the other animal needs to have at least one copy of the albino gene as well.

A visual to visual will have 100% visual offspring

Visual to het will have 50% visual offspring / 50% hets

Het to het will have 25% with no gene / 50% het / 25% visual offspring

Het to normal will have 50% het / 50% normal offspring

In a majority of cases you cannot tell the hets from a normal offspring. Sometimes you’ll have something like a ringer or tracks show up like in pied offspring.

The % of het doesn’t mean there’s part of a gene. It means there’s a chance that they have the gene.
-Het to het will have 75% of the offspring that don’t show the gene… 1/3 or 33% are normal, 2/3 or 66% will carry that gene. 66% is the chance of you having the gene unless proven by breeding later on. 66% het.

-het to normal will have a 50% chance of passing on the gene. So that’s a 50% het


There are heterozygous and homozygous forms of both dominant and recessive mutations.

The difference between them is that dominant mutations are visually distinguishable in heterozygous form while recessive mutations are not.


So albinism is a recessive trait right? So it needs 2 copies to show visually correct?

I have a goldeneye Albino Whitewater, but there aeems to be contention about Whitewaters being Albino because they have golden eyes not pink/red.

Now my Limburg and my Matrix both have pink/red eyes so they are homozygous albino?

So combined they would make visual albino with het matrix het Picasso het snow like if she was Het Picasso would she pass on that or no?

Im not the smartest bulb in the pack i kinda understand but not really.


yeah albinism is reccesive

1 Like

I think @t_h_wyman may be the one to know for sure, but I think the more golden eyed colors on albino eyes are linked to a T+ type albino?

Like how leopard gecko albinos have gold colored eyes with red pupils. That type of albinoism leads to some more brown, yellow and white albinos because not all the darker shades turn off all the way to make a white and yellow albino.


Im glad somebody brought this up. While “het” is most commonly used when dealing with recessives, it is important to remember that it is just short term for “heterozygous”, and whether the trait is recessive, inc dom, or dom does not change whether an animals genes can be het. For example, an animal “het” for a dominant trait will only pass it on 50% of the time, as opposed to a homozygous animal which would always pass the trait on.


Yep, over the years I’ve seen the incorrect idea that “het” is only a term for recessive traits spread all too often.

In sexually reproducing “diploid” organisms there are two sets of chromosomes, thus capable of carrying one or two copies, or “alleles”, of a given single gene mutation, regardless of whether the mutations phenotype is distinguishable with one copy or two.

To get even more nit-picky about it, there is a statistical probability of passing one mutations allele 50% of the time, but it is only a statistical probability. It has the potential to pass it on to 100% of the offspring, or 0%. The best way to understand this is considering a coin toss. You have a 50% probability of landing on heads or tails but it is possible you could land on heads every time… or none of the time. But it is not likely.

With a homozygous form of a mutation carrying two copies, a.k.a. alleles, it will pass a single copy to all offspring 100% of the time.


Pretty close :+1:t4:

What the hobby likes to call “T-positive Albinos” are actually more correctly hypomelanistic animals. Which is to say, they still produce some melanin, but less than the normal amount.

Because melanin is still present, it can/does begin to accumulate in certain areas of the body which will then lead to lesser “pigmenting” of those areas. That can result in eyes with a somewhat more golden hue or skin with a grey/tan blushing


Thanks now i learned something new about my snake.


honestly it took me so long to understand what all this meant to dude don’t worry, :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: