Trans Veiled?????/

[Rickky]

Ok...I was thinkin the other day why are trans veiled sooo much more xpensive than regular veileds. Dont get me wrong I have one and I think he is one of the coolest things in the world....but...it is a genetic defect if im correct....Also Ive heard than because they are translucent the pigment that they do have is more vibrant...Why is that Any opinions would be greatly appreciated....

 

[THECHAMMAN]

i think its just a matter of rarity. no other chameleon has this gene. and very few veiled chams have it, so i would assume there would be a pretty high price tag. also, i just thought it was a reccessive gene, not a genetic defect. also, i never new they were more vibrant.

 

[summoner12]

i think its just a matter of rarity. no other chameleon has this gene. and very few veiled chams have it, so i would assume there would be a pretty high price tag. also, i just thought it was a reccessive gene, not a genetic defect. also, i never new they were more vibrant.

If im not mistaken a "defect"ive gene can be recessive.

 

[THECHAMMAN]

i understand that, but i just thought it was a normal gene, that somehow was laying dormant and then came out. im no expert though.

 

[Rickky]

my understanding is that a dormant gene or one that is not seen but is still there would be considered recessive...which cud also be a genetic defect...correct me if i am wrong...

 

[THECHAMMAN]

i aggree. im pretty sure you're right. though ive been doing research on the translucence of snakes and they described it as a recessive genetic defect. so i would assume you were right.
i assume it is the same with snakes as with chameleons.

 

[blackbetty]

Can someone answer me this since its the topic of discussion..how do you know if its a trans veiled? My Ben is super pale, like pastel green with a brownish mark here and there..never seen him change to any other color even when mad...I dont know anything about him, not even his age...Here is a pic from earlier today..He was upset from me moving him yet he hasnt changed his coloration. He actually looks a tad darker there than normal due to not using a flash on the camera.

 

[Rickky]

Trans veileds have patches or no pigmentation...That im sure is a regular veiled chameleon...Healthy looking also...I would give him some time as they mature u get more colors

 

[Rickky]

i meant of no pigmentation not or no

 

[Chris Anderson]

Rickky & Thechamman - Any alteration of the genetic sequence is technically a genetic defect. The term defect has a negative connotation but that is because it is improperly associated solely with genetic issues that are deleterious to the animal's fitness. Not all defects are deleterious but the translucent gene is technically by definition a genetic defect none the less. Also, it is a codominant trait, not recessive, that was originally found in a few WC imported animals and selectively bred for the trait. They are as expensive as they are because they are relatively new, uncommon and in high demand.

Chris

 

[THECHAMMAN]

thank you for the insight. i bet we looked like the 2 stooges arguing about something im sure we dont know alot about. and again, thank you for the insight.

 

[Rickky]

I didnt want u to think i was arguin by any means....im jus tryin to learn and give my opinions...im jus tryna feed the knowledge and get diif points of view

 

[blackbetty]

He doesnt have bars though.. he has like a brownish horizontal mark here or there..and thanks, im glad he looks healthy..and definite plus lately.

 

[Rickky]

The bars will come later as he matures...on th back feet does he have the tarsal spurs

 

[blackbetty]

Yes, he is a male.

 

[Rickky]

cool...i wud jus give him a another month or 2

 

[hallenhe]

Chris - I respectfully disagree that "any alteration of the genetic sequence is a genetic defect"; this is not a usage I've ever encountered in university genetics. An alteration or variation from what is considered the "wild type" (which may be the most common, or may simply be the first version sequenced) is considered a mutation across the board, whether good, bad or indifferent.

That said, my impression is that, in the wild, the translucent veiled would likely be at a disadvantage (i.e. less protection from UV, leading to either diminished basking, cutting down on D3 synthesis, or increased mutation rate caused by DNA damage), thus potentially contributing to the rarity of the gene. The fact that its recessive would also contribute to its rarity, as both parents would need to pass a copy along to the offspring.

 

[Chris Anderson]

Chris - I respectfully disagree that "any alteration of the genetic sequence is a genetic defect"; this is not a usage I've ever encountered in university genetics. An alteration or variation from what is considered the "wild type" (which may be the most common, or may simply be the first version sequenced) is considered a mutation across the board, whether good, bad or indifferent.

Your definition and mine are the same. For anything to be an alteration, it has to be assumed that there is a standard condition (ie: a "wild type) for it to vary from. The definition I gave thus assumes that the alteration is a change from the "wild or standard type". As I also stated, these do not have to be deleterious to technically be defects.

That said, my impression is that, in the wild, the translucent veiled would likely be at a disadvantage (i.e. less protection from UV, leading to either diminished basking, cutting down on D3 synthesis, or increased mutation rate caused by DNA damage), thus potentially contributing to the rarity of the gene.

In the wild it would be at a disadvantage for a wide range of reasons (don't forget hiding from predators) and like other defects that show up in the wild (albinism, etc.), these disadvantages decrease their fitness and keep their numbers in the wild down. In captivity, these same defects are not necessarily deleterious when you remove these other selective pressures, however.

The fact that its recessive would also contribute to its rarity, as both parents would need to pass a copy along to the offspring.

Its codominant, not recessive.

Chris

 

[dodolah]

Just to offer simple explanation for Betty.
No, your chameleon is not a translucent veiled.

Here is some example of what it looked like (taken from Flchams):

 

[leedragon]

where do you get one like this? it may have the wrong DNA but it is really beautiful