# Ball Pythons > BP Morphs & Genetics >  The Blue-Eyed Leucistic Ball Python

## OhhWatALoser

Unless noted pictures from http://www.newenglandreptile.com

This is a Blue-Eyed Leucistic



It seems once a week I see a question somewhere, asking what makes a BEL (Blue-Eyed Leucistic) so mayb this will cut down on this repeated question.

BEL are usually made from a Heterozygous Morph x Heterozygous Morph breeding or you'd already have a BEL or Super phantom

BEL is the homozygous (super) form of multiple morphs, and yes they can be interchanged. You don't need a Mojave x Mojave, you can do Mojave x Lesser, Phantom x Russo Het, or any 2 morphs for that matter (only exception phantom x phantom, they will not make a BEL but a super phantom)

here are the morphs

*Mojave*



a mojave x mojave breeding usually produces what i'd call a dirty BEL, they sometimes have a pattern, the head usually has markings on it, the white isn't usually a stunning white, but still a white snake with blue eyes, doing a lesser x mojave or anything else x mojave usually cleans the snake up.

*Lesser Platinum*



I was told a lesser x lesser breeding will produce the most stunning BEL you can get, but thats always going to be a debate.

*Butter*



Similar looking to the lesser, im told butters keep more of a gold color

*Russo Het Leucistic*



Doesn't look like the others at all does it? but also a Co-Dom morph that makes BEL and also does when crossed with the other morphs.

*Phantom*



These are an odd ball in the BEL club because a Phantom x Anything above will produce BEL, but a Phantom x Phantom breeding will produce a Super Phantom.....


i got this picture off a forum, im pretty sure Ralph Davis Reptiles owns the picture

If you want me to add anything let me know, but this should answer the same questions I keep seeing over and over and over.

----------

_ARpythons_ (06-03-2009),bdevillier19 (07-01-2009),BjDavid (02-16-2010),CWalker (06-02-2009),ifun.jc (07-21-2010),Maurice Tebele (02-16-2010),_TessadasExotics_ (03-16-2010),_TheOtherLeadingBrand_ (06-02-2009),Whitney (06-03-2009)

----------


## marvint

nice info!

----------


## MarkS

> BEL is the homozygous (super) form of multiple morphs, and yes they can be interchanged. You don't need a Mojave x Mojave, you can do *Mojave x* Lesser, *Phantom* x Russo Het, or any 2 morphs for that matter (only exception phantom x phantom, they will not make a BEL but a super phantom)
> 
> *Mojave*
> 
> 
> 
> *Phantom*
> 
> 
> ...


Pretty good explanation, HOWEVER  I'm pretty sure that a Phantom X Mojave will NOT produce a white snake.  I think that it will produce a snake similar to the Mystic potion ball that Tony McCain produced which was his mystic crossed with a mojave (I think most people now agree that the mystic is another line of phantom) 

Here is a link to a thread with pics of mystics in it.  
http://www.ball-pythons.net/forums/s...=Mystic+potion

Sorry, I couldn't find a pic of a mystic potion but it looks very similar to a super phantom.,

----------


## Spaniard

> Sorry, I couldn't find a pic of a mystic potion but it looks very similar to a super phantom.,


Here is a Mystic Potion pic.
http://gallery.pethobbyist.com/photo.php?id=380774

----------

MarkS (06-02-2009)

----------


## amaurer2

Super Phantom and the Lesser Platinum are my favorites that you showed.  All of them are beautiful!

----------


## OhhWatALoser

> Pretty good explanation, HOWEVER  I'm pretty sure that a Phantom X Mojave will NOT produce a white snake.  I think that it will produce a snake similar to the Mystic potion ball that Tony McCain produced which was his mystic crossed with a mojave (I think most people now agree that the mystic is another line of phantom) 
> 
> Here is a link to a thread with pics of mystics in it.  
> http://www.ball-pythons.net/forums/s...=Mystic+potion
> 
> Sorry, I couldn't find a pic of a mystic potion but it looks very similar to a super phantom.,


could someone vouch for this? ive always been told it made a BEL with all crosses

and also im in violation in terms because i posted pics without written permission, i thought giving credit was good enough, i apologize, and they said i was allowed to post links to the pictures which i would do but i can't seem to edit my post... help anyone?

----------


## Kara

You may use the pics. 

K~

----------

dr del (05-31-2009),OhhWatALoser (05-31-2009)

----------


## matt71915

would a super phantom x any of the others produce a BEL too?

----------


## MarkS

> could someone vouch for this? ive always been told it made a BEL with all crosses
> 
> and also im in violation in terms because i posted pics without written permission, i thought giving credit was good enough, i apologize, and they said i was allowed to post links to the pictures which i would do but i can't seem to edit my post... help anyone?


I don't think that Phantom X Mojave has been done yet.  At least it hasn't been made public if it has.  It IS known that a Mystic X Mojave will NOT produce a white snake, so I guess it all depends on whether or not you think a Mystic and a Phantom are the same thing.

----------

OhhWatALoser (05-31-2009)

----------


## Buttons

I was showing my girlfriend this thread cause she loves BELs and she asked me a question that I couldn't answer. 

What would a BEL x BEL produce?

----------


## Mitch21

All BELs...

----------

_Buttons_ (06-01-2009)

----------


## pavlovk1025

> I was showing my girlfriend this thread cause she loves BELs and she asked me a question that I couldn't answer. 
> 
> What would a BEL x BEL produce?


HAHA My wife said the same thing. Beat me to it.

----------


## Buttons

> All BELs...


Really? Interesting.

----------


## LadyOhh

> What would a BEL x BEL produce?


Depends on the combo BELs in question... but in theory, all BELs

----------

_Buttons_ (06-01-2009)

----------


## RandyRemington

Also it looks like Platy is a combo of lesser and an otherwise normal looking version of this gene which I think the closest thing I've heard to a name is "hidden".

----------


## FragginDragon

> Depends on the combo BELs in question... but in theory, all BELs



Hey Heather, could you expand on your answer?  I'm very interested in the BEL combo part of this equation.

----------


## MarkS

> Hey Heather, could you expand on your answer?  I'm very interested in the BEL combo part of this equation.


Well, in theory, if you bred two Blue eyed Leucistics together that were them selves the result of a lesser X phantom cross, (ie: Karmas) You could produce about 25% Super phantoms.

----------


## Crush54

That's a great explanation! That really cleared up my questions, Thanks!!!    :Snake:

----------


## PythonWallace

> could someone vouch for this?


Yes. Like what was said, mystics are very likely to be a newer line of the phantom, and mystic x mojave does not make a BEL. Even if they are not a line of phantoms, mystics are a BEL complex gene, and since crossing them with a mojave doesn't produce BELs, it's a fact that not every combo will give you lucies.

----------


## TheOtherLeadingBrand

This is awesome... it's pink! What do they look like as adults:

----------


## OhhWatALoser

i asked ralph davis for permission to use his pic, he hasn't got back to me, but i also asked him what phantom combos do and do not make BEL's, can anyone answer that? i was told they all made BELs

Phantom x Mojave = ?
Phantom x Lesser = ?
Phantom x Butter = ?
Phantom x Russo Het = ?

----------


## RandyRemington

The only one I remember reading about being done was Lesser X Phantom.  That produced Karma, one of the first captive hatched white snakes.  Ralph has butters so maybe he did that one too but I'm not at all sure the Mojave or Het Russo cross has been done yet with the original Phantom.

----------


## asplundii

> mystic x mojave does not make a BEL.


I am not sure I would say that. The snake produced by a mystic x mojo or a phantom x phantom is a blue eyed snake with a bit of pattern showing through... We do not say that mojo x mojo are not BluELs just cause they have a purple head, we just say they are "dirty". So by the same token, the mystic x mojo and the super phantom (and one presumes the super mystic and the phantom x mojo) are just "really really dirty" BluELs.

At least that is how I look at it.

----------


## PythonWallace

> I am not sure I would say that. The snake produced by a mystic x mojo or a phantom x phantom is a blue eyed snake with a bit of pattern showing through... We do not say that mojo x mojo are not BluELs just cause they have a purple head, we just say they are "dirty". So by the same token, the mystic x mojo and the super phantom (and one presumes the super mystic and the phantom x mojo) are just "really really dirty" BluELs.
> 
> At least that is how I look at it.


You can say whatever you want, but a mojo x mojo makes leucistics. You can call them skidmarks if you want, but that doesn't change the fact that they are lucies. 

Phantom x phantom and phantom x mojave do not make lucies. You can call them "dirty lucies" if you want, but by definition, if it has a pattern and xanthiphore and melanin, it cannot be a lucy. A patternless white snake, whether it has a "dirty" head or not, is leucistic.

----------


## asplundii

> but by definition, if it has a pattern and xanthiphore and melanin, it cannot be a lucy. A patternless white snake, whether it has a "dirty" head or not, is leucistic.


And yet the dirty head of a super mojo is the result of the presence of melanin, so your argument falls apart... And even the cleanest BluELs can have a faint pattern to them. So, by your definition, neither of those are BluELs

And, somewhat tangential, the super fire/sulfur has yellow blotching and yet we still call them luecies...

----------


## PythonWallace

> And yet the dirty head of a super mojo is the result of the presence of melanin, so your argument falls apart... And even the cleanest BluELs can have a faint pattern to them. So, by your definition, neither of those are BluELs
> 
> And, somewhat tangential, the super fire/sulfur has yellow blotching and yet we still call them luecies...


They aren't my definitions. But I was talking about animals having a common visible pattern that contains varying degrees of those color pigments. A faded snake isn't a lucy. I understand what you are saying, but the definitions are already established, so you would be rogue to start calling the mystic potion or super phantom BELs, or a super mojave anything other than a lucy. Again, I understand your logic, but the definitions are already established and accepted. And as far as the super fire, I agree that it's odd that they are still called lucies with the yellow blotching, but I didn't prove the gene, so I don't get to name it.

----------


## FragginDragon

> Well, in theory, if you bred two Blue eyed Leucistics together that were them selves the result of a lesser X phantom cross, (ie: Karmas) You could produce about 25% Super phantoms.


OK, so what if you bred two BEL's that were products of a mojave x lesser?  Or a mojave x mojave?

----------


## asplundii

> I understand what you are saying, but the definitions are already established, so you would be rogue to start calling the mystic potion or super phantom BELs, or a super mojave anything other than a lucy.


Well I did say:




> At least that is how I look at it.


  :Good Job: 

I get that the "established definitions" are there but sometimes they are just not quite right. I hate and will continue to hate the usage of the term "co-dom" to explain morphs because it is totally and completely in error. And I know I can not change that usage either but that does not make it correct....

As for me being a rogue... would not be the first time, likely won't be the last either. But life is more fun being the nutjob  :Rolleyes2:

----------


## asplundii

> OK, so what if you bred two BEL's that were products of a mojave x lesser?  Or a mojave x mojave?


The prior would have the potential for lesser x lesser, lesser x mojo and mojo x mojo.

The latter would only give mojo x mojo offspring

----------


## PythonWallace

> Well I did say:
> 
> 
> 
> I get that the "established definitions" are there but sometimes they are just not quite right. I hate and will continue to hate the usage of the term "co-dom" to explain morphs because it is totally and completely in error. And I know I can not change that usage either but that does not make it correct....
> 
> As for me being a rogue... would not be the first time, likely won't be the last either. But life is more fun being the nutjob


We'll just agree to agree, then.  :Good Job:

----------


## asplundii

> We'll just agree to agree, then.


I can live with that  :Very Happy:

----------


## Drewp

ok so if you breed a BEL produced by a mojave x mojave to a normal, will you get all mojaves?

And if you breed one made by lesser x lesser, all lessers?

What about a lesser x mojave to a normal?

----------


## asplundii

> ok so if you breed a BEL produced by a mojave x mojave to a normal, will you get all mojaves?


Yes




> And if you breed one made by lesser x lesser, all lessers?


Yes




> What about a lesser x mojave to a normal?


50% of the clutch should be lesser and the other 50% should be mojo. Unless the odds gods are in a mood.

----------


## FragginDragon

> OK, so what if you bred two BEL's that were products of a mojave x lesser?  Or a mojave x mojave?





> The prior would have the potential for lesser x lesser, lesser x mojo and mojo x mojo.
> 
> The latter would only give mojo x mojo offspring


I'm sorry, but I don't understand your answer, maybe I'm missing something. 
Are you saying that in the former mating I would get mojave's, lesser's, and BEL's?
And in the latter pairing, I would get mojave's and BEL's?

----------


## OhhWatALoser

> I'm sorry, but I don't understand your answer, maybe I'm missing something. 
> Are you saying that in the former mating I would get mojave's, lesser's, and BEL's?
> And in the latter pairing, I would get mojave's and BEL's?


ok lets start from the top

if you bred two BEL's all your offspring are going to be BEL no matter what the 2 orginal BEL were. its impossible to get a lesser or mojo or anything.

now how clean those BEL would be would depend on the genes they get, if they got lesser x lesser gene they would be pretty clean, if they got mojo x mojo genes they would most likly have the dirty head, mojo x lesser ive seen go both ways.

now you asked what would happen if you bred two BEL that were lesser x mojos?
25% lesser x lesser
50% mojo x lesser
25% mojo x mojo

now could you 100% tell the difference between all of them... probally not. is it a lower lesserxlesser or a mojoxlesser, is it a lower lesserxmojo or a mojoxmojo... i donno how you could tell.

and two mojo x mojo BEL would jsut make all mojo x mojo offspring.

----------

FragginDragon (06-04-2009)

----------


## jluman

> now how clean those BEL would be would depend on the genes they get, if they got lesser x lesser gene they would be pretty clean, if they got mojo x mojo genes they would most likly have the dirty head, mojo x lesser ive seen go both ways.
> 
> now you asked what would happen if you bred two BEL that were lesser x mojos?
> 25% lesser x lesser
> 50% mojo x lesser
> 25% mojo x mojo
> 
> now could you 100% tell the difference between all of them... probally not. is it a lower lesserxlesser or a mojoxlesser, is it a lower lesserxmojo or a mojoxmojo... i donno how you could tell.


Mojave x lesser leucistics are very white. There's no way you could mistake one for a super mojave, or vice versa. I think you would have a hard time telling the lesser x lesser leucistics from the mojave x lesser leucistics though.

----------


## RandyRemington

It will be interesting to see how this complex is marketed as they become more common and more crosses are done and it gets harder and harder to sort things out.  Say you bred a lesser\\phantom X butter\\Vin Russo.  We don't know for sure yet but I bet all four possible combos of the babies (lesser\\butter, lesser\\Vin Russo, phantom\\butter, phantom\\Vin Russo) would be white and look a lot alike (maybe not the best example if lesser and butter are the same).  Already I see ads for just "leucistic" and I guess you are left to ask about the parentage.  Would make some difference though as I'd love to have a shot at one with phantom even if it would take the right pairing to find out.  If you could identify a pair with phantom in it those white snakes could produce the 25% homozygous phantom that isn't white in the next generation.

----------


## OhhWatALoser

> Mojave x lesser leucistics are very white. There's no way you could mistake one for a super mojave, or vice versa. I think you would have a hard time telling the lesser x lesser leucistics from the mojave x lesser leucistics though.


i've seen some mojo x lessers that were pretty dirty looking, i thought they were super mojos but he swore to me they were lesser x mojo. mayb i got lied to tho.

----------


## SGExotics

Im not sure about anyone else, but i like the super phantom and the mystic potion A LOT more than the BEl! But the BEL is still awesome!

----------


## muddoc

> I was told a lesser x lesser breeding will produce the most stunning BEL you can get, but thats always going to be a debate.


Just a bit of simple symantics, but I think the word stunning is an opinion.  I myself believe that the Super Mojave is more stunning than the Super Lesser.  However, I will agree that the Super Lesser is the cleanest BEL.




> You can say whatever you want, but a mojo x mojo makes leucistics. You can call them skidmarks if you want, but that doesn't change the fact that they are lucies. 
> 
> Phantom x phantom and phantom x mojave do not make lucies. You can call them "dirty lucies" if you want, but by definition, if it has a pattern and xanthiphore and melanin, it cannot be a lucy. A patternless white snake, whether it has a "dirty" head or not, is leucistic.


Jake,
  Just my opinion on the matter, but I thought I would interject my understanding of Leucism.  If I understand the condition correctly, it is actually caused by a lack of, or turned off chromatophores.  Chromatophores are the cells in the skin that are responsible for displaying pigment.  If they are absent or turned off, then the skin does not hold pigment.  That would mean that the pigments are present in the animal, but the skin does not hold them.  Therefore, a Leucy would actually have xanthriphores, melanin, and any other pigments that may be acting in Ball Pythons.

Just my .02,

----------


## PythonWallace

I pretty sure you are right, Tim. I was thinking of them displaying the pigment, but I definitely didn't word it that way. I had a brain fart with the lack of chromatiphore. This whole last week has been one giant brain fart for me.

----------


## krinklebearcat

So in a typical Mojave-Lesser cross, the odds for a BEL are 25%, does that change at all if you do a Pastave-Lesser cross?  What would be the breakdown for clutch odds?

----------


## 771subliminal

> So in a typical Mojave-Lesser cross, the odds for a BEL are 25%, does that change at all if you do a Pastave-Lesser cross?  What would be the breakdown for clutch odds?


12.5% WT
12.5% lesser 
12.5% mojave, 
12.5% mojave, lesser, 
12.5% pastel
12.5% pastel, lesser, 
12.5% pastel, mojave, 
12.5% pastel, mojave, lesser,

----------

krinklebearcat (02-16-2010)

----------


## jsschrei

Excelent post on this topic!!!

----------

Maurice Tebele (02-16-2010)

----------


## Maurice Tebele

> I am not sure I would say that. The snake produced by a mystic x mojo or a phantom x phantom is a blue eyed snake with a bit of pattern showing through... We do not say that mojo x mojo are not BluELs just cause they have a purple head, we just say they are "dirty". So by the same token, the mystic x mojo and the super phantom (and one presumes the super mystic and the phantom x mojo) are just "really really dirty" BluELs.
> 
> At least that is how I look at it.


thats how i look at it 2 :Very Happy:

----------

