Question about morph "standards"

I want to get better at being able to ID morphs, specially the more sublte morphs. I know people say that looking at a ton of pics helps. The trouble im having is finding actual "standard" descriptions of morphs. I want to know exactly what makes a morph a morph and not a dinker. Im also not talking about proving it out or anything like that. There are high and low quality animals. Im just using this as an example but what exactly is the deifference between a LOW quality pastel and a normal? (Without any breeding involved) I just cant find a place that list specific traits that identify an actual morph.

A low quality pastel will have yellow in his color but it wont be so bright and it will eventually brown out my pastel isnt the best quality heres a pichttp://img.tapatalk.com/d/13/11/11/upudyse7.jpg

Sent from my SPH-L720 using Tapatalk

I am trying to figure out a good way to explain this without giving a lecture on histone methylation and Mendelian genetics , so bear with me.

For a specimen to be considered a "morph", in the context of a trait that is directly heritable via a co-dom or recessive gene, then there must a constant trend in how that population of morphs develop. For example, every albino ball python I know of has yellow and white in place of the normal black and brown, the pattern itself is relatively unaffected though; albinism is also proven out to be recessive so I can say with relative certainty that an albino bred to a normal will produce normal babies that carry the albinism gene and that an albino bred to a normal het albino will likely yield a mixture of albino and normal 100% het albino. Of course, this is a very cut and dry example, some morphs are a bit more complicated, ex. Granite back and Anthrax retics. There are a few trends, but they are a lot more unpredictable. In addition to this, we must think population wise when we determine these trends as individuals will differ at least slightly no matter how close they are. Hope that helps, it's a rough example but it should you start you off.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Physician&Snakes

I am trying to figure out a good way to explain this without giving a lecture on histone methylation and Mendelian genetics , so bear with me.

For a specimen to be considered a "morph", in the context of a trait that is directly heritable via a co-dom or recessive gene, then there must a constant trend in how that population of morphs develop. For example, every albino ball python I know of has yellow and white in place of the normal black and brown, the pattern itself is relatively unaffected though; albinism is also proven out to be recessive so I can say with relative certainty that an albino bred to a normal will produce normal babies that carry the albinism gene and that an albino bred to a normal het albino will likely yield a mixture of albino and normal 100% het albino. Of course, this is a very cut and dry example, some morphs are a bit more complicated, ex. Granite back and Anthrax retics. There are a few trends, but they are a lot more unpredictable. In addition to this, we must think population wise when we determine these trends as individuals will differ at least slightly no matter how close they are. Hope that helps, it's a rough example but it should you start you off.

---

It does help out but i wanted to know at what point does an animal go from being a really light/dark normal to being an actual morph. How can you visually identify the morph. Not tryin to give anybody a hard time but there is not a whole lot of info i could find on traits a morph MUST have to be considered a specific morph and what traits it CANT have. Best way to compare what im saying is dog breed standards.

If I'm not mistaken.... I believe the question is on the order of "what makes a fire a fire?" Or "what makes a yellow belly a yellow belly?".

Like with dogs there is a written standard that makes that breed. So you know exactly what you're looking for.

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Crazymonkee

If I'm not mistaken.... I believe the question is on the order of "what makes a fire a fire?" Or "what makes a yellow belly a yellow belly?".

Like with dogs there is a written standard that makes that breed. So you know exactly what you're looking for.

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk

---

Yes thats exactly what im asking.

Unfortunately I have not found anything like that either, I have just been looking at tons of pics

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Crazymonkee

If I'm not mistaken.... I believe the question is on the order of "what makes a fire a fire?" Or "what makes a yellow belly a yellow belly?".

Like with dogs there is a written standard that makes that breed. So you know exactly what you're looking for.

---

The agreement of two people, one of which has a significant sum of money. :gj:

Oh, that and actual genetics that you can't see with a human eye.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gerardo

I want to get better at being able to ID morphs, specially the more sublte morphs. I know people say that looking at a ton of pics helps. The trouble im having is finding actual "standard" descriptions of morphs. I want to know exactly what makes a morph a morph and not a dinker. Im also not talking about proving it out or anything like that. There are high and low quality animals. Im just using this as an example but what exactly is the deifference between a LOW quality pastel and a normal? (Without any breeding involved) I just cant find a place that list specific traits that identify an actual morph.

---

Morphs are genetic mutation that alters the phenotype of the wildtype(normal) animal.
Each mutation has a vast array of variation.
For example, a lesser can be more silver and cream or more yellow and brown. It can be more reduced or busy in pattern.
I think there are many variations of 'high quality' animals for a single morph too. Like, I personally think a reduced silvery cream lesser can be just as quality as a reduced yellow one.

And it's not just color. It's the contrast between colors that can improve quality as well, imo.

"High Quality" animals are usually the ones that "WOW" you.
Even the more subtle morphs, a quality animal will look nothing like a normal, where as a low quality animal could look very much like a normal.


In regards to your example of pastel. A quality pastel will be bright yellow contrasting with the black. A lower quality pastel is brown muddy looking. Low quality babies are orange and/or brown. Oranges turn brown as adults. High quality pastel babies are neon yellow almost.
I hope she doesn't mind, but MissRiss2012 has one of the best quality pastels around.

This is her pastel looking amazing at 800g. Better than many hatchlings.
http://img.tapatalk.com/d/13/11/07/u8ere3a4.jpg

Here's one via Google that is about the same size as well.
http://www.junkmail.co.za/images/lar...124751467.jpeg


What I personally consider a high quality vs low quality yellowbelly, where the lower quality one looks almost normal.

Yellowbelly via WOBP:
http://www.worldofballpythons.com/fi...-belly/008.jpg

http://www.worldofballpythons.com/fi...-belly/002.jpg

What I mean by color contrast.
2 black pastels. One that I personally find to be a 'higher quality' expressing more color contrast than the other.

http://shop.kicksballs.com/images/ma...ost%2026-4.jpg
http://www.worldofballpythons.com/fi...pastel/012.jpg

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gerardo

It does help out but i wanted to know at what point does an animal go from being a really light/dark normal to being an actual morph. How can you visually identify the morph. Not tryin to give anybody a hard time but there is not a whole lot of info i could find on traits a morph MUST have to be considered a specific morph and what traits it CANT have. Best way to compare what im saying is dog breed standards.

---

How to ID a morph.
You have to develop an eye for them. Just keep looking at examples.
Like, can you ID a Yellowbelly from a normal? It's actually easier to ID them in person than in photos if certain morphs were side by side of each other.

Maybe not a lower quality specimens, but there are no mistaking the higher quality ones.
High quality animals "pop" and should "wow" you.

And I do admit stuff like specials and specter are more difficult compared to other high expression morphs.

Damn this stuff is harder than i thought. Sucks i cant look at too many BPs in person.