Leucistics with other genes

So I was browsing a little bit and was anxious to see if when you produce a BEL from lets say Mojave pastel x butter pin would you be able to tell visually if the BEL carries any of the other genes or would you have to breed them out to prove it? I seen a leucistic pastel and it didn't look different from a regular luci... I understand an albino leucistic ball will have red eyes but what about the other 100's of morphs

If I remember correctly they will show a pattern under a black light :confusd::confusd:

Some combos can be seen under blacklight but even then its just a guess. When you start stacking 3+ genes in there, theres no way to know other then to prove it out through breeding. Basically your telling the genes to make a snake that has the four genes but your also simulatenously telling it to lack all pigment. The genotype remains the same but the phenotype will be a leucy.

Supers work for knowing what's in there. Sorry if this is really obvious but a super pastel mojo that produces a bel from any other pairing will always have the pastel in it.

it depends on the genes, I believe someone showed how you could see the pin through a lucy with a black light, but then I heard someone proved out a spider lucy and couldn't see anything, even under a black light. I saw a super fire pos pastel a few years back, it had an odd whiter patch on the back of the head that I have never seen on another super fire, but I haven't seen another super fire pastel to see if it had the same thing. Then also a super mojave (which if you can decide if you really wanna call it lucy or not) you can tell a lot easier with pastel, they have a lighter head spot and the one adult I saw yellowed out pretty good. I'm interested to see if enchi or super enchi can break up some of the white in lucys.

it gets easier when its not an all-white lucy.

like, for example, super fires still have these yellow patches along the back, which have a few darker spots in them.

i think enchi can really do something, especially in the case of super fire, you get more of the darker dots in the yellow areas. but it should also be possible to see a difference in pastel super fire or hypo super fire.

it depends on where you draw the line, super mojaves are still considered lucys in spite of the grey head, how about a super phantom or a mystic potion? or how about ivory, some consider them to be leucistic, others dont, and there are a lot of ways to influence the optics of an ivory.

black light can work, but its difficult to take a picture of the fluorescence, some cameras just fail to focus and you only get a blurry purple mess. and there are not enough of these pictures out there, so you have no reference to compare it to.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pythonfriend

it gets easier when its not an all-white lucy.

like, for example, super fires still have these yellow patches along the back, which have a few darker spots in them.

i think enchi can really do something, especially in the case of super fire, you get more of the darker dots in the yellow areas. but it should also be possible to see a difference in pastel super fire or hypo super fire.

it depends on where you draw the line, super mojaves are still considered lucys in spite of the grey head, how about a super phantom or a mystic potion? or how about ivory, some consider them to be leucistic, others dont, and there are a lot of ways to influence the optics of an ivory.

---

The super fire pos pastel i was referring to yellow wasn't noticeably different, just it had this patch that was about 2 shades whiter than the rest of it. Waiting to see if any other super fire pastels have an anomaly like it.

Here was my sequence of thoughts on this: A lot of things are partial lucy, even piebald is. There doesn't seem to be a agreed upon definition on lucy (the where, whats, and whys on the missing pigment) but, I don't think anyone would disagree that an all white animal would look like a complete lucy and anything with any else would at best look like a partial lucy. I don't see people calling piebalds(partial) a lucy(complete) no more than I see people calling hypo,fire,vinilla,ect.(partial) an albino(complete). So why call some partial animals lucy and some not? Then super fires fall into a greater gray area, some are all white, some aren't, what the heck do you call that? lol.

I know I know, the hobby isn't scientific and blah blah blah, but why does the super mojave seem to be the exception to the rest of our naming patterns?