Pastel Morph questions

Nice try anyway. I'm gonna post that on a forum I admin and see if it turns out that way. I don't know how to make it work on these type of boards, lol.

Actually I've been staying out of the whole "co-dominant" vs. "incomplete dominant" discussion for the most part. I don't really understand the finer points of the difference and I'm not really sure we could tell just by looking anyway.

Every now and then you hear about particularly bright "normal" pastel siblings. I wonder if these aren't carriers of genes other than pastel that have been bred into some of the premium pastel lines over the years to enhance them. Basically I'm figuring that someone working on the ultimate pastel might pick particularly bright colored "normal" females and some of these might actually be genetically bright due to unnamed (but not pastel) genes. So some of the premium pastel lines might be combos of pastel + other bright genetics and sometimes those other genetics are seen stand alone in the siblings. Those non-pastel siblings still will never produce pastels on their own (i.e. without being bred to a pastel) but might be interesting genetically anyway.

what forum do you admin cody? I admin the site in my sig.

one thing that really surprises me is the amount of people who thick that you can get hets for everything. i seen one guy selling spider hets one time and he had people interested in them till he got slammed by someone who knew better. i just how that people that are looking to by any het and any morph do some reading on that morph before spending there cash and even check out the breeder if it not a visible morph. you hear about it all the time one one trying to get there dream morph by buying hets and then they buy them from unknown breeders to save money but find out later that they got ripped. go to nerds site they have a lot of info on genetics that is very helpful .

It's my understanding that for codominant genes, the heterozygous normal + morph phenotype should be completely different than the homozygous morph phenotype, whereas for incomplete dominant genes, the heterozygous normal + morph phenotype is an intermediate, blend, or lesser of the normal and homozygous morph phenotypes. In other words, morphs where the homozygous morph is a super of the heterozygous morph. Therefore, the pastel gene should technically be incomplete dominant.

I'm not sure if there are any true codominant genes in ball pythons right now, so I'll just come up with a fictional example. Let's say we have the Excodom morph. The heterozygous normal + morph phenotype is a red striped ball python and the homozygous morph phenotype is a blue polka-dot ball python. This would be a codominant gene since the heterozygous form and homozygous form are completely different.

However, as far as herps go, it probably isn't necessary to make the distinction between codominant and incomplete dominant and it makes sense to call them all the former rather than the latter as it's shorter to write or type.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gncz73

one thing that really surprises me is the amount of people who thick that you can get hets for everything. i seen one guy selling spider hets one time and he had people interested in them till he got slammed by someone who knew better. i just how that people that are looking to by any het and any morph do some reading on that morph before spending there cash and even check out the breeder if it not a visible morph. you hear about it all the time one one trying to get there dream morph by buying hets and then they buy them from unknown breeders to save money but find out later that they got ripped. go to nerds site they have a lot of info on genetics that is very helpful .

---

Amen to that lol, a while back someone was claiming they bought a het for pastel for the price of a normal. :roll:

okay, i've always thought a pastels shed would be clear, no gray tints
of the snakes pattern. am i wrong?