Base Mutations

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mischke

Thanks for the information! I know on the NERD site they had most of the dominate mutations listed as dominate with a TBD besides it, so i figured if they where going to list it as Dominate instead of Co-Dom, there must have been some kind of discernment that made them do so. Guess not...

Does anybody have pics of Het Red Axanthic or Red Axanthic, if Red Axanthic even exist?

Thanks, Nick

---

TBD = To be Decided

Trying to prove out my big Burgundy...

http://i356.photobucket.com/albums/o...s/large020.jpg

http://i356.photobucket.com/albums/o...s/large028.jpg

http://i356.photobucket.com/albums/o...s/large013.jpg

http://i356.photobucket.com/albums/o...s/large026.jpg

And correct me if I'm wrong but the het. red axanthic is het for black backs...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Koolaid

And correct me if I'm wrong but the het. red axanthic is het for black backs...

---

Alright, you're wrong.
Het reds are a co-dom mutation, the homozygous Red Axanthic is obviously the super and does exist.
Proven by Corey Woods.
Google it. I don't post pictures that don't belong to me and my het red female is in shed.
-Steven

http://www.coreywoods.com/RedAxanthic/RA14.jpg

Is that a good example of a homozygous form of a Red Axanthic?

Also found this:

http://www.ralphdavisreptiles.com/co...all_python.asp

That's what I was thinking haha... but I remember someone selling them and saying that het. red axanthics will make nice black backs.... I was a little confused... but I know that het. red axanthics are blackbacks so I don't really know why I said that last post... I'm an idiot haha :rofl:

I think some use the term "dominant" for something like "we know it's not recessive and is some sort of dominant". Sort of a holding area while we find out if it's co-dominant or not. But now that pinstripe has been proven completely dominant it's a little confusing. I tend to throw the word "completely" in front of dominant for an animal like pinstripe where the homozygous looks like the heterozygous mutant but I'm not sure that's the best way. It might be better if the holding category was just changed to "some type of dominant" and just "dominant" was reserved for the proven animals of which I believe pinstripe is the only ball python and even that is still very new and based only on BHB's reptile radio interview.

[QUOTE=RandyRemington;940583]I think some use the term "dominant" for something like "we know it's not recessive and is some sort of dominant". Sort of a holding area while we find out if it's co-dominant or not. But now that pinstripe has been proven completely dominant it's a little confusing. I tend to throw the word "completely" in front of dominant for an animal like pinstripe where the homozygous looks like the heterozygous mutant but I'm not sure that's the best way. It might be better if the holding category was just changed to "some type of dominant" and just "dominant" was reserved for the proven animals of which I believe pinstripe is the only ball python and even that is still very new and based only on BHB's reptile radio interview

Randy, Maybe the term "visually dominant " could be considered for mutations like the Pinstripe -- i.e. when he super form looks he same as the base morph.
:confused::confused:

Does anybody have pics of any of the other mutations?