Sulfur = Fire

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by envy_ld50

A lot of people must not be reading the whole thread. I have said all along the morph needs to be proven. And that breeders SHOULD distinguish thier lines if they choose like BHB and Graziani have done. Certain posters are not reading and fully understanding what is being said. But I agree with you Raul. We need to take the time to prove out our animals.

---

I think you need to go do a little bit more research on your history. Do you realize that Graziani and McCurly produced the first Pastels the same year. Then they both sold animals before they were proven to have a Super, or that they were proven to be compatible. Yet 10 years later, we still have NERD Lemons and Graziani Pastels. I also would like to know what you mean by Sulfurs being unproven? Are you talking about wether or not they are proven compatible? As far as that goes, NERD has a line of Axanthics, but has yet to test compatibility with other established lines. What do we call those Axanthics?

I think Randy's post pretty much summed it up.

I was wondering if you had any pics of the big female Eric, I know you had her for awhile, and liked her:) She looks good in your pic, but not as Burgundy as she does in some pics. Could be a lighting thing, but your pic is pretty darn representitive of how she looks.

I agree, there is no way to please everyone. I did what I felt was right at the time, and have no regrets. I think some of you have gotten way too wound up and upset about it, for pretty petty reasons. I think the "confusion" arguement is old and tired. If you are trying to say that someone will buy a Sulfur and not know what they are buying, I doubt it. If you think anyone will sell a Sulfur and knowingly mislead someone as to what they are selling, and what someone is buying, I think you have misjudged our character.

Also, whoever said EBN has had Sulfurs "forever" is totally adding to the misinformation....EBN got 1.1 Sulfur Pastels and 0.1 Sulfurs FROM ME in 2006.
So, unless they got some animals from Eric, and I do not think they did, I would say 2006 to 2008 is far from "forever." The ORIGINAL breeding was done in 2005...so there are no Sulfurs older than 2005 except for my original female.

Thanks for all the interest, you know what they say about publicity....

Eric is right in his comment about not using the name Fire. I was told that Davies was making a big deal about the name, and that anyone using the name Fire to describe any snake other than a snake from his original line,would get sued...etc. Not that I was really worried, but that and a few other tidbits of information I got, made me go another direction.

Dave

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by muddoc

As far as that goes, NERD has a line of Axanthics, but has yet to test compatibility with other established lines. What do we call those Axanthics?

---

It is my limited understanding that NERD's line is compatible with VPI's.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MPenn

It is my limited understanding that NERD's line is compatible with VPI's.

---

Mike,
That is great to hear. Do you have any more info on that, or who tried it, what the breeding was, and what the outcome was?

Thanks,

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RandyRemington

To me sulfur is just as much not proven to be the same as fire as it is not proven to be different. Why should the burden of proof be more on one side of the argument than the other? When sulfur was first named and fires where high dollar you better believe fire owners would have been all over anyone calling sulfurs fires.

The recent evidence that the homozygous sulfur looks like the homozygous fire helps make the case that they might be the same but even now if the sulfur line name was to be changed to fire it could well prove to be the misleading info. We may yet confirm subtle differences mentioned here or maybe even incompatibility. Even once the two are bred together and if they prove compatible we could still have an allele situation and might never be able to prove one way or the other. The debate still goes on for lesser vs. butter.

If the original sulfur line was held until fully understood (and I’m not sure that is even possible without genetic mapping) we would all know less about it than we do now. There would be fewer neat combos out there, and other breeders would still be waiting years to get to work with them. Sure we should do our best to avoid confusion but I would argue that letting other breeders work with this line so that they can provide first hand opinions and making the morph a public item of discussion will do more for getting clarity sooner than keeping the project until all questions are answered. What if the originator comes to the wrong conclusion after keeping the morph from the public for years and years while the price of fires drops to where there is no longer great resistance to calling the new line fire? A lot of time would have been wasted and fewer people would be interested in working to confirm the originator’s answers. The hobby would have largely passed the potential new line/morph by.

I think benefits sharing the opportunity to work with a new line/possible new morph with other breeders outweighs any short term potential for confusion for the industry. If lesser and butter where still being held by the originators while they sorted out if they are exactly the same or not (or the platy issue) think of all the current lesser owners who wouldn't have that morph to enjoy.

---

I echo many of Randy's pearls -- as well as supporting Eric and David for having done more with a "new morph" than many have done before making it readily available to the public (combos last season and Super this year).

I proved an animal this season (Het Cajun) that looked kind of like a Het Red Axanthic?? Sort of like a Lori Ball??? -- but was not related to either. Had I proved one of "those" 2 animals and chosen a name for them, I would have had a problem if someone (me in this case) proved an animal dominant (one clutch/one generation and slapped my animals name on it.

It is less confusing to attach a new name to a new line than adopt the established name/new line for a "similar" morph. Let the snake community decide which morph they like best and why. What is in a name? A rose by any other -- would smell as sweet...words to live by!!! Just an opinion -- everyone is entitled to one. MORE NAMES = LESS CONFUSION
:gj:

I want to think everyone for coming in and sharing their advice as well as many of the breeders who have been around longer than I as they have had shed some light on morph history. I think I will try to acquire a female sulfur for breeding this year or maybe even next year. I will try to see if they are compatible with fires on the super form. Maybe together we can get to the bottom of the sulfur faster as randy has mentioned.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mricyfire

There needs to be a snake committee so this can stop...all these morphs that are pretty much the same but have variations in price..ugh

Kinda the reason why I just got an RTB.

---

Enjoy your rtb.... great snakes.... :)

We'll continue the open discussion and quest for information without a committee, education is key, not restriction! :gj:

It's been a fascinating read!

Just because they appear to be allelic, and likely have an effect on pigment and pattern in similar ways, does not necessarily make them the same gene.

Many genes also will have genes that work with them, like the *daddy*s and *sibs* that rdr is working with, that enhance genes that operate from the same locus.

does that make the genes the same? not necessarily. given the generation time of these pretty beasties, it is VERY difficult to say in the beginning that gene A functions the same as gene B in all situations, but if the phenotypes, ie, the way they look, varies CONSISTENTLY... what is wrong with providing distinction between them?

I think the most confusing part of this for potential buyers is that the various genes are not divided into *families* of similar function.... I mean if we could buy Locus A Mojaves, Locus A Butters, Locus A Lessers, Locus X Cinnamon Pastel, Locus X Black Pastel, Locus C Pastel Jungles, Locus C Lemon Pastel, Locus D Sulfurs, Locus D Fires, then the buyer would KNOW that this is a variation on genes from the same locus, that, while it may be SIMILAR in function, may not affect pigment and pattern in the same way, or interact with other genes at other, corresponding and complementary locuses in the same way.

The naming conventions may be related, not to differences in the gene SPECIFICALLY, but to a family of other genes that correspond with that gene that changes the phenotype slightly. Does that mean that it shouldn't have a different name? no, as long as the genes are explained to buyers SOMEWHERE.

This is just my $.02

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EmberBall

I think Randy's post pretty much summed it up.

I was wondering if you had any pics of the big female Eric, I know you had her for awhile, and liked her:) She looks good in your pic, but not as Burgundy as she does in some pics. Could be a lighting thing, but your pic is pretty darn representitive of how she looks.

I agree, there is no way to please everyone. I did what I felt was right at the time, and have no regrets. I think some of you have gotten way too wound up and upset about it, for pretty petty reasons. I think the "confusion" arguement is old and tired. If you are trying to say that someone will buy a Sulfur and not know what they are buying, I doubt it. If you think anyone will sell a Sulfur and knowingly mislead someone as to what they are selling, and what someone is buying, I think you have misjudged our character.

Also, whoever said EBN has had Sulfurs "forever" is totally adding to the misinformation....EBN got 1.1 Sulfur Pastels and 0.1 Sulfurs FROM ME in 2006.
So, unless they got some animals from Eric, and I do not think they did, I would say 2006 to 2008 is far from "forever." The ORIGINAL breeding was done in 2005...so there are no Sulfurs older than 2005 except for my original female.

Thanks for all the interest, you know what they say about publicity....

Eric is right in his comment about not using the name Fire. I was told that Davies was making a big deal about the name, and that anyone using the name Fire to describe any snake other than a snake from his original line,would get sued...etc. Not that I was really worried, but that and a few other tidbits of information I got, made me go another direction.

Dave

---

Dave, who-ever told you that Eric Davies is making a big deal out of the Sulfur/Fire situation, is sadly mistaken and just trying to stir up trouble!
As far as threatening to sue some-one, that is not his way of operating. Smacking some-one in the mouth or breaking a face - perhaps, but sueing, never!!
Eric Davies could not give a monkey's cuss who claims what or does what =he has more to do with his life than petty things like that;

And just in case you are wondering how I know -

I AM Eric Davies!!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eric Sandoval

Envy, I was just playing with the biased thing. Just wanted to make sure you knew that as it's easy for things to be misconstrued in text.

Here is a pic I took of the original Sulfur female. I think most of us know Dave is a little lacking in the photography skills dept.;) so I thought I'd throw this up here. I personally hate this pic because of the stuck shed but it's the only one I have. Pictured with her is a normal, it looks really dark but it's just your average normal, and a really nice Mojave het hypo. I'm hoping to hatch some Hypo Sulfurs this coming season, which will be another cross we can compare with the fire equivalent.

Eric

https://ball-pythons.net/gallery/fil...snakes_073.jpg

---

Very nice Fire female you have there Eric!
Eric Davies