Female Fire, $$ question.

How much do you guys think a 1700-1800 gram Female Fire should go for? I don't know what I should ask..

I wouldn't take any less than 2K for her..

yea as long as shes proven het lucy... id say 2k atleast, i think id ask more unless you really need to move her.

I haven't got the chance to prove her out yet, she was received in a trade deal but I have no use for her right now...

I figured I'd try and get a trade or sell her for a few other morphs I want/need....The most that she'd be paired with is a Pinstripe male for now, which isn't doing much as far as what she's capable of making..lol.

Being that she is Not proven I'd assume the value will drop noticeably right? $1200 sound reasonable for an Un-Proven female fire?

Thanks for the help.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wildman09

I haven't got the chance to prove her out yet, she was received in a trade deal but I have no use for her right now...

I figured I'd try and get a trade or sell her for a few other morphs I want/need....The most that she'd be paired with is a Pinstripe male for now, which isn't doing much as far as what she's capable of making..lol.

Being that she is Not proven I'd assume the value will drop noticeably right? $1200 sound reasonable for an Un-Proven female fire?

Thanks for the help.

---

"Proven" doesn't mean crap!!! she is a breed-able female morph price her as such. People only give a damn about Het's being proven het.. AKA they produced visuals.. She's worth 2000.00

Usually I see breed-able run at least 1 dollar a gram. Then you add in the baby cost. Then add in the cost for a brand new baby. about 300 more.

So yes 2k + ...

dont give her away.. That is like gold right now.. get paid or get a good trade..

:gj:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wildman09

Being that she is Not proven I'd assume the value will drop noticeably right? $1200 sound reasonable for an Un-Proven female fire?

---

Unproven Fire, or unproven breeder?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MarkieJ

Unproven Fire, or unproven breeder?

---

BOTH..But she looks Nothing like the normal sibs, she has NO Black at all, what SHOULD be black is brown-ish/tan kinda deal.

I'm getting pictures up in a little while to show what she looks like. I got her in trade and the trade was what a female fire should be according to the general price range you guys have given...maybe a little less but, I am Sure she is what I was told she is.

I'll post pictures in a few and let you all give your .02...

Just some advice but prove her out before you put a huge price tag on her.

If she came from a pairing that didn't involve a fire you can rule out her being fire. ( just basing on you saying she looks nothing like her normal siblings )

Believe it or not there are some weird looking ball pythons that look 100% unique that carry no genetic mutation.

I'd just be careful with the label as you can develop a very bad rep if she turns out normal. Besides if she's 1800 grams you can prove her out with minimal time and effort.

Yeah, I was thinking about just keeping her but I'm pretty sure she is a Fire. The Father was a fire, the mother I'll find out for certain.

Here are a few "low quality" shots of her. She has No black on her, the "alien head eyes" are like a caramel color, whatever is usually black is brown or a light tan/caramel. I'm going with what I was told and gonna say Fire. I might just prove her out if I find something worth putting her with.

*She is a Lot lighter then the camera shows*

Pictures below, what do you guys think?



http://i134.photobucket.com/albums/q...ildman/013.jpg
http://i134.photobucket.com/albums/q...ildman/012.jpg
http://i134.photobucket.com/albums/q...ildman/011.jpg
http://i134.photobucket.com/albums/q...ildman/010.jpg
http://i134.photobucket.com/albums/q...ildman/005.jpg

well for one thing.. there is no such thing as het lucy....

fire, russo, mojo, lesser/butter/... they aren't het for BEL's

they just produce them.. its their super.. dont listen to someone say oh they are het for ivory..
yellowbelly x yellowbelly = super yellowbellies (ivory) and yellowbelly's

so a fire is not het for BEL's
its just a product of selective breeding. no het required like pieds.

anywho

for that size fire... yeah 2k. maybe 1800$$ but dont lose-out on a profitable animal.

I'm not looking to make much off this girl. I got her on trade so I'm just looking to get a few morphs I really want. I'm not in this to make money, this is my Hobby. I want to make a few morphs I really like and be able to continue to fund/grow my collection. Yeah, making a few bucks here and there is nice but I'm not looking to make this my source of income, not yet at least.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sookieball

well for one thing.. there is no such thing as het lucy....

fire, russo, mojo, lesser/butter/... they aren't het for BEL's

they just produce them.. its their super.. dont listen to someone say oh they are het for ivory..
yellowbelly x yellowbelly = super yellowbellies (ivory) and yellowbelly's

so a fire is not het for BEL's
its just a product of selective breeding. no het required like pieds.

---

Umm, not really sure what you're trying to say with the above, but there most certainly is such a thing as heterozygous leucistic; however, I'm going to guess you were trying to get at something along the lines of there not being(at least yet) such a thing as a ball python with the wild-type phenotype that is heterozygous leucistic. Fire is equivalent to heterozygous black-eyed leucistic, just as yellowbelly is equivalent to heterozygous ivory. The blue-eyed leucistic complex is a bit less cut-and-dry, but it's pretty safe to say that of them at least butters/lessers are equivalent to heterozygous blue-eyed leucistic. These are facts, and have nothing at all to do with selective breeding. The mutations just have visually different phenotypes than the wild-type in both the heterozygote and the homozygote, with the homozygote being "more extreme" - essentially the definition of incomplete dominance.

Oh, and my advice to the OP would be to keep the girl and pair her with one of his dominant or incomplete dominant males. Adult female morphs are invaluable, and unless you really need the cash there is no reason to sell her. It's hard to tell from the lighting in the pictures if she's a fire or a light normal though. If the trade was for a fire, and if she is that different from her normal sibs, it's probably safe to call her a fire; though it wouldn't hurt to find out where the previous owner's breeding stock came from if possible. Also, as others have said, $2k is probably about right for a breed-able female fire if you do choose to sell her.

russ, not trying to argue, but clarify...

i dont even know how to word this.

what i was saying is that mojo, lesser/butters, russo's, fires,

they all can produce BEL's in any mix of the bunch,

your odds differ from which mix u mix up....

but a mojave is not het. its a homozygote carrier. base morph who's super form is a white snake with black eyes.

i get what your saying, but its proven.

have you ever heard or seen a het.for mojo x het.for lesser cross to produce BEL's?

im sorry if i seem rude its just what i have gathered from what i have read, seen and expierienced.


and just read what you replied... i guess its technically het. leuc.

but if that was the case, wouldn't it be acurate to say that super pastel is the product of 2 hets?



oh and i would totally go with russ and keep her too... just cuz i like fires, they clean up and make other morph combos brilliant!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sookieball

well for one thing.. there is no such thing as het lucy....

fire, russo, mojo, lesser/butter/... they aren't het for BEL's

they just produce them.. its their super.. dont listen to someone say oh they are het for ivory..
yellowbelly x yellowbelly = super yellowbellies (ivory) and yellowbelly's

so a fire is not het for BEL's
its just a product of selective breeding. no het required like pieds.

---

Don't go passing along incorrect information if you have no idea about what you are talking about.
Fire is heterozygous for Black-Eyed Leucistic.

Yellow Bellies are heterozygous Ivory and let's correct your pairing.
Yellow Belly X Yellow Belly = 25% chance Ivory aka Super YB aka Homozygous Ivory
25% chance Normal
50% chance Yellow Belly aka Heterozygous Ivory

-Steven

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sookieball

but if that was the case, wouldn't it be acurate to say that super pastel is the product of 2 hets?

---

Yes. Very Accurate.
A Super Pastel is the product of 2 Hets.
A Pastel is a Heterozygous Opal or Super Pastel.

I think you need to keep reading up on basic genetics.

-Steven

Steven is right just like a pastel is heterozygous pastel and super pastel is homozygous pastel, the only difference between say pastel and albino is pastel is a visual and albino is only a visual if its homozygous.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sookieball

russ, not trying to argue, but clarify...

i dont even know how to word this.

what i was saying is that mojo, lesser/butters, russo's, fires,

they all can produce BEL's in any mix of the bunch,

your odds differ from which mix u mix up....

but a mojave is not het. its a homozygote carrier. base morph who's super form is a white snake with black eyes.

i get what your saying, but its proven.

have you ever heard or seen a het.for mojo x het.for lesser cross to produce BEL's?

im sorry if i seem rude its just what i have gathered from what i have read, seen and expierienced.


and just read what you replied... i guess its technically het. leuc.

but if that was the case, wouldn't it be acurate to say that super pastel is the product of 2 hets?



oh and i would totally go with russ and keep her too... just cuz i like fires, they clean up and make other morph combos brilliant!

---

a Mojave is a visual het, homo for bel

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by stevenkeogh

Yes. Very Accurate.
A Super Pastel is the product of 2 Hets.
A Pastel is a Heterozygous Opal or Super Pastel.

I think you need to keep reading up on basic genetics.

-Steven

---

well thats for sure but what im trying to say is ( by the way all of this is very helpful and thanks! )

because they are visual, you dont really have to worry about it being het.
its like a given. isn't it?

i would worry about fires though... they really do confuse the heck outta more peeps than ud think... :-)

you dont have to prove out a visual pastel to prove it.
u get me?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sookieball

russ, not trying to argue, but clarify...

i dont even know how to word this.

what i was saying is that mojo, lesser/butters, russo's, fires,

they all can produce BEL's in any mix of the bunch,

your odds differ from which mix u mix up....

but a mojave is not het. its a homozygote carrier. base morph who's super form is a white snake with black eyes.

i get what your saying, but its proven.

have you ever heard or seen a het.for mojo x het.for lesser cross to produce BEL's?

im sorry if i seem rude its just what i have gathered from what i have read, seen and expierienced.


and just read what you replied... i guess its technically het. leuc.

but if that was the case, wouldn't it be acurate to say that super pastel is the product of 2 hets?

---

Your odds don't change at all no matter which combination you use from the BEL complex (which fire is not a part of). Any BEL will yield all heterozygous offspring when bred to a normal. Just which hets those are depend solely on what cross made the BEL. And yes, mojave x lesser makes a BEL (it may look like different odds if two different mutations made it, but put into a punnet square it works essentially the same). This is because the mutations are two different alleles of the same gene. Typically combinations from the same complex like this will be visually similar to either homozygote. You don't seem rude, just a bit misunderstood. And yes, super pastel is absolutely a product of two hets - pastels are just visual hets.

http://www.pakistan.tv/videos-fire-b...I_komGc%5D.cfm

pretty nice fire in this vid.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sookieball

what i was saying is that mojo, lesser/butters, russo's, fires,

they all can produce BEL's in any mix of the bunch,

your odds differ from which mix u mix up....


have you ever heard or seen a het.for mojo x het.for lesser cross to produce BEL's?

---

First part of this quote: These base morphs do not produce Black/Blue-Eyed Leucistics in any mix.
Fire X Lesser will not produce a Leucistic animal.
Fire is separate from Lesser Platinum, Phantom, Mojave, Butter...
Fire and Sulphur are members of the Black-Eyed Leucistic complex where as the others are members of Blue-Eyed.

Next: The odds do not change. No matter which morphs you use, the odds remain the exact same as long as they are members of the same complex.

Last: There is no such thing as Het Lesser or Het Mojave as the base morphs are Heterozygous for the Blue-Eyed Leucistic.
But a Lesser X Mojave can definitely produce BlueEL.

-Steven

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sookieball

well thats for sure but what im trying to say is ( by the way all of this is very helpful and thanks! )

because they are visual, you dont really have to worry about it being het.
its like a given. isn't it?

i would worry about fires though... they really do confuse the heck outta more peeps than ud think... :-)

you dont have to prove out a visual pastel to prove it.
u get me?

---

The only reason he might have to "prove out" the fire female would be because he didn't seem certain of its genetics. Some mutations are more subtle than others, and can sometimes be confused with the wild-type or even different mutations (in this case vanilla or even specter) that look very similar. However, since it supposedly came from a fire parent and he received it as a fire, it is probably safe to say it is most likely a fire.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Russ Lawson

Your odds don't change at all no matter which combination you use from the BEL complex (which fire is not a part of). Any BEL will yield all heterozygous offspring when bred to a normal. Just which hets those are depend solely on what cross made the BEL. And yes, mojave x lesser makes a BEL (it may look like different odds if two different mutations made it, but put into a punnet square it works essentially the same). This is because the mutations are two different alleles of the same gene. Typically combinations from the same complex like this will be visually similar to either homozygote. You don't seem rude, just a bit misunderstood. And yes, super pastel is absolutely a product of two hets - pastels are just visual hets.

---

GOD THANK YOU!

really im not good at being able to write or speak what i think. u know?
but from what i have seen, fires are in the mix of BEL's? people have posted pics and vid's of fire x fire pairing.... now i am baffled?

please if you would PM me id love it, just to pick your brain!

im sorry i love to learn....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Russ Lawson

The only reason he might have to "prove out" the fire female would be because he didn't seem certain of its genetics. Some mutations are more subtle than others, and can sometimes be confused with the wild-type or even different mutations (in this case vanilla or even specter) that look very similar. However, since it supposedly came from a fire parent and he received it as a fire, it is probably safe to say it is most likely a fire.

---

You're too quick for me Russ.
-Steven

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by stevenkeogh

First part of this quote: These base morphs do not produce Black/Blue-Eyed Leucistics in any mix.
Fire X Lesser will not produce a Leucistic animal.
Fire is separate from Lesser Platinum, Phantom, Mojave, Butter...
Fire and Sulphur are members of the Black-Eyed Leucistic complex where as the others are members of Blue-Eyed.

Next: The odds do not change. No matter which morphs you use, the odds remain the exact same as long as they are members of the same complex.

Last: There is no such thing as Het Lesser or Het Mojave as the base morphs are Heterozygous for the Blue-Eyed Leucistic.
But a Lesser X Mojave can definitely produce BlueEL.

-Steven

---

lol thank you! i just asked russ to tell me about the fire part! your better with words than i am... deffinately.

but thats what i ment,

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sookieball

GOD THANK YOU!

really im not good at being able to write or speak what i think. u know?
but from what i have seen, fires are in the mix of BEL's? people have posted pics and vid's of fire x fire pairing.... now i am baffled?

please if you would PM me id love it, just to pick your brain!

im sorry i love to learn....

---

The homozygous form of fire is the black-eyed leucistic - a white snake, often with yellow patches along the spine, that has black eyes with red pupils. You could include sulfurs and lemonbacks in a complex (or potentially as the same mutation depending on who you talk to) with fires, but this is completely separate of the blue-eyed leucistic complex, as these mutations are of another gene.

If your snake did not come from a proven line of Het Black Eyed Lucy, then it is just a nice light normal until you prove it to be something else. As is, your snake is probably worth $300 or so, as a dinker and a big female-assuming it is a female. If I was you, I would buy a male Het Black Eyed Lucy and prove her out one way or the other. Then, when you sell her, you know what to ask. If you sell her as a Fire, and you ask Fire money, and she proves out to be a normal, you are going to have some issues on your hands. Sell her as a dinker for $300 or keep her and prove her out.

Dave

I really don't think the snake you have pictured is a Fire........

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MitsuMike

I really don't think the snake you have pictured is a Fire........

---

That was my first thought too especially with no head spot at all.
I know they don't all stand out real strong but don't all fires have the head spot?
http://i968.photobucket.com/albums/a...l/SDC10013.jpg

I got her as a fire, the father was a 100% positive fire. I guess I will have to prove her out, she is ALOT lighter then the pictures show (crappy cell phones..lol)...Her head is super light, No black on her, just browns and light tans...I'll get some better pictures soon.

I have her paired up with my Pin male, so if I get some light ones I'll know. Plus Fire Pins are $$$...:D

I'm going to assume she's a fire, but like most of you have said, get a male fire and try to prove her out...

Being light doesn't make a fire......it has to have that head spot which yours doesn't have.
And just cuz the male was fire the female was still normal.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sookieball

well for one thing.. there is no such thing as het lucy....

fire, russo, mojo, lesser/butter/... they aren't het for BEL's

they just produce them.. its their super.. dont listen to someone say oh they are het for ivory..
yellowbelly x yellowbelly = super yellowbellies (ivory) and yellowbelly's
.
.
so a fire is not het for BEL's
its just a product of selective breeding. no het required like pieds...

---

Please don't take offense at this, but..

WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG. What you said is the EXACT opposite of 'correct'.. lol.

Heterozygous does NOT mean 'looks normal but carries a recessive trait'.

A diploid organism is heterzygous at a locus if it carries only one copy of a particular allele.. in this case, the fire is simply the heterozygous expression of the allele that causes black-eyed leucies in the homozygous expression of the trait.

So yes, patels are hets. Super pastels are homozygotes. Yellowbellies are heterozygotes. Ivories are homozygotes.

Good catch :gj:
genetics 101 is a rough topic for some :P

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by snakesRkewl

Good catch :gj:
genetics 101 is a rough topic for some :P

---

Read the thread.
It's been covered already.

-Steven