Question about morph "standards"

I want to get better at being able to ID morphs, specially the more sublte morphs. I know people say that looking at a ton of pics helps. The trouble im having is finding actual "standard" descriptions of morphs. I want to know exactly what makes a morph a morph and not a dinker. Im also not talking about proving it out or anything like that. There are high and low quality animals. Im just using this as an example but what exactly is the deifference between a LOW quality pastel and a normal? (Without any breeding involved) I just cant find a place that list specific traits that identify an actual morph.

A low quality pastel will have yellow in his color but it wont be so bright and it will eventually brown out my pastel isnt the best quality heres a pichttp://img.tapatalk.com/d/13/11/11/upudyse7.jpg

Sent from my SPH-L720 using Tapatalk

I am trying to figure out a good way to explain this without giving a lecture on histone methylation and Mendelian genetics , so bear with me.

For a specimen to be considered a "morph", in the context of a trait that is directly heritable via a co-dom or recessive gene, then there must a constant trend in how that population of morphs develop. For example, every albino ball python I know of has yellow and white in place of the normal black and brown, the pattern itself is relatively unaffected though; albinism is also proven out to be recessive so I can say with relative certainty that an albino bred to a normal will produce normal babies that carry the albinism gene and that an albino bred to a normal het albino will likely yield a mixture of albino and normal 100% het albino. Of course, this is a very cut and dry example, some morphs are a bit more complicated, ex. Granite back and Anthrax retics. There are a few trends, but they are a lot more unpredictable. In addition to this, we must think population wise when we determine these trends as individuals will differ at least slightly no matter how close they are. Hope that helps, it's a rough example but it should you start you off.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Physician&Snakes

I am trying to figure out a good way to explain this without giving a lecture on histone methylation and Mendelian genetics , so bear with me.

For a specimen to be considered a "morph", in the context of a trait that is directly heritable via a co-dom or recessive gene, then there must a constant trend in how that population of morphs develop. For example, every albino ball python I know of has yellow and white in place of the normal black and brown, the pattern itself is relatively unaffected though; albinism is also proven out to be recessive so I can say with relative certainty that an albino bred to a normal will produce normal babies that carry the albinism gene and that an albino bred to a normal het albino will likely yield a mixture of albino and normal 100% het albino. Of course, this is a very cut and dry example, some morphs are a bit more complicated, ex. Granite back and Anthrax retics. There are a few trends, but they are a lot more unpredictable. In addition to this, we must think population wise when we determine these trends as individuals will differ at least slightly no matter how close they are. Hope that helps, it's a rough example but it should you start you off.

---

It does help out but i wanted to know at what point does an animal go from being a really light/dark normal to being an actual morph. How can you visually identify the morph. Not tryin to give anybody a hard time but there is not a whole lot of info i could find on traits a morph MUST have to be considered a specific morph and what traits it CANT have. Best way to compare what im saying is dog breed standards.

If I'm not mistaken.... I believe the question is on the order of "what makes a fire a fire?" Or "what makes a yellow belly a yellow belly?".

Like with dogs there is a written standard that makes that breed. So you know exactly what you're looking for.

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Crazymonkee

If I'm not mistaken.... I believe the question is on the order of "what makes a fire a fire?" Or "what makes a yellow belly a yellow belly?".

Like with dogs there is a written standard that makes that breed. So you know exactly what you're looking for.

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk

---

Yes thats exactly what im asking.

Unfortunately I have not found anything like that either, I have just been looking at tons of pics

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Crazymonkee

If I'm not mistaken.... I believe the question is on the order of "what makes a fire a fire?" Or "what makes a yellow belly a yellow belly?".

Like with dogs there is a written standard that makes that breed. So you know exactly what you're looking for.

---

The agreement of two people, one of which has a significant sum of money. :gj:

Oh, that and actual genetics that you can't see with a human eye.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gerardo

I want to get better at being able to ID morphs, specially the more sublte morphs. I know people say that looking at a ton of pics helps. The trouble im having is finding actual "standard" descriptions of morphs. I want to know exactly what makes a morph a morph and not a dinker. Im also not talking about proving it out or anything like that. There are high and low quality animals. Im just using this as an example but what exactly is the deifference between a LOW quality pastel and a normal? (Without any breeding involved) I just cant find a place that list specific traits that identify an actual morph.

---

Morphs are genetic mutation that alters the phenotype of the wildtype(normal) animal.
Each mutation has a vast array of variation.
For example, a lesser can be more silver and cream or more yellow and brown. It can be more reduced or busy in pattern.
I think there are many variations of 'high quality' animals for a single morph too. Like, I personally think a reduced silvery cream lesser can be just as quality as a reduced yellow one.

And it's not just color. It's the contrast between colors that can improve quality as well, imo.

"High Quality" animals are usually the ones that "WOW" you.
Even the more subtle morphs, a quality animal will look nothing like a normal, where as a low quality animal could look very much like a normal.


In regards to your example of pastel. A quality pastel will be bright yellow contrasting with the black. A lower quality pastel is brown muddy looking. Low quality babies are orange and/or brown. Oranges turn brown as adults. High quality pastel babies are neon yellow almost.
I hope she doesn't mind, but MissRiss2012 has one of the best quality pastels around.

This is her pastel looking amazing at 800g. Better than many hatchlings.
http://img.tapatalk.com/d/13/11/07/u8ere3a4.jpg

Here's one via Google that is about the same size as well.
http://www.junkmail.co.za/images/lar...124751467.jpeg


What I personally consider a high quality vs low quality yellowbelly, where the lower quality one looks almost normal.

Yellowbelly via WOBP:
http://www.worldofballpythons.com/fi...-belly/008.jpg

http://www.worldofballpythons.com/fi...-belly/002.jpg

What I mean by color contrast.
2 black pastels. One that I personally find to be a 'higher quality' expressing more color contrast than the other.

http://shop.kicksballs.com/images/ma...ost%2026-4.jpg
http://www.worldofballpythons.com/fi...pastel/012.jpg

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gerardo

It does help out but i wanted to know at what point does an animal go from being a really light/dark normal to being an actual morph. How can you visually identify the morph. Not tryin to give anybody a hard time but there is not a whole lot of info i could find on traits a morph MUST have to be considered a specific morph and what traits it CANT have. Best way to compare what im saying is dog breed standards.

---

How to ID a morph.
You have to develop an eye for them. Just keep looking at examples.
Like, can you ID a Yellowbelly from a normal? It's actually easier to ID them in person than in photos if certain morphs were side by side of each other.

Maybe not a lower quality specimens, but there are no mistaking the higher quality ones.
High quality animals "pop" and should "wow" you.

And I do admit stuff like specials and specter are more difficult compared to other high expression morphs.

Damn this stuff is harder than i thought. Sucks i cant look at too many BPs in person.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gerardo

It does help out but i wanted to know at what point does an animal go from being a really light/dark normal to being an actual morph.

---

When we can safely assume a single gene is responsible for the trait. Light and dark coloration could be effected by potentially thousands of genes, each playing their own little part. Morphs are a single gene that cause a trait.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gerardo

How can you visually identify the morph. Not tryin to give anybody a hard time but there is not a whole lot of info i could find on traits a morph MUST have to be considered a specific morph and what traits it CANT have. Best way to compare what im saying is dog breed standards.

---

This is completely dependent on each individual morph. I feel pictures speak louder than words most of the time. I mean just with the above examples, fires are lighter in coloration, they have a reduction in black pigment, sometimes have more than normal flames/blushing, sometimes have a head stamp, and homozygous version is a black eyed lucy. Yellow Belly will have the pattern drop down the sides farther than normal, sometimes have more flames/blushing, and sometimes be off color than normal, and homozygous version is a Ivory. Besides a the homozygous version of the genes, you can see all of this with a Google images search of each morph.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by satomi325

Morphs are genetic mutation that alters the phenotype of the wildtype(normal) animal.
Each mutation has a vast array of variation.
For example, a lesser can be more silver and cream or more yellow and brown. It can be more reduced or busy in pattern.
I think there are many variations of 'high quality' animals for a single morph too. Like, I personally think a reduced silvery cream lesser can be just as quality as a reduced yellow one.

And it's not just color. It's the contrast between colors that can improve quality as well, imo.

"High Quality" animals are usually the ones that "WOW" you.
Even the more subtle morphs, a quality animal will look nothing like a normal, where as a low quality animal could look very much like a normal.


In regards to your example of pastel. A quality pastel will be bright yellow contrasting with the black. A lower quality pastel is brown muddy looking. Low quality babies are orange and/or brown. Oranges turn brown as adults. High quality pastel babies are neon yellow almost.
I hope she doesn't mind, but MissRiss2012 has one of the best quality pastels around.

This is her pastel looking amazing at 800g. Better than many hatchlings.
http://img.tapatalk.com/d/13/11/07/u8ere3a4.jpg

Here's one via Google that is about the same size as well.
http://www.junkmail.co.za/images/lar...124751467.jpeg

---

Thanks! Of course I don't mind if you share my photo :)

Like she said, I definitely think that contrast Is a big factor. I ONLY purchase animals that make me say "wow" and stops me in my tracks.

I will have to find the link, but there is a section in the forums here on BP.net that describes many morphs and even circles those traits in photos to help illustrate what makes a pastel a pastel, for example.

I'm on my phone, but you should be able to find those threads! I believe they are in the BP Morphs and genetics section.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gerardo

It does help out but i wanted to know at what point does an animal go from being a really light/dark normal to being an actual morph. How can you visually identify the morph. Not tryin to give anybody a hard time but there is not a whole lot of info i could find on traits a morph MUST have to be considered a specific morph and what traits it CANT have. Best way to compare what im saying is dog breed standards.

---

This is something I've been trying to research also, without much in the way of clear-cut results. And really it's surprising that this topic doesn't get more attention, as crazy as the morph list is getting lately.

Take the fire morph, for instance. I've found this much out: they are all brighter in color than normals, they all have black or mostly black eyes, they all have clean bellies with varying amounts of "tracking" along the sides, they have varying amounts of "flames" coming up into all side bands that touch the belly, but some more than others. Then it gets tricky. There's the "fire" head stamp; most have it, some don't. Most have a reduced pattern, some don't. Most of them have a lot of blushing, some don't. And most have a sharp contrast between the dark and light colors, but some don't. I've looked at pictures, read descriptions, and asked around on forums but I have yet to find anything I can use as a reliable standard. If you have an animal that is not proven and has no solid background info, but has a good case for being the morph based on its physical appearance, as I currently do, you will fight a long uphill battle when looking for any kind of field guide to stand it up against. I guarantee you if I posted my girl in the "is this a morph" section, I would get a mixture of "low quality fire" and "really light normal."

And there are much more subtle morphs than fire. I've seen animals that are described, even proven, as a do-dominant morph where I've seen more aberrant animals passed off as "nice normals." I'm actually glad to see someone else pose this question, as I was beginning to think I was the only one who felt this confusion. Sure, if it proves out through breeding or has documented parents to back it up, it's a morph. But as for visually picking out a subtle morph when you don't have any documentation on the animal, it is very, very difficult.

So yeah, I'm right with you on this one.

There used to be some posts here called the 'hunters guide' to the morphs. It was basically about picking out morphs from lots of import babies. It had some pretty good discriptions in it though for the various named morphs. I thought it was stickied here somewhere? I can't seem to find it now.

I think I remember it. It didn't get updated past a certain point, but it had some good pointers on some of the (for lack of a better word) "older" morphs.

There's a subsection of the forum that describes the different morphs in detail. I'm not sure if it's fully up to date with new morphs that are starting to come out, but it's somewhere to start...

http://ball-pythons.net/forums/forum...-Python-Morphs