Quote Originally Posted by snakesRkewl View Post
Every single visual mutation that we work with is incomplete dominant, there are zero codominant traits proven in ball pythons. Codominant will not blend like incomplete dominance when added to another mutation. Pastel is incomplete dominant, as is mojave. Each on their own, incomplete dominant traits. Codominant would be if we added pastel to mojave and sections of the snake would look like a mojave and section would look like a pastel. Instead they blend together. That is how incomplete dominant traits work.
As I wrote in post 101 in this thread, pastel and mojave are independent genes. Only different versions of the same gene can be dominant/recessive/codominant/incomplete dominant to each other. Normal/pastel/super pastel is relevant, and normal/mojave/super mojave is relevant. The relationship between pastel and mojave is not relevant.

Strangely enough, if you look at Burmese, Siamese and Tonkinese cats, the Tonkinese (the heterozygous cat) is intermediate in color between the other two. Just like pastel ball pythons are intermediate in color between the normal and super pastel ball pythons. And the Siamese and Burmese genes have been identified as codominant to each other for decades.

Definitions tend to change over time. The USA National Institute of Health's genetics glossary lists only codominance. See https://www.genome.gov/genetics-glossary/Codominance. There is no listing for incomplete dominance. Red/pink/white flowers have been considered an instance of incomplete dominance. The human A, AB and B blood types have been considered instances of codominance. Now, both are listed as forms of codominance in the NIH glossary. That turns "codominance" and "incomplete dominance" into synonyms and makes this discussion moot.