So scaleless, a true Co-Dom morph?

[OhhWatALoser]

why is the het scaleless not an incomplete dominant?

Just because it has some scales missing on top of the head means it's not a recessive trait?

i think this is true.

we have one gene, lets call it scaleless.

and in the heterozygous form it has a few scales missing on the head, lets call it "scaleless head" or "het scaleless". very visual, no guesswork.

and in the homozygous form we have the completely scaleless BP. we could call them "fully scaleless" or "super scaleless" or "OMFG what dark wizardry is that"

seems to be a textbook example of incomplete dominant, or as we say codom.

especially if Brians assessment that scaleless head x scaleless head gives you 25% normals, 50% scaleless head, and 25% full scaleless holds true.

Recessive traits don't show up in the phenotype of the animal unless the gene is homozygous for that trait. Take brown eyes and blue eyes in people. Brown eyes are dominate.... if you have just one copy of the gene, you'll have brown eyes. Blues eyes are recessive because if you only have one copy of the gene, you will not have blue eyes. So the scaless head is incomplete dominant as the op suggested. Its more like the genes that control melanin production in people. Most of them are incomplete dominant genes.

I think all of you missed the post, I am saying it is NOT incomplete dominant as it really doesn't fit the definition of it, it IS co-dominant. It is showing both phenotypes in their entirety.

Ok so I accept the premise that scaleless is codom, but indulge my curiosity: what would an incomplete dominant look like in this case? A snake completely covered in half-scales? Very weak/miniscule scales?

I would say something that changes the scales, but doesn't make them disappear.

incomplete dominant is a scientific term, and codominant is an inaccurate term we commonly use when we mean "incomplete dominant", but somehow everyone just says codom.

co-dominant is a scientific term explained in my original post.

Codominance
Definition
noun
A condition in which the alleles of a gene pair in a heterozygote are fully expressed thereby resulting in offspring with a phenotype that is neither dominant nor recessive.

Incomplete dominance
Definition
noun
A kind of dominance occurring in heterozygotes in which the dominant allele is only partially expressed, and usually resulting in an offspring with an intermediate phenotype.

flawed, but ok

Recessives are not hidden like most people theorize.
Every trait in it's het form has markers that show, if one has eyes open enough to learn those markers.

Dominant form versus incomplete dominant forms ~ no proof that the homozygous looks the same as the heterozygous, except in books.
When there is proof of a Dominant trait that throws all hets, I'll happily agree.

Recessive are a whole nother subject, no reason to get into it now
Dominant has a definition, the book definition is the proof. If the trait does not fit the definition, then you are classifying it wrong.