Quote Originally Posted by Ball Clan View Post
Not dismiss. Like I said, just refer to them as het with markers, and define the super as a recessive morph, examples = het pied and het red axanthic. I'm just saying we don't need 500 "morphs" when 250 of them are barely discernible. We should save the cool names for the cool phenotypes, and call the hets what they are. If it's something that really stands out, like pastel or lesser, that's one thing. But I think something like disco which is essentially invisible to anyone other than the most experienced breeders should be called a het disco, whereas the super disco should be the disco morph and considered recessive rather than co-dominant. That's not dismissing, it's just cleaning up the ever-growing morph list and eliminating the clutter.
Then it would be classified incorrectly, an inc-dom morph just needs a intermediate heterozygous form, doesn't matter how subtle. A recessive wouldn't have a marker if it is truly recessive.... yea we already have enough misclassified genes. As for disco they are a few shades lighter than a normal ball python, hardly need experience to see that. and red axanthics are inc-dom, not many people will argue that. het red axanthic is very visual.

As for this morph the thing is quite a few shades lighter than a normal, I wouldn't call it desert. The color is might be similar but lacks the cleanliness of the desert which is it's most sought-after trait for most. I don't see it being a game changer right now, but they probably said the same thing about the orange dream. Good luck with the project.