Vote for BP.Net for the 2013 Forum of the Year! Click here for more info.

» Site Navigation

» Home
 > FAQ

» Online Users: 680

0 members and 680 guests
No Members online
Most users ever online was 47,180, 07-16-2025 at 05:30 PM.

» Today's Birthdays

None

» Stats

Members: 75,910
Threads: 249,115
Posts: 2,572,187
Top Poster: JLC (31,651)
Welcome to our newest member, coda
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 11
  1. #1
    BPnet Veteran BlueMoonExotics's Avatar
    Join Date
    09-25-2012
    Location
    SW Florida
    Posts
    326
    Thanks
    259
    Thanked 81 Times in 56 Posts

    Question about proving out a gene

    I was wondering when people name a new gene what is the criteria? I ask because in the case of banana or coral glow they are 2 different lines (if I remember correctly) but they have 2 different names because they were imported by different people. However, it seems like when someone gets a yellow belly as an import they still call them a yellow belly. So, lets say I were to prove out a morph that I got as an import.... am I supposed to give it a new name even if it were similar (or pretty much the same) as another morph? Or is that choice just up to the one who proves it out? I understand that there can be different lines like pastel or lemon pastel but I have mixed feelings on having 3 or 4 different names for the same morph.

  2. #2
    BPnet Veteran alan12013's Avatar
    Join Date
    06-14-2014
    Location
    Portland Oregon
    Posts
    568
    Thanks
    418
    Thanked 130 Times in 124 Posts
    Images: 30
    You'd hate dealing with leopard geckos Sorry I can't answer your question though.

  3. #3
    Registered User
    Join Date
    02-09-2013
    Posts
    2,385
    Thanks
    200
    Thanked 581 Times in 459 Posts
    most of the new names that people come up with turn out to be useless, and then they only cause confusion until they go away. most of these names will eventually be forgotten, and until then, they will have served no purpose other than to cause confusion.

    there are no criteria. when something old gets another new name, people figure it out eventually and the name becomes useless. if something new gets a new name and it is in fact new, it sticks.

    look at lesser/butter. lesser is the default name, more commonly used, and butter is the useless second name. people buy butters and immediately rename them into lessers. when some people dont get it and are so stubborn about it that, lets say, the price for butters is higher than the price for lessers, people will re-label their lessers and sell them as butters, also you will see more butter/lessers.

    same with sugar/calico, mystic/phantom, banana/CG.

    so the rule is that there is no rule, you can make up names for no reason, some breeders (NERD) do this routinely for marketing purposes. the question is: will others adopt the new name or will others ignore it?

    in the english language, thousands of new words come up every year, and others go extinct. most of the new words go extinct quite rapidly.
    The Big Bang almost certainly (beyond reasonable doubt) happened 13.7 billion years ago. If you disagree, send me a PM.
    Evolution is a fact, evolutionary theory explains why it happens and provides four different lines of evidence that coalesce to show that evolution is a fact. If you disagree, send me a PM.
    One third of the global economy relies on technology that is based on quantum mechanics, especially quantum electrodynamics (electron-photon or electron-electron interactions). If you disagree, send me a PM.
    Time Dilation is real, it is so real that all clocks if they are precise enough can measure it, and GPS could not possibly work without it.
    If you disagree, send me a PM.

    The 4 philosophically most important aspects of modern science are: Evolutionary theory, Cosmology, Quantum mechanics, and Einsteins theory of general relativity. Understand these to get a grip of reality.

    my favorite music video is online again, its really nice: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oABEGc8Dus0


  4. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Pythonfriend For This Useful Post:

    BlueMoonExotics (07-14-2014),OhhWatALoser (07-14-2014)

  5. #4
    BPnet Royalty OhhWatALoser's Avatar
    Join Date
    07-28-2007
    Location
    Suburbs of Detroit
    Posts
    4,986
    Thanks
    530
    Thanked 2,721 Times in 1,477 Posts
    Images: 2
    It's simple, tell the truth.

    If it is a new morph name it and market it as such
    If it is a new line of an old morph, market it as such
    If it is unproven, market as a such (dinker)

    Morph names are supposed to identify genes, not be a marketing scheme....

  6. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to OhhWatALoser For This Useful Post:

    alan12013 (07-14-2014),BlueMoonExotics (07-14-2014),PitOnTheProwl (07-22-2014)

  7. #5
    Registered User coolballsdave's Avatar
    Join Date
    04-29-2010
    Location
    Roosevelt, Utah
    Posts
    196
    Thanks
    72
    Thanked 62 Times in 44 Posts
    Images: 1

    Re: Question about proving out a gene

    Quote Originally Posted by OhhWatALoser View Post
    It's simple, tell the truth.

    If it is a new morph name it and market it as such
    If it is a new line of an old morph, market it as such
    If it is unproven, market as a such (dinker)

    Morph names are supposed to identify genes, not be a marketing scheme....
    I agree with this...

    Further - Name and market your new morph as a new morph only after you play with the genetics for a while to make sure it is genetically unique from other similar looking snakes on the market.

  8. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to coolballsdave For This Useful Post:

    BlueMoonExotics (07-14-2014),Philip451 (07-22-2014)

  9. #6
    Apprentice SPAM Janitor MarkS's Avatar
    Join Date
    07-22-2005
    Location
    St Paul, MN
    Posts
    6,209
    Thanks
    1,535
    Thanked 2,678 Times in 1,596 Posts
    Blog Entries
    9
    Images: 3

    Re: Question about proving out a gene

    Quote Originally Posted by BlueMoonExotics View Post
    However, it seems like when someone gets a yellow belly as an import they still call them a yellow belly.
    Actually Ralph Davis originally (and probably still) called his line of yellow bellys 'goblins'. You can't really call an animal by an existing name until you've actually proven them to be compatible. After all look at the super stripes and others in that group (puma, highway) which were originally thought to be yellow bellies until they were proven NOT to be.
    Draco dormiens nunquam titillandus

  10. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to MarkS For This Useful Post:

    alan12013 (07-14-2014),BlueMoonExotics (07-14-2014),coolballsdave (07-14-2014)

  11. #7
    BPnet Veteran BlueMoonExotics's Avatar
    Join Date
    09-25-2012
    Location
    SW Florida
    Posts
    326
    Thanks
    259
    Thanked 81 Times in 56 Posts

    Re: Question about proving out a gene

    Quote Originally Posted by Pythonfriend View Post
    look at lesser/butter. lesser is the default name, more commonly used, and butter is the useless second name. people buy butters and immediately rename them into lessers. when some people dont get it and are so stubborn about it that, lets say, the price for butters is higher than the price for lessers, people will re-label their lessers and sell them as butters, also you will see more butter/lessers.

    same with sugar/calico, mystic/phantom, banana/CG.
    I'm sure this is true for some, but I keep mine labelled as whatever they were sold to me as regardless of price because some people are particular as to which "line" they are and don't want to "dirty up" their breeding plans.

    Quote Originally Posted by MarkS View Post
    Actually Ralph Davis originally (and probably still) called his line of yellow bellys 'goblins'. You can't really call an animal by an existing name until you've actually proven them to be compatible. After all look at the super stripes and others in that group (puma, highway) which were originally thought to be yellow bellies until they were proven NOT to be.
    I can see that having a new name for a similar morph would be beneficial in this case (where it's similar but acts differently). I can also understand that some want to keep the lines "clean". I guess I would probably take what several people have posted and combine it. Make a new name but just clarify that it is acting like whatever the popular name is for it.

  12. The Following User Says Thank You to BlueMoonExotics For This Useful Post:

    AGoldReptiles (07-21-2014)

  13. #8
    Registered User Spike89's Avatar
    Join Date
    04-30-2014
    Location
    Lebanon, OH
    Posts
    193
    Thanks
    1
    Thanked 41 Times in 33 Posts

    Re: Question about proving out a gene

    Have you checked out the WOB app?

  14. #9
    Sometimes It Hurts... PitOnTheProwl's Avatar
    Join Date
    11-21-2010
    Location
    San Antonio, TX
    Posts
    12,050
    Thanks
    6,313
    Thanked 6,985 Times in 4,274 Posts
    Images: 3

    Re: Question about proving out a gene

    Quote Originally Posted by OhhWatALoser View Post
    It's simple, tell the truth.

    If it is a new morph name it and market it as such
    If it is a new line of an old morph, market it as such
    If it is unproven, market as a such (dinker)

    Morph names are supposed to identify genes, not be a marketing scheme....
    This is better than I could say it.

    There are no "rules" so there are a lot of people just trying to make a name for themselves that they think if its something they haven't seen they need to claim a name. The problem is the names are getting STUPID and don't reflect anything about the animals gene build.

  15. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to PitOnTheProwl For This Useful Post:

    BlueMoonExotics (08-01-2014),zachbinger (07-22-2014)

  16. #10
    BPnet Veteran
    Join Date
    03-11-2012
    Posts
    589
    Thanks
    57
    Thanked 224 Times in 129 Posts

    Re: Question about proving out a gene

    The naming of ball pythons has become a big joke. Bunch of pre-schoolers with that 'look at me" syndrome.

  17. The Following User Says Thank You to grcforce327 For This Useful Post:

    PitOnTheProwl (07-22-2014)

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v4.2.1