Is more really merrier?

[BCS]

I was looking around on morph your world, just day dream about potential offspring and maybe a few future purchases, but as I got deeper, I couldn't help noticed that a lot of mixed combos particularly 4 or more looked messy. You could barely even tell what morphs they are. I guess having a morph with 5+ genes may make a great breeder but for appearance purposes, they just seem to blotch out and look grainy. Maybe this is just me, of course we all like things differently. What are your opinions? How many morphs are just too many? (Appearance only. I too would buy any snake that had great potential as a breeder whether it looked nice or not).

[distaff]

I was looking around on morph your world, just day dream about potential offspring and maybe a few future purchases, but as I got deeper, I couldn't help noticed that a lot of mixed combos particularly 4 or more looked messy. You could barely even tell what morphs they are. I guess having a morph with 5+ genes may make a great breeder but for appearance purposes, they just seem to blotch out and look grainy. Maybe this is just me, of course we all like things differently. What are your opinions? How many morphs are just too many? (Appearance only. I too would buy any snake that had great potential as a breeder whether it looked nice or not).

SnakeBytes has a video on this, IIRC, it is with Brian visiting with the guy from NERD. They seemed to share the same conclusion. I'm not an expert on the morphs, but it seems that some genes are more troublesome than others.

[FluppleWott]

I usually like 3 gene animals best. But I'll admit, I love killer queenbees. My favorite morph and it has more than 3 genes if you count a super as two. Yet the patterns and colors are still very lovely and defined.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I337 using Tapatalk

[Glennpogi]

On a breeders point of view the more genes in a single animal the better... But you're right most of the time they don't look good, its their potential genetic make up are the one favored... I think good looking 5to 6 gene combo should be planned well in order to produce visually nice looking ones

[Slowcountry Balls]

There are a few 4 and 5 gene combinations that will still make me think "Wow!", but for the most part they get too busy and blurred together. This season we produced what we think is a Sterling Calico Mojave. She has great potential as a breeder, but, for the most part she is just all silver/grey. She has some really faint patterning on her sides that are hard to capture on camera, but for the most part, she hides her genes. Here is a picture of her (on the right) a Sterling Calico (on the left) and a Mystic Sterling (in the middle). I am pretty sure of the combinations, but not a 100%.

[distaff]

That girl on the right may be "hideing" her genes, but I think she is stunning.

[Solarsoldier001]

I don't know the calico lesser pastel spider is pretty awesome for a four gene


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Solarsoldier001]

Or the calico lesser super pastel. That one is pretty amazing to me as well


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Bigfish1975]

I think it all depends on the genes involved. I've got 1-4 gene animals in my collection and each is beautiful. I do feel though that when you get into 4+ genes, it can be difficult (for me at least) to determine whats all in there. I name what I can, give the pairings and if someone comes up with an extra gene in there. That's awesome.

[BCS]

It wont kill anyone to have a mean morph maker, but I also like to know the potential hatchlings. You have 6 eggs and 6 morphs, the chances of getting all six is such a small chance and it would be great if you like a huge surprise factor that could either be a good thing or, "well at least they are healthy".

And as for the whole super thing... to me it is one morph regardless. I do not count supers as two separate morphs... so to me a super pastel is just a single super pastel, not two different morphs... that's my opinion. I mean, you breed two pastels together, the out come is obvious.