Base Morphs

[New Herper]

OK, what are the existing base morphs? And, are they usually recessive, dom, or co-dom?
Just wondering I am still learning and trying to figure out what Morph I would like to try and breed.

[Stewart_Reptiles]

OK, what are the existing base morphs? And, are they usually recessive, dom, or co-dom?

It would be long to list all of them, so I will recommend you to 2 links regarding morphs and also how basic genetic works

http://www.ralphdavisreptiles.com/ma...ven_traits.asp

http://www.ballpython.ca/genetics.html

I would also recommend you some good books

The Complete Ball Python Book

Pythons Of The World Vol 2

[Rapture]

Good call

[daniel1983]

Here is a great poll/thread on base morphs:
http://www.ball-pythons.net/forums/s...ad.php?t=24479

[Emilio]

RDR's site is awesome everything you need to know about these amazing reptiles is there. Read up its good stuff

[MarkS]

A better question would be. 'What morphs are considered base morphs?' Albino obviously would be and Pied, but what about Ivory? Ivory is just the homozygous form of yellowbelly, but would you consider Yellowbelly or Ivory to be the base morph? You wouldn't consider het albino to be a base morph, because it looks no different then a normal, yet many yellow bellies don't look that much different then a normal either yet the homozygous form is very obviously a morph. What about pastel and superpastel? Which one would be considered the base morph? Would Leucistic be considered a base morph? If so, would you differentiate between a mojave leucistic and a lesser platium leucistic and a white diamond leucistic and a mocha leucistic?

Mark

[JLC]

A better question would be. 'What morphs are considered base morphs?' Albino obviously would be and Pied, but what about Ivory? Ivory is just the homozygous form of yellowbelly, but would you consider Yellowbelly or Ivory to be the base morph? You wouldn't consider het albino to be a base morph, because it looks no different then a normal, yet many yellow bellies don't look that much different then a normal either yet the homozygous form is very obviously a morph. What about pastel and superpastel? Which one would be considered the base morph? Would Leucistic be considered a base morph? If so, would you differentiate between a mojave leucistic and a lesser platium leucistic and a white diamond leucistic and a mocha leucistic?

Mark

As I understand it...a "base morph" is any morph that could reasonably appear in the wild. This would include the homozygous forums of both recessive and co-dominant traits. "Designer morphs" are those where two or more "base morphs" are combined by a breeder...an event that is highly unlikely to ever occur in the wild.

[Emilio]

As I understand it...a "base morph" is any morph that could reasonably appear in the wild. This would include the homozygous forums of both recessive and co-dominant traits. "Designer morphs" are those where two or more "base morphs" are combined by a breeder...an event that is highly unlikely to ever occur in the wild.

I think Judy is exactly right.

[jhall1468]

because it looks no different then a normal, yet many yellow bellies don't look that much different then a normal either yet the homozygous form is very obviously a morph.

By definition a morph is an animal with a different phenotype than a normal. A phenotype is simply a specific set of visible characteristics. Although the Yellow Bellies don't look A LOT different than a wild-type, they all share a visible characteristic that is different which makes them a "morph".

A heterozgyous recessive animal fails this definition, so it isn't a morph at all.

If so, would you differentiate between a mojave leucistic and a lesser platium leucistic and a white diamond leucistic and a mocha leucistic

Technically, most leucistics are base mutations. Lucy crosses like the phantom-lesser platty are not base morphs. The differences are obviously subtle... but a person with a good eye can tell the difference between most of them. And more importantly, they can be bred out to determine their lineage.

However, keep in mind finding a lucy in the wild is highly unlikely. Not because they don't appear, but because a high white animal is likely going to have a short life-span in the wild. Consider the fact that it was only within the last 15ish years that Bob Clark discovered the first Albino.

[MarkS]

This would include the homozygous forums of both recessive and co-dominant traits.

I agree with this, to a point. But this would mean that yellow belly and Ivory would BOTH be considered base morphs, even though it's the same mutation that causes both. (both yellow bellies and ivories have been found in the wild)

However, keep in mind finding a lucy in the wild is highly unlikely. Not because they don't appear, but because a high white animal is likely going to have a short life-span in the wild.

I disagree with this. It's no more unlikely to find a leucy in the wild then it would be to find an albino in the wild. The color of the animal is not going to have that great of an effect on the survivability of a nocturnal animal. Albinos have been found in the wild as well as white snakes.

Consider the fact that it was only within the last 15ish years that Bob Clark discovered the first Albino.

Bob Clark did not 'Discover' the first albino. He was the first to realize their potential and reproduce them from wild animals caught by trappers and supplied by importers. No simple feat in itself though, so he should be credited with being the originator of the ball python breeding industry. Before he produced and marketed his albinos, there WAS no ball python breeding industry. It made no sense to comercially breed an animal that produced so few offspring when cheap imports could be had so readily by anyone.

Interestingly, I've heard tales where there have been a few wild piebald balls that were found in Africa and some rather big names in the herp industry refused to buy them because they looked 'diseased' with those big white patches on them.

Mark