Quote Originally Posted by asplundii View Post
Granted not all caramels kink, but you never see a higher rate of kinking in the hets do you? The kinking condition is a result of a pathway disruption that is only there when both recessive alleles are present, in the presence of a WT allele there is no indication that the animal is a het unless you know that based on breeding.
Are you 100% on that?



Again, you are talking homozygous vs. heterozygous condition. The specific condition is the result of a homozygous induced disruption. In the heterozygous condition there is no indication of any other factor associate.
Are you 100% on that too?

I do not deny that the above mentioned conditions are real but I do not think they are exactly in the same range of condition as the het pied marker. If pied is a recessive trait then the hets should be phenotype WT. If they are not phenotype WT then pied has to be a co-dom trait (albeit a state where the het form is a very very subtle one but we have that like with a few other morphs so it is not unheard of.)
Are you 100% on that one too?


Look at it in this manner:

When someone is breeding a pastel to a WT they usually pick a WT with high yellow/gold so as to enhance the pastel effect (why breed a pastel to a dark animal if it is just going to give you sub par pastels?) As a result, WT offspring from pastel breedings tend to be higher yellow animals.
And this?




No on is ignoring your speculation, however genetics in of themselves are complicated, and many are simply trying to wrap their heads around what co-dom vs incomplete dom really means.

Randy Remington is the guy people go to for guidance in understanding ball python genetics. Your broad declarations on the results from ball python breedings is really quite authoritative.

Have you been to a reptile show? Have you seen the multitudes of dirty brown pastels and normal looking co-dom morphs? I would think it's safe to say that few people are truly working on selective breeding, even far less likely are they accidentally selectively breeding for a trait that could be a marker.

I bring up deserts as my example number one. Look at the pattern changes the desert morph does to HET recessive animals like the desert het clown? Wow... it's really amazing.

Or perhaps there are genes at work in the marker animals that are expressed in the phenotype as "markers" when the heterozygous form of the recessive morph gene is present?

Maybe the way these genes work are not so cut and dry that we can say for CERTAIN that they only work this way, and there is NO possibility that the interactions, distance, or accumulation of genes has no phenotypical expression when the recessive gene of the desired morph is only heterozygous.