Does the Ball Python industry have a future?

definitely an interesting topic with the scaleless. I agree the microscale is a little different but it seems like the BHB and WHS line are quite similar.
as far as the bananas and coral glows go, in my opinion are the same. Both are beautiful and I just so happen to work with bananas. But if you have ever watched any videos on YouTube with the BOA basement, he claims and swears that they are two different genes. I guess it's just people's opinions and you know everyones got one.I would like to see both side by side as babies and adults just to make my own assumption. But the flecking does appear in both

Originally Posted by CombatWombat

But if we're talking Supers when it comes to Lessers and Butters being the same. Both produce the BEL but those cannot produce Het. BELs

Then how do we get a Russo Leucistic...basically a BEL which can become Het.

Sorry this just fascinates me

Technically a lesser or a mojave is a het bel, they're just very distinct examples. The russo gene actually looks very different than a normal as well, we have a couple right now. They're super blushed out on the top, MUCH light in color, and a lot of flames on the side.

I would equate it to yellow bellies...at first people referred to them as "het. ivories", but now you see all sorts of yellow belly combos that make the snake look awesome (fire yellowbelly is one of my favorites). I haven't seen a lot of things done with russos for some reason but I have a feeling it will do some neat things as well.

Originally Posted by chrisis697

definitely an interesting topic with the scaleless. I agree the microscale is a little different but it seems like the BHB and WHS line are quite similar.
as far as the bananas and coral glows go, in my opinion are the same. Both are beautiful and I just so happen to work with bananas. But if you have ever watched any videos on YouTube with the BOA basement, he claims and swears that they are two different genes. I guess it's just people's opinions and you know everyones got one.I would like to see both side by side as babies and adults just to make my own assumption. But the flecking does appear in both

At the end of the day it comes down to genetics and what you can prove. I've seen no reason to believe that they're any different, and a lot of people will list them as coral glow/banana. Until someone produces a combo with a coral glow and the same with a banana but with a very different result, I'll keep believing they're identical. I did a lot of research on these at one point and found a lot of info leading to them being the same. Of course that doesn't mean I'm right, but based on what I've seen and read I have no reason to think differently.

Originally Posted by chrisis697

definitely an interesting topic with the scaleless. I agree the microscale is a little different but it seems like the BHB and WHS line are quite similar.
as far as the bananas and coral glows go, in my opinion are the same. Both are beautiful and I just so happen to work with bananas. But if you have ever watched any videos on YouTube with the BOA basement, he claims and swears that they are two different genes. I guess it's just people's opinions and you know everyones got one.I would like to see both side by side as babies and adults just to make my own assumption. But the flecking does appear in both

I just think its interesting that people have been on the lookout for scaleless balls for awhile and then presto...3 similar but different types pop up? Weird!
Guess someone should give me a female "banana" and I'll put him with my "coral glow" and we'll see what happens. Haha

Originally Posted by MCMB-2

Technically a lesser or a mojave is a het bel, they're just very distinct examples. The russo gene actually looks very different than a normal as well, we have a couple right now. They're super blushed out on the top, MUCH light in color, and a lot of flames on the side.

I haven't seen a Russo outside of the White Diamond in person to be able to judge that. Thank you for clarifying that for me.

Originally Posted by CombatWombat

I haven't seen a Russo outside of the White Diamond in person to be able to judge that. Thank you for clarifying that for me.

I hadn't seen them either until the end of last year, I think they're gorgeous. I'm really surprised that people haven't done more with them because they look like they'll have some really nice effects on lightening morphs. Ours are just babies right now, but once they grow up I definitely want to see what things they produce.

Originally Posted by chrisis697

as far as the bananas and coral glows go, in my opinion are the same. Both are beautiful and I just so happen to work with bananas. But if you have ever watched any videos on YouTube with the BOA basement, he claims and swears that they are two different genes. I guess it's just people's opinions and you know everyones got one.I would like to see both side by side as babies and adults just to make my own assumption. But the flecking does appear in both

the only way to prove any genetic difference, and prove they are different genes, would be through genetic testing of the original imports or their direct offspring. Beyond that, we just have opinions that are based on what is observed at a fairly superficial level.
As long as the snakes look good I don't really care if I have a Banana or a Coral Glow; I just call it a Coral Glow because that was the label when I bought it.

Originally Posted by MCMB-2

Technically a lesser or a mojave is a het bel, they're just very distinct examples. The russo gene actually looks very different than a normal as well, we have a couple right now. They're super blushed out on the top, MUCH light in color, and a lot of flames on the side.

The way I like to look at co-doms is as if they are a "visual het" and the super is the genetic morph.
In other words, the pastel is a "visual het" for super pastel; Kind of like using markers used to try and identify recessive genes, but reliable.
An enchi could be a good example: a super enchi is very distinct but some "het" enchis are more difficult to identify.
does this make sense?

Originally Posted by j_dunlavy

The way I like to look at co-doms is as if they are a "visual het" and the super is the genetic morph.
In other words, the pastel is a "visual het" for super pastel; Kind of like using markers used to try and identify recessive genes, but reliable.
An enchi could be a good example: a super enchi is very distinct but some "het" enchis are more difficult to identify.
does this make sense?

It makes perfect sense. All ball pythons that have a super form, are technically hets in their single form (as in they only have one copy of that allele). Sometimes being "het" means close to no visual difference compared to a normal ball python and sometimes being "het" for a gene means a VERY distinctive phenotype. For those hets, because they're so distinct, people give them distinct names, but yes, they're all hets in the end

I think Nick is arguing for the Russo as a "distinctive het" like pastels or enchis, as opposed to what people think of as true hets, like ghosts or pieds.

Originally Posted by MCMB

I think Nick is arguing for the Russo as a "distinctive het" like pastels or enchis, as opposed to what people think of as true hets, like ghosts or pieds.

I got that, just putting my thoughts out there.
To me "distinctive het"= "visual het", just different terms is all.

I thought of a great example that fits into this theme: The woma and HGW ball.
While we have the dominant gene Woma (with no super) we also have the Hidden Gene Woma; basically a visual het for the (fatal) pearl gene. Both snakes are similar in appearance but clearly different genes, unlike the banana and coral glow. CG and Banana also do not exhibit clear differences when mixed with other genes like the woma and HGW do either.

now back to the womas genes; if I remember correctly, NERD brought the woma genes to the hobby but initially figured out there was some sort of other genes at play with their woma balls that needed to be figured out, leading to the name "hidden gene" on one of the lines of woma balls.

To bring this around full circle, and back to the original topic, whenever a new gene is introduced, I feel it is REALLY important to work with that gene enough to fully understand it; how does it blend with other genes?; does it has a super form or is a simple dominant?; and most importantly, are there fatal gene combinations/birth defects etc.
It all goes back to sitting on a new morph before releasing it; and yes, that would lead to a lot of that morph and combos being released at once which would be financially beneficial for the founder of the gene. The high price would be one reward for the time spent learning about the gene (the other being happy hobby breeders who buy into it).
To skimp on this would be irresponsible; if you release a new gene you should be willing and able to provide as much info as possible about said gene, otherwise, you may have a bunch of people try to breed something that turns out to be fatal (like the pearl).*

Being responsible about how genes are identified and introduced will help to solidify the future of the ball python hobby/"industry."


*(and to be very clear: I am NOT accusing NERD of doing anything wrong; I am using the HGW as an example of something fatal when not bred responsibly because it is the perfect example of a gene that you have to be cautious with. NERD identifies the pearl ball python as "the failure" on their website. They also state that a pearl can be made from a normal offspring of a HGW bred back to a HGW. Kevin clearly states the pearl is fatal in his "lethal genes" discussion on you tube and I have a lot of respect for the fact he posted information on lethal genes.)

Originally Posted by j_dunlavy

Being responsible about how genes are identified and introduced will help to solidify the future of the ball python hobby/"industry."

I also am on the same page about the single gene of a super being a het without the traditional markers. Kind of mind blowing if you think about it.

But I was reading up above. NERD did their work with the pearl after failing with the regular woma ball and going to hidden gene woma. Both of them are both visually similar. It's a kill gene in waiting if you don't know genetics of the animal you're breeding out.

It also makes you wonder about kill genes to other kill genes. Like SpiderXWoma. I noticed on World of Ball pythons that it hasn't been created. Is this because of a fear of it being an ultimate kill or has it been produced with no results.