Possible WC hypo

[Bill]

I have uploaded a few chameleon photos at the request of several members. I hope there are no complaints. May be we have a new topic, should we post pictures of our other animals or should we try to keep the focus on garters. I for one feel a little funny about posting pictures of reptiles other than garters so if there are any of you that would prefer to keep this strictly snakes I will respect that. Thanks

[Garter_Gertie]

Bill, it should go under the thread "Our Other Animals."

You're so sweet and nice to ask! Such a pleasant person!

[zooplan]

... so if there are any of you that would prefer to keep this strictly snakes I will respect that. Thanks

hahaha, thats funny, nice and much too late.


We have "The Natur photogaphy Thread" too.
We are happy about all pleasant photos you like to share.
There is also a thread about pcs of the members, several about meetings...

[anji1971]

Bill, if you hunt around, you'll find many threads that deal with other topics. We share all kinds of stuff here!
There's Pics of your Other Pets, The Nature Photography Thread, Pics of You, and the mother of all threads, It's Ohh so Quiet, Shh...........
So by all means, join in any one of those threads, and have fun!!

[Bill]

Bill, if you hunt around, you'll find many threads that deal with other topics. We share all kinds of stuff here!
There's Pics of your Other Pets, The Nature Photography Thread, Pics of You, and the mother of all threads, It's Ohh so Quiet, Shh...........
So by all means, join in any one of those threads, and have fun!!

Thanks,I will

[Bill]

hahaha, thats funny, nice and much too late.


We have "The Natur photogaphy Thread" too.
We are happy about all pleasant photos you like to share.
There is also a thread about pcs of the members, several about meetings...

OK Udo, I just did not want to set anyone off. There is a chameleon forum for cham talk. But thats cool if nobody minds.

[Bill]

Bill, it should go under the thread "Our Other Animals."

You're so sweet and nice to ask! Such a pleasant person!

Thank you Gertie. I appreciate that. But then again,wait til you get to know me.

[Snake lover 3-25]

wow long thread!!!!


neat snake...... red eyes???? wow confusing but awesome!!!!!!!

[sschind]

me??? showing off???? just adding 2 cents.... that's a Nebraska albino....she came from Nebraska...has more straw coloring than the other plains albino genes..... if I was gonna show off, I would have added my "christmas" albino plains....an Iowa albino with orange....

Using the terms as Udo has defined them, and I agree with, then using the term albino to describe this animal would be incorrect and I think that was the basis for James' whole discussion. That animal is not an albino it is an amelanistic. Just because someone bred it and stuck a name on it doesn't mean its the correct name. Also, a bit of confusion arises when we consider terms like Albino, snow and blizzard. The terms Albinism, thus albino, are scientific terms based on specific criteria. The terms snow and blizzard are descriptive terms that while on the surface may seem to be based on scientific criteria just like albino (snow = no black or red, blizzard = no black red or yellow, which are by the way great ways to describe them) they have no scientific basis. They are simply descriptors like "flame" and any number of other terms. The confusion comes in when scientific thought processes of people like James comes in contact with the marketing thought processes of people who want to breed and sell more pretty snakes.

Just think back to when the first amelanistic corn was produced. They guy probably looked at it and thought "what does this remind me of. It has no black, albinos have no black so it must be an albino" Thus the albino corn was born. Later on when this gene was combined with the gene for no yellow (anerythrism) the result was a snake that looked even more albino than the first they guy must have thought " oh crap, this looks even more like an albino than the first but an even more albino corn sounds stupid so what can I think of that is really really white? I know, I'll call it a snow corn." Ok, I think you can see where this is going. Fast forward a few years and we add in the gene for no red and the result is an even whiter snake. Now the guy must be going nuts. He has to be thinking "double crap, how much more white can this thing get. What in the world is whiter than snow? the only thing I can think of is a lot of snow and what is a lot of snow? I know, a blizzard."

With the way genetics are being tested in today's morph crazy world of reptiles I think it is entirely possible, even probable that people are using old terms in new ways that they were either never intended to be used or, more likely, never envisioned to be needed to be used. Maybe we need to come up with new scientific terms to describe what is happening. Maybe the old terms simple don't cut it. They were fine for what they did but in this day and age they are simply not accurate. The problem with that, in my opinion, is that more people are intent on creating new genetic morphs than trying to really describe what is genetically happening, not that they may not know what is happening they are just not out to prove it scientifically. They are happy to keep using old terms to describe new effects and thus confusion abounds. Even with the really really smart people. A prime example of this is a term I see in the ball python hobby a lot. They use the term "visible het" Now to me, a visible het can not exist because by its definition, at least the definition I learned in my genetics classes, an animal that is heterozygous shows no visible markings that it is heterozygous. They claim that a Pastel ball is a visible het because if you breed two of them together you get a "super" form or a super pastel. They say that a pastel is really a het for super pastel and since you can tell a pastel visually then it must be a visual het. I understand what they are saying and it makes sense to me but I contend that they should come up with a new word rather than het. Granted the old definition may be incomplete based on what we now know but adding to the definition of a already accepted term can only lead to confusion.

Sorry this was so long, hopefully I have succeeded in confusing you even more so we can continue interesting discussions such as this.

[Zephyr]

The only thing I can think of for the whole visual het thing is that the gene that the snake is het for is also tied to a dominant gene that would alter its appearance and hence indicate the presence of the recessive one.
I've had almost no genetics training/education so go ahead and rip that apart if I'm wrong lol.