Technical "Morph" question

[infernalis]

Firstly, I do not really like the term "Morph" it does not fit. (What do they change into??)

However, Is a FLAME really a "Morph"

I would believe flames to be a common red Eastern Garter.

Forget "Extreme" or any variations, Just plain ol flip the rock and there it is flames.

Thanks..

[crzy_kevo]

oh geeze u brought it here too hold on let me paste some stuff lol

[Stefan-A]

Morph just means form (or shape). It doesn't need to change into anything.

If anybody's interested:
Morph (zoology - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia)

[crzy_kevo]

but what causes them to be red it would be a gene which is dominant the offspring will not come out as hets becuase of the dominant gene but what causes an albino eastern to be albino well that is also a gene the only difference is it is a recessive gene which will produce hets if the snake is not bred to another which carries that gene

[Zephyr]

From my experience a flame just has an exaggerated amount of "Northeastern" phase coloration. Nothing more. The color is so vivid that it overtakes the snake's natural browns and greens.

[infernalis]

Morph just means form (or shape). It doesn't need to change into anything.

If anybody's interested:
Morph (zoology - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia)

Thanks once again Stefan for pointing out yet more great reading materials.

The terminology has a new meaning, AND I learned a bit about genetics just now.

[Loren]

"color phase" could be used too. Just my opinion, would be that I tend to call them a phase or variation when its still a wild type coloration, but it becomes a morph when its more or less man made through custom breeding. Again, thats just in my mind.

[Stefan-A]

"color phase" could be used too. Just my opinion, would be that I tend to call them a phase or variation when its still a wild type coloration, but it becomes a morph when its more or less man made through custom breeding. Again, thats just in my mind.

I see what you mean, but so far, there aren't any man-made snake morphs at all. All we really do is selective breeding. What we make happen in captivity could well happen in the wild too, we just increase the odds a bit.

[infernalis]

So anyways what brought this up was a discussion on inbreeding.

I can see where it would be necessary to inbreed to increase the odds with say albinism, but I cannot see a viable reason where it would be NECESSARY to inbreed flames or even Pugets to get more of the same.

An acquaintance bred sibling Iowa Snow Radix and it yielded a litter of 100% snows.

Had he bred the snows to unrelated radix, the results would have been quite different.

[Garter_Gertie]

I was going to say I think like Loren re color phase/morph until reading Stefan's post. It was a "DOH!" (smackng self in forehead) moment.

But the more I read it the more I think - in my opinion - it does uphold the 'morph' thought. Yes, it *could* happen in nature, but it isn't and that's what selective breeding is - selection of specifics to obtain specifics, in this case a 'morph' in my terminology.

So, I guess I still think along the lines of man-made being a 'morph' and natural selection being a color phase.