I'm not trying to rehash old arguments here, but I think the "is it a pattern" question has a clear answer of "yes" that cannot be refuted. So I'll respond.
Quote:
Originally posted by Rich Z
Well, the problem I see here is that not all of us are convinced that the "Blood Red" trait is a pattern trait rather than a color trait.
|
Maybe you're seeing a different effect in some examples where an infusion of color is happening, but that isn't what I'm talking about here.
The first time I saw a "snow bloodred" was all the convincing I needed. Perhaps we aren't talking about the same thing here. I'm talking about something that affects the pattern in normals, charcoals, anerys, amels, and snows, among others.
If this trait is affecting a color, which color is it affecting in snow corns to make them different from snow corns not expressing it?
Quote:
And based upon the well known fact that the coloration in corns changes dramatically while maturing further strengthens my opinion that this is really a case of the red (or red-orange) coloration increasing to overpower and blot out the pattern that is seen in babies and juveniles.
|
I don't agree with this. I have a very light pewter, pictured above. If the disappearing pattern were a result of extra pigment growing in, why is he still so light-colored? If the what you're saying is true, he would be super-dark.
If the above were true, how is it that snows expressing this pattern are hatched and immediately recognized as such? Red is not part of the equation, nor is black.
Quote:
Is this an unusual occurence in corn snakes? Nope, not at all. I have Silver Queens that are losing their patterns (and they have patternless abdomens as well). I have Opals that have turned into perfectly white animals. One Snow Motley in my collection has completely lost it's pattern. Motleys and Stripes can have the pattern become very indistinct as age reduces the contrast between the pattern and ground color. And of course, Blizzards can gain or lose their pattern almost every other shed.
|
The fact that other genetic or nongenetic influences can mimic the phenotype doesn't invalidate an actual genetic trait. That is, some normals can look dorsally "more motley" than some motleys do, dorsally. (I can post specific examples if needed, but I know you guys have seen this happen, too.)
This doesn't invalidate Motley as a genetic trait.
Quote:
Patternless (full or partial) abdomens? Heck I see that in Motley, Striped, Silver Queens, Upper Keys, Milk Snake Phase and Blood Reds. So what does that mean? Beats me.
|
Again, this applies to motleys...
Quote:
What do you call a Diffuse Corn that does not lose all of it's pattern?
|
What do you call a doctor who graduated last in his class? Doctor.
What do you call a motley corn that doesn't have circles down the back? A Motley.
What do you call a Diffuse Corn that does not lose all of it's pattern? Diffused.
Quote:
Protecting the fragile minds of newbies should not be the goal of any naming convention for the corns, I believe.
|
I think there's a difference between necessary complication and unnecessary complication. Genetics is what it is. Names have to be applied so we can identify morphs. These are necessary complications.
But using the name "nothing gets redder than this" for what is inarguably a pattern is, IMO, an unnecessary complication. Teaching people what the different morphs are, while using the term "blood red" for a pattern, is like trying to teach someone math when 3 and 7 both have the same exact name and symbol.
Quote:
If someone cannot grasp the concept of variation in any given cultivar of the corn snake, then they are lost anyway with all of this. Variation is the rule, not the exception, so people just have to understand this and accept it.
|
Just a few lines up you were using this as an argument that a pattern trait should not be named.
-----
As for the "dial" and "corn" examples, these are not applicable. "Dial" has no other meaning in telephones...
It is not reasonable to expect "Apple Computer Store" to sell apples.
It
IS reasonable to expect "Apple Fruit Store" to sell apples.
Quote:
Like many, I'm all for a better name if its accuracy of description just glares at us. I just haven't heard it yet and with all the educated input on this forum, I think it would have been suggested if it was out there.
|
This simply is not a realistic expectation.
"Diffused" describes the pattern of as many of these animals as "butter" describes the color of amel caramels. It gives a good general idea of what to expect. There is no perfect name, it is never expected in other morphs, but now all of a sudden it is expected. I don't buy it.
The other option, if you believe there's no way any word will ever fit, is to use a "nonsense" word. Motley doesn't describe a pattern or a color. Nobody can ever refute the use of Motley for that pattern because there's no inherent "pattern" meaning, so it means whatever pattern we say it means.
Call it Quijybo, Trundlefart, or Chevrolet for all I care. Those things have no implied meaning, so they will mean exactly what you say they mean.