• Hello!

    Either you have not registered on this site yet, or you are registered but have not logged in. In either case, you will not be able to use the full functionality of this site until you have registered, and then logged in after your registration has been approved.

    Registration is FREE, so please register so you can participate instead of remaining a lurker....

    Please be certain that the location field is correctly filled out when you register. All registrations that appear to be bogus will be rejected. Which means that if your location field does NOT match the actual location of your registration IP address, then your registration will be rejected.

    Sorry about the strictness of this requirement, but it is necessary to block spammers and scammers at the door as much as possible.

So Peach is now Amaretto?

Susan said:
I really don't understand what the fuss is all about. Trade names will either be used or not and what is accepted by the majority will most likely be what is used 10 years from now when the morph is as common as an amel. Honestly, why all this hulabaloo about the originator being the one to give the trade name. If that person does not jump in with a name at the start (or if there are multiple breeders creating the same thing at ther same time), and someone else does 6 years later, bit deal. You snooze, you lose! Is it a perfect match for color? Heck no! But then, what morph is? Many examples of "mismatched" names have been listed throughout this thread. The name "amaretto" is pretty and sounds better than "amberder", IMO, and only time will tell which one becomes the more widely accepted and used.
Click to expand...


AMEN !!!

Walter,
:crazy02:BOUT' CORNS !!
 
dave partington said:
Good points Susan.
I wonder if it's even a good idea to slap a trade name on an f2 combination of genes. Several different clutches of the same genetic/trait carrying offspring can be hatched and there will be a great amount of variation between individuals. Would it not be better to save 'trade names' for f4/f5 line bred and higher? I have a couple of Tequila Sunrise from different breeders, and they do not look much like each other. I think another breeder was working with some of the same genes/traits of TS but called their line 'Blushing', and they were distinctively different looking.
Click to expand...

LINE BRED F4/F5.........not good at all in my opinion. That weakens the bloodline. I NEVER breed past a F3 generation. At that point it's time to outcross bloodlines, to strengthen, then recover the look.

As far the Tequila Sunrise example here, not good either.
The genetic traits of those are totally unknown, so yes you will have distinctively different appearences. Hell, Sean @ VMS produces different looking animals from the same line.

Walter
:crazy02:BOUT' CORNS !!
 
Drizzt80 said:
Susan (and KJ . . . who hasn't disappeared) pretty much hit the nail on the head. Use what you want. What's the use complaining about the topic if you don't like what's used when you can use the genetic terms if that's to your liking or the trade names if they are to you liking? (Of course you have every right to complain if you want.) If you're too lazy/busy/distracted to keep up with the trade names, use the genetic names and be done with it.

And, irregardless, the reality is the market will ultimately decide.
D80
Click to expand...

Again, AMEN !!! Perfectly said Brent, Thank You !!

Walter
:crazy02:BOUT' CORNS !!
 
Carinata said:
We'll agree to disagree. I'm still a colubrid guy, but some of those Ball Pythons are just insane! You're right though, those reds and oranges aren't as prevalent. But I like Axanthics not Albinos.

Gotta toss some Fat-tails in there though! No Ball Python can stand up to a Whiteout Zulu!

http://jmgreptile.com/cimages/whiteoutzulu001.jpg
Click to expand...

I'm sorry, but I see absolutely no appeal to AFTs. They're the BPs of the gecko world: dull, and every shade of brown is a "new morph". The only difference is that they're easy to feed. If you want a real gecko, get a Uroplatus. ( My Uroplatus guentheri )
 
iculatr said:
Last I checked this topic was about corn snakes...must be off on some tangent...
Click to expand...

Well, just about every point about the subject that could be made, has been:

Sometimes the first person to produce a new morph calls it a trade name.

Sometimes the trade name is adopted without fuss.

Sometimes the trade name doesn't catch on.

Sometimes someone comes up with a new trade name.

Some morphs go by their genetic names.

Some genetic names are too long/awkward, and those morphs might benefit from a trade name.

Some trade names reflect the look of the new morph.

Some trade names do not reflect the look of the new morph.

Some people care greatly about this subject.

Some people do not.
 
I have to think hard to remember what pretty much any trade name means, except snow, butter, avalanche, plasma, granite and fire.
 
RobbiesCornField said:
I'm sorry, but I see absolutely no appeal to AFTs. They're the BPs of the gecko world: dull, and every shade of brown is a "new morph". The only difference is that they're easy to feed. If you want a real gecko, get a Uroplatus. ( My Uroplatus guentheri )
Click to expand...

I have to agree with Robbie on the AFT, they (along with BP's) do nothing for me. It doesn't matter what color they come in, nor does the fact that some sell for a high dollar amount, they just don't appeal to me, in the least.

I understand both sides to this conversation about names. I do think that the person who created the first of it's kind should get to name it. I also believe that it should make some sense, in relative to the genetics. Granted, that's not always possible, & even with Cinder/Ashey, both names seem to fit, some people like one name, some like the other. Or Red Factor/Red Coat. I prefer Red Factor, & that's what I use.

Sure, call it what you want, but how confusing will it be if there's three different names for one morph, because people cannot agree on a name? I know it really doesn't matter, in reality, there will never be 100% agreement.

As long as the breeder lists the genetics involved, I'm not as concerned with the trade name (unless they're trying to pass an animal off as something that it's not).
I guess I'm just thinking out loud.
 
Well I think I see where the disconnect is. I hate Amels and Caramels. I love Axanthics. I think there's more morph potential and much more contrast. I love AFTs because of the amount of cool mutation that are possible to create and the amount of new morphs coming in and popping up every year. These guys are the next big thing! The high price tags are nice however, because I can buy into new projects much easier and make a better profit.

Check these guys out!

Photo courtesy of JMG Reptiles
 

Attachments

  • Hidden Gene Stinger.jpg
    Hidden Gene Stinger.jpg
    44.7 KB · Views: 42
nwheather said:
As long as the breeder lists the genetics involved, I'm not as concerned with the trade name (unless they're trying to pass an animal off as something that it's not).
Click to expand...

But listing genetics out defeats the purpose of a trade name...right?
 
Carinata said:
Well I think I see where the disconnect is. I hate Amels and Caramels. I love Axanthics. I think there's more morph potential and much more contrast. I love AFTs because of the amount of cool mutation that are possible to create and the amount of new morphs coming in and popping up every year. These guys are the next big thing! The high price tags are nice however, because I can buy into new projects much easier and make a better profit.

Check these guys out!

Photo courtesy of JMG Reptiles
Click to expand...

They ARE cute little boogers, just not my thing. And it's not so much the colors themselves that make corns so wonderful, but the VARIETY of the colors!!

Edited to add, what other single species can display white, black, grey, dark grey, purple, peach, orange, neon orange, red, brown, yellow, neon yellow, pink and tan?
 
airenlow said:
But listing genetics out defeats the purpose of a trade name...right?
Click to expand...

Not necessarily, when you have two or three different breeders using their own trade name for a morph.
For example, I know of a snake that was listed as a "Tangerine Sunglow" they chose that because of the coloring. Now, in reality, the snake was *not* a true Tangerine Sunglow, because she was not a hybrid. After explaination, "Tangerine" was dropped on the label of that particular snake, so as not to confuse the matter.
 
Something about the structure of AFT's & BP's (as well as most Boa's) just does not appeal to me. I'd never own any of them, they just don't impress me, at all.
 
nwheather said:
Something about the structure of AFT's & BP's (as well as most Boa's) just does not appeal to me. I'd never own any of them, they just don't impress me, at all.
Click to expand...

I mean I don't look at the structure, more the color morphs. I think Corns biggest downfall is the limited pattern morphs. With Balls you have Enchis, Spiders, Pinstripes, Red Stripe, Genetic Stripes, Tricks, GHIs, and on and on. With Corns you have Tessera, Motley, Stripe, Terrazzo, and Bloodreds.
 
Carinata said:
I mean I don't look at the structure, more the color morphs. I think Corns biggest downfall is the limited pattern morphs. With Balls you have Enchis, Spiders, Pinstripes, Red Stripe, Genetic Stripes, Tricks, GHIs, and on and on. With Corns you have Tessera, Motley, Stripe, Terrazzo, and Bloodreds.
Click to expand...

What's your point? Nothing about AFT's or BP's impresses me, at all.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top