• 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.

'New' morphs from Charles Pritzel's book

Since he found the original thread...Here is the post on the articles. I imagine more data is available being that it's been a year since I found those articles...If I find the time today I'll run through a search to see if anything new has cropped up. :)

KJUN said:
If the animals don't "suffer," then this is just another mutation that can be successful IN CAPTIVITY.

How do we know if they are or are not suffering? That's probably the ultimate mystery in regards to them. How do we know that their quality of life is equal to a scaled snake?
 
How do we know if they are or are not suffering? That's probably the ultimate mystery in regards to them. How do we know that their quality of life is equal to a scaled snake?

The same way we "know" it about albinos. How do you know it doesn't PAIN an albino to be forced into the normal light level of a keepers room? Is it wrong to keep albinos because we don't KNOW they aren't in pain?
 
The same way we "know" it about albinos. How do you know it doesn't PAIN an albino to be forced into the normal light level of a keepers room? Is it wrong to keep albinos because we don't KNOW they aren't in pain?

An argument could be made that if an Amel was in pain from being at normal light levels it could retreat to its hide while a scaleless animal can't retreat from its problems (outside with subject of water loss, it could soak I imagine). I've never observed any of my Amels retreat from light, but I honestly don't observe them closely enough that I would notice distress at all times. Wouldn't it be more of a concern with Amels in regards to sensitivity to UV light then normal light levels? Or am I thinking in the complete wrong direction?
 
I made a few comments earlier, I am going to go ahead and bow out of this discussion, I will watch it diligently. But will definitly bow to greater minds on this subject. :wavey:
 
On the whole T+ Albino is simply a paradox of a term and I think it really shouldn't be used.
The definition of Amelanistic is -without- melanin. Not some, not just a sip- nada.
It -may- hold to true paradox but again, once there's melanin the term Amelansitic shouldn't be used.

I don't think that a morph's trade name should actually reflect the hereditary traits/strength of the gene. Else you want to name Lavanders by the purple pigment or however that works.

Let's face it, people who aren't into genetics can be snake keepers.

The term T+ Albino is wrong, cause it ain't albino. The melanin may be present or reduced by any number of factors. However, once it's there, it ain't an albino anymore


I think the true albino is a blizzard and a amelanistic is a form off albinism.
And i don't care how to call a colour, but i like to call it by the genetics
The term "albinism" encompasses a wide range of traits, all of which result from problems with pigment production or distribution. So far, more than 60 different mutations have been isolated from many different species. Many of these mutations and their subsequent effects have been found to be identical in both humans and non-humans. Since the basic mechanisms for pigment production are nearly identical across all mammals, most data gathered from one species can easily be applied to other species. The various albino mutations may act in different ways and may occur at several different sites, but the end result is always a defect in the amount of pigment being produced and/or distributed.
Pigment -- melanin -- is produced through a series of chemical reactions which are made possible by the action of various enzymes in the body. The same general process occurs in all mammals, both human and non-human. For all mammals, the most important enzyme in the production of melanin is tyrosinase. The "classic" type of albinism is known as OCA1 -- OculoCutaneous Albinism, type 1. OCA1 involves a mutation in the gene which produces tyrosinase. Mutations in many different regions of the tyrosinase gene can cause OCA1.
Albinos with absolutely no pigment -- the "true" or "complete" or "tyrosinase negative" albinos -- are known as OCA1A albinos. Individuals with other types of OCA, such as "yellow", "brown", or "red" albinos, may have a substantial amount of pigment and still be albinos. In these cases, their defective tyrosinase gene may still produce an enzyme with some residual activity. These albinos are known as "tyrosinase positive" or "partial" albinos. The gene which produces tyrosinase is referred to as "C" when discussing color genetics ; therefore, mutations in this gene are sometimes referred to as C series mutations.
Melanin is produced in special cells called "melanocytes", and distributed in small granules known as "melanosomes", which are located inside the melanocytes. Some types of albinism, such as OCA2, may affect the normal production and distribution of the melanosomes. Individuals with these types of albinism (OCA2, OCA3, and so on) may therefore have normal tyrosinase function, but may still not have normal production or distribution of the pigment molecules.
OCA2 albinism involves mutations in the P series of genes, which normally produces an integral membrane protein component of the normal melanosome. P series mutations are properly referred to as Oculocutaneous Albinism type 2, but may also sometimes be referred to as "pink-eyed dilution" mutations in species such as mice. OCA2 is actually the most common type of albinism found in humans across the world, even more common than the "classic" C gene albinism (OCA1).


The terms "true" and "complete" albino often trip people up when they are first learning about albinism. Please don't be confused by these words. The term "true albino" was coined many years ago, when scientists were trying to distinguish albino animals from animals which were white for other reasons (such as extreme spotting or extreme merling). Given the immense advances in our understanding of genetics in recent years, this term is outdated and archaic, and should probably not even be used any more. Likewise, the term "complete albino" is misleading. "Complete", in this context, simply means that the animal is not producing any pigment whatsoever -- it is a tyrosinase negative albino. Likewise, the term "partial albino" simply means that some pigment IS produced -- the animal is tyrosinase positive. Partial albinos ARE still albino, and DO still tend to experience many of the same problems as "complete" albinos. As explained above, mostof the many types of albinism -- even OCA2 (P gene albinism), the most common type of human albinism in the world -- are tyrosinase positive.

Melanin: A type of pigment or coloring substance made in the eye and skin of humans and many other animals.

Phaeomelanin: A yellowish-broth or reddish form of the pigment melanin. Some persons with albinism seem to produce this pigment in areas such as beards.

Eumelanin: A darker brown or black form of the pigment melanin.

Enzyme: A specialized protein in the body that helps the body convert one chemical substance to another.

Tyrosine: An amino acid, or protein building block. Tyrosine comes from a wide variety of foods, and deficiency is rare except in extreme protein malnutrition. The system uses tyrosine to make melanin.

Ty-Neg: Tyrosinase negative, which refers to a type of albinism in which hairbulbs incubated in a chemical solution of tyrosine do not make pigment.

Ty-Pos: Tyrosinase positive, which refers to a type of albinism in which hairbulbs incubated in a chemical solution of tyrosine make pigment.

Yellow Albinism: A type of albinism similar to ty-neg albinism .

DOPA: Dihydroxyphenylalanine, a natural chemical which the body makes as a step in the process of making the pigment melanin.

Hypopigmentation: A general term for decreased pigmentation or coloration.

Sorry to jumpt in but i found this and maybee ?????????????

GREATINGS
JAN
 
Sorry everybody,but i'm new to corn snakes and this site,sorry if this isn't the place to ask, people are saying they have an amel or a motley,but the man in the shop said my new snake was an Amel Motley.Is this possible or is it one or the other.its orangy in colour with a sort of ribbon going down to the tail.(Not stripes or blobs).Sorry to be so ignorant.Have no photos at present.
 
My claim was not that T+ Albino for a hypomelanistic phenotype is inaccurate, and actually said that I agree that Ultras are albinos (following the definition of albino you use) and that they are surely Tyrosinase positive. I disagreed that T+ Albino is FAR more accurate and descriptive than ultra (considering Ultra has been described as a hypomelanistic phenotype) and I said it doesn’t bring any new information. As someone else mentioned in this thread, T+ albino by itself could be any kind of hypomelanistic phenotype, which is why I don’t think it is MORE accurate than the other terms we use for hypomelanistic phenotypes. You are using “albino” as a word to “describe an animal with an abnormally reduced amount of pigmentation”. Some people use it as a synonym for amelanistic, others as reduced or absent melanin pigment. I’m not even interested in debating on which definition is the right one, but each of them have different implications in the use of the term “T+ albino”. I have no problem with any of those “albino” definitions as long as the author does not imply that his definition is the only valid one, and if the author is consistent in his (her) use of the term. I personally favour terms like hypomelanism or amelanism over albinism when it’s possible. But that’s me.

It’s obvious we have a different view on this and I would be pleased to discuss it further, but on a different tone.

I actually agree with you. I was just wondering why some people choise to use the words "useless" and "inaccurate" to describe the term "T+albino". I don't have any interest in changing the name from "ultra" to "T+albino". That would be silly and unnecessary.

I just like to see why people choose to accept one "made up term" but refute another "made up term". There is no scientific "proof" of precisely what Ultra is, and why it does what it does. So claiming that EITHER term is "more accurate" or "more scientifically correct" is just ludicrous IMO. There is no actual knowledge of what is happening, which means ANY educated term is just as appropriate.

I said "T+albino" was *more* accurate because it at least described the phenotypic look of ultra without the need to redefine the world "ultra". The word "ultra" has nothing to do with snakes, mutations, melanin, pigment, or genetics. It is a pretext used to elevate the root word above normal status. That's it. To claim that it is more accurate, where a defined and understood term specific to the case at hand is not is, well...confusing to me. Confusing at the least, and arrogant at best. "The word I made up is more accurate than the scientifically coined terminology"...Hmmm...just a touch on the arrogant side, and, quite frankly...wrong.

My ONLY question was why it was called inaccurate and useless. It is NOT inaccurate, nor is it useless...

In all...I really do agree with you. I apologize if my posts came off as condescending. I had a bad day, and may have typed a little arrogance of my own. Apologies to you, sir.

KJUN--
That is an archaic and extremely narrow definition of the word "albino" you are using for your argument. By your definition, the only "albinos" that exist are animals completely lacking of ANY pigmentation. I do not believe that exists in snakes of ANY species.

Sure...in 15whatever when they first discovered albinism in mammals, it was much simpler to define because it was the only known form. Fast forward a few hundred years, and we find out that "albinism" occurs on MANY different levels, with MANY different pigments, in MANY different species.

It's like saying that all lizards have legs. It was only true until the first legless lizard was found...

Is a plant that doesn't have cloryphyll an albino? Why, yes it is! But...by your definition, EVERY plant is albino because NONE of them contain melanin. Hmm....
 
Sorry everybody,but i'm new to corn snakes and this site,sorry if this isn't the place to ask, people are saying they have an amel or a motley,but the man in the shop said my new snake was an Amel Motley.Is this possible or is it one or the other.its orangy in colour with a sort of ribbon going down to the tail.(Not stripes or blobs).Sorry to be so ignorant.Have no photos at present.

Yes, it is possible to have an Amel Motley. That is called a double recessive because it is expressing the genetics of two different recessive mutations. :)

Be sure to post pics in the forum's Gallery when you get a chance! :D
 
I made a few changes above. I just substituted a different mutation for scaleless. ...and I do NOT mean this to pick on you. I respect your opinions, and I don't really think they are completely wrong. I'm just making a point, and your post is a good one to do it to since it is obvious you have passion about it - with reasons that have convinced you that you are right. Kudos on it!

To be honest, I find the Europeans aversion to scaleless rather humorous for two reasons. (1) the biggest market for the scaleless ratsnakes has been Europe and (2) the words you said were exactly what was said about albinos and other morphs just a little over a decade ago. Now, they are are big buyers of morphs. In 10 year, I bet i'll be selling a LOT of scaleless across the pond. :)

The reason I changed it to albino above is because (1) melanin IS used for thermoregulation in the wild and (2) I've been told about the exact same thing specifically concerning albinos in the past.

Anyone that is hypocritical enough to say I don't keep scaleless because they are monstrosities, but I do keep albinos and such....are really just saying which monstrosities THEY WILL KEEP.....and that is funny to me.
KJ

Nah I don't feel picked upon, so no need to apologize or explain- I don't mind people attacking my argument as long as they do not stoop to attacking the person who makes it.

Now, I think that you're simplifying the matters a bit too much... I mean life is not about black and white. I think that we all set our lines somewhere in the middle shades of gray and it varies between one person to the next.
I mean, sure, you could say that vegetarians are hypocrites cause while they do not eat animals, they still receive vaccinations and medications that were tested on animals.
Or people who feel bad for mice and because of that do not keep snakes- however they have no problem with gorging on a burger.
Yes, you could call them hypocrites, but I think that's a mistake.
Morals are a very complicated thing and each of us perceives things quite differently.

Do I know beyond a doubt that I am not hurting animals by line breeding morphs? No- I don't.
However I, just me, Oren- believe that some changes are more extreme than others. And in my own perception, which can be wrong or right, a matter of coloration is lesser in impact than matter of actual physical organs.
I cannot show evidence that prove my claim. It's a personal belief.
If by your standards I am a hypocrite than so be it. I only think that every human being is "guilty" and has committed this crime at one point or another that he formed an opinion based of his own perceptions and nothing else.

I am very open minded and I can be wrong- what I try to do is compare it to the canine domestication for instance. And from what I see, it was the physical manipulation, not color, that brought about what I can only call decadence- animals that suffer from hip displacia or cannot mate without help.

We are all "forced" to form opinions, and either one of us can be wrong or right. I simply am suggesting a more careful approach, and try to draw a line- I am not trying to force this line on anyone of course. I am merely sharing my point of view here.
I hope people will simply know and make sure that a line should be set, at some point. To try and avoid the mistakes we made with other animals.

Beyond that, I am perfectly aware that my ideas may seem conflicting or hypocritical... I however simply think they're human ones.
 
Thanks TripleMoonsExotic for your prompt reply,it was very enlightening,saw some pictures on your other site thing and still cant find a pic that looks like my snake.Will post pics as soon as i have worked out how.Thanks again.
 
I actually agree with you. I was just wondering why some people choise to use the words "useless" and "inaccurate" to describe the term "T+albino". I don't have any interest in changing the name from "ultra" to "T+albino". That would be silly and unnecessary.

I think a general consensus on “T+ albino” will be very difficult to obtain because more than one definition of “albino” is used by different people, for different reasons and supported by different arguments, many of which are educated and sound. I guess "inaccurate" shows up when the albino definitions get mixed up in discussions.

Here’s my view on two of the common albino uses and their relation with T+Albino :

I think that people using Albinism strictly in synonymy with Amelanism will find the use of T+Albino not only useless and inaccurate, but a complete nonsense. The reasoning would be that if you can tell that a snake is T+ because is has a very low quantity of melanin, well it’s not an albino. So T+Albino is obsolete in this case. Following this definition of albinism, a T+Albino would have to be determined by L-Dopa test on a fully amelanistic snake. Some of those adopting this definition will also consider the use of T+ Albinism justifiable when the presence of melanin is so low that it is not clearly detectable. In these cases, T+ is a label used to confirm the presence of tyrosinase in a concerned sample, which has been determined by the test because it cannot be assessed visually.

Those using albino as a reduction or absence of melanin should see no problem with the use of T+albino, it’s accurate and just as descriptive as hypomelanism (as a generic term, not specifically Hypo A). In this case, a hypo is an albino, and it’s most certainly tyrosinase positive (since it’s not amelanistic), so T+Albino sure goes. So in this case, a T+albino can be either a hypomelanistic snake (no need for Dopa test) or a tested T+ amelanistic individual.

I think there’s no problem with any of these definitions or use, and senselessness or inaccuracy qualifications should always consider what the author uses as a definition for albinism. If the author doesn’t specify the intended definition, well probably the natural response for people will be to adapt the term to their definition of albinism, and flags rise if the use doesn’t fit with it.

On the Ultra name, I always assumed it was short for ultra-hypomelanism, coined to emphasize that we’re dealing with an extreme hypomelanistic phenotype. I always thought it was pretty descriptive in that sense. Also, as a side note, I think it’s reasonable to suspect that this particular type of hypomelanism is related to tyrosinase production (or activity) since it’s on the same locus as the amelanistic allele, which is related to tyrosinase (since amel corns are T-). Personally, even if I don’t use “albino” all that much, T+ only catches my attention if it concerns tested amelanistic (or ambiguous) animals.

Again, this is my view.

In all...I really do agree with you. I apologize if my posts came off as condescending. I had a bad day, and may have typed a little arrogance of my own. Apologies to you, sir.
No worries, and appreciated. Glad we can keep discussing this.
 
I don't have any trouble with "T-positive albino" if it is used as a unique name. I dislike it when used as a category holding several independent mutant genes. Because then it seems to say that those genes are in some way more similar than they are to genes outside the category. Case in point: amelanistic in the corn snake is T-negative (it's been tested). Both ultra and hypomelanistic are T-positive. Is ultra more like hypomelanistic or amelanistic? Answer: ultra is more like amelanistic because both are c-series genes.
 
Its just ironic * rather than my placement of love here * that the Ultra gene decided to rest on the same allele as corn amel.. Just makes a lot more confusing, and convincing at the same time.. *LOL*

Regards.. Tim of T and J
 
I agree with both of the above two posts.

JFdery-
Thanks for the conversation. I actually agree 100% with your above post, and my feelings are indeed identical to yours. Definitions and semantics are everything in a debate of this nature.

PaulH-
I also agree with YOUR post, which is why I believe that "T+albino" works well when discussing the ultra gene. I find it confusing to have amelanistic and "ultra-hypomelanistic" be allelic genes. As I posted above, homo. ultra, ultramel, and amel are three different looks on the same locus. The way I see it, calling ultra "T+albino" lessens the confusion because it shows the relationship to amelanism...it is an "albino", but tyrosinase is present, explaining the difference in looks between the three possible phenotypes...

Of course3...I am well aware that my mind works a little differently, and that sometimes...my thought processes are anything BUT clarifying...;)
 
The only time I would ever use the word "albino" would be to explain the difference between an amelanistic and an anerythristic to a newcomer (noob). Otherwise I tend to agree with KJUN, I had previously looked up the word albino about a year ago and my recollection is that it was initially used to describe mammals lacking pigment. As far as current usage, especially with regard to reptile genetics, IMHO it's archaic and generic.
 
PaulH-
I also agree with YOUR post, which is why I believe that "T+albino" works well when discussing the ultra gene. I find it confusing to have amelanistic and "ultra-hypomelanistic" be allelic genes. As I posted above, homo. ultra, ultramel, and amel are three different looks on the same locus. The way I see it, calling ultra "T+albino" lessens the confusion because it shows the relationship to amelanism...it is an "albino", but tyrosinase is present, explaining the difference in looks between the three possible phenotypes...
I don't like using T-positive albino for ultra because
1. ultrahypomelanistic is well established as the name.
2. what do you name a third mutant allele at that locus? It could happen. There are at least 5 T-positive mutant alleles at the c locus in the lab mouse, where its T-negative mutant gene resides.
3. Tyrosinase positive albino is established as a name for an albino mutant gene in the black rat snake. To my eyes, pictures of T-positive albino black rat snakes cannot be distinguished from pictures of T-negative albino black rat snakes. For what it's worth, there are also two independent albino mutant genes in the boa constrictor. Nobody has tested them for tyrosinase activity yet. I would ROTFLMAO if both turned out to be T-positive. A safer bet would be that one is T-positive and one is T-negative, though.

JFDery wrote, "I think that people using Albinism strictly in synonymy with Amelanism will find the use of T+Albino not only useless and inaccurate, but a complete nonsense. The reasoning would be that if you can tell that a snake is T+ because is has a very low quantity of melanin, well it’s not an albino."

IMHO, the term is useful and accurate if a dopa test is the most reliable way to distinguish between a T-positive albino and a T-negative albino. As in the black rat snake.
 
Not that I get along with Chuck anymore, but in many conversations I have had with Chuck about Ultramel Animals and T+ Albino, there is no doubt in my mind that T+ was simply a label given to ultramel corns before they were known as Ultra based genetics.. Other wise T+ just a useless name.. Ultra is a CoDom, much like tessera is, so expect the tessera market to drop like the Ultra market when everyone and his brother is able to produce them..

Regards.. Tim of T and J

i said this as soon as i heard about the co dom, i'll wait 2 years and ay 30$ rather than 1200$ now.. dont mean to sound disrespectful there, and dont get me wrong, if i was the one with them 1st i'd probably do the same price wise, as would most people.
i am starting to like them aswell.. typical that they are expensive lol
 
Why would anybody in their right mind want to call an Ultramel a T+Albino?

Ultra is a T+Albino like all other hypomelanistic genes, but anybody who has seen one, would not want to label them with the mystical name of T+Albino. An Ultra’s phenotype is closer to a Normal than a Hypo.

T+Albino enthusiast like the name for an extreme hypomelanistic snake, such as the T+Albino Boa, which is nothing more than an extreme hypomelanistic snake. Ultra is far from an extreme hypomelanistic snake. But now Ultramel looks similar to a T+Albino Boa, so they want to call them T+Albino, so they are more special.

I think anybody who wants to call an Ultramel, a T+Albino is extremely confused because an Ultramel is heterozygous for two different genes, not homozygous for a single gene. An Ultramel is het for Amel and Ultra and is an extreme hypo. A Hypo Lava or Hypo Sunkissed or Hypo Ultras are all more extreme hypos than the single homo versions of each gene. Trying to call an Ultramel a T+Albino is not any different than calling a Lava Sunkissed a T+Albino. They are not mystical, just a combination of different genes.

T+Albino Corns are not special in anyway. We have a ton of T+Albino Corns, do I need to list them? Hypo, Sunkissed, Lava, Ultra, Christmas Hypo, Strawberry Hypo and all of their combos are all T+Albinos.

Trying to call Ultramel Corns a T+Albino is a ridicules attempt at trying to raise a particular morph to something special when they are just double heterozygous Corns.

Does anybody know how the Ultra gene got its name? In the beginning, they were called Ultra Hypos, because of the phenotype of Ultramel when bred to Amel. When they bred Ultramel X Ultramel, they produced clutches of Amels, “Ultra Hypos” (Ultramels), and “Hypos”(Ultras) which were actually Ultras. Everybody thought they had discovered a new extreme hypo gene, so the Ultra Hypo name seemed fitting. Many people back then wanted to call them T+Albinos too, simply because of the extreme hypo look.

Each and every hypomelanistic Corn gene that we have could have been called T+Albino as a Trade Name and/or Genetic Name in the beginning. If somebody discovers a new hypo gene and pushes the name it might stick, just like other Trade Names and Genetic Names have, but trying to label an Ultramel as T+Albino is ridiculous. It is a double heterozygous Corn not a single gene causing the phenotype.
 
Joe, could you possibly tell me any more about christmas hypo being t+, or where you got that information from?
 
Ultra is a T+Albino like all other hypomelanistic genes, but anybody who has seen one, would not want to label them with the mystical name of T+Albino. An Ultra’s phenotype is closer to a Normal than a Hypo.

T+Albino enthusiast like the name for an extreme hypomelanistic snake, such as the T+Albino Boa, which is nothing more than an extreme hypomelanistic snake. Ultra is far from an extreme hypomelanistic snake. But now Ultramel looks similar to a T+Albino Boa, so they want to call them T+Albino, so they are more special.

I think anybody who wants to call an Ultramel, a T+Albino is extremely confused because an Ultramel is heterozygous for two different genes, not homozygous for a single gene. An Ultramel is het for Amel and Ultra and is an extreme hypo. A Hypo Lava or Hypo Sunkissed or Hypo Ultras are all more extreme hypos than the single homo versions of each gene. Trying to call an Ultramel a T+Albino is not any different than calling a Lava Sunkissed a T+Albino. They are not mystical, just a combination of different genes.

T+Albino Corns are not special in anyway. We have a ton of T+Albino Corns, do I need to list them? Hypo, Sunkissed, Lava, Ultra, Christmas Hypo, Strawberry Hypo and all of their combos are all T+Albinos.

Trying to call Ultramel Corns a T+Albino is a ridicules attempt at trying to raise a particular morph to something special when they are just double heterozygous Corns.

Does anybody know how the Ultra gene got its name? In the beginning, they were called Ultra Hypos, because of the phenotype of Ultramel when bred to Amel. When they bred Ultramel X Ultramel, they produced clutches of Amels, “Ultra Hypos” (Ultramels), and “Hypos”(Ultras) which were actually Ultras. Everybody thought they had discovered a new extreme hypo gene, so the Ultra Hypo name seemed fitting. Many people back then wanted to call them T+Albinos too, simply because of the extreme hypo look.

Each and every hypomelanistic Corn gene that we have could have been called T+Albino as a Trade Name and/or Genetic Name in the beginning. If somebody discovers a new hypo gene and pushes the name it might stick, just like other Trade Names and Genetic Names have, but trying to label an Ultramel as T+Albino is ridiculous. It is a double heterozygous Corn not a single gene causing the phenotype.

Joe, you got anything for us besides babble and opinion? :bang:

Oh, and I think there are some people looking for you...
 
Back
Top