The problem with the snakes people work with now, is history. In the begining, we worked with homozygous animals. That is, animals from a local with like genetic makeup(even they have oddballs, but the type of oddball is within their genetic range) Now days, you may have a banded or a striped, or a newporter, or any of the newer morphs. But you have no idea of its genetic makeup(heterozygous) As they are not homozygous. You could use the word pure, but that word is not all to accurate with kingsnakes as kingsnakes are polymorphic(of many pattern types) in nature.

Whats funny is, this pic you posted reminds me of some of the original captive produced abberants from forty years ago(dude a flashback). I use to call those simple abberants, as they were the first step. Breeding those back to eachother produced complicated abberants, then crossing those with complicated abberants to other complicated abberants from different genetic backgrounds produced what you are working with today.

So yes, its easy to see for me, where that came from. Its merely a flashback. Thanks for posting Cheers

[ Reply To This Message ] [ Subscribe to this Thread ] [ Hide Replies ]