Posted by:
JaredAren
at Wed Oct 4 16:56:10 2006 [ Email Message ] [ Show All Posts by JaredAren ]
Isn't the Stillwater hypo trait a genetic trait? If you don't call it a Stillwater hypo then how would one label it to differentiate it from the other hypo line? This is necessary because apparently the two lines are not compatible. So calling it a hypo would not be accurate and calling it a Stillwater hypo would not be accurate. It seems to me that naming the Stillwater hypo morph after a place was a mistake and is going to lead to many disagreements as to how future offspring are to be labeled. I see that many are labeling outcrosses as Stillwater outcrosses and others are just going with Stillwater hypos. Once we produce snakes that have more than one genetic combination things will be even more confusing. I guess we have two options 1) focus on the fact that the Stillwater hypo trait is a genetic morph more than it is a locality and label all animals with the genetic trait Stillwater hypos [I like this because I think that worrying about having "pure" Stillwaters is a marketing ploy at best] or 2) start throwing in the word outcross at the end of every new Stillwater double and triple morph that is created. Anyone else have other ideas, comments, or suggestions?
-----
Jared Douglas
[ Hide Replies ]
|
but............... - JaredAren, Wed Oct 4 16:56:10 2006