In a post below, Kerby showed a pic of a snake he called a JR lavender. I mentioned, it did not appear to be what JR and I called lavenders way back then.
The dead snake is what we called a lavender. Now, back then, we did not have all these names attached, like the T 's or T-'s. Or co dominates. All those names came after to explain what WE were producing. We simply called them by who was selling them. hahahahahahahahaha.
The point is, they are only names and do not tell you what your going to see. While these names do follow a LOOSE pattern, they are not exact.
In this case, the dead one looks like a lavender, so its logical to call it that. The replacement, is a very non lavender appearing individual. The question is, do you call them by what you think their genes are, or do you call them by how they fit in a catagory??????? This is important. Consider this, a german shepard is a german shepard, but most do not fit the discription and would not be allowed in a dog show. The reason is, they do not appear like the discription of a german sheppard.
This example is very accurate as, these dogs are not will natural species or better yet, wild species population types. These are captive produced mutations(like dogs) and often crossed with all sorts of other genetic lines(like dogs) Therefore to fit a discription. How well it meets the discription is how good a specimen it is. The dead one is a lavender, the other one may be of the same bloodline but does not meet the discription of a lavender.
To better understand this, when we find a wild snake, you make a discription of that animal and then if its consistant with others in the area, you call it a delray beach king(just an example) So from that point on, these kings have a mini name, based on a subpopulation. With captive producted animals that have been crossed to make a form, or derived from a mutation(non-normal characteristic) You can only call them by their appearance.
Lets look at your two snakes. Lavender is a T , that is, that mutation is causing a reduction in trionsine(sp) So it does not have to be exactly the same. The second individual has much less T, then the dead one. Therefore has much less melinin.
Both snakes have a consistant head and nuchal pattern, they could be of the same bloodling. BUT, those two snakes have different types of body patterns. The live one is of a desert king type. The bands do not taper on the sides, again, consistant with desert kings. The dead ones bands have a pronounced taper on the sizes, this is typical of coastal kings, the original lavender was a coastal. This indicates, outcrossing of the lavender gene.
Now consider to be a type(something named) The type should only produce a like type, not some of the same types and others of any other types. If it produces other types, then its a cross and no longer a type. With all other captive animals, this is the rule. a type/strain/form, must produce like offspring. For instance, a T- albino(my line) only produces T- offspring. Of course, they can be of many local types and apparently of other types too, goins and easterns, etc, but its still only produces T-'s.
If that trait is crossed to T , and then those offspring produce members of both or more, they are no longer T- OR T , they are mutations that are not consistant.
All in all, if the first one was what you wanted, then you got screwed. You bought it because it looked like something you wanted. The second one does not appear to be what you wanted. I would ask for one like the one you purchased. (i guess all I needed was this last paragraph) Cheers
