I'm curious... if a Sunglow is classified just as an amel with no white... than wouldn't MOST striped or motley amels be potentially classifiable as Sunglows, as the stripe and motley genes reduce borders?
Just wondering what other people's opinions are on this.
Thanks.
-----
-Jaime Palma
Mad-City Constrictors
Reptile & Amphibian Forums
Welcome to kingsnake.com's message board system. Here you may share and discuss information with others about your favorite reptile and amphibian related topics such as care and feeding, caging requirements, permits and licenses, and more. Launched in 1997, the kingsnake.com message board system is one of the oldest and largest systems on the internet.
Sunglow Clarification Question
MCConstrictors
Nov 29, 2007 12:02 PM
Replies (3)
MCConstrictors
Nov 29, 2007 12:05 PM
That about clarifies it for me, at least.
-----
-Jaime Palma
Mad-City Constrictors
DonSoderberg
Nov 29, 2007 02:41 PM
Since 95% of all amel motlies have no white, it would be tempting to call all amel motlies SUNGLOW MOTLIES. Hence, my explanation in your Sunglow Motley thread below about how I distinguish between an amel motley and sunglow motley. It's all about the saturation of colors. Deep, rich colors that are uninterrupted by changes in shade or hue is what distinguishes a sun motley from an amel motley. Most have contrast between markings and ground coloration, but rich, solid coloration is the hallmark of sun motlies.
South Mountain Reptiles
walter smith
Nov 30, 2007 04:45 PM
I agree with Don. It's not just the loss of white margins that classify a Sunglow, it's also the darker, deeper & richer coloration achieved through selective breeding.
If a Amel Motley was tossed into a bucket of Sunglow Motlies, I believe it wouldn't be any problem to pick it out due to it's more dull coloration vs. the Sunglow's.
Walter
