The reason I questioned the use of the term co-dominant is because I believe it is not used properly in a lot of cases, or
at least it's not specific enough. The way I understand it is that there are alleles that are co-dominant and alleles that are incompletely dominant. The former means that each allele will fully express it's phenotype when heterozygous, while the latter will produce a *blend* between the two homozygous phenotypes. For example, say a flower's color is produced by incompletely dominant alleles. If the plant is homozygous for the "normal" allele, the flower color will be red; if homo for the "mutant" allele, the color will be white. If heterozygous, however, the flower's color can be any color "in between" red and white. (ie, a blend.) So I'm not sure there is a clear line between a "normal" and a "jungle", maybe just various levels of expression.
Some hets might favor the look produced by the "normal" allele, some might faver the "mutant" allele's phenotype. So my question, as with BRB coloration, is how the heck can you visually tell if the snake is a "Super" (ie, homozygous for the mutation) or a het that shows a very high level of expression towards the "mutant" allelle????? Or between one of those and a "phase"? Anyway, I think we are saying similar things, but it's getting late and I'm getting tired...
Thanks for the pics,
Ed
>>You have to know the lineage of the parents but since they are mostly from the Swedish line and not that many jungles are floating around. Even a low expression jungle will have more than a head stripe prolly at least one questionable saddle but mine has very nice tail color. If she is not a jungle then I have a tail as bright as any of the jungles in that litter and will produce very very very very very very very very red albinos and sunglows and the jungles were very nice in regards to color which is why I picked her out cuz of her lineage tracing back to the lipstick line and this is her father
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>I believe Ed that co-dominant means they have two visually distinguishable forms in the het and super such as Motley, Arabesques, and I think jungle. So I think they should be called co-dominant "mutations" and not co0dominant "trait" since traits are passed genetically and when a jungle is bred to a normal there is incomplete dominance in the offspring since there will be normals and jungles. When a super jungles mates to a normal there will be dominance cuz every boa will be a jungle. I think it matters if you say Jungle is co-dominant mutation instead of saying that the jungle trait is co-dominant cuz that is wrong. Does that make sense to you and I'm just taking a stab at this so don't think its right but I would love some correction though.
>>Bob
