Reptile & Amphibian Forums

How do you prodoce gost cals? there BEATIFUL!!!!!!! sorry it might be a dumb qquestion butjust wondeering any adavice would be so thankful!

A true GHOST Californai kingsnake would be a double homozygot of a HYPOMELANISTIC and axanthic/anerythistic. Since there is only one new true line of axanthic in excistence it will be a while before any are made. This "true" axanthict has not been released yet to breeders as only one person i know is working with them. A GHOST can not be developed until someone breeds the axanthics to a hypo and breeds the double hets back to each other..

What you are probably refferring to is a Ghost cal king which is NOT a double homo. It is a name that was just applied without much forethought on the originators of this morph. You cannot make this morph as it is its own single reccessive trait on its own.

Check with Kerby on attaining any as he is the resident expert here on this forum and also happens to be the largest breeder of new Cal king morphs in the US or the world for that matter.. But you can find these "Ghosts" from other breeders as they have been around since about 1990-91. I produced them in 1992-93. But i would still check with Kerby. Maybe he will chime in on the local and such since I forget all that. He also bred the "Ghosts" into other traits.

Geez when a name sticks , it sticks.
-----
Signature edited

Rainer, you are one of the people on here that I make a point to pay attention to every post they make.....but this last bit doesn't make any sense to me:

It is a name that was just applied without much forethought on the originators of this morph.

I simply don't get it....either way you slice it, it will still be a "buzz word"....and "attention-grabber". I was under the impression that "GHOST" had no bearing on actual genetic(maybe I'm wrong)..............therefore, how can the originators have been wrong? Can't they call it whatever they want to? Why not simply come up with a new name for the "TRUE GHOST" (I like "Spectre"? Unless you are just saying the "old ghost" is not consistent with what we consider "true ghost" to be in other species?

Maybe someone just needs to smack me in the head and lay it out straight for me?
-----
1.0.0 Lampropeltis getula holbrooki
0.1.0 Lampropeltis getula californae
0.0.1 Lampropeltis getula nigra
1.0.0 Lampropeltis mexicana thayeri
2.3.0 Eublapharis macularius macularius
0.0.2 Rhacodactylus ciliatus
0.1.0 Gerrhosaurus major major

>>Rainer, you are one of the people on here that I make a point to pay attention to every post they make.....but this last bit doesn't make any sense to me:
>>
>>It is a name that was just applied without much forethought on the originators of this morph.
>>
>>I simply don't get it....either way you slice it, it will still be a "buzz word"....and "attention-grabber". I was under the impression that "GHOST" had no bearing on actual genetic(maybe I'm wrong)..............therefore, how can the originators have been wrong? Can't they call it whatever they want to? Why not simply come up with a new name for the "TRUE GHOST" (I like "Spectre"? Unless you are just saying the "old ghost" is not consistent with what we consider "true ghost" to be in other species?
>>
>>Maybe someone just needs to smack me in the head and lay it out straight for me?
>>-----
>>1.0.0 Lampropeltis getula holbrooki
>>0.1.0 Lampropeltis getula californae
>>0.0.1 Lampropeltis getula nigra
>>1.0.0 Lampropeltis mexicana thayeri
>>2.3.0 Eublapharis macularius macularius
>>0.0.2 Rhacodactylus ciliatus
>>0.1.0 Gerrhosaurus major major

This is one of many problems with this hobby/business, there is no standardized naming schemes. And as you point out they are named as attention grabbers, this is very confusing to the customer whom just wants a cool colored snake. I mean we have patternless hognose that are called supercondas why not Vanishing Pattern? I understand people want to name something they found and have every right to but when is enough enough? I am not sure when enough will be enough but when you look at all the morphs for just a single species like Ball Pythons with its what 80 plus morphs, its very confusing indeed.

Anery - lack of red
Hypo - reduction of black

I guess Anerythristic-Hypomelanistic would be just as confusing unless..
-----
Jason A.
"Long time Herper, first year Breeder `07."

how can the originators have been wrong? Can't they call it whatever they want to? Why not simply come up with a new name for the "TRUE GHOST" (I like "Spectre"? Unless you are just saying the "old ghost" is not consistent with what we consider "true ghost" to be in other species?

Ahh well the older ghosts were really just hypomelanism that someone wanted to give a more catchy name without knowing any better.

I think were the confusion comes from is when someone like the OP (original poster) asked HOW he can make a Ghost. That is what i was answering so there would not be any confusion. Otherwise he would be still trying "to make" a ghost when in fact you can't when he was reffering to the Cal king. A Ghost is commonly known as a double homo axanthic/anery x Hypo. Just like a "SNOW" is a T negative albino x axanthic/anerythristic.

Anyone originating anything can call it whatever they like since they are the first person to have it. But it would behove them to be better informed about what is going on in gentic names in books like Dr. Bern Bechtel and corn and Ball python gentics as well as Burmese gentics to preperly market them.. Though not even those corn-python gentics are all in line with each other.

The Ghost rosy boa was also misnamed. Now they called it a "hypo" because there are true Ghosts being made-(axanthic x hypos) in rosy boas. So the hobbiest have corrected that. I wish everyone would pay attention to cornsake gentics so we all could be on the same page. But I also belive their can be special exceptions to the rules. For example the Peanut Butter is a type of hypo even though it is unusual and is a allelic with the T negative. Whitewall speckled kings could have been labled Whitesided speckeled kings but the name "Whitewall" is expressive enough in my book. At least it is not called Enchanted Forest king or whatever.lol! But the Ghost desigantion for a hypo will confuse newbies to the hobby unless they spend some time learning history.

And not every originator that comes up with a catchy name has it stick forever... The Licorice stick ratsnake is now properly labled "Whitesided" on breeders lists and tables. Just because someone is lucky enough to breed two normal looking (unkown hets) together and produce something does not make them the experts in the hobby. It could be and has been young teenagers that got lucky or someone finding a new morph while field collecting and have not even sold a single smnake before then.. Usually what happens though is somebody else picks the project up from that person and markets them anyway.
-----
Signature edited

Thanks for going through the trouble of explaining this guys.....Yes, I have heard that the cornsnake genetics and morphs were the most up to date, while ball pythons have run amuck.

Thanks again guys!
-----
1.0.0 Lampropeltis getula holbrooki
0.1.0 Lampropeltis getula californae
0.0.1 Lampropeltis getula nigra
1.0.0 Lampropeltis mexicana thayeri
2.3.0 Eublapharis macularius macularius
0.0.2 Rhacodactylus ciliatus
0.1.0 Gerrhosaurus major major