Reptile & Amphibian Forums

Due to extreme variability and the extreme striping turning out to not be a "super," and lower than expected numbers of "possible supers (the very light ones)" I had always felt it most likely that I was dealing with a simple dominant gene that was just variable (modifying genes). In the past I had only held back the most extreme offspring for myself, but last season I held back more longer, and got some interesting results. I also examined pics and in person some of those I've sold over the last couple ofseasons and it now looks like there is probably a "super." Although as juvies there's not generally a tremendous difference, as they become adolescents and adults the probable supers lighten moreso than the others including the eyes. All Mayans have somewhat light colored eyes, but the supposed supers lose the dark bottom half mostly or entirely and can turn amber to orange with age. They are cleaner and have some of the same characteristics as Swedish jungle supers. No, I have not conclusively proven this yet, but it certainly looks probable. Now the question is whether those I call "smokes" or "hypoerythristic" are a totally separate morph or not....the probability is that it's an effect of the modifying genes, but in my limited breedings it has behaved as if it could be it's own dominant or codominant morph. I don't have adult females of this line yet to prove out. I have always reported my interpretations of my breeding results and it has evolved over time (my belief is that at least one other well known morph needs to "evolve" in the future). It seems that some will complain about something to try to discredit me even if it's my grammar, income level, supposed uneducation...I'm mostly of French, English and Native American descent; want to pick at that and hit every possible form of insult and bias? It doesn't much bother me and only shows you true colors to potential customers. Several have told me that there's "bullies" on this forum they refuse to buy from, and they no longer use this forum and rarely the website. It's possible to express "opinions(yes, opinions not the truth because you believe it so)" without insult.
In this pic in my belief are: Hypo Super Mayan, Smoke Mayan, Smoke Super Mayan, and Hypo Smoke Super Mayan. None are super hypo, and all have some Hog Island in the ancestry.
.jpg" class="img-fluid my-2" alt="Image" loading="lazy">

I like these boas a lot, i think theyre beautiful. I am not sure if beautiful is a genetic "morph." ive produced beautiful boas from ugly parents and vice versa. what i think you need to ask yourself when labeling these names you are giving as a morph is what are the features/characteristics in these animals that make them unique from others and can be reproduced and replicated in very breeding thereafter by breeding them to other boas or to each other if recessive.

striping is found in hypos, motleys, and junges
clean background is found in pastels and jungles
light color brown color, bold color is found in many breedings almost every litter has a light boa, a bold boa, etc. your boa to be genetic has to produce a % of a unique feature everytime.

i think a beautiful boa when bred will obviously make more beautiful boas, but as soon as it begins to breed to other lines becomes an entirely differnt look, a genetic boa continues theyre look regardless of what it is paired to. therefore you have to get on the drawing table sort of speak and really map how these animals can be considered a morph. I work with a number of beautiful lines that when bred intelligently will produce gorgeous snakes however i am not sure it is a morph, its a genetic quality sure, but a morph is a much different claim.

best of luck, and again i really really like your boas, they fit in many ways with caramels, and a list of pattern and color morphs to make better examples of those pattern and color morphs..

very nice and well said,thumbs up.

..

My opinion is your boas are nothing special, just mixed BCI type boas with crazy names.

They are nice boas. Good luck.
-----
Richard Ceniceros

They all appear to be quite generic type hypo's
As said,they do look good.

Rep

I just don't see it... They look like hypos and nothing else....

Joe

This has been my opinion on these since the first time I saw them...

Noting more than average / decent looking hypo locality crosses.

Everytime I see them posted for sale on Fauna I just shake my head and move on. I just don't get it :shrug:

Either way, good luck this season.
I hope you get some more answers and maybe prove us all wrong...
-----
"Go Big or Go Home" Muscle Morph Constrictors Inc. Long Island, New York * MuscleMorphConstrictors@yahoo.com

...with that said I really like the light colored/abberant one in the bottom right corner of the picture and wouldn't mind adding her to my collection

If you've got any females with that look please PM me so we can talk further.
-----
"Go Big or Go Home" Muscle Morph Constrictors Inc. Long Island, New York * MuscleMorphConstrictors@yahoo.com

Interesting responses considering only two of the 4 in the pic are hypomelanistic.

Perhaps you should make a thread to help us understand what each so-called "trait" is that you are wanting us to know. Like this for example (please use this example for all of our sakes) -----------

> This is a Mayan Boa --

(insert picture here, of only one snake)

the trait that makes this a "Mayan" is (insert single specific trait)
.
> This is a Smoke Mayan --

(insert pic of a single snake)

What makes this one different than the regular Mayan is - (insert your description)

> This is Smoke Super Mayan --

Pic of a single Boa with an explanation on how it is different than a regular Smoke Mayan

> ect . . . .

I am so confused by what you think that you are seeing in your group pics . I see a couple Hypos and a couple regulars - some with aberrancies , most likely polygenic . They do looked crossed , as you have said that they are. The two Hypos show variations of different tones/colors -- which is common in all Hypo litters . The normals show different variations of lightness and color too -- which is also very common, and more-so emphasized in Colombian/Hog crossed Boas . I've had some Hog crossed litters, and the normals hardly look like siblings, because they vary so much.
-----
Snake room janitor

If they are Hogg crosses how can you say only 2 of them are hypomelanistic?All animals in Hogg cross litters have the potential to be hypomelanistic because of the hypomelanism from the Hogg genetics. They are very good looking snakes but how can you make destinctions as to morphs unless you can confidently know to what extent Hogg hypomelanism is being expressed in the animals.
If you have animals from a Hogg cross litter and have some that have a particular appearance and line breed them then you may be able to produce a line that consistently expresses a form of the Hogg island hypomelanism. That would take several generations and would only be a line and the results of breeding that with another morph would be hard to predict.

Yes, Hog genetics lighten and brighten (much like the Swedish jungle gene), and the animals having Hog genetics are slightly lighter and brighter than those having no Hog genetics. I don't consider polygenic selective bred "pastels" or Hogs to be a "mutation certainly, but I concede it can be considered a "morph." In such case these in the first picture could be considered "combo-morphs" in the same way "Kirby line bloods" or "sunsets" can be considered "combo-morphs." However, the original examples of this morph are "Nicaraguans that express the same type of color/pattern markers as low expression Swedish jungles; I have bred two other bloodlines to them (not to my knowledge having any Hog in them) and got the same jungle-type patterns and pigmentation reduction (both reds and blacks). Color of the non-Hog examples is duller, but the reduction in pigments are the same. There is essentially very little difference in these and Sedish jungles except the "hypoerythristics," which may be analogous to the "poor quality" or "dark" jungles in Colombians...or may not. If Sedish jungle is a "morph" then so are these. And, I see a high degree of hypocrasy in these forums when it comes to purity....Roswells are admittedly intergrades yet many who down any new project as "mutts" have or praise them; VPI T-positives and Aztecs are technically of unknown genetics that could have Hog or any number of locales mixed into them, etc. I have no understanding of why people think that breeding other morphs to Hog or other locales will make them unrecognizable, or why cleaning them up by doing so is really such a bad thing....Kirby Hog-Bloods are the prettiest I've saw thus far. The one pictured below is 3/4th Nic and 1/4th Cancun poss het T-positive snow (Mr. Stone says no hypo was involved) and has the pigment reduction and aberrancies...no Hog in this one.

The clarifications about your boas is helpfull especially the results of other breedings. I agree with others that showing separate examples of each snake with a description would allow us to better appreciate what you have.

I consider the natural hypomelanism and color switching in Hoggs to be a genetic adaptation that enables the snakes to live in different enviroments within a small island. This color changing ability is also seen in other island boas and in the hypo trait. My goal with the hogg x blood cross was to take advantage of the natural hypomelanism in the hoggs to make more colorful boas that have the blood boa gene and a retained pattern. I have produced hypo blood boas but they show the usual loss of pattern that comes with the hypo gene.

As for purity I have always been a strong supporter of crosses and intergardes. What we produce will never be introduced into the wild. The boas we produce are always a reflection of our personal taste regarding color and pattern which goes into the animals we select to breed and the animals we produce whether it is with morphs or local specific animals.I no longer have any snakes due to the rules of my state but greatly enjoy seeing all of the new animals that are being produced. I still wish someone would breed a high yellow peruvian with the inky black coloration that they have with an Arabesque boa. I think that would be a great looking boa.

I see why some want to breed for purity, but it's also as you said...and if I produce colorful pretty intergrades that people want instead of imports then t takes some pressure off wild populations. I have a "black Peruvian" that has been cycling through with multiple males ...Berry het pewter El Salvador, Stone het T-positive snow Nic X Cancun, and hypo from "Blue Moon" X "Mayan." I'm thinking since the Perivian is a blue-black color that eventual bloods may be pretty purple??? And if not then I'll bet black-bloody T-positives will be

I find it quite interesting that often it's the people raising the more common line of Colombian jungles ("real jungles" as I've saw them listed in ads) that have markers virtually identical to Mayans, that say they can't see a morph at all in my snakes...I think it's selective and not objective opinion.

I also find it interesting that the more common line of Colombian jungles was marketed and readily bought into before a "super" was definitely proven, and it's the same with many morphs----I'm still waiting for the logical reason why Aztecs are so variable and have "two phenotypes of super." And why were other intergrade or unknown parentage/lineage morphs bought into by the big breeders instead of shunned? There just seems to be some hypocrisy in the philosophy of the "boa gods" in my belief.

I may be fairly new to keeping boas(3yrs), but i think they're pretty awesome with the variations that you get and I especially like the lighter t-pos looking ones. Let the haters hate like they love to do and enjoy your boas because that's the reason everyone of us got one to begin with they make us happy and they intriuge our minds like nothing else does. People sometimes get caught up the money and buisness aspect of it, but remember at the roots its all about what makes you happy. Plus taking chances is now why we have all the different boas we have today.....

I’m sorry, but I haven’t seen anything to indicate “bullies” or “haters”. I don’t dislike you, I don’t even know you, and you don’t know me. I’m neither a “bully” nor “hater”. I will say that I do not care for your behavior. I would guess that’s probably true of most of the people that have responded to you that you identify as “bullies” or “haters”. When you put yourself out there asking people’s opinions or feedback, and some don’t agree with your point of view, calling them names does not reflect well on you.

Here is it in a nutshell, plain and simple. You have some snakes, some of them pretty, some of them even very pretty, congratulations. But you have to understand that the reason so many people object to your claims is simple. Over the years (yes, it’s been years…) that you have been promoting what you arguably refer to as a “morph”, after repeated requests from some highly respected individuals, you remain unable to identify specific characteristics one could use to describe your “morph”.

Over this period of years, you have been given very sound advice as to how you should proceed to prove your “morph”, if you wanted to be taken seriously. For example, you were told things like: isolate the characteristics that you think are unique to your “morph” to a point that you can describe said “morph” and be able to reasonably predict the outcome of selective breeding. You didn’t do that. Instead, you tell us: “I have bred two other bloodlines to them (not to my knowledge having any Hog in them)…” and you’ve used or produced something that is “3/4th Nic and 1/4th Cancun poss het T-positive snow…”, which tells us that not only are you not attempting to isolate the unique characteristics of your “morph”, but you are purposefully adding more genetic confusion to something that you already don’t understand.

All the while, you are building a registry of “brand names” a mile long, but can’t explain much about any of them. It’s really quite amazing that you actually try to describe a super form of something that you have yet to adequately describe in the non-super form….simply amazing… Look at all the qualifiers you use in one post: probably, maybe, maybe not, likely, probable, could be, supposed…have not conclusively proven… It’s clear that you really don’t have the basis or foundation to claim much of anything beyond you have some pretty boas, you even some very pretty ones.

Surely you can see how this gives the impression that you are much more interested in establishing and marketing a “brand” instead of truly advancing your understanding of what may or may not be happening genetically with your animals. Can you really not see that?

I tell you these things not because I “hate” you, I don’t. Again, I don’t know you. I, like many others, am just trying to give you the honest feedback you asked for.

Mark

Stick a fork in this one,Mark nailed it.

There is no point in going out of my way to point out individual characteristics....I have repeatedly for years said it is a "jungle-like" or "jungle-type" trait being variable in much the same way as Swedish jungles, having virtually identical markers to them as well. They are clearly visible in photos, yet breeders who raise Swedish jungles always fail to see those said same markers??? Some of my previous posts over the years have received quite rude comments, and I was just astonished at comments I've saw on other people's posts/replies as well. I can (have) shown pics of examples so light in color there is zero visible black, yet they retain the entire pattern (visibly look T-positive) and am told they are normals! Above I was told that the pic showed all hypos when in the group photo only two are hypomelanistic (though all have some small percentage of Hog), one having zero black! I think it's not I who needs a lessen on how to identify morphs. I often wonder how many morphs have went by the wayside in the past just because it wasn't something entirely obvious.

I don't see what you're talking about. You have what seems to be some really dark hypos, along with some odd looking normals. They appear to be a result of mixing a lot of different locales and since you got something that looked slightly different, you decided they were morphs.

I see no, I mean no, similarities between your animals and jungles. Striping and pattern abnormalities are ancillary traits of jungle boas. They can happen, but they don't define a jungle.

I think you need to step back, really take a look at boas in general, and get a lot of advice before trying to make claims like you have. You've pretty well shot yourself in the foot on this one. This is part of the reason that Mike at Basically Boas took so long introducing the Paradigm, he wanted to know what he was dealing with before advertising it.

Instead of trying to sell interesting looking crossed boas to a limited consumer market, you've made claims that you can't back up. From what I've read in your posts here and your ads, I think you're a bit over your head when it comes to genetics. You're trying to apply concepts to things that don't follow those rules.

Chris

You are sadly mistaken

I have been reporting breeding results now for several years, and it makes no difference what you do or do not choose to see, do or do not choose to believe. Your opinion does not change the results. It is ludicrous to believe that a morph does not exist because it is a locality (yes, not even a subspecies cross) cross. I suppose there can never ever be morphs in locality crosses, intergrades, or hybrids....or that any respectable boa breeder would ever market such a thing without knowing every detail of it's genetics; yeah, right. Say, does anyone out there have breeding results to report from breeding two of those slightly aberrant nice colored "Aztec littermates" together? I'd like to see pics of some of those, please.

I think in the excitement of breeding, a lot of people get a bit caught up with what they have produced. That's fine and great, but you gotta step back and think about what you've got.

I know you don't like hearing everything that people on this thread have told you, but it is what it is. People did not have this reaction when the girl produced the Roswell boas (which happen to also be from a cross) or the people who produced the Scoria. Those were obviously something genetic, it was plain and obvious after the second breeding. The Scoria turned out a bit different than they thought, but still genetic.

The boas you've produced have a bunch of different looks, that is easily seen in the different localities that you've used. The one boa you posted looks like it COULD be something like a Sonoran hypo. The rest of them appear to be striped hypos, much like the 20 other lines of hypo that have prevalent striping in them, but yours seem to be fairly dark on average.

If I applied your logic to my Ferrari pastels, I'd be selling them as dominant hypererythristic animals since about half the babies in each litter come out with significantly more red coloration than the other half. The reason that I don't do that is that I know how this type of breeding works.

You can blow off everyone's comments as much as you'd like, it doesn't make you right.

Chris

You have passed judgement only having saw a very few examples of what I've poduced. You have passed judgement on the assumption that I'm claiming a "pattern morph" and much like Swedish jungles, these are primarily a color morph, having in all cases a reduced capacity to produce pigment (the "dark" appearing examples still have precursors to melanin which {like T 's} appear visually the same as melanin, but when crossed to hypomel's is obvious they have reduced pigment). It is you who are too focused on believing in only what you believe or expect to be a morph, instead of being objective and seeing where the breeding results take it....like I said, your belief or mine has no effect on the genetic outcome