Was that Jason kind of eluded to the variance of a particular phenotype within a given clutch might not constitute naming each individual appearance as a distinct visual phenotype in and of itself.(not trying to put words into anyone's mouth here,that's just what I got from reading the reply.) I agree with Al in that,after numerous generations of visual change in appearance of a particular "line",it may be totally appropriate of refer to those animals as being of Applegate "origin",or "influence",but if the distinct visual change carries through in multiple breeding trials,it may warrant giving this new appearance a distinct name,while still making it clear to potential customers,of the phenotype's genetic origin.(especially if there are more than one variety that may not be genetically incompatible,ie; "Applegate","Bechtel","Dyer",etc...)

[ Show Entire Thread ]