Sunglow Poll:

[Serpwidgets]

No, that is not true for HypoMiami, for an example.



Ok, I see ZigZag is a little tricky, I think we both know that.
My post was more like a question, is it really just the look that counts or not?!? Should we name every "amel" animal that lacks white Sunglow or do we expect Sunglow x Sunglow+"Another trait" to give Sunglows.

It's an equal discussion to "should a HypoBloodred give me all Bloodreds when bred to a normal Blood or do I get just "diffused" animals."
Know what I mean?

Now I see what you mean. But I think this is not a real expectation with any of those morphs. If you breed candycane to candycane, you can get plenty of non-candycanes from them, especially if they are unrelated parents.

IMO in these cases it is the look, because there's no specific "gene" being bred for or against. (It's definitely a bonus if they "breed true" but that's not always going to happen, and cannot be guaranteed.)

 

[Shep151]

Sure you can vote.

Selectively bred Amel, no Hypo required (No white) = no white amel that can be homo hypo.

They key word is required. The option doesn't say 'no hypo allowed'.

This was the intent. Sorry to you folks out there that have degrees in splitting hairs! I guess I should have hired a lawyer to write my poll!

 

[snakepimp]

Sorry to you folks out there that have degrees in splitting hairs!

Hey Shep151, you must not have read many of the threads on these forums, or you would have known this would happen....
:cheers: START DRINKING!
I have to further clarify my position by saying that "my ideal" sunglow would be a *BRILLIANTLY* colored amel with 0 white and plenty of red and orange regardless of lineage or exhibited mutations. What then, would I call a brilliantl YELLOW background and crimson blotches on an amel with 0 white?
Really frickin' awesome, that's what.
Thanks for using "the razor" on our language Serp', and reducing the arguments down to what they really are. I agree that common usage is the rule in this case, and the numbers are speaking out loud and clear.

 

[princess]

Look as hard as you like and you won't find a flicker of white on this girls topside. When it comes down to it...isn't that what makes a sunglow cornsnake a sunglow cornsnake?

I don't like people calling wishy-washy greyish backgrounded normals miamis just to make them more marketable, I don't like amels with lot's of colour in the back ground being called candycanes just because both their parents were candycanes, I don't like people calling a 'slightly' yellowish blotched snow a 'green-blotched' and I think we need to put our foot down when we pick the characteristics that we define as prerequisites in a sunglow.

I personally say we should say NO WHITE ON THE DORSUM, because different people have different deffinitions of what 'a little bit of white' means.



No white means no white. Full stop.

 

[ultimatecorns]

Though the poll is interesting/ I believe the result would have been radically different if it were worded like this

What is a sunglow?

A. Selectively bred amel, no white, PERIOD

B. Hypo Amel, no white, Period

C. Either a selective bred amel or a hypo amel, no white.

D. Either a selective bred amel or a hypo amel, some white.

I confess I eventually did vote, but did so for the throw away option just to see the numbers.

I believe most would agree with
C. Either a selective bred amel or a hypo amel, no white.

 

[Susan]

I hatched this guy out in 1998 from one of my very first clutches. Unfortunately, this is the only pic I have of him (taken in 2002) and I sold him shortly thereafter. I always considered him a Sunglow-type amel (the thin bands around his saddles were yellow, not white), but sold him strictly as an amel. His parents were a regular amel het snow (average amount of white) and an anery het snow (also average looking). Amel clutchmates were also average looking with white. Had I been interested in producing sunglows, I would have definately kept him for the project. Any opinions?

 

[Serpwidgets]

I don't like people calling wishy-washy greyish backgrounded normals miamis just to make them more marketable, I don't like amels with lot's of colour in the back ground being called candycanes just because both their parents were candycanes, I don't like people calling a 'slightly' yellowish blotched snow a 'green-blotched' and I think we need to put our foot down when we pick the characteristics that we define as prerequisites in a sunglow.

I have to agree 100% with this. It is, after all, the point of having designations for specific phenotypes. If anything can have the name regardless of phenotype, the name loses its meaning.

If you want to separate hypo amels from selectively bred amels, there is an alternative to trying to redefine a well-established name. The term "hybino" is already in use for such a condition. A quick Google (http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=hybino) shows that it's already in use with at least geckoes and hondurans. It may be easier to establish in cornsnake language because of those precedents.

If such a thing were adopted, a no-white amel would be a "sunglow," an amel hypo with white on it would be a "hybino," and a no-white amel hypo would be a "sunglow hybino." This allows all cases to be covered without confusion or qualification.

 

[DdotSpot]

If such a thing were adopted, a no-white amel would be a "sunglow," an amel hypo with white on it would be a "hybino," and a no-white amel hypo would be a "sunglow hybino." This allows all cases to be covered without confusion or qualification.

Great stuff Serp, I agree. I think I'm going to go ahead and start making those designations. Hybino is an easy to designate, and overdue title in the cornsnake realm

 

[E. g. guttata]

I'm going to hate jumping into this convo this late in the argument but......

A sunglow is bred to have no white. Origionally this was accomplished through selective breedings. IMO, if it doesn't have any white, it's a sunglow. No white=sunglow, that's it, period, end of the line. If you use some type of hypo or some other gene that helps, then I don't care, but I would much rather have an "old school" sunglow than one that is also homo hypo. That is my preference. If all your sunglows have hypo in them, good for you, if they don't, good for you. If you have sunglows that have the whatchamadidgit gene in them to make the oranges stand out more and still keep the no white appearence, good for you. I would much rather have a simple selective bred amel than one that has a whole bunch of gene thrown into the mix. It certainly makes things a whole lot easier on me.

 

[CAV]

I believe most would agree with

C. Either a selective bred amel or a hypo amel, no white.

I can only speak for one person, but that isn't what I'd say at all.

 

[Joejr14]

I can only speak for one person, but that isn't what I'd say at all.

Well of course, hence the poll up above.

I am sorry Ultimatecorns, but you're playing semantics.

The answer that you want as an option is the exact same as answer choice #1.

 

[Menhir]

I take:

E - "I can't get enough of that wonderfull Duff!"

Anyone want some other possibilities?

 

[CAV]

Well of course, hence the poll up above.

Wut??? :shrugs:

 

[Hurley]

Where's "F - It's an amel... :shrugs: , no how about some selectively bred charcoal morphs?!?"

:grin01:

 

[hzahorka]

This is all very interesting to learn what everyone likes/dislikes. I have no idea if my sunglow is het to anything but I will talk to the man I bought him from to find out. He has no white on him at all and he's up for sale but after all this talk I just might rethink this and keep him lol. I have a pale hypo coming in tomorrow (she's peach & orange) that I haven't decided if I will breed her back to my ghost het snow or my "normal" amel but I just might breed her back to my sunglow...choices, choices, choices! ;o)

 

[Joejr14]

Wut??? :shrugs:

Quote:
Originally Posted by ultimatecorns

I believe most would agree with

C. Either a selective bred amel or a hypo amel, no white.


I can only speak for one person, but that isn't what I'd say at all.

I was agreeing with you, I think, that in fact if that question was inserted for this poll, the vote would still be overwhelmingly for the first choice.

Unless of course, you were agreeing with Ultimatecorns, and then, I disagree, but when I read your post I thought you were telling him that you would not vote for choice 'C'

 

[CAV]

Yeah that.

I thought for a minute you were attempting to speak for me.

 

[Serpwidgets]

Great stuff Serp, I agree. I think I'm going to go ahead and start making those designations. Hybino is an easy to designate, and overdue in the cornsnake realm

Heh heh.... wait, do I detect some sarcasm there?

 

[Taceas]

Ugh. Certain people enjoy conflict I think. Life isn't fun without people arguing, I guess.

To me, a sunglow means an amelansitic corn without any white on the back. I don't think all snakes who haven't any white on their back should qualify using the term Sunglow, no matter how the breeder reached that end result. I think to most of us, old school or not, it means an amel corn without white, simply put.

If you want to add something else to the mix, go ahead and do so. But to term and sell them as being a "sunglow" is only inviting yourself for some serious mockery and this whole spectacle we have going right now. Some people may buy a sunglow from someone and not know it has hypo in the mix, and totally befugger years worth of breeding when what they thought should have come out...didn't.

Maybe a different name for a standard homo hypo-amel corn should be thought up. If Ultimate can determine which of the guesstimated 3,000 variants of hypo he used, make a new name. But one just can't go through and alter the definition of a word halfway through just because you think it makes the snakes look better with hypo.

Here's a "sunglow" motley I produced in 2003. Just a standard amel motley, but it certainly fits the definition of a sunglow. And Terri, there is no hypo involved.

 

[Sisuitl]

That is one bright snake! It actually hurts my eyes to look at it! :grin01: One thing I love about sunglow motleys (which is just about every amel motley out there) are the little sun shaped dots.