J
junglepython2
Guest
Where has all the Leucistic talk come from? The pic implies they are the the juvenile form of the marble childrens which certainly isn't leucistic.
While we are on topic, Someone said that they aren't leucistic because they have brown colour on their heads. Leucism is a visual trait that affects all colour pigments. It does not mean a total lack in colour, in other words you can have leucistic animals with some colouring.
I didnt say its not genetic just not yet proven.
Time will tell.
Actually, leucism is more than a visual trait. It is a genetic condition which prevents the formation of pigments (all pigments) in the skin. You can have animals without skin pigment which are not leucistic. I breed black-eyed white rats, their skin is pink, their fur is white, their eyes are black, they are phenotypically like a leucistic, but they are not leucistic at all. They are piebalds with a big white spot which covers the entire body. These rats still have all the genetic goodies required to make pigments, the code is all there, but the neural cells don't migrate far enough to get to the skin. Leucism is an entirely different condition, even if it looks the same. I also have pink-eyed white rats which look just like albinos, but they are not albinos. They have the same genetic condition which causes a big white spot to cover the whole body, and a second mutation which causes the eyes to be pink. If you have only one of these mutations you'll have a black-eyed white, if you only have the other you'll have a pink-eyed rat with pigmented fur. Even though these pink-eyed whites are indistinguishable from an albino, they are most certainly not albino.
As for whether or not a 'non-genetic piebald' counts as a piebald, I'm not sure, I suppose it's subjective. If I got a Children's Python and gave it some burns, or infected patches of its skin with bacteria, and after it healed up the result was a snake with blotches of discoloured skin, would it count as a piebald? I'd say no, but I wouldn't argue the point.
As for the Children's in question here... I think I'll tactfully bite my tongue
Sex appeal is sky rocketing!
I'm not gonna argue with the great Sdaji lol but i would like to know if you agree with me and my interpretation of the definition of leucistic that the trait doesn't necesarily mean that an animal is totally white and can have some colour?
As I stated in the begining, they don't look leucistic, they look like young marbleds, if anyone can recall, that mother was much lighter in colour when she was younger also, and developed more brown with age, one would assume these are too do the same.
I thought Sdaji clearly explained that, "It is a genetic condition which prevents the formation of pigments (all pigments) in the skin."
As I stated in the begining, they don't look leucistic, they look like young marbleds, if anyone can recall, that mother was much lighter in colour when she was younger also, and developed more brown with age, one would assume these are too do the same.
I thought Sdaji clearly explained that, "It is a genetic condition which prevents the formation of pigments (all pigments) in the skin."
As I stated in the begining, they don't look leucistic, they look like young marbleds, if anyone can recall, that mother was much lighter in colour when she was younger also, and developed more brown with age, one would assume these are too do the same.
Enter your email address to join: