Morph Standard?

[RakesRepts]

I'm new to the world of leopard geckos. I have 3 leopard gecko books, have searched the internet, and spent more than a few weeks browsing the various threads in this forum.

Here's what I'm looking for: a morph standard for every major morph. Like the AKC has a breed standard for every breed of dog with a detailed description of the various traits and features one should have, I'd like to see something similar for leopard geckos (pictures would be helpful also - as would a list of the various pairings that would produce that morph).

The best I have been able to find is the leopard gecko wiki - and that is helpful.

***I am not a breeder, have never bred leos and realize this may sound like a noob post. There's a very good reason for that: I AM A NOOB :main_yes:***

Can anyone point me in the right direction? Perhaps someone is in the process of forming the ALGC (American Leopard Gecko Club)? :main_huh:

 

[Thorgecko707]

Funny nobody has touched this for five hours. That's rare. Lol. I fancy the rainwater albino as a supreme morph. Just my opinion. But yes, we need a pure bred club for refined blood lines.

 

[Golden Gate Geckos]

First of all, I am very glad you are actually doing research! Since I am an 'old school' gecko breeder, I can say that at one time there WERE standards for morph identification that we all adhered to. Things were more cohesive back in the good old days, LOL!

Unfortunately, breeders started getting a little bit too competitive and egocentric, and different breeders started calling 'their' versions of morphs their own morph name. The idea was to go to the bank with a 'new' morph (which is STILL happening as a marketing ploy as we speak...)

Anyway, to get back on topic, if the industry leaders can't seem to even get along without some kind of belly-bucking squabble, there is little hope of establishing a standard for all the morphs and combination morphs existing today... and in the future. Sorry if I sound pessimistic, but I'm just a 'mean old gecko lady' who has seen practically most of everything. Sad, isn't it?

 

[Landen]

First of all, I am very glad you are actually doing research! Since I am an 'old school' gecko breeder, I can say that at one time there WERE standards for morph identification that we all adhered to. Things were more cohesive back in the good old days, LOL!

Unfortunately, breeders started getting a little bit too competitive and egocentric, and different breeders started calling 'their' versions of morphs their own morph name. The idea was to go to the bank with a 'new' morph (which is STILL happening as a marketing ploy as we speak...)

Anyway, to get back on topic, if the industry leaders can't seem to even get along without some kind of belly-bucking squabble, there is little hope of establishing a standard for all the morphs and combination morphs existing today... and in the future. Sorry if I sound pessimistic, but I'm just a 'mean old gecko lady' who has seen practically most of everything. Sad, isn't it?

:main_thumbsup:

 

[roger]

First of all, I am very glad you are actually doing research! Since I am an 'old school' gecko breeder, I can say that at one time there WERE standards for morph identification that we all adhered to. Things were more cohesive back in the good old days, LOL!

Unfortunately, breeders started getting a little bit too competitive and egocentric, and different breeders started calling 'their' versions of morphs their own morph name. The idea was to go to the bank with a 'new' morph (which is STILL happening as a marketing ploy as we speak...)

Anyway, to get back on topic, if the industry leaders can't seem to even get along without some kind of belly-bucking squabble, there is little hope of establishing a standard for all the morphs and combination morphs existing today... and in the future. Sorry if I sound pessimistic, but I'm just a 'mean old gecko lady' who has seen practically most of everything. Sad, isn't it?

well said Marcia I agree with u 100% and it is we as the consumer of those leos that perpetuate the marketing ploy

 

[Jordan]

Well their may not be what you ask for, but there are plenty of forums, which are just as good for learning. There are even specific leopard gecko forums. and obviously this one, the morphs and genetics section and the picture's section will allow you to look at loads and loads of morphs, and you can begin to compile your own list.

 

[M_surinamensis]

One of the difficulties inherent with setting a standard is the way that the morphs are mostly distinct genotypes. There are some which are a result of line breeding and are less predictable, but the majority of the morphs either are or are not, based on genotype. A good looking example might commend a much higher price, be praised and used to indicate what a morph can be... but a poor example is still carrying that genetic trait and is still what it is labeled as.

Breed standards are something that are quite a ways off, if they ever arise for leopard geckos. There simply isn't the same degree of distinction between gecko morphs as there are breeds of dog.

However, there is some definite truth to the idea that there are high quality examples of a trait and comparatively low quality examples of the same trait. An organized informational resource which details the more desirable features would have a lot of potential value, if it were accessible enough.

 

[lillith]

Something I would be interested in is in a set of conformation standards, regarding what are the proper physical parameters/morphology for a well-bred leo.

iHerp does have lineage tracking, but it's in its infancy...

...and that was my zwei pfennig...

 

[RakesRepts]

Thanks to all of you for your feedback. I'm following your advice and simply continuing my research, both within and without this forum (mostly within).

 

[Thorgecko707]

The production of melanin and pattern base for each more would be a good base. Once all the morphs are re-line bred back to pure we can treat them as true morphs. The problem is cross breeding done by the consumer. My patternless malbino will be out of the lab and available to the public next February. After six years of line breeding we will see if it is ready to be a morph.

 

[M_surinamensis]

The production of melanin and pattern base for each more would be a good base. Once all the morphs are re-line bred back to pure we can treat them as true morphs. The problem is cross breeding done by the consumer. My patternless malbino will be out of the lab and available to the public next February. After six years of line breeding we will see if it is ready to be a morph.

The above post is really a pretty succinct illustration of part of the reason why something akin to breed standards would be difficult to push forward with in the herpetocultural industry/hobby. Too many people breeding too many reptiles who don't have the slightest idea what they're actually doing, what is happening genetically with the offspring they produce or what is happening physiologically to the individual animals. Read that line about "true morphs" and consider that this guy is apparently producing and selling animals on a regular basis... there's no way any type of registry or association that encourages production aimed at a single specific ideal representation of a trait would manage to gain the acceptance of a numeric majority.

Even if you set aside the ignorant individuals and focus on implementing standards among the more serious minded professional crowd, there's too many different opinions about aesthetic appeal to come to a reasonable consensus.

And after that there exists the overwhelming issue surrounding production numbers. The business models of the largest producers and wholesalers (who buy from individuals in bulk and then turn around and sell to others) are such that they are largely incapable of adhering to the dictates of a recognized standard, as such an act would necessitate highly selective, controlled pairing for several years in order to really see results. It's just not practical or possible for them to do so without radical restructuring of their operations. Worth it in the long term or not meaningful recognition and adherence would require their active participation and that is simply not going to happen.

It opens interesting debates about the value of selective breeding and the idea that genetic success in captivity is reflective of a very different set of standards than genetic success in a natural environment... but the conclusions of individuals engaged in such a discussion are sort of a moot point, since the fact that such a debate exists is evidence that the practices and positions of individual breeders will not conform to a single standard.

 

[Thorgecko707]

The above post is really a pretty succinct illustration of part of the reason why something akin to breed standards would be difficult to push forward with in the herpetocultural industry/hobby. Too many people breeding too many reptiles who don't have the slightest idea what they're actually doing, what is happening genetically with the offspring they produce or what is happening physiologically to the individual animals. Read that line about "true morphs" and consider that this guy is apparently producing and selling animals on a regular basis... there's no way any type of registry or association that encourages production aimed at a single specific ideal representation of a trait would manage to gain the acceptance of a numeric majority.

Even if you set aside the ignorant individuals and focus on implementing standards among the more serious minded professional crowd, there's too many different opinions about aesthetic appeal to come to a reasonable consensus.

And after that there exists the overwhelming issue surrounding production numbers. The business models of the largest producers and wholesalers (who buy from individuals in bulk and then turn around and sell to others) are such that they are largely incapable of adhering to the dictates of a recognized standard, as such an act would necessitate highly selective, controlled pairing for several years in order to really see results. It's just not practical or possible for them to do so without radical restructuring of their operations. Worth it in the long term or not meaningful recognition and adherence would require their active participation and that is simply not going to happen.

It opens interesting debates about the value of selective breeding and the idea that genetic success in captivity is reflective of a very different set of standards than genetic success in a natural environment... but the conclusions of individuals engaged in such a discussion are sort of a moot point, since the fact that such a debate exists is evidence that the practices and positions of individual breeders will not conform to a single standard.

I completely agree, except I don't sell my geckos yet. I don't have a license to sell in California so I will be turning my project over to someone with a bigger facility. Some people have dollar signs in their eyes, I have Moose. Ron Tremper was the reason I switched from horticulture to Eublpharine genetics. I want my name in more books than you so I will do what it takes. And I am not some random breeder. Do you not want your geckos to change color? I sure do. And I love it when my project turns from hot pink to red to purple and back again. everybody is going to try to put my project's genes in their geckos.

 

[ILoveGeckos14]

I made a thread awhile back about the same thing. It's pretty 50/50. It would have its benefits and I would like to see it happen buuuuuttt I think it would be near impossible to come up with a viable way of implementing said plan.

http://geckoforums.net/showthread.php?t=51586

 

[AMoriarty]

I would definitely like something like this--I keep thinking about maybe breeding my female gecko in 2-3 years and I would want to pick a mate for her that might turn out some interesting-looking babies--but though I can look at pictures and say, "oh hey, that's beautiful" or "wow, what a cool carrot-tail," some of the finer points of gecko morphs elude me--for instance, what the heck is a "raptor" vs. an "aptor?" I keep lookig at pics, and they...keep seeming like basically the same thing. What is the difference between a tremper albino and a bell albino, both genetically and in appearance, for example? A resource like this for leo breeders and just plain newbies would be great.

 

[Jordan]

what the heck is a "raptor" vs. an "aptor?"

Well the R stands for Red eyes.... So that's the difference.
Raptor have eclipse eyes, Aptors don't.

 

[AMoriarty]

Well the R stands for Red eyes.... So that's the difference.
Raptor have eclipse eyes, Aptors don't.

Thanks--it took me a while to even figure out that it was an acronym for something!

 

[Jordan]

Thanks--it took me a while to even figure out that it was an acronym for something!

Haha thats fine. I'm presuming you know the acronym now then?