I’m hoping some old timers will chime in here. Since the beginning of the ball python craze, a lot of imports with dazzling patterns and colors have, unfortunately, not proven genetic. Other genes may have been lost to failure of acclimation of imported ball pythons.
I start this thread based on the 1995 book, The Ball Python Manual, by Dave and Tracy Barker, Philippe de Vosjoli, and Roger Klingenberg, D.V.M.
Those of you with a copy of this book can get insight into my curiosity by flipping to the color photograph section and view the “Jungle” ball python, pictured 6th as a baby, and again pictured 23rd, shown as an adult, locked with a normal female.
I was all of 12 when this book regaled me with the coveted piebald, but I never once forgot the jungle gene pictured. Nothing today resembles it as a single gene. Perhaps the closest gene is a leopard (which I absolutely love).
And so, this thread. I apologize that not everyone will have this book, and I cannot find any copies of the photographs in this book. I do not wish to infringe on the copyright, so I cannot post pictures directly from this book as I have found none via Google search.
Regardless, I would love to hear of any and all genes that never “made it” in the ball python category. A good example is the Viper ball, which was a non-genetic import for Brian Barczyk. A single photo of it survives from Ralph Davis, if you would like to search.
Alas, if you do not have a copy of the aforementioned book, I encourage you to pick up a copy (I located a used one) and check out the awesome, definitely outdated information. Boy, times have changed. But much of the book still provides a great reference, even to this day, for keeping this amazing, genetically diverse species.