Question about Spotnose and Chocolate

I’m considering buying a Spotnose Clown female to put to my Chocolate combo male, but I have some concerns and I can’t seem to find the answers for this.

So I wanna know, since Spotnose and Chocolate are allelic, would combining the two produce a wobble? I know Super Spotnose wobbles. And I’ve heard rumors that Super Chocolate has a slight wobble, but that one isn’t talked about a lot so I’m not sure. I know there are a few Dark Knights out there and other Choc/Spotnose combos but I can’t find anyone talking about whether they wobble or not. Some people say combining any two “spider complexes” will result in a wobble.

So have any of y’all produced Choc/Spotnose combos and what are y’all’s results with it? Any bit of info is greatly appreciated.


In any allelic wobble complex animal, you have a chance at an animal that wobbles, potentially very badly.


Given that they’re allelic and that we know super chocolate often wobbles and super spotnose always wobbles, it is extremely likely that a chocolate spotnose animal would end up wobbling.


@ballornothing @inspirationexotics Thank y’all. That’s pretty much what I figured, but I just wanted to double check.


I’ve produced exactly one chocolate spotnose up to this point. She’s a chocolate fire spotnose and has no wobble. Other than hatching out of a “boob” egg at 32 grams, she has no issues whatsoever.

Of the many super chocolates and chocolate spotnose I’ve handled, I have not observed any wobble myself. My super chocolate enchi hypo is one I’ve raised from a hatchling.

This isn’t to say it’s not possible to have a wobble in either of these combos, I’m just stating my somewhat limited experience. Every super spotnose (powerball if you like) I’ve ever observed or handled had a significant wobble and that’s a lot more total animals I’ve had experience with. Super spotnose were popular a number of years ago.


I don’t personally have any chocolate or spotnose, but a friend of mine used to have a super chocolate with a very minor wobble (most people probably wouldn’t have noticed it). I’ve seen one super chocolate on MM with a wobble, and I’ve come across a small handful of people on FB with super chocolates that wobble. I don’t know the extent of their wobbles though.

For spotnose, I’ve come across quite a few people with het spotnoses (combo or single gene, none were allelic combos) with wobbles of various severity.

I just went through every chocolate spotnose on MM, and only one was noted to have a slight wobble. This doesn’t mean that was the only one with a wobble, a lot of breeders don’t put a description or note when they have a wobble. This is the one with the noted wobble: Chocolate Spotnose Het Clown Ball Python by ProHerper - MorphMarket

Based on what we know about the complex and those morphs, we could guess that spotnose chocolate would have a chance of wobbling. How often it appears, we don’t know


are we now referring to Incomplete co doms as hets now?

1 Like

I mean it’s not incorrect, but I wanted to specify het spotnose and not super spotnose just to avoid any possible confusion


i mean i guess i can see that, but you could just say powerball when referring to the super spotnose.

oh and to stay on topic somewhat my super chocolate does not show a wobble, nor do any of the close to say 30 spotnose and spotnose combos i have.


Yeah I could, but I was referring to het spotnose so it wouldn’t really help with that

1 Like

Seems to me though referring to something as “het” spotnose for the single gene form is more confusing than just calling by its actually name.

spotnose = spotnose single gene
Powerball = super spotnose


but then why even say powerball and confuse people more?

het is correct but rarely used. Remember that Lesser used to be ‘het lesser platinum’. A lot of the terms that we tend to use aren’t correct and a number of people who founded the hobby admit it.
And combo names are fun… but in the end confuse people who are not familiar with them all, or interchanged depending on what a breeder likes.
-Killer ButterBee Enchi
-White Walker
-Enchi Killer Queenbee
-Super Pastel Enchi Spider Butter
All the same morph, different and confusing names to a new hobbyist unless you just refer to the genes themselves.


Ok then why not just non super form. I fully understand that we have used terms that aren’t technically correct for those are geneticist in this hobby for many years, however trying to use the “ term” het for single gene morphs now is just seriously going to make people confused.
So if we are now using “het” for single genes to differentiate from the super forms what term are using for the non visual forms of recessive traits now :thinking:. Because obviously we can no longer use “ het” for that and het for single gene mutations

Technically speaking, yes we can, and probably should.
A het recessive is a single copy of a recessive gene. A het spotnose, lesser, chocolate, etc are all single copies of that gene.

If we wanted to get even more technical you could call a pied a homozygous pied, a super spotnose a homozygous spotnose. It’s all technically correct.


I’m not sure why “het” should confuse anyone who’s actually familiar with genetics. Single gene = heterozygous, “super” = homozygous. Het spotnose is no less correct than het monsoon or het albino - it all conveys that the animal has one copy of the indicated gene. In fact, heterozygous is less confusing in my opinion, because if you say “single gene spotnose” one could mean that the animal has only one copy of the spotnose gene specifically but there are other genes present, or it could mean the ONLY gene the animal has is spotnose.

Regardless, all of us here clearly knew what phantom meant, which is all that matters, really.


Thank you. And yeah I was kinda thinking the same thing about people just not talking about it. I’m assuming a wobble has popped up in more than just the one that mentions it. Then again I might be wrong. But I think I’ll just avoid mixing the two.


@exactlyexotics @wreckroomsnakes

Thank y’all too. I really appreciate the input.

1 Like

But should we really, when there is zero reason to do

Right here is the key! People who are new to the hobby and who do not have more advanced genetics than that of high school level will be confused by this.

No where did i say this was incorrect so there is that. … Just said it’s confusing and really unnecessary to use it this way.

There is really no reason to say single gene spotnose if you are referring to a combo. No one is ever going to say single gene spotnose single gene yellowbelly single gene pastel when talking about a combo. Completely unnesscary. Same way you will never see someone write or say het spotnose, het pastel, het lesser, and so on…

why are people always trying to change the name of things in this hobby…

1 Like

But you still suggested using powerball instead of super spotnose yourself. Lol.

That aside…
I personally use lesser/super lesser…but it does boil down to the hobby in general using poor naming conventions and heterozygous and homozygous are the more ideal scientifically. By originally calling them het lesser platinums and lesser platinum, that was ideal. But hobbyists don’t like using het in regards to genes that have that visual difference.

You can’t call a het albino an albino. And what would a super albino even entail? Lol.
You say either het/hom albino. Or het/visual albino. Just saying ‘albino’ means the white and yellow ball python.
But went with poor naming conventions and now saying ‘spotnose’ doesn’t mean 2x the gene.

It’s all dumb all around.
But calling them het or super is far less confusing than using combo names like white diamond, killer queenbee, kraken and so on. Especially when things like puma the combo and puma the original name for champagne both existed. (And now there’s a panther gene iirc too. Lol)


I don’t have any gripes with names of things as long as we all understand each other. I use the way Corey named red axanthic and het red axanthic correctly as an example all the time. At least we’re moving up in the world with most people saying incomplete dominant instead of co-dominant now.