The aseel thread!!!

[keblow]

Hey everyone. I just got back on a few days ago after quite a while without internet access, and realized there were also a few replies to me the last time I was in the thread. My apologies if it seemed like I dropped off the face of the earth and ignored responses. I just figured I'd drop a few pics of some of Cackle's Aseels for interest. Too young to judge well yet (3 months) but I can say one hen is actually a decent specimen so far.

This guy seems to have a short body and high tail, no pearl eye, legs too far forward even though the pic angle doesn't reveal it. Not particularly wide or prominently shouldered either. High station, relatively good bone, long neck and pretty good comb are his positives.

I like this girl a lot so far. Nice head and beak shape, wider, prominent shoulders, better leg placement, pearl eye, straight legs and feet. Not quite as big as some of the others, tail not as tight as I like, but a pretty balanced specimen. She might be able to give better type to that stag above.

The other pullet I'm favoring. High station, long neck, long tight tail, straight legs, wings held high. Her head is all right, body a little narrow. I think she might pair well with a solid cock to take advantage of her height and widen the body in the offspring.

This guy is really wide but has a prominent breastbone at the moment. Pearl eye is developing, very peppy fellow (I had him on life support after he took on two other boys and took a beating at 6 weeks - he still is quite aggressive), legs aren't so straight, and his tail is the second worst of the bunch behind the stag up above even though it looks ok here.

The goals I've put together are for the tallest bird I can get out of the genetics I have to work with, medium body size, relatively high stance. Eventually I might blend in some Sumatra on the side for gypsy face and the lacing gene, and at that point I'll be out of this thread and into the Oriental game thread. Actually, I think my original musings may have been there?

These four were the only ones that gave me a good opportunity to picture them, but I have one more hen who shows better type so far. I'm still far from a final assessment for the first year pairings (I'm thinking March). I know breeding to pullets and stags isn't good practice, and after the first year matings i will discontinue it. Also, there will be no culls until 18 months so I don't inadvertently lose a decent bird. Anybody feels like picking these guys apart or sees me making a poor assessment, feel free to comment.

Thanks, and glad to be back on here!

 

[CLSranch]

I've been reading this thread and I admit I skipped 20 pages in the middle. I have dark cornish and was thinking of switching to a game type bird for better broodiness and ability to protect themselves from predators, although anything is gone when something gets in the coop at night.

In the US, the Dark Cornish seem to be mostly based on e+ (wild-type, with chipmunk-striped chicks), although I've had at least one Dark Cornish Bantam that was E^Wh/e+ (split for wheaten and wild-type). I've read that in Australia they are often wheaten-based (chicks a pale gold/yellow color, few or no stripes.) The adult color seems to be about the same in either case.

But the Darks have the pattern gene and melanotic, which would not be found in correctly-marked birds of the Wheaten color variety. The black hackles in Darks are caused by some other gene, maybe charcoal.

I think crossing the varieties would not be a good idea. You need the correct patterning (black & brown) on the body of the Darks and you do not want that patterning on the body of the Wheatens. So the actual wheaten gene at the e-locus (E^Wh) might not be a problem, but several of the other genes would be a problem if you mixed the varieties.

I don't understand the genetic talk here or in some of the other post. Not going back to the beginning to quote kanoid???? etc genetics just saying I don't understand before asking my question.

Partly accurate and partly ludicrous. They are extremely people oriented, but not to the point of protecting the owner from threats. They have also been observed to hunt,but it's not a learnt behavior. If you have mice and aseel on your property, expect them to be gone sooner rather than later, but you can't just go hunting with then like you would a dog. Aseel definitely are very aware of their surroundings, and are usually the first to alert, so from that perspective yes, they would make good "watchdogs", I just don't like the word. I think alert and observant fits them more, and does not lead to unnecessary confusion

Sounds like what I want. My chickens do NOT follow me around and are probably the least people friendly breed I've had. I got them because they are good foragers and occasionally broody.

Big question here is what's the difference between them. I know Dark Cornish have game fowl in them. The picks of a lot these roo's are identical (minus some build) to Cornish and it seems that the hens are a game fowl color, instead of the darker double lacing???

 

[NatJ]

Big question here is what's the difference between them. I know Dark Cornish have game fowl in them. The picks of a lot these roo's are identical (minus some build) to Cornish and it seems that the hens are a game fowl color, instead of the darker double lacing???

I don't know which exact genes are making the color difference in the birds you see, but obviously there are some differences. I assume the differences in the Cornish came from the same ancestors that caused the change in body shape.

Chicken color genes can be confusing.

Sometimes the same genes will make chickens that look different than each other (example: wheaten roosters vs. wheaten hens).

Sometimes different genes will make chickens that look alike (example: wheaten roosters vs. duckwing roosters.)

Sometimes different genes will make chickens that look different (example: wheaten hens vs. duckwing hens, which is part of how we know that wheaten and duckwing are actually caused by different genes.)

So for now I'll just say "genetic differences" account for the color differences.

I don't understand the genetic talk here or in some of the other post. Not going back to the beginning to quote kanoid???? etc genetics just saying I don't understand before asking my question.

Many chicken genes have been studied and given names. Some of the other posts were discussing specific genes by name, or by the abbreviations for their names. But if you don't already know the names or abbreviations, it just looks like a bunch of nonsense

Some people find it useful to learn about the color genetics, and some find it just plain fun, but other people don't need to learn it if they don't find it fun or useful. (I think the people who actually do enjoy genetics are pretty rare )

 

[keblow]

If you're looking for the general differences between the two, I've owned both breeds, raised from hatchery stock.

Both birds were originally bred for fighting, and the Cornish sucked at it and so began to be bred exclusively for meat, and this explains their differences in a nutshell.

Aseels are fairly calm and intelligent, friendly towards humans with little handling, but aggressive towards other birds. The cocks will not tolerate other males, sometimes starting as early as 5 weeks old, although the Cackle Hatchery birds I have now are 14 weeks old and still not too bad. I did have a bad round of fighting at 6 weeks and monitored it closely, almost losing one of them. Cornish are nowhere near as bad in that regard, and also seemed much less intelligent to me. I took a lot of predator losses on the Cornish, and very few on the Aseels, possibly due to differences in awareness, but I think the heavier, more awkward build of the Cornish just doesn't give them speed or coordination. Aseels are more broody of the two, and lay fewer eggs as a general rule, though they are both not good layers.

To reemphasize, one is a game in temperament and function, the other is a meat bird with some genetics reaped from a gamefowl ancestor.

Hope this helps, and feel free to ask for more information!

 

[fluffycrow]

Hey everyone. I just got back on a few days ago after quite a while without internet access, and realized there were also a few replies to me the last time I was in the thread. My apologies if it seemed like I dropped off the face of the earth and ignored responses. I just figured I'd drop a few pics of some of Cackle's Aseels for interest. Too young to judge well yet (3 months) but I can say one hen is actually a decent specimen so far.
View attachment 3577507
This guy seems to have a short body and high tail, no pearl eye, legs too far forward even though the pic angle doesn't reveal it. Not particularly wide or prominently shouldered either. High station, relatively good bone, long neck and pretty good comb are his positives.

View attachment 3577510
I like this girl a lot so far. Nice head and beak shape, wider, prominent shoulders, better leg placement, pearl eye, straight legs and feet. Not quite as big as some of the others, tail not as tight as I like, but a pretty balanced specimen. She might be able to give better type to that stag above.

View attachment 3577512
The other pullet I'm favoring. High station, long neck, long tight tail, straight legs, wings held high. Her head is all right, body a little narrow. I think she might pair well with a solid cock to take advantage of her height and widen the body in the offspring.

View attachment 3577516
This guy is really wide but has a prominent breastbone at the moment. Pearl eye is developing, very peppy fellow (I had him on life support after he took on two other boys and took a beating at 6 weeks - he still is quite aggressive), legs aren't so straight, and his tail is the second worst of the bunch behind the stag up above even though it looks ok here.

The goals I've put together are for the tallest bird I can get out of the genetics I have to work with, medium body size, relatively high stance. Eventually I might blend in some Sumatra on the side for gypsy face and the lacing gene, and at that point I'll be out of this thread and into the Oriental game thread. Actually, I think my original musings may have been there?

These four were the only ones that gave me a good opportunity to picture them, but I have one more hen who shows better type so far. I'm still far from a final assessment for the first year pairings (I'm thinking March). I know breeding to pullets and stags isn't good practice, and after the first year matings i will discontinue it. Also, there will be no culls until 18 months so I don't inadvertently lose a decent bird. Anybody feels like picking these guys apart or sees me making a poor assessment, feel free to comment.

Thanks, and glad to be back on here!

I think you've made an excellent analysis of each bird. Very nice birds. No need to change threads (if you don't want to), this thread might be titled the aseel thread, but we discuss all Oriental gamefowl. Besides that, even I, the creator of the thread might need to be kicked out if we were being super strict with the rules. Really excited to see how yours develop

 

[fluffycrow]

If you're looking for the general differences between the two, I've owned both breeds, raised from hatchery stock.

Both birds were originally bred for fighting, and the Cornish sucked at it and so began to be bred exclusively for meat, and this explains their differences in a nutshell.

Aseels are fairly calm and intelligent, friendly towards humans with little handling, but aggressive towards other birds. The cocks will not tolerate other males, sometimes starting as early as 5 weeks old, although the Cackle Hatchery birds I have now are 14 weeks old and still not too bad. I did have a bad round of fighting at 6 weeks and monitored it closely, almost losing one of them. Cornish are nowhere near as bad in that regard, and also seemed much less intelligent to me. I took a lot of predator losses on the Cornish, and very few on the Aseels, possibly due to differences in awareness, but I think the heavier, more awkward build of the Cornish just doesn't give them speed or coordination. Aseels are more broody of the two, and lay fewer eggs as a general rule, though they are both not good layers.

To reemphasize, one is a game in temperament and function, the other is a meat bird with some genetics reaped from a gamefowl ancestor.

Hope this helps, and feel free to ask for more information!

My birds have always been very aware of their surroundings, from a very young age. To this day, my male is usually the first to alert. I'd like to add that not only do aseel have way more aggression towards other birds, but they also seem to know where to strike without having much, or any experience

 

[CLSranch]

I don't know which exact genes are making the color difference in the birds you see, but obviously there are some differences. I assume the differences in the Cornish came from the same ancestors that caused the change in body shape.

Chicken color genes can be confusing.

Sometimes the same genes will make chickens that look different than each other (example: wheaten roosters vs. wheaten hens).

Sometimes different genes will make chickens that look alike (example: wheaten roosters vs. duckwing roosters.)

Sometimes different genes will make chickens that look different (example: wheaten hens vs. duckwing hens, which is part of how we know that wheaten and duckwing are actually caused by different genes.)

So for now I'll just say "genetic differences" account for the color differences.


Many chicken genes have been studied and given names. Some of the other posts were discussing specific genes by name, or by the abbreviations for their names. But if you don't already know the names or abbreviations, it just looks like a bunch of nonsense

Some people find it useful to learn about the color genetics, and some find it just plain fun, but other people don't need to learn it if they don't find it fun or useful. (I think the people who actually do enjoy genetics are pretty rare )

If you're looking for the general differences between the two, I've owned both breeds, raised from hatchery stock.

Both birds were originally bred for fighting, and the Cornish sucked at it and so began to be bred exclusively for meat, and this explains their differences in a nutshell.

Aseels are fairly calm and intelligent, friendly towards humans with little handling, but aggressive towards other birds. The cocks will not tolerate other males, sometimes starting as early as 5 weeks old, although the Cackle Hatchery birds I have now are 14 weeks old and still not too bad. I did have a bad round of fighting at 6 weeks and monitored it closely, almost losing one of them. Cornish are nowhere near as bad in that regard, and also seemed much less intelligent to me. I took a lot of predator losses on the Cornish, and very few on the Aseels, possibly due to differences in awareness, but I think the heavier, more awkward build of the Cornish just doesn't give them speed or coordination. Aseels are more broody of the two, and lay fewer eggs as a general rule, though they are both not good layers.

To reemphasize, one is a game in temperament and function, the other is a meat bird with some genetics reaped from a gamefowl ancestor.

Hope this helps, and feel free to ask for more information!

Much thanks to you both.

 

[keblow]

This is going to be an awfully long post, but I can't find the information I'm looking for even after a lot of internet perusal.

I want to SEE the ideal Aseel body type. I'll lay out what I've found.

I'm already aware that duck toes, knock knees, stork legs, improper leg placement, narrow bodies, split tails, and a lot of other faults and defects exist, and some are automatic culls. What I'm looking for is the shape of strictly the body itself, because I see such a variety in pictures.

I've been listening to Kenny Troiano for hours a day. He does American Games, and while they're not the same, they are a bird with the same foundation purpose the Aseels have. Every now and then he will compare with Aseels and I get a bit out of it. For example, the low wingset on AGs is incorrect for Aseel, which should be held parallel to the line of the back. He often references a 'football shaped body' which sounds like it should match the Aseels except that the breast should be a little wider (same tucked up keel, relatively wide set legs, not too deep, breastbone well fleshed).

When I read the standards I've found, I get what it's saying, but need to match that visually to really grasp it. I've found a few internet pics that I'm hopefully not breaking the law by using, and I'll comment what I think I'm seeing there.

This one seems really good overall to me, and I will admit I lean away from the strongbuild type. This is what I picture the ideal to be, and I don't really see any body type problems here. Maybe, maybe, he's got a little hump in the spine. Am I on track or just plain wrong?

This one's body looks alright but not quite deep enough to me.

This last one looks like he's got a bit of hump in the spine. Troiano says Aseels have that, but he doesn't say if it's acceptable in the breed. I'm guessing it's not. Other than that the depth looks correct, shape okay but needing a little more filling out of the breast.

Am I getting this or way off the mark? Some of these have other faults I can see, but I only want them for for their bodies lol.

Thanks everybody, and feel free to ramble on, because I love information.

 

[Bigtom Turkey]

Asils, like all gamefowl are bred for competition not uniformity. Yes they share traits people think help them compete, but that is not their main purpose. All the birds you presented are likely Asils, just from different hands. I know this doesn't help you clear things up though.

 

[keblow]

Right. Aseel to me is more of a landrace or umbrella term for different strains, with a lot of room for personal preference. I'm not arguing against their purpose, just convinced that form and function go hand in hand, so I'm interested in breeding for it. It makes sense to me that a bird whose body fits together well (similar reasoning for the proper form of a racehorse or egg laying chicken) can pass on traits better than one whose performance is good despite bad conformation. Thus the interest in body shape.