The Moonshiner's Leghorns

[ColtHandorf]

Y'all keep going round and round on this and I don't understand. To my knowledge there hasn't been any concrete research on the "shredder" gene or whatever you want to call it. Just that it exists in large fowl breeds of the Lavender variety. Perhaps @nicalandia knows of some definitive research.

Anyway, I don't see how using non-Lavender birds that clearly don't have the gene to produce split Lavender birds that don't have it, bred to Lavenders that don't have it is creating birds that "don't appear to have it". When it comes down to it, breed standards are based on the phenotype, not the genotype of the bird no matter which way you look at it. I can have a Black Orpington that has a stray white feather that would cause him to lose points at a show and not place. If I pluck that feather (and I'm not saying anyone should do this), and he gets Grand Champion, the judges are only able to judge him on his physical appearance. Not the fact that genetically there's something going on there.

By the same token, if I cross my Lavender Silver-laced Orpington cockerel over my Silver-laced Orpington hens to create splits and cross him back to his daughters and produce Lavender Silver-laced Orpingtons they are still Lavenders. They are pure, and because of the outcross they shouldn't have any feather issues. Similarly to Blues. Many breeders say to cross your Blue birds back to Black to increase the depth of Blue and the lacing/edging effect on the feathers. Breeding Blue x Blue generation after generation causes a paler Blue. Why should you breed Lavender x Lavender ad nauseum expecting different results when you could cross in the undiluted color to make the corrections faster, less expensively, and achieve for all purposes, the same effect.

 

[The Moonshiner]

Y'all keep going round and round on this and I don't understand. To my knowledge there hasn't been any concrete research on the "shredder" gene or whatever you want to call it. Just that it exists in large fowl breeds of the Lavender variety. Perhaps @nicalandia knows of some definitive research.

Anyway, I don't see how using non-Lavender birds that clearly don't have the gene to produce split Lavender birds that don't have it, bred to Lavenders that don't have it is creating birds that "don't appear to have it". When it comes down to it, breed standards are based on the phenotype, not the genotype of the bird no matter which way you look at it. I can have a Black Orpington that has a stray white feather that would cause him to lose points at a show and not place. If I pluck that feather (and I'm not saying anyone should do this), and he gets Grand Champion, the judges are only able to judge him on his physical appearance. Not the fact that genetically there's something going on there.

By the same token, if I cross my Lavender Silver-laced Orpington cockerel over my Silver-laced Orpington hens to create splits and cross him back to his daughters and produce Lavender Silver-laced Orpingtons they are still Lavenders. They are pure, and because of the outcross they shouldn't have any feather issues. Similarly to Blues. Many breeders say to cross your Blue birds back to Black to increase the depth of Blue and the lacing/edging effect on the feathers. Breeding Blue x Blue generation after generation causes a paler Blue. Why should you breed Lavender x Lavender ad nauseum expecting different results when you could cross in the undiluted color to make the corrections faster, less expensively, and achieve for all purposes, the same effect.

View attachment 2490747

Lol. We all have to live and learn.

 

[ColtHandorf]

Lol. We all have to live and learn.

So I don't need to worry about it? lol

 

[nicalandia]

To my knowledge there hasn't been any concrete research on the "shredder" gene or whatever you want to call it. Just that it exists in large fowl breeds of the Lavender variety. Perhaps @nicalandia knows of some definitive research.

Danne Honour, one of the best and meticoulus breeder I've seen in my years of research. No research have been done in the Shredder/Wingpatch fenotype on many Lavender colored breeds, some people believe it's a mutation that is vey very close linked to Lavender and that to break the linkage one needs to breed 100s to get a few that do not have the wingpatch. I for one believe that it's an allelic mutation of Lavender as it does not express itself on black or other diluted phenotype

 

[HaikuHeritageFarm]

Y'all keep going round and round on this and I don't understand. To my knowledge there hasn't been any concrete research on the "shredder" gene or whatever you want to call it. Just that it exists in large fowl breeds of the Lavender variety. Perhaps @nicalandia knows of some definitive research.

Anyway, I don't see how using non-Lavender birds that clearly don't have the gene to produce split Lavender birds that don't have it, bred to Lavenders that don't have it is creating birds that "don't appear to have it". When it comes down to it, breed standards are based on the phenotype, not the genotype of the bird no matter which way you look at it. I can have a Black Orpington that has a stray white feather that would cause him to lose points at a show and not place. If I pluck that feather (and I'm not saying anyone should do this), and he gets Grand Champion, the judges are only able to judge him on his physical appearance. Not the fact that genetically there's something going on there.

By the same token, if I cross my Lavender Silver-laced Orpington cockerel over my Silver-laced Orpington hens to create splits and cross him back to his daughters and produce Lavender Silver-laced Orpingtons they are still Lavenders. They are pure, and because of the outcross they shouldn't have any feather issues. Similarly to Blues. Many breeders say to cross your Blue birds back to Black to increase the depth of Blue and the lacing/edging effect on the feathers. Breeding Blue x Blue generation after generation causes a paler Blue. Why should you breed Lavender x Lavender ad nauseum expecting different results when you could cross in the undiluted color to make the corrections faster, less expensively, and achieve for all purposes, the same effect.

View attachment 2490747

I don't feel like "losing" a generation to splits every other season is faster, less expensive or more efficient, personally. I also don't think I'll ever be able to produce a competitive line of lavenders if I have to keep crossing out all the time.

Y'all do your thang, but I want a pure line of lavenders that breeds true without fray. I'm a big believer in tight line and family breeding to set traits, suss out and eliminate faults, and fine-tune various aspects of your line, and it's difficult (maybe impossible) to maintain the kind of tight line breeding I want with constant outcrossing to another variety. Guess I'm a silly idealist.

That being said, while I am not as experienced with this sort of gene in poultry, I do have some ideas that have carried over from rabbits about how dilutions can be maintained and improved and I'd like to apply them to my birds to see what happens. The "breed back to black" to get good blues is common in rabbits, too, but in my experience and other even more experienced breeders' opinions, you can only truly improve a dilute color by breeding that variety to itself religiously and selecting hard for best color. That has proven to be true and effective for both myself and other consistently winning breeders.

I have seen it work in blues in poultry, too, as I recall. Those that breed blue to blue are the ones that seem to eventually best achieve the depth of color and the beautiful lacing that is so desirable from what I've seen. I don't know how that would work out with lavender. I can't find anyone that has bred lav to lav through multiple generations to find out aside from Dan. He alluded to the fact that it is true, but perhaps I'll have to inquire about it more specifically. I'll look up some of my contacts across the pond that breed lav-only lines, too.

Clearly, we have different goals with our lavender lines, though, and to each their own. My approach makes you cringe, and yours makes me cringe. LOL. But everyone has to do what they feel they need to do to achieve their desired results.

 

[nicalandia]

Fry is not on the same chromosome as Lavender therefore not linked. To my understanding Lavender Coturnix Japónica Quail do not have the bad feathering as some lines of Lavender Chickens and both mutations are allelic and found on the same chromosome

 

[The Moonshiner]

I don't feel like "losing" a generation to splits every other season is faster, less expensive or more efficient, personally. I also don't think I'll ever be able to produce a competitive line of lavenders if I have to keep crossing out all the time.

Y'all do your thang, but I want a pure line of lavenders that breeds true without fray. I'm a big believer in tight line and family breeding to set traits, suss out and eliminate faults, and fine-tune various aspects of your line, and it's difficult (maybe impossible) to maintain the kind of tight line breeding I want with constant outcrossing to another variety. Guess I'm a silly idealist.

That being said, while I am not as experienced with this sort of gene in poultry, I do have some ideas that have carried over from rabbits about how dilutions can be maintained and improved and I'd like to apply them to my birds to see what happens. The "breed back to black" to get good blues is common in rabbits, too, but in my experience and other even more experienced breeders' opinions, you can only truly improve a dilute color by breeding that variety to itself religiously and selecting hard for best color. That has proven to be true and effective for both myself and other consistently winning breeders.

I have seen it work in blues in poultry, too, as I recall. Those that breed blue to blue are the ones that seem to eventually best achieve the depth of color and the beautiful lacing that is so desirable from what I've seen. I don't know how that would work out with lavender. I can't find anyone that has bred lav to lav through multiple generations to find out aside from Dan. He alluded to the fact that it is true, but perhaps I'll have to inquire about it more specifically. I'll look up some of my contacts across the pond that breed lav-only lines, too.

Clearly, we have different goals with our lavender lines, though, and to each their own. My approach makes you cringe, and yours makes me cringe. LOL. But everyone has to do what they feel they need to do to achieve their desired results.

I thought we had the same goal? To eliminate the fray gene from a lavender line. We just have different opinions on how to go about it or what approach will get us to the goal.
You have certain ideas about what you think my approach will result in. Mainly you see it as just hiding the gene instead of eliminating it. A band aid approach. I have no issue with you having your beliefs but do not project your beliefs as my goals.
I have stated multiple times that my goal was to eliminate the issue and I have stated I haven't saw it in my birds for years. Don't come on my thread and get it twisted.

 

[HaikuHeritageFarm]

Also, IMO, even the birds that don't show fully obvious effects of fray still have far inferior feather quality and pass that on to their offspring. For example, my "opal" (cream+lavender over gold duckwing) legbar exhibits no clear signs of fray like what I see in my f3+ isabel to isabel leghorns, and certainly no wing patch, though I'm sure that's largely related to the fact that he has very little chestnut in his wingbows, but I can clearly see the difference in feather quality between his f1 split offspring and cream to cream chicks in the same hatch, even in the brooder as the first begin feathering in. I fully expect that line breeding on him will have fray raging back in a generation or two.

 

[HaikuHeritageFarm]

I thought we had the same goal? To eliminate the fray gene from a lavender line. We just have different opinions on how to go about it or what approach will get us to the goal.
You have certain ideas about what you think my approach will result in. Mainly you see it as just hiding the gene instead of eliminating it. A band aid approach. I have no issue with you having your beliefs but do not project your beliefs as my goals.
I have stated multiple times that my goal was to eliminate the issue and I have stated I haven't saw it in my birds for years. Don't come on my thread and get it twisted.

I guess I was confused. I thought you crossed back to browns/blacks to achieve the disappearance of the problem and didn't concern yourself with whether or not you could breed multiple generations of lavender to themselves.

If you are working to eliminate fray as well and have pure lavender lines then we do indeed have the same goal, and since you've already licked the problem can I buy birds from you rather than starting over?

I apologize if I misunderstood, I truly wasn't trying to twist your words.

ETA—I realize now that what you quoted was my response to Colt's post regarding breeding phenotypically representative birds for the show table. My goals are to eliminate fray, not just to breed birds that appear to not have it, so perhaps it is not you (Moonshiner) and me who differ, but rather myself and Colt.

 

[HaikuHeritageFarm]

Danne Honour, one of the best and meticoulus breeder I've seen in my years of research. No research have been done in the Shredder/Wingpatch fenotype on many Lavender colored breeds, some people believe it's a mutation that is vey very close linked to Lavender and that to break the linkage one needs to breed 100s to get a few that do not have the wingpatch. I for one believe that it's an allelic mutation of Lavender as it does not express itself on black or other diluted phenotype

To clarify (since I seem to be misunderstanding a lot of things here,) you disagree with Dan's opinion? He told me that breeding enough to find the one male that didn't exhibit the fault was how he went about successfully creating fray-free Isabella Phoenix. I am using his work with those birds as my template.