Genetics of Salmon Faverolles

[zackcrack00]

I have found that the typical salmon genotype as in Faverolles is eWH/eWh - S/- - Mh/Mh. Are there other genes at play for the base genotype of this variety? My hens have black ticking on their hackles, why? Which gene(s) dictate the presence of ticking in silver wheaten mahogany hens?

 

[Wappoke]

I have found that the typical salmon genotype as in Faverolles is eWH/eWh - S/- - Mh/Mh. Are there other genes at play for the base genotype of this variety? My hens have black ticking on their hackles, why? Which gene(s) dictate the presence of ticking in silver wheaten mahogany hens?

Salmon faverolles are dominant wheaten ( light wheaten) and carry sex-linked silver but do not carry mahogany. Mahogany affects the breast color of the males, it should be white with black markings if the birds carried mahogany.

I believe the red in the male is due to autosomal red or a leaky silver allele.

Any black ticking in the females hackles is due to the wheaten allele. The wheaten allele is very good at not producing black pigments but sometimes it does not function properly and some black sneaks into the feathers of the females.

 

[junebuggena]

Actually, Salmon Faverolle do have the mahogany gene.

 

[Wappoke]

Actually, Salmon Faverolle do have the mahogany gene.

The research by Brumbaugh and Hollander, and that by Smyth and Somes would disagree with your statement. The mahogany gene is a columbian-like restrictor removing black pigment from certain areas of the chicken's body. In the case of males, it removes black from the breast of the male. In some cases , the breast will appear to be spangled.

The following is a quote from Smyth:

"The major effect of Mh on the adult male is to restrict black from the base of the pennaceous part of the breast feathers. The amount of black left distally is less in homozygotes than In heterozygotes, some of the breasts of homozygotes resembling the secondary pattern, spangling."

In addition to reducing the amount of black in the males breast, the mahogany gene would cause the wheaten color of the female to be a reddish hue.

http://www.bantamclub.com/PDF/Smyth.pdf`

 

[junebuggena]

https://poultrykeeper.com/poultry-breeding/the-other-type-of-gold-red/
Mahogany does have a restricting effect on black, but not in the same way that columbian does. Mahogany restricts black through the hackle and wing, it has no effect on black chests.

 

[Wappoke]

https://poultrykeeper.com/poultry-breeding/the-other-type-of-gold-red/
Mahogany does have a restricting effect on black, but not in the same way that columbian does. Mahogany restricts black through the hackle and wing, it has no effect on black chests.

I posted that mahogany was columbian-like; I did not post that it was expressed in the exact same way. Dark brown is another columbian-like restrictor. This is a term used in research papers to refer to black restrictors as a whole. See the following quotes from Smyths paper.

"As I visualize the situation, the genetic determination of primary plumage pattern revolves around the genotype at the E--locus and its modification by other genes with primary pattern effects. This idea is presented diagrammatically in Figure I. Each of the E--alleles determines a specific primary pattern, varying from the extreme black distribution of the E--allele to the greatly reduced amount present in the wheaten (eWh and eY) females, With the appropriate modifying genes the eumelanin distribution associated with any of the E--alleles may be moved to the extremes, solid black or essentially non-black Columbian-like (as in the clear Buffs)."

"Several genes have been isolated that further restrict the black distribution associated with the unmodified E--alleles, primarily in the direction of a Columbian-like pattern. These include Columbian (Co),mahogany (Mh) , dark brown (Db)and dilute (Di). In addition there appears to be unidentified modifying genes such as those proposed by Somes and Smyth (1966) which tend to behave as a polygenic complex. Various genotypic combinations of the above can account for the many modified phenotypes ranging from a wild type male with slight red tipping on its black breast to a phenotypically non-black Buff Orpington."
.


Poultry keeper is not a scientific journal. Nowhere in the internet article does Grant present data that would support the statement. I am surprised Grant would present an article that had incorrect information. He discusses the Ap gene which can be found in the chicken genome but the gene has nothing to do with color in a chicken. The Ap gene expression is referred to as apterylosis- featherless chickens. This is a dominant gene that produces chickens that have varying degrees of nakedness. Read the information in the book below.

http://chla.library.cornell.edu/cgi...dno=2837819;didno=2837819;view=image;seq=0130


Grant did not read the work by Brumbaugh and Hollander or the work by Smyth. All three of the authors have been published numerous times in scientific journals.

So you are saying the conclusion drawn from the data collected by Smyth, Brumbaugh and Hollander is incorrect. I do not understand how you can dismiss the findings of these researchers. The work by these individuals is used by other researchers to support their findings . Smyth, Brumbaugh and Hollander have published many papers on genetics and are referenced many times by other scientists.

The file below is the paper by Brumbaugh and Hollander


http://chickencolours.com/Genetics of Buff Brum&Holl.pdf


I have also read Brian Reeder's (Reeder was mentioned in the online article) paper on the subject of autosomal pheomelanin. His paper was never published in a peer-reviewed scientific journal. If he had tried to publish the article, it would have been rejected- he used a published genotype to represent the autosomal pheomelanin. From what I can gather, he did not do a literature search.


You can believe what you want to believe but I can not understand how you can dismiss published research.

 

[SeneyMaker]

If I remember correctly, from many discussions years ago, it was possible that the Mahogany allele and the autosomal red may have been the same allele, but named differently by different researchers. Regardless, something is needed to get the red shoulders.

What most people do not know is that Salmon Faverolles also have the cream allele. This helps to clean some things up to get a better color. Another point to remember is that the two different Wheaten alleles at the extended locus can get crossed (eWh and ey). If ey gets in the mix, good luck. It is a bear to fix. ey will bring black into the hackle. However, the cream gene will try to remove it, but not completely. One clue to look for is the undercolor when trying to fix the correct wheaten allele. Its all in the finer points.

If you go to my website you will see the eWh, ey, and ig alleles at work. Can you tell which color varieties have them?

RJ Seney

 

[Wappoke]

If I remember correctly, from many discussions years ago, it was possible that the Mahogany allele and the autosomal red may have been the same allele, but named differently by different researchers. Regardless, something is needed to get the red shoulders.

What most people do not know is that Salmon Faverolles also have the cream allele. This helps to clean some things up to get a better color. Another point to remember is that the two different Wheaten alleles at the extended locus can get crossed (eWh and ey). If ey gets in the mix, good luck. It is a bear to fix. ey will bring black into the hackle. However, the cream gene will try to remove it, but not completely. One clue to look for is the undercolor when trying to fix the correct wheaten allele. Its all in the finer points.

If you go to my website you will see the eWh, ey, and ig alleles at work. Can you tell which color varieties have them?

RJ Seney

Mahogany and autosomal red are expressed differently. Please reference the research that would indicate they are the same allele with different names.

Please post your website address.

 

[SeneyMaker]

I have no reference material. If you will note my post, I stated that there had been a "discussion" years ago regarding the subject of the two named traits. I personally never tried to test breed to make an argument either way. My intention was to make aware of a discussion that occurred years ago between several people when they were trying to identify if there were any substantial differences that stood out. Several years ago I researched the chicken genome extensively, but have been away from it for some time. I will make no argument one way or the other because I cannot substantiate either.

To place the ball back in your court, can you reference your material that clearly shows the distinction and were scientific analysis of test breeding programs has shown them to be separate and how they positively affect the color. I'm not trying to act smart here; I would really like to know if that argument has been resolved since the time I was active.

In regards to posting my website address, I do not know the rules of this forum. I looked for them but was unable to find a list of what is appropriate and what is not. However, most forums do not like to have links posted to websites where there are pages that sell things. I sell my books on the site that I used to resurrect my Seney breed web pages recently. And because the search engine bots have not found the pages to log yet, searches may fail. Just do a search on my name, not the avatar name, and you should be able to find the chicken pages. The pages can be selected at the top menu of my website.

RJ Seney

 

[Wappoke]

I have no reference material. If you will note my post, I stated that there had been a "discussion" years ago regarding the subject of the two named traits. I personally never tried to test breed to make an argument either way. My intention was to make aware of a discussion that occurred years ago between several people when they were trying to identify if there were any substantial differences that stood out. Several years ago I researched the chicken genome extensively, but have been away from it for some time. I will make no argument one way or the other because I cannot substantiate either.

To place the ball back in your court, can you reference your material that clearly shows the distinction and were scientific analysis of test breeding programs has shown them to be separate and how they positively affect the color. I'm not trying to act smart here; I would really like to know if that argument has been resolved since the time I was active.

In regards to posting my website address, I do not know the rules of this forum. I looked for them but was unable to find a list of what is appropriate and what is not. However, most forums do not like to have links posted to websites where there are pages that sell things. I sell my books on the site that I used to resurrect my Seney breed web pages recently. And because the search engine bots have not found the pages to log yet, searches may fail. Just do a search on my name, not the avatar name, and you should be able to find the chicken pages. The pages can be selected at the top menu of my website.

RJ Seney

Read the entire string and you will find my references with quotes with respect to the expression of mahogany.

Autosomal red is any red color that is not associated with the gold allele according to Hutt. There is no autosomal red gene, it is a catch-all for other possibilities other than the sex-linked gold allele.

http://chla.library.cornell.edu/cgi...=chla&idno=2837819&q1=autosomal+red&submit=Go


It is possible that a recessive gold diluter is found in the salmon faverolle. The cream gene has been isolated from silver parents and gold parents that were used to produce silvers. (Fayoumi, hamburghs) It was also isolated from light brown leghorns. (Poultry breeding and genetics by Crawford) I also isolated cream from silver spangled spitzhauben- I would post the pictures but can not find them.