![Image](http://www.psittacula-mutations.nl/wordpress/wp-content/gallery/halsbandparkieten-ringnecked-parakeets/1-0-dombont-turqkobaltviolet-2.jpg)
Nothing more then a dom. pied turq violet cobalt.
![Happy :)](./images/smilies/1.gif)
Moderator: Mods
There are no SL Edge in Oz that im aware of
That's exactly right. it was also concluded wrongly that this fallow will only be present when cinnamon is also present in the birds genetic makeup. Clearly not the case.trabots wrote:Ben, I had a couple of 'Dom' Edged birds around 10 years ago when they were known as 'fallows' and supposedly all cocks were split Cinnamon. You probably know the story.
Sorry but when i look at this pic of your so called "saddleback" offspring i can't see a yellow saddle area too.mcw-indianringnecks wrote: When you look at most pictures you will see most have no saddle,except people using there name to describe Turquoise Harlequins
P,S. I dont beleive there is Turquoise in Saddlebacks ,it doesnt act the same as my birds .
Hi Chris, are the above birds the same age?mcw-indianringnecks wrote:saddleback is simply the wrong name for these birds
Chris can you help clarify these two statements please. To me they seem a bit of a contradiction. First you say that saddleback and turquoise act differently. Seeing as turquoise acts like any blue locus allele, I'm not following why you would first say they don't act the same and then follow that by saying saddleback is a new parblue. Are they acting differently, or the same? Perhaps you are referring to a phenotypic similarity and a genetically differentmcw-indianringnecks wrote:...
P,S. I dont beleive there is Turquoise in Saddlebacks ,it doesnt act the same as my birds .
...
I beleive like Emerold they are simply a new par blue????????????
thx for your detailed answer.mcw-indianringnecks wrote:saddleback is simply the wrong name for these birds
Just to say thank you Tienie. Some keys to avoid "fighting" like in Terry's group:Carr.birds wrote:Chris
Thanks for sharing you experience and opinion with us. Forum members please give Chris an opportunity to share his point of view. Currently there is very little information available and this is the only way we can learn from a saddleback breeder. If you don’t agree with his statements and can’t proof your point with breeding results, simply keep quiet and don’t get involved in fights similar to Terry’s group.
I do own a lovely violet saddleback and you should know by now I do share my results and experience with all other Forum members. If all go according to plan next year’s results will be shared with you.
Ben thanks for all your input regarding sl edged. It is a lovely mutation and combination with other mutations result in awesome phenotypes.
Pics will be send tonight from home.
Tienie
jumping in.. Willy the smilies only need to be clicked on to appear in your post- once you've finished writing click a smilie to end your sentence or place the cursor where you wish it to be (as if you were going to edit your finished sentence for example, and click on the smilie you'd like to use.trabots wrote:Now how about a quick lesson on how to use the smilies? I tried to drag them over and copy and paste, to no avail.
As Johan wrote here you (sorry here is must write "you" because Chris is believingmcw-indianringnecks wrote: That emerold is a par or new par blue ,the same as i beleive there is a new par blue in saddleback.
Fantastic having worked with artificial lighting all my caree and have experience with u.v. lighting as well other stage lighting in Disco's and nightclubs I've aggonized over the value of using this medium for this purpose I know that I can give you the result you want purely by malnipulating the sauce and background lighting 10 out of 10 although I promised to stay unaminous on this forum I could'nt let this slip.Chriskoi wrote:thx for your detailed answer.mcw-indianringnecks wrote:saddleback is simply the wrong name for these birds
Same bird in both pics but photographed under different angel and different UV light.
Cheers.
Yeah, but then you can't speak of a parblue mutation in the context of "saddleback". That's the Intention behind Johans and my Posts. ;)mcw-indianringnecks wrote:since 2009 when phil and i received our saddlebacks we have both breed 3 saddlebacks each , we have both sold only 1 bird each + 1 i gave to a friend for his birthday.Neither of us has breed any Turquoise looking birds , From the green series birds that we did produce [from saddleback ] . From there breeding results were No SL Edge ,No Turquoise No Dilutes and unfortunatley No Saddlebacks , I dont hide things. Pictures of every bird weve ever breed are on my new web site , Nest to what ever age that was possable.
There was 1 exception 1 Violetgreen Harlequin breed from saddleback was breed to a Turquoise Grey producing 4 Turquoise looking babies , But said to be unusually bright.[not in my control ].
If these bright birds were hens then we can not eliminate Sl EdgedBut said to be unusually bright.[not in my control ].
Maybe it is a "turq" mutation of another locus but not the b-locus. If this is the truth you simply can't name it a parblue. ;)mcw-indianringnecks wrote:As ive said for years i dont beleive Turquoise is involved.
Hi,mcw-indianringnecks wrote: So what else but a new par blue could be responsable for there richness of colour and yellow projessive colouring.
I suppose its ok for people around the world to sell turquoise harlequins as saddlebacks ,, well why not just sell them as turquoise harlequins.
Ok. Hopefully we will find out. Tienie is doing a great testjob. So nice that you sold a "saddleback" to him.mcw-indianringnecks wrote: I cant explain it but theres no turquoise or opaline in our birds,thats the point of the forum, to help to do that.
I think it wasn't a member of this forum. For sure it is possible when emerald is a parblue mutation which should be proved by the breeding results of Mikes cleartail violet cobalt x cleartail turq emerald breeding pair. But i would say lets wait for the offspring of the next season of the same pair. If he still gets no normal blue offspring then we could say emerald is a parblue.mcw-indianringnecks wrote: When i breed DF Emerold i was aquised of being a liar as its genetically not possable to breed df emerold.
They were not wrong at all. If paired to another dom. pied they can produce homozyguos dom. pieds which look like albinos with black eyes. But same is true for non "saddleback" dom. pieds.mcw-indianringnecks wrote: When Phil showed pics of his first saddleback nest ,they said dont buy saddlebacks they produce black eyed albinos.
Oh come on. Willy was faced with the same fight at yahoo but he is still with us. And further more he never has given up and provided breeding and test results every year. So it is up to the owner resp. breeder of a new Mutation to prove or disprove the genetic makeup. Or find some one who is willing to do the job (Tienie or Deon or ...). We all know testing could only be done with a lot of aviary space.mcw-indianringnecks wrote: I* love the idea of the Forum and your right we dont want to end up as the gen site did So simply im done .
thx. hope we find some interesting stuff to develope our idea of the saddleback Makeup.mcw-indianringnecks wrote: Hopefully my web site will be complete buy the end of the month all i have to say will be on there +all the pictures i have,If your interested take a look , if anybody wants to use pictures from my site on this forum yous have my permission.
Best Wishes Chris
For the one from Europe i know for sure the bird was breed out of dom. pied green /blue /opaline x turq violet cobalt.
Chris I hope you have'nt misunderstood my earlier post it is not my intention to direct any comment at you or in relation to the information in your post. My comment is directed purely at the use of U.V.light in order to high-light feather characteristics of birds.I know you as well as most other forum members are in favour of this practice and thats fine however I consider it futile,for what it's worth I agree with your comments in regard to using public forums and I agree that people like you and I would be better keeping out of them have faith we are not alone sorry if I offended you.mcw-indianringnecks wrote:As ive said for years i dont beleive Turquoise is involved.
So what else but a new par blue could be responsable for there richness of colour and yellow projessive colouring.
So far its beleived ive misheld information and used artifisual light to maluniplate photoes ..
I suppose its ok for people around the world to sell turquoise harlequins as saddlebacks ,, well why not just sell them as turquoise harlequins.
Sort of remember now why i dont post on Forums
Hi Johan,Johan S wrote:If that bird in the middle is a hen, it could be cinnamon? Flight feathers look brownish and barb of the tail feather is very light. Just guessing here though.
Hm, don't think it's a opaline cinnamon combo. I think such a bird should show the typical opaline pattern in the wings because cinnamon isn't able to remove them. Furthermore cinnamon isn't causing such light flight feathers. Here is a pic of nice cinnamon (left; unaltered) and a cinnamon opaline look a like (right; same pic as left but modified with Paint .Net):Johan S wrote:Sorry Madas, I meant to say carrying the cinnamon gene, not only cinnamon green, for which this bird is way too light. Probably cinnamon opaline like Ben suggested.
May be opaline cinnamon SL Edged green.Johan S wrote:Sorry Madas, I meant to say carrying the cinnamon gene, not only cinnamon green, for which this bird is way too light. Probably cinnamon opaline like Ben suggested.