The saddle is back

[Recio]

Hi everybody,

This is the answer to Johan asking whether SB acts on melanin or on psittacin pigments:

An optical saddle can appear due to:

1. Changes in melanin distribution in Dom Pied birds:

1.1. Lack of melanins in the saddle area (Dom Pied subtype).... it will produce a yellow saddle in a Green bird (Green series) or a White saddle in a blue bird (Blue series). If it is a DF Dom Pied the saddle will not be apparent since the birds will appear completelly yellow (Green series) or White (Blue series).

1.2. Lack of melanins mostly in the whole bird excepting the saddle área (Dom Pied subtype) .... it will produce a Green saddle in a yellow bird (Green series) or a blue saddle in a White bird (Blue series). This is the mutation which is correctly called "saddleback" in other species. Again the saddle will not be visible in DF Dom Pied birds, completelly lacking melanins.

2. Changes in psittacin distribution in Parblue birds:

2.1. Lack of psittacins in the saddle area (Parblue subtype) .... it will produce a blue saddle in a green bird. If expressed in a DF Dom Pied (= non melanins): white saddle in a yellow bird.

2.2. Lack or decrease of psittacins in the whole bird excepting the saddle área .... it will produce a Green saddle in a blue bird. If expressed in a DF Dom Pied (= non melanins): yellow saddle in a White bird.

As you can see we can get phenotypic saddlebacks with mutations acting either on melanins (Dom Pied) or on psittacins (Parblues). Both Dom pied and Parblues are incomplete mutations that allow to produce a saddle either by the presence of the pigment in the saddle área (1.2 and 2.2) or by its presence all around the saddle área producing a "hole" inside without pigment (1.1 and 2.1).

We can also get phenotypic saddlebacks by combining Dom Pied and Parblues (either type 1 or 2) as in Chris' birds, further producing different optical saddles. Chris SB would be a combo of a Dom Pied producing a lack of melanin in the saddle área (type 1.1) with a Parblue allowing the deposition of psittacins in the saddle área (type 2.2). This Parblue type in Chris' SB seems to show some specific characteristics (richer color, brighther, deeper, ...) which could be due either to the presence of Dom Pied (it allows a further expression of psittacins) and/or to a specific characteristic of this Parblue, as breeding results not producing Turquoise birds after pairing to Blue series birds seems to suggest (could it be a Parblue 2???).

Pics of most of the different saddles have been posted in the FB fórums that you are also following.

I think that we all agree that the term Saddlebacks is not the rigth one since, as described above, we can get different saddles with different mutations and combination of mutations, and because the word "Saddleback" is already in use for a specific type of Pied in other species. In fact, Saddleback should be used as a morphotype word to specify the type of Dom Pied and/or Parblue at work, and thus when saying SB we should also specify the saddle color and the general bird color: Ex: SB yellow/green for a bird with a yellow saddle in a green bird. The informed breeder will be able to deduce that this bird is in fact a subtype of Dom Pied lacking melanin in the saddle area in a Green series bird.

Regards

Recio

[madas]

as breeding results not producing Turquoise birds after pairing to Blue series birds seems to suggest (could it be a Parblue 2???).

This statement is not correct because Bob Irvine has breed two violet(sf) "parblue"Blue offspring birds from Garrys famous first "saddleback" hen of OZ paired to plain blue.


Pics of most of the different saddles have been posted in the FB fórums that you are also following.

I think that we all agree that the term Saddlebacks is not the rigth one since, as described above, we can get different saddles with different mutations and combination of mutations, and because the word "Saddleback" is already in use for a specific type of Pied in other species. In fact, Saddleback should be used as a morphotype word to specify the type of Dom Pied and/or Parblue at work, and thus when saying SB we should also specify the saddle color and the general bird color: Ex: SB yellow/green for a bird with a yellow saddle in a green bird. The informed breeder will be able to deduce that this bird is in fact a subtype of Dom Pied lacking melanin in the saddle area in a Green series bird.

So then "saddleback" isn't the right term why should we add "SB" to a new mutation label?

So simply call them ADP (advanced dom. pied) or dom. pied turq resp. dom. pied turqBlue until we have found out what they. For over 20 year or more nobody knows the term indigo and refered to low level "turq" birds simply as turquoise. After some research we found out that these low level turqs couldn't be the same as high level turqs and assigned another name. So why should we changed this for the "saddleback"?
Call them dom. pied turqs until we found the true make up in the future.

madas

[Molossus2]

Madas you are right . I maintain that we should just keep the old name until we know exactly what mutation we are dealing with here..until then,, to call it anything else would be misleading ..
This reminds me of the incorrect naming of the south african deep. It was wrongly assumed to be the same mutation as the Oz Deep .. the bird was named Deep and was being sold as Deep,,,then after I pointed out the error ,, it was changed to SA Deep..some breeders still advertise this bird as Deep.. what a ball of confusion..
One must realise that this will go down in our records and time will remember us for our actions...

[madas]

So here is some new input to the saddleback discussion. Attached some pics of an emerald dom pied.

undewing which is showing the typical emerald markers:


short after leaving the nest:


with a age of 5:


So is saddleback still a new "parblue"??? Or nothing more then a advanced pied???

[Molossus2]

Madas the only problem with this one is the typical trend of moult will eventually see the bird being enveloped in the cream emerald blend..so in this case the saddle temporary.
or the brightness of the saddleback which is a typical pied with intense brightness of color( now being called a d p ) that does not even develop a saddle(hence the need for a name change) ,, . only noticed in pied this far by people who initiated this name change. I maintain this is not restricted to pied only. If I am correct then the pied is only a combo and its true genetic makeup is actually overlooked due to the new name.

These should not be called saddleback..Even the selective saddle on the green bird of Babu .. is actually a dominant pied that does not breed true cos its just a variant...I have never seen any line bred offspring proving its genetic prepotency.

One day when a saddleback that produces type for type emerges we can at least keep our heads high.

[Recio]

Hi Madas,

That bird is, as you say, an Emerald Dom Pied. The apparent yellow saddle is due to the lack of melanin in the saddle area (Dom Pied effect) and not to an increase of psittacins in the saddle. The parblue component in this bird is Emerald, and it induces an homogeneous increase in psittacins. If you take out the Dom Pied effect, you will not find any "yellow" saddle.

Chris SB, as I specified above, seems to be a combo of Dom Pied lacking melanin in the saddle area + specific Parblue with an increase in psittacin pigment specially in the saddle area. Look at those pics:



Here you can see that the parblue component is restricted to the saddle, similarly to Deons' DF Violet Dom Pied SB (2nd pic). If you take out the Dom Pied effect you will always find a yellow saddle. This psittacin pattern is not the same of a Turquoise, an Indigo or an Emerald. Do we agree? So .... which is the parblue at work? To me the specificity of Chris SB is mainly the parblue type at work.

You wrote ..... "Bob Irvine has breed two violet(sf) "parblue"Blue offspring birds from Garrys famous first "saddleback" hen of OZ paired to plain blue."

Could you show us the pics of these parblues bred from SB? We know that Emeralds breed Emeralds, Indigo breed Indigos and Turquoise breed Turquoise when paired to Blue. What do SB's parblue breed when paired to Blue? What I am meaning is: could Bob Irvine reproduce the parblue saddle pattern in the offspring?

If the answer is YES, then this means that this Parblue breeds true and that it is different of the other Parblues so far described/accepted. At this point getting the homozygous bird becomes the next step. It would also mean that very probably this "Saddle" parblue si another allele of Blue.

If the answer is NOT .... which is the expressed ParblueBlue? IndigoBlue? TurquoiseBlue? ... and where does this allele come from? I have my little idea ...

About naming: I agree with you and Lee: let's see which is the true nature of the allèles at work before giving new names. We have time ...

Best regards

Recio

[Mikesringnecks]

I don't know if any of this will help. I understand and accept that we can get "saddles" in different ways. I remain confused about Babu's saddles being retained into adult life and Chris's being subsumed by an apparently progressive spread of psitticin.
The last 3 photos attached depict a 2013 TurquoiseBlue Cleartail cock with a clear "saddle" as a juvenile and with a psitticin covered back after the first adult moult. I don't know whether the "saddle" results from reduced melanin or increased psitticin but the UV shot leads me to favor increased psitticin.
The first photo depicts a 2014 Violet TurquoiseBlue Cleartail with a "saddle". In this case the saddle was not evident until the juvenile moult.
Both birds have a common Turquoise gene inherited by their fathers from an old "Pastel Grey" Cleartail cock bird. Whilst I live within traveling distance of Chris Whipps and I have observed his Saddlebacks, I have neither Dominant Pied nor "Saddleback" genes in my collection. The "saddles" in the attached photos are apparently a Turquoise gene phenomenon and, whilst most offspring show psitticin in "socks" and wing patches, the odd bird exhibits a saddle up to the first adult moult. The saddle then appears to be subsumed by a spread of psitticin during that first adult moult.
Kind regards
Mike

[Molossus2]

Recio,
I have seen turq parblue develop from almost blue to a saddleback turqblue to a completely turq blue...add this to dom pied then you have an almost blue bird develop a yellow sadddle and then a turq dom pied at maturity..
I believe this is true in some cases of emerald too..ie an almost normal blue develops an emerald saddle and moults completely into an emerald parblue..much like the turq..since this has not been well documented among breeders historically we are not in a position to confirm this.. now that the emerald mutation is more common elsewhere breeders will come foward with evidence to this effect...
Thus it is my position that its not the Dom Pied that causes the saddle yellowing but its the moult cycle of the parblue (in the case of the bird posted by Stefan ,, the emerald opaline dom pied) ..
I do believe that in the absence of emerald(parblue) in this bird a blue&white saddle would have manifested as part of the normal moult cycle and this would ultimately disappear with ensuing moults..This does not mean that a normal dom pied cannot be selective bred with a saddle..It will not produce true to type ...
My opinion only.

[madas]

You wrote ..... "Bob Irvine has breed two violet(sf) "parblue"Blue offspring birds from Garrys famous first "saddleback" hen of OZ paired to plain blue."

Could you show us the pics of these parblues bred from SB? We know that Emeralds breed Emeralds, Indigo breed Indigos and Turquoise breed Turquoise when paired to Blue. What do SB's parblue breed when paired to Blue? What I am meaning is: could Bob Irvine reproduce the parblue saddle pattern in the offspring?

Here is the "parblue" violet offspring of end 2013. So not fully matured. Phenotype fits for a juvenile "saddletype" Turquoise. Then fully matured with 3 years of age the "truq" spreads over to the flights. So nothing special to me.

[madas]

Chris SB, as I specified above, seems to be a combo of Dom Pied lacking melanin in the saddle area + specific Parblue with an increase in psittacin pigment specially in the saddle area. Look at those pics:



Here you can see that the parblue component is restricted to the saddle, similarly to Deons' DF Violet Dom Pied SB (2nd pic). If you take out the Dom Pied effect you will always find a yellow saddle. This psittacin pattern is not the same of a Turquoise, an Indigo or an Emerald. Do we agree?

No we don't agree.

A bird labeled by Chris as "sf saddleback violet". So i can't see a restricted parblue saddle.



And now please stop calling these birds "saddleback" because they have nothing to do with the common saddleback mutation. Tienie proved that it is possible to breed the so called "SB" by using an ADP and turquoise. Maybe in his birds opaline is playing a role too. But this point has to resp. will be sorted out in next 2 years. Here is a pic of Tienies "SB". Sorry can't see a difference. The nice brightness could be caused by a rec. modifier gen which isn't unusual for pied mutations. Rec. pieds are brighter and darker too.





Cheers.

[Recio]

Hi,

I think that we are all saying the same things: we should not call SB a bird which is showing a transient parblue saddle which disappears at adulthood when psittacins spread away, producing the highest amounts on the wing patch and the head. This bird is probably a normal Turquoise.

Babu says that his SB ("SB" for Madas ) do not loose the saddle at adulthood, and Chris' SB still retain a higher amount of psittacin in the saddle respective to the wing patches and head (you can see in the above pics). This is not typical of Turquoise, Indigo or Emerald. The higher psittacin level of "SB" does not correlate with a marked red ring (not red ring at all or extremely ligth) as it does in Turquoise birds. This points to a lack of increase of psittacins at sexual maturity.

Bob irvine's results show that "SB" parents, with psittacins restricted or mainly expressed in the saddle area, can produce normal Turquoise offspring (following Madas's info); how to explain this:

1. It could be due to the variability of expression of Parblues:
For: it is an already accepted idea, good to explain complex interactions without going deeper.
Against: Turquoise birds produce Turquoise birds and not Indigo or others. So, a Turquoise bird with the highest amount of psittacins in wing patches and head, should not produce a bird with the highest amount in the saddle, but another phenotypic Turquoise. And, similarly a bird with the highest amount of psittacins in the saddle should not produce a phenotypic Turquoise bird. Of course, I am talking about adult phenotypes.

2. It could be due to a lack of action of sexual hormones on the psittacin increase we can see at sexual maturity, so that the adult birds retain the juvenile transient saddle of Turquoise. This lack of action of sexual hormones could be due to a decrease in steroids receptors quantity or functionality, or to a decrease in the production of sexual steroids.
For: Chris reports on the difficulty in getting "SB", with the odds of parblue offspring not matching the expected odds. A decrease in sexual dependent functions could lead to a lower fertility and/or lower production of the defective offspring, explaining the very low production of parblue phenotypes from "SB" (just Irvine's birds ???).
Against: this action would depend on a different gene, which could/should be expressed independently of the Parblue gene, and thus it should also act on normal greens. Could the brigthness of Violet Green offspring from SB (Chris results) be due to this?

3. Let's imagine that the "saddle" parblue is, in fact, a saddle Parblue 2. In this situation the bird showing the saddle would be a Parblue2Blue2. If this bird is also split Turquoise (Wild1Turquoise1, Parblue2Blue2) when paired to a normal Blue (Blue1Blue1, Wild2Wild2) the only possible phenotypic parblue offspring will be Turquoise (Turquoise1Blue1, Wild2Parblue2) or (Turquoise1Blue1, Wild2Blue2), but it does not mean that the Parblue2 does not exist. It would be just hidden, as split.

Of course the above possibilities are not exclusive: a little of variability in expression always exists, and the Parblue2 could act through a change in the capacity of sexual hormones to regulate the deposition of psittacins at sexual maturity.

Regards

Recio

[Mikesringnecks]

Hi Recio
I have never studied the second blue locus concept found in budgies. I particularly have no idea how par blue mutations from the two loci act in combination with each other on the phenotype. Could you either explain and/or point me to some good references.
Kind regards
Mike

[Recio]

Hi Mike,

A blue gene is a gene which takes part in the metabolic synthesis of psittacins, its transport to the feather follicle or its final deposition in the feather. When defectif, it does not allow the final presence of psittacins and the bird appears blue. If only partially defectif it produces parblues.

As you can see there are many steps involved from the synthesis (which can depend on many different metabolic pathways) to the final expression, and each step can be defectif, similarly to the melanin pathway. We call Blue1, Blue2, ... the different possible genes which, if defectif, allow the final production of a Blue bird.

If those genes are involved in very different tasks (ex. one of them coding for an enzyme acting on psittacins synthesis and another one acting on its transport) we can expect them to be located far away one from the other or even in different chromossomes, allowing an easier detection. Ex: Blue1Blue1, Wild2Wild2 (phenotypic Blue) x Wild1Wild1, Blue2Blue2 (phenotypic Blue) will produce Green birds double Split for each mutation (Wild1Blue1, Wild2Blue2).

If those genes are involved in the production of sligthly different psittacins (ex with different uv fluorescence), very probably one of them has evolved from the other, after duplication (tween genes) and independent genetic evolution, and both of them are probably located in the same región of the same chromossome (thus very highly linked). Since both genes have evolved from the same ancestor they can share some genetic regulation (ex both regulated by another gene which we call master gene) and could show complex interactions so that a Blue1Wild1, Blue2Wild2 could not show a Green phenotype due to complementation (we have already discussed this concept). Those closely linked genes could be very difficult to identify, but the way they are regulated, its time and sex dependent expression and their complex interaction producing phenotypes which are not just the addition of each phenotype, or intermediary phenotypes, could allow us to detect them.

To think that there is only one Blue gene is simplistic and illusory. Blue genes highly linked will be very difficult to identify but it is sure that there are others which are located on different chromossomes and are easier to detect, whenever we keep an open mind ... and look for them at any occasion that some "strange" findings appear, like the lower than expected odds of parblue offspring from SB.

Regards

Recio

[Mikesringnecks]

Hi Recio
Thanks a lot. I must admit it is difficult to understand/accept that there are numerous mutated genes and different loci impacting on eumelanin synthesis/transport and only one locus where mutations impact on psitticin.
Kind regards
Mike

[Mikesringnecks]

Hi Madas
You posted a trio of photos of an Emerald Dom Pied with a saddle at 5 early in this thread. I was very doubtful re the authenticity of the saddle when the same photos appeared on another forum, however I am assured it is genuine. That being so, photos of the siblings and the parents cold be informative, is that something you can supply?
Kind regards
Mike

[Johan S]

I have never studied the second blue locus concept found in budgies.

Hi Mike, there isn't a second blue locus in budgies. Both the two different blue genes are at the same locus, i.e. they are alleles.

[Recio]

Hi Mike;

Some good lecture:

http://www.bestofbreeds.net/al-nasser/article12.htm

http://homepage.ntlworld.com/k_jones/clwyd/gray.htm

Budgies's parblues (Yellowface I, Yelloface II and Goldenface) act all of them through an inhibitory mechanism, so that the homozygous bird show less psittacin than the heterozygous bird (ParblueBlue). The most remarkable is the Yellowface I allele which, in the homozygous form, produces a Blue bird .
There is a recent theory saying that in fact the Yellowface I is not another allele of the Blue locus but an heteroallele Blue1Blue2, and so the Blue bird produced in a theorical homozygous Yellowface I, would be, in fact, an homozygous Blue2. In this situation Blue1 and Blue2 would be heteroalleles of the same gene (the same gene mutated at two different points).

I want to outline that Budgies' parblues act through an inhibitory mechanism so that the homozygous forms show less psittacin than the heterozygous ParblueBlue, similar to Emerald and some morphotypic "Saphire like" birds under study in IRN. The other patched parblues in IRN (Turquoise, Indigo, Saphire?) act through an activatory mechanism, producing homozygous forms with a higher amount of psittacins than the heterozygous ParblueBlue, pointing to a different type of Blue locus than in budgies.

Does anybody know a single species showing two different allèles of the same Blue gene (locus), one of them acting through an activatory mechanism (Homozygous Parblue greener) and the other through an inhibitory mechanism (homozygous Parblue bluer)? I can hardly imagine such possibility ...

Regards

Recio

[Mikesringnecks]

Hi Recio
Thanks very much again. I have copied the references and I will digest the contents over the next few days.
Are you certain that Emerald acts through an inhibitory mechanism and that the DF bird exhibits less psitticin than the SF or is it an hypothesis at this stage? I ask because I intend pairing 2 year old Emerald Cleartails this season in the hope of identifying it for myself. I know it is 4 to 1 but they should double clutch so I might get lucky.
I am also going to try Emerald to Green Cleartails but unfortunately my Green cock is split Blue so my chances of getting any visible Emerald Green split Blue offspring to compare to Green split Blue offspring will be small. In this arena I do hope that your hypothesis ultimately proves to be correct, however I am still working on the assumption that Emerald is a par blue until proven otherwise by someone reliable.
Kind regards
Mike

[BuksV]

halo Mike
Please can you help me. What is the difference and or how do I as a novice breeder tell between a parblue and turq. is there different types of turq.
Thank you

[Mikesringnecks]

Hi BuksV
There is no real difference.
The term par blue refers to a range of genes that exhibit incomplete blue characteristics. Said another way, a pair of blue genes at the blue locus removes all yellow pigmentation, whilst a blue / par blue combination at the same locus produces some yellow pigment but much less than that seen in a green bird.
Turquoise is one of a series of par blue genes. Turquoise, Indigo and Sapphire that admit progressively less yellow pigmentation. Starting at about 50% for a turquoise and say 10% for a sapphire. It is deposited in patches, at least in young birds.
Emerald admits an even amount of yellow over the entire plumage and it is therefore not patchy, even in young birds. It is a different looking yellow.
It does get more complicated, particularly with visual indicators, combinations and possibly other genes and even other loci but I will stop here before I get lost.
Kind regards
Mike

[BuksV]

Halo Mike
thank you.
I have a few turq. birds in different mutation.
ranging from opalines to cleartails and pieds.
and a varity off different shades blue.
Regards
Buks

[Recio]

Hi Mike,

We have some data pointing to an inhibitory action of Emerald on psittacin synthesis:

1. The red ring of a Turquoise Emerald (or TurquoiseEmerald, selon hypothesis) shows a lower amount of red psittacin than a TurquoiseBlue bird. If the actions of Emerald and Turquoise were additive (ex: like Indigo and Turquoise) we should find a deeper red ring in an Emerald TurquoiseBlue (or EmeraldTurquoise, selon hypothesis) than in a TurquoiseBlue.

2. Deon received two Emerald females from Chris. One of them was a bit greener than the other and showed a higher fluorescence under uv. This female was thougth to be probably homozygous Emerald and the other one Emerald Blue (or EmeraldBlue) according to the prevalent hypothesis of additive effect of parblues. Anyway in the first year, the suppossed heterozygous female has produced 100% Emerald offspring, and the greener one (suppossed homozygous Emerald) has not produced any offspring yet.
All this means that, rigth now, we have more data pointing to the homozygous female being the bluer and the heterozygous female being the greener than the oppossite, and thus, we can suspect an inhibitory action of Emerald on psittacin synthesis (like in Budgies), according to the effect found on the red ring of the Emerald Turquoise combo. This coming season we will have more data from Deon's birds and I hope we will be able to conclude for sure which one of these females is the homozygous Emerald.

3. Emerald males do not show a red ring, either in heterozygous or homozygous birds, but a creamy like colour. If the action of Emerald was activatory, we should expect a pink-ligth red ring in the homozygous bird, but this is not the case.

The action of Emerald on psittacin synthesis seems to be inhibitory and it also seems to be almost completelly saturated in the heterozygous bird, so that the homozygous bird is very similar to the heterozygous one. Due to this, the inhibitory action of Emerald is easierly detected in combo with patched parblues.

About the phenotype of an homozygous Emerald: as explained above, it is very close to the heterozygous Emerald, so that only the trained eye can make the difference and only when looking at both birds side by side.

Regards

Recio

[Mikesringnecks]

Hi Recio
So, it is yet to be proved which makes it all that much more interesting from my point of view. Because mine are all cleartails, I am actually looking at the yellow pigment and thus far it is somewhat confusing.
Firstly, the emerald coloration in a cleartail seems to change with successive moults. My oldest are only rising 2 year olds but their yellow looks different to that of the 2014 juveniles. I will take some side by side photos to see if it is really different or just my imagination.
Secondly, I have a rising 3 year old TurquoiseEmerald (or TurquoiseBlue Emerald) Cleartail and some rising 2 year old Violet and Dark EmeraldBlue Cleartails. If I had to guess, I would have said that the TurquoiseEmerald Cleartail yellow is stronger than the BlueEmerald yellow but again I'm not at all sure. I will do some side by side photography with them too, but they are a year apart in age and the two year olds have either Dark or Violet in them whilst the 3 year old TurquoiseEmerald does not. Net result any difference may be due to other variables
I'll let you know what the photos indicate in coming days if you think it will help.
Kind regards
mike

[Recio]

I have a rising 3 year old TurquoiseEmerald (or TurquoiseBlue Emerald) Cleartail and .... If I had to guess, I would have said that the TurquoiseEmerald Cleartail yellow is stronger than the BlueEmerald yellow but again I'm not at all sure

Hi Mike;

A TurquoiseEmerald (or TurquoiseBlue Emerald) is suppossed to show more psittacin than a BlueEmerald (or Blue Emerald) in any hypothesis. If you want to look for the inhibitory action of Emerald you should compare a TurquoiseEmerald (or TurquoiseBlue Emerald) to a TurquoiseBlue, but not to an Emerald Blue. You should also take care to deal with the same Turquoise allele, the same sex and age birds, if you want to accuratelly compare both birds.

Regards

Recio

[Recio]

Hi,

To me the most impressive finding in Bob Irvine's female is that the melanin and psittacin deposition seems to be mostly independent, specially in the body (head colour is not easy to determine), that is I can not see a single feather showing a green colour, but just yellow or blue or white colours. We know that, in general, there is an inverse coupling between melanin and psittacin deposition, so that when melanin increases, psittacin decreases (ex: primary flying feathers, you just need to compare a Blue Grey and a SL-Ino); and the opposite, when melanin decreases, psittacin increases (ex: dom pied birds showing a deeper yellow in patched areas, as a prove you just need to look at the saddle of the Dom Pied Emerald posted by Madas).

Besides there is also an asymetrical deposition of melanin reminding a halfsider phenotype.




@ Madas: could you ask Bob Irvine for a recent pic of the 2013 offspring. It would be great to see how the saddle has evolved in the offspring (spreading to the wings like in Turquoise or restricted to the saddle like the mother?), and I am also curious to see if the ligther bird (the third one in your pic) is also able to show an uncoupled melanin and psittacin deposition.

If there was a mutation allowing to uncouple melanin and psittacin deposition we would be able to produce really stuning birds. Such uncoupling could just be the maximal expression of a physiological mechanism inverselly regulating melanin and psittacin synthesis/transport/deposition, as explained above.

Regards

Recio

[Mikesringnecks]

Hi Recio
Fair comment, I have a TurquoiseEmerald hen but not a cock so only her belly is relevant. I have plenty of TurquoiseBlue Cleartail birds but their bellies are patchy so no relevant comparison is possible there. All I can say from casual observation is that the intensity of yellow on my cleartails seems to increase as follows: from juvenile EmeraldBlue, through 1 year old EmeraldBlue, mature EmeraldTurquoise, juvenile TurquoiseBlue, mature TurquoiseBlue to Green.
I will still pair EmeraldBlues this season to see if I can identify a DF bird.
Kind regards
Mike

[Recio]

All I can say from casual observation is that the intensity of yellow on my cleartails seems to increase as follows: from juvenile EmeraldBlue, through 1 year old EmeraldBlue, mature EmeraldTurquoise, juvenile TurquoiseBlue, mature TurquoiseBlue to Green.

Hi Mike,

Your casual observations in cleartails fit the inhibitory effect of Emerald on psittacin production, since the amount of psittacin is : ... mature EmeraldTurquoise < juvenile TurquoiseBlue< mature TurquoiseBlue ...

Regards

Recio

[madas]

1. The red ring of a Turquoise Emerald (or TurquoiseEmerald, selon hypothesis) shows a lower amount of red psittacin than a TurquoiseBlue bird.

This statement isn't correct. The emeraldTurquoise of Len Mitchel are showing a normal pink neckring.

copyright Len Mitchell

[madas]

To me the most impressive finding in Bob Irvine's female is that the melanin and psittacin deposition seems to be mostly independent, specially in the body (head colour is not easy to determine), that is I can not see a single feather showing a green colour, but just yellow or blue or white colours.

Another pic of the first OZ "SB" showing green feathers in the flights:

[Recio]

1. The red ring of a Turquoise Emerald (or TurquoiseEmerald, selon hypothesis) shows a lower amount of red psittacin than a TurquoiseBlue bird.

This statement isn't correct. The emeraldTurquoise of Len Mitchel are showing a normal pink neckring.

Hi Madas,

I did not say that the Turquoise Emerald did not show a red ring but that this red ring is less marked than in a TurquoiseBlue. It should be the opposite if there was an additive effect. Do you have a side by side pic of such birds to compare? ... and of a better quality if possible.

Regards

Recio

[Recio]

To me the most impressive finding in Bob Irvine's female is that the melanin and psittacin deposition seems to be mostly independent, specially in the body (head colour is not easy to determine), that is I can not see a single feather showing a green colour, but just yellow or blue or white colours.

Another pic of the first OZ "SB" showing green feathers in the flights:

Do you know the age of the bird in each pic?

Thanks

Recio

[Mikesringnecks]

Hi Recio
I did realize that my casual observations supported your hypothesis which is why I passed it on. However, I am inclined to the view that a DF Emerald in a mutation that reveals the psitticin without much eumelanin interference is going to provide a much better indicator. Therefore, I will proceed with the Dark EmeraldBlue Cleartail to Violet EmeraldBlue Cleartail pairing in the 2015 season in the hope of getting an identifiable DF.
Kind regards
Mike

[madas]

Some updated pics of Bobs parblues from the org. "SB" female of OZ. Thx Bob for your contribution.

violet(sf) female:




violet(sf) male:




bird without violet or dark (sex unknown yet):



madas

[BuksV]

halo everybody
Can you please assist, is this a marker. And can you tell for what mutation.





will appreciate it a lot
Thank you
Buks

[BuksV]

Also this I the nest mate underwing.

[madas]

Looks like Turquoise marker.