IndianRingNeck.com

Chriskoi wrote:This is the first clutch breed by GW from the Netherlands out of dom. pied green /opaline x turq cobalt violet:





Left opaline green and right some kind of "dom. pied". But what kind of mutation is the bird in the middle???
Don't tell me it's a dom. pied. My bet it is a opaline SL Edged green.

btw: all three birds were females.

greetings.

after seeing a few green birds in opaline pieds as well as dark green pieds i think the hens were"

Left to Right: Green Opaline - Green Opaline Pied - Dark Green Pied.

Ben, my first question for that would be, if pied dilutes the back and coverts of the bird, and opaline dilutes the back and coverts of the bird, how come the opaline pied shows more colour in the back and coverts than just the pied alone, i.e. does opaline darken a pied? This hasn't happened in dilute opaline combinations, neither in SL edged opaline combinations. I wonder why pied would be different? Thoughts?

opaline green, opaline SL Edged green???, "dom. pied" dark green???

bird in the middle isn't showing any sign of "piedness".

hi
for those interested here is what the bird that started this thread looks like now
[URL=http://s1281.photobucket.com/user/ ... .jpg[/img][/url]

madas wrote:opaline green, opaline SL Edged green???, "dom. pied" dark green???

bird in the middle isn't showing any sign of "piedness".

Tienie's sl edged opaline has plenty of black on flights as well as opaline pattern can be seen on the back
Also, IMO if the middle bird would have also been dark, it would have had a major change in phenoype.



Gratz,

Did you breed with your bird ?

hi Ben
he is only rising 2yo born 2012
will have a go this year hopefully he is up to it:lol:

Johan S wrote:The only thing that concerns me is that the parent birds are then reported incorrectly. A hidden cinnamon gene in the cock bird could still pass through, but adding SL edged to that as well will be very hard to find. It means the green dom. pied / opaline is actually a green dom. pied SL edged / opaline / cinnamon. Isn't that a bit of a stretch?

PS: @Madas, well done on some excellent paint.net skills! That cinnamon-opaline looks wonderful!

Here comes a pic of what i think is a real cinnamon opaline:



Your thoughts?

Hard to say with the flash being used, but that could be a real contender for cinnamon-opaline, yes. I've seen a picture of a violet cleartail cinnamon-opaline from England on Facebook, but can't seem to find it. Now that is an interesting bird.

Edit: Here it is, thanks Ben.

this 'oz misty' isn't Misty though is it? Weren't they trying to give it an appropriate name as it is different to the Misty's o/s and as well as in different species.

Ringo it would be nice to see more information on this one viz its origin and formation this far...

Hi Molossus,

I shall try n do that.
The best way to understand something is to go back in time as much as possible and follow the breadcrums.
now that's not an easy thing to do when most breeders did not even notice or ignored things that did not make sense.

If anyone has usefull past info please feel free to add/correct anything .

Part I

Starting from Jack Smith where the Harlequins came from in OZ.

Q: What is a Harlequin & WHY did they name it so? why not dominant pied?? (my guess is becuase they knew it is not a D. pied)

Saddlebacks & where they originated from !? - how i understand it from info i could find:
At Gunnadah sale (biggest in Oz) J S brought the Harlequins for sale.
John F. bought them from that sale, Garry B. bought some after the sale.
From what i have seen at JF original harlequins are the clearflight looking (at least the birds he and Garry bought that year)
in 07 i bought a turquoiseblue harlequin from Jack but i did not end up keeping it, however i was also told poss/Opaline.
(if there's smoke there's fire)
males were possibly split opaline (this i think Jack told everyone who asked )
and indeed some were breeding as split opaline although i don't think they are split but could be part of what makes a Harlequin with a very low x-over rate for opaline & the other mutation is barely visible in a blue or green irn (just like misty but behaving like SL D. ?).


TBC - Thoughts thus far?

Ring0Neck wrote: Starting from Jack Smith where the Harlequins came from in OZ.
Q: What is a Harlequin & WHY did they name it so? why not dominant pied?? (my guess is becuase they knew it is not a D. pied)
Saddlebacks & where they originated from !? - how i understand it from info i could find:
At Gunnadah sale (biggest in Oz) J S brought the Harlequins for sale.
John F. bought them from that sale, Garry B. bought some after the sale.
From what i have seen at JF original harlequins are the clearflight looking (at least the birds he and Garry bought that year)
in 07 i bought a turquoiseblue harlequin from Jack but i did not end up keeping it, however i was also told poss/Opaline.
(if there's smoke there's fire)
males were possibly split opaline (this i think Jack told everyone who asked )
and indeed some were breeding as split opaline although i don't think they are split but could be part of what makes a Harlequin with a very low x-over rate for opaline & the other mutation is barely visible in a blue or green irn (just like misty but behaving like SL D. ?).
TBC - Thoughts thus far?

My info is that JS was able to import one (or some) harlequins from the UK out of Babus aviaries with his contacts to a zoo of OZ. Harlequin is a name created by Babu.
Among these harlequins there was a male split for opaline. The origin of all opaline birds available in OZ.

madas

Great info.

Yes Madas, that's what is known.

The origin of all opaline birds available in OZ.

not all. i have personally seen opaline and split from OS at a breeder i visited a while back, which all come from the same source UK in the end.

Ring0Neck wrote: from OS

OS or US? If not US what is OS?

Over Seas / another country

molossus wrote: when both birds were placed together they were thought to be on and the same mutation and this can be easily understood as both share some features that would cause this mistake.

So this bird is sharing the same features as a dom. pied???



Funny Britishers. Those who can't cook doesn't seem to be able to breed birds either.

Funny Joke Chriskoi - maybe Optometrists are not covered by medicare in Brit

Here are 2 x 2013 males unrelated, i acquired them from the same breeder.
Both are by a wide definition TurquoiseBlue Violet Harlequins.
It is obvious that it is not so.

pic almost a month old (violet in the saddlback's tail is more evident now)
http://parakeet.me/irn/m/em/d/s/P2089819.JPG

says the guy sitting with one of the most exciting new mutations in the world

Ring0Neck wrote:From conversations with Bob :
The saddleback (SB for short)
SB hen X Blue male
offspring: 2 blue males (i asked and he confirmed normal blues)
and one SB hen

This breeding result cancels out the option of SL Edged being involved !

Bob's thoughts on SB: "Ben, my thoughts, a unique mutation at the moment, not turquoise, I am leaning towards a parblue..."

posted back in Aug 13
http://www.indianringneck.com/forum/vie ... ack#p99577



So, This breeding result rules out the option of Sex-Linked mutations being involved, if indeed a hen was bred from his hen SB .
No violets in that nest !

My primary focus is now on PR Mod. , remember PR's article?

Ring0Neck wrote: My primary focus is now on PR Mod. , remember PR's article?

No.

Ring0Neck wrote: Bob's thoughts on SB: "Ben, my thoughts, a unique mutation at the moment, not turquoise, I am leaning towards a parblue..."

If it is a parblue then we already should have seen a normal "SB" blue series bird without dom. pied.
As said before for me the dom. pieds are a "very dominant" mutation with an offspring ratio of 75%-80% compared to the normal siblings.
Perhaps we should solve this question before asking what a SB is. Same is true for SA. So for me the count of normal blue series birds from SB pairings is to low to make an conclusion.

Did anybody give a linkage between dom. pied, dark and blue a chance? Which then leads to a crossover of parblue and dom. pied?

A close linkage between dom. pied and the b-locus could explain the non-parblue, non-pied offspring as well. So SB then is nothing more then a par-blue mutation and the dom. pied linked on the same chromosome which could only be splitted of by re-crossover. So without this re-crossover you are only able to breed normal blues and SBs from a SB x Blue pairing in a 50%:50% ratio.

madas

Madas,

Very plausible thoughts.

Can you please elaborate on: "Did anybody give a linkage between dom. pied, dark and blue a chance? Which then leads to a crossover of parblue and dom. pied?" ?

I also thought of Dark but seeing that most SBs were bred in blue and violet no dark was mentioned i crossed it off.

Ring0Neck wrote:Madas,

Very plausible thoughts.

Can you please elaborate on: "Did anybody give a linkage between dom. pied, dark and blue a chance? Which then leads to a crossover of parblue and dom. pied?" ?

I also thought of Dark but seeing that most SBs were bred in blue and violet no dark was mentioned i crossed it off.

Hi,

dark and blue are already known to be linked on the dark/blue chromosome. So now add dom. pied and you have a chromosome with three mutations linked on it.
You need no dark for a crossover of dom. pied and blue. ;)
Think in the same way as for ino, opaline and cinnamon.

madas

Now you talking ;)
something like this is what i been trying to say for the last month

How can we test/prove this theory?

Also, the green pieds offspring from SBs are rich in yellow unlike a normal green pied.

My thoughts are that Gary believed to be true what birds he gave Chris, only a scenario out of norm could explain the weird offspring results.
It would not make sense Gary to sell s-thing that isn't so, it's like cutting the branch from underneath your legs.

As said before for me the dom. pieds are a "very dominant" mutation with an offspring ratio of 75%-80% compared to the normal siblings

my "white" pied bred no pieds out of 4 chicks & the other pair bred 1 /4 chicks , both pied parents were males
hens: green violet & Violet Homo. Turq. respectively which might have s-thing to do with low ratio of pieds

Not 100% sure yet but i suspect same sex offspring for SBs; male SB parent X Blue hen will breed only male SBs
that will probably change if paired to a pied hen

Watch the tail colors.
I did not take all 3 in 1 shot so i have to use 2 pics to show differences.


Green Violet & Deep Blue


Deep Blue & Saddleback Harlequin "Violet"

http://parakeet.me/irn/m/em/d/s/DBvSB.jpg

Molossus,

Nice bunch of birds my friend. I decided to increase my collection in pieds as well.

Back to saddleback; as Chris said many times, we need to forget the saddle, there's no saddle, name is wrong, my saddleback is not 1 yet and already fully covered in yellow.
also, look at it's belly, like a rainbow.

I'm thinking to pair him up with the hen on the left in the pic . (she is not pied)
what do you think?

http://parakeet.me/irn/m/em/d/s/bellyup.jpg

Ring0Neck wrote:
Check out the 2 consecutive pics i took 2 days ago of the hen or the sibling male (can't tell for sure as they look v similar)
You'd think i'm showing 2 diff. birds here. I just moved 2 steps.

http://parakeet.me/irn/m/em/d/s/P3090508.JPG
http://parakeet.me/irn/m/em/d/s/P3090509.JPG

I'm betting you got the brother there. Besides the point, I know. Can we get a pic of them in the sun? I really like the way the colour of the wing coverts change.

Johan S wrote:
I'm betting you got the brother there. Besides the point, I know. Can we get a pic of them in the sun? I really like the way the colour of the wing coverts change.

Johan,

Yep, that's the reason i mentioned it

Here's a pic from back in Jan 7th they look slightly diff. now.
will take some new pics soon

http://parakeet.me/irn/m/em/d/s/P1078692.JPG

Below in Feb
http://parakeet.me/irn/m/em/d/s/P2190227.JPG

Can you guys comment on these 2 blue opalines.

First 1 to me seems as if it is carrying this "mysterious" mutation (a nice looking bird indeed)
https://picasaweb.google.com/MCWaviarie ... 2031215794

The second is what i would call a normal Opaline.
https://picasaweb.google.com/MCWaviarie ... 4168742626

I have seen quiet a few opalines in recent months and most are not as flashy as the first.

What is your take?

Ring0Neck wrote: First 1 to me seems as if it is carrying this "mysterious" mutation (a nice looking bird indeed)
https://picasaweb.google.com/MCWaviarie ... 2031215794

Looks the same way like the "spangle" opalin of Gary Baldwin.

Johan S wrote:... Can we get a pic of them in the sun? I really like the way the colour of the wing coverts change.

Managed to get some today
http://parakeet.me/irn/m/em/d/s/P3130808.JPG
http://parakeet.me/irn/m/em/d/s/P3130838.JPG
http://parakeet.me/irn/m/em/d/s/P3130698.JPG

Hi Gratz
I don't know if this will add anything to the discussion, but I have bred a TurquoiseBlue Cleartail this season which currently has a saddle. It is 5 months old and the saddle has appeared recently and I am assuming it will spread with time. If there is any significance at all in this, I would assume that significance lies in the fact that there are no other genes involved in creating the phenotype; no edged, no pied just cleartail and turquoise.
To me this suggests that turquoise can produce a saddle, at least at some point in its development. I have not heard of any relationship being proposed between cleartail and turquoise that might result in a saddle phenotype.
My apologies in advance re the quality of the UV pics but I don't know how to photograph them under UV. They come from 2 different light sources and fluorescence is beautifully clear to the eye but I can't replicate it on camera.
Kind regards
Mike

Why does the saddleback on the left is showing a red eye and the other two don't?



thx.

I see turquoise not saddleback
Whose birds are they? Parentage? etc the person who has these birds shold know why red eyes on that bird.

Ring0Neck wrote:Maybe bred from saddleback but i see turquoise.
Whose birds are they? Parentage? etc the person who has these birds shold know why red eyes on that bird.

Then ask Philip Highland. ;)

Well.

LOL i edited again previous post.

Chris should ask him.
Its true i don't have a blue SB but clearly the red eyes indicates something else yet he calls both saddlebacks.

I'd like to see a better pic of that SB or when they were younger.


I can only assume that their phenotype change dramatically within the 1st year if that is in fact a blue SB.

Recent pic of my violet SB 2013 bred

http://parakeet.me/irn/m/em/d/s/DBvSB.jpg


Madas, do you think my SB has Emerald in it? parents were after all SB or Parblue Violet Harlequin X Emerald hen
Breeder i got it from does not think it is emerald as he had an hen in emerald there and it is different (i sent you pics of that bird a while ago).

I will find out for sure once he breeds.

The red eye might be from the flash/angle of the eye & in fact there could be no red eye. we can see flash was used. still.
Chris will probably answer this for us.
I'm not an expert in SBs.

If saddleback was paired to another pied it probably will make sense, the other pieds will interfere with saddleback's phenotype.
SB might be distorted paired to a diff. type pied, i think clearflight type pieds are best suited. Just thoughts i have and i could be wrong.

Ring0Neck wrote: Recent pic of my violet SB 2013 bred

http://parakeet.me/irn/m/em/d/s/DBvSB.jpg

Madas, do you think my SB has Emerald in it?

Hm. Don't think so. Can't see any Emerald indicator.
Have you checked the underwing section?

madas wrote:
Hm. Don't think so. Can't see any Emerald indicator.
Have you checked the underwing section?

Me neither.

6 week old pic in flight

Ring0Neck wrote:The red eye might be from the flash/angle of the eye & in fact there could be no red eye. we can see flash was used. still.

But the heads all three birds are forming the same angle to the camera. So i don't think it is the "red-eye" effect.

Btw: the bird on the left isn't showing a visible iris as well.

madas wrote:

Ring0Neck wrote:The red eye might be from the flash/angle of the eye & in fact there could be no red eye. we can see flash was used. still.

But the heads all three birds are forming the same angle to the camera. So i don't think it is the "red-eye" effect.

Point taken, the camera yes, but the bird's head on the left has a diff. angle looking at the camera hence light from flash could have a diff. effect from the other two.

Head looks lighter as well, if another pic will show darker head the same as the bird on the right it will pretty much confirm flash.
Not saying it does or does not have red eyes, that only he & chris can answer.

No Iris, i guess they are 2013 young and not fully formed or reacted to flash?
my Sb in the last photo does not show an iris either although it does have it.

Ring0Neck wrote:

madas wrote:

Ring0Neck wrote:The red eye might be from the flash/angle of the eye & in fact there could be no red eye. we can see flash was used. still.

But the heads all three birds are forming the same angle to the camera. So i don't think it is the "red-eye" effect.

Point taken, the camera yes, but the bird's head on the left has a diff. angle looking at the camera hence light from flash could have a diff. effect from the other two.

Head looks lighter as well, if another pic will show darker head the same as the bird on the right it will pretty much confirm flash.
Not saying it does or does not have red eyes, that only he & chris can answer.

No Iris, i guess they are 2013 young and not fully formed or reacted to flash?
my Sb in the last photo does not show an iris either although it does have it.

Bazinga

Ring0Neck wrote:

Tell Cooper that Bazinga is a Jellyfish, right here in OZ

Alright Kripke. ;)

Ring0Neck wrote:The red eye might be from the flash/angle of the eye & in fact there could be no red eye.

Don't believe I've ever seen a pic of a IRN having red eyes (due to flash) that weren't already of a mutation that are hatched with red eyes. Do you have an example?