IndianRingNeck.com

just out of interest ...what is the rarest or most sought after mutation now?

ush2611 wrote:just out of interest ...what is the rarest or most sought after mutation now?

not a mutation at all but i think it is a plain wildtype green not split for anything (in the context of aviary birds).
I would bet you will find no such bird.

madas

madas wrote:

ush2611 wrote:just out of interest ...what is the rarest or most sought after mutation now?

not a mutation at all but i think it is a plain wildtype green not split for anything (in the context of aviary birds).
I would bet you will find no such bird.

madas

Madas, just out of interest, how many such wildtype green that don't split for anything do you think you will find in the wild?

My suspicion is that that number is much much lower than we would expect. I base that on the fact that we see the same mutations over various species even on different continents. So, to me, it makes sense that those mutations existed even in very early bird species from which the ones we know today evolved.

Johan S wrote: Madas, just out of interest, how many such wildtype green that don't split for anything do you think you will find in the wild?

For big, unrelated and stable populations you can expect a rate of 75% wildtype green birds which aren't split for anything.

madas

PS: Did you get my email with attached pics of this year offspring?

madas wrote:

Johan S wrote: Madas, just out of interest, how many such wildtype green that don't split for anything do you think you will find in the wild?

For big, unrelated and stable populations you can expect a rate of 75% wildtype green birds which aren't split for anything.

madas

Hi Madas,

Where does this 75% come from? IMO it is a too low number and probably the real % of wild birds not split for any mutation (I am meaning colour mutation) is higher than 95%.

Regards

Recio

Let's make some quick calculations;

If there was 75% of wild birds not carrying any colour mutation ... it would mean that 25% of wild birds are split for recessive mutations, that is 1 over 4 wild birds would be, in fact, a split bird.

So, if I import 4 wild birds, most probably one of them would be a split bird (may be none, may be more than one, but those are average numbers) . If I pair those birds I will get two couples, one of them made up a wild bird and an split bird. In this situation if I back breed every chick of the first generation to their parents (50% of the chicks from the split to wild pair are also split for the same mutation), I should be able to see a recessive mutation appearing in my aviaries in the second generation, and this just from 2 pairs of wild taken birds. This would be tooooo easyyyyy !!!! ... and we all could see new mutations appearing in our aviaries since we can not avoid a minimal degree of inbreeding.

This is the reason I think that the % of wild birds not carrying a recessive colour mutation must be higher than 75% ... but I know that you never say things without a reason ... so my question : Where does this 75% come from?

Regards

Recio

Recio wrote:Let's make some quick calculations;

If there was 75% of wild birds not carrying any colour mutation ... it would mean that 25% of wild birds are split for recessive mutations, that is 1 over 4 wild birds would be, in fact, a split bird.

So, if I import 4 wild birds, most probably one of them would be a split bird (may be none, may be more than one, but those are average numbers) . If I pair those birds I will get two couples, one of them made up a wild bird and an split bird. In this situation if I back breed every chick of the first generation to their parents (50% of the chicks from the split to wild pair are also split for the same mutation), I should be able to see a recessive mutation appearing in my aviaries in the second generation, and this just from 2 pairs of wild taken birds. This would be tooooo easyyyyy !!!! ... and we all could see new mutations appearing in our aviaries since we can not avoid a minimal degree of inbreeding.

This is the reason I think that the % of wild birds not carrying a recessive colour mutation must be higher than 75% ... but I know that you never say things without a reason ... so my question : Where does this 75% come from?

Regards

Recio

Don't forget the birds in the wildernees of Germany, Netherlands, Belgium, France, Greece, Bulgaria, Great Britain, Italy, Austria, Portugal, Spain and Switzerland. ;)

madas

Hi Madas,

Those are not wild but feral populations constituted from scaped birds which were previously selected because they were already mutants (or splits) ... so those numbers do not really apply for real wild populations (India, Pakistan, ...)

Recio

Recio wrote:Hi Madas,

Those are not wild but feral populations constituted from scaped birds which were previously selected because they were already mutants (or splits) ... so those numbers do not really apply for real wild populations (India, Pakistan, ...)

Recio

Hi Recio,

i was kidding you. Sorry to much caffeine.

Recio wrote: Where does this 75% come from?

Pure speculation. I hope that the rate is much higher. But i think it isn't higher then 95%.

madas