white ameraucana

[Guest]

Does the white ameraucana carry dominant white. I know they are recessive white. Has anybody crossed a white ameraucana with a black ameraucana ( or another color variety) and produced white chicks due to dominant white. The chicks would have been white with some black specs in their down.


Tim

[Jean]

I just hatched some!!!!

I had a buff pullet in my layer facility that I pulled out because none of my buffs are laying.  (she is clean faced)  I figured I could cull the clean faced resulting chicks.

Anyway I had a white cock bird in that pen and I marked all of her first eggs in case of a mixed variety chick hatching and I got a couple white chicks with a white spot on their heads.  I think one has a couple specks on the back too.

This cock bird is a cross from Wayne Meredith lines and Jerry De Smidt\'s if that matters to you.

[Guest]

Jean,

I will check back with you in a couple months. Wheaten chicks can be white, similar to dominant white.

Thanks for the info.

Tim

[Jean]

They are not wheaten.  I seperate all my eggs by variety when they go into the hatcher.

[John]

with a white spot on their heads.

With a dark spot on their heads would sure look like wheaten.

[Mike Gilbert]

Jean, it might be possible that dominant white came over from the buff side of the mating.   Dominant white is sometimes carried in buffs, as it tends to lighten the color.  If I\'m not mistaken, John used buff polish at one point, which I believe have dominant white.   Are any of your buff birds descendents of his line?    By the way, most buffs are wheaten based (e-locus) so it is possible to produce wheatens out of certain crosses with buffs.   Coincidentally,  I crossed buff with blue wheaten bantams this year, and some of the F-1 look like almost pure buff.

[Jean]

This particular hen is from Paul\'s old lines.  I believe the bloodlines are from Jay Horn, which would carry buff orpington blood.

[Guest]

So I take it that white ameraucana could carry birchen (from polish) and wheaten from the buff cross. Is there any other breeds that were used to produce the whites?

I am trying to determine the genotypes of different breeds of birds. Knowing the breeds and varieties that were used to produce a breed are very helpful. Many times I use the ancestry of a breed and research to come up with a genotype. I have not found any research using ameraucana, so I have to go with other breeds with similar traits or I use the ancestry of the bird.
Most varieties are easy to determine but white and black are a mixed bag.

Mike

Blue is a good alternative to dominant white to use in a buff bird. The only problem with blue is that it makes the birds a brownish/orangish color. I have incorporated blue into my rhode island red to see how it effects the color. I have to do some more crosses to be definite but thats the way it appears at this time. I could have heterozygous wheaten/brown birds and that may be causing the brown color. More work to do.

Tim

[Jean]

I have some whites from another breeder that carry the barring gene.....

Tim, in generalities, do recessive birds usually express darker eyes and legs or lighter???  Or is it the dominant white that usually expresses lighter eyes and legs?

[Guest]

Jean,

I am in the process of reading and gathering infromation on eye color. I will be making a trip to the univeristy to get some more research on eye color. As of now, the E locus (extended black, wheaten etc.) and the sex linked dermal melanin or dermal melanin inhibitor have the greatest effect on eye color. Basically the more melanin ( black pigment) a bird has the darker the eyes.

I need to read more studies to get a better handle on all the possible phenotypes and eye color. It is more difficult than most genetics.

Both recessive white and dominant white will inhibit the addition of pigment to the legs. Barring is a potent inhibitor of pigment in the shanks and tends to inhibit color through out the bird. I have some barred rhode island red females that are buff in color due to the barring gene.  Inhibitors have an additive effect so birds with dominant white and barring should have clean legs without any black pigment. Mottling is another gene that will inhibit black pigment in the shanks.

The white ameraucan with barring I think would be a problem. Males with two barring genes would have white shanks and feet. If the white was built on extended black, then it may work if the male bird has one barring gene.The legs would be very light in color and not every bird would have the light leg color.


Tim

[Mike Gilbert]

With regard to eye color, I have bay eye and dark brown eye in my large fowl brown reds.   These birds have mostly black feathers, but the reddish bay eye come through OK if the genetics are right.   The dark eye is caused by a sex-linked recessive gene.   Thus females are \"pure\" for either bay OR brown eye, while males with reddish bay eyes can be carriers of the dark brown eye.   I have test mated my best 2008 cock bird, and he carries both bay and brown eye, as evidenced by the fact that some of his daughters have bay eye and some have dark brown eye.   All the females used this year had bay eyes, so all the 2009 cockerels have bay eyes.   Each one saved will need to be test mated next season because of their sires genetics.  Recessive versus dominant white is not a factor in these, they have neither.

[Jean]

I have been getting very light legs in my offspring of this new flock.  I had three females with no color in part of the left leg.  I will probably end up getting rid of most of these birds and starting over as 90% or more of the chicks are hatching dark with white spots on their heads.

My next step was to put a black cock over the hens and do some test matings.  I don\'t know if it is worth the trouble to clean up this line.....

[Mike Gilbert]

Recessive whites will often hatch dark, including Plymouth Rocks and other breeds.  Your whites with very light legs could be carrying either the dominant Di (dilute) gene or the dominant sex-linked barring gene.   It should not be difficult getting rid of either one - simply select the breeders with darker legs.  Unwanted dominants are the easiest to eliminate.    I think crossing to a black is an excellent idea - for one thing you will be able to tell if your whites carry dominant white or not.   If not, all the F-1\'s will be colored.
If possible try to find a black male with a little white/silver leakage in the hackle, then you will be bringing silver instead of gold into the line - I think that helps prevent brassiness.

[John]

So I take it that white Ameraucana could carry birchen (from polish) and wheaten from the buff cross. Is there any other breeds that were used to produce the whites?

I don\'t think Polish were ever crossed with white Ameraucanas.  They may have Birchen from crosses with blacks.  Also, unless someone has white sports from buffs, I don\'t think buff was ever crossed with with whites to improve them.  When I developed LF whites, buffs and blacks decades ago, I used an over-sized white bantam cock (from Jerry Segler) over 5 pullets of each variety...white and buff Orpington and black Australorp (hatchery stock).  I may have also developed LF blues at the same time...but don\'t remember.  LF blacks were later crossed with whites to improve them.  LF whites, bantam buffs and LF buff laced Polish have all been crossed to the LF buffs to improve them.  The buffs were never used to improve the whites that I know of.  
I believe the LF black are mostly based on E, but with Birchen (E^R) still floating around.  LF whites are probably the same.  I\'ve been culling heavily over the past few years to get the LF buffs back to pure Wheaten pure (e^y/e^y).  Some birds show some white and they may be e^y and some chicks have had Brown (e^b) phenotype.  I\'ve culled these as day-old chicks, but have also thought they could be used to create a Brown (Partridge) based Ameraucana.  I think the blues would be better laced based on e^b rather than E or E^R.
 

[Guest]

Jean,

I agree with Mike. I am sure you know the following but I am going to write this for spectators.

Out crossing to a black or a silver would be a good way to determine if barring or dominant white is the problem. I would cross a black male with the white females.  Check the bottom of the black male\'s feet and make sure the centers on the  bottoms of the feet are blue/slate. If the centers of the feet are white/pink, do not use the male. The slate or blue color would be evidence that the male carries the sex linked gene dermal melanin that causes ameraucana to have slate/blue legs. If you use a male, the offspring  will inherit the sex linked gene from the father that causes the shanks to be blue/slate.

If you use a silver male then you will know the male carries silver and it will be easy to determine the proper shank color.

The F1 chicks from the cross will be black so if any of the chicks carry the barring gene or dominant white it will show. Even if you use a silver male it will be the same outcome. Then cross the F1 silver non barred birds and one in four of the F2 chicks should be recessive white with the proper colored shanks. If you only hatch one white F2 chick  then back cross to one of the F1 parents and 1/2 of the offspring will be recessive white.

John,

Thanks for the information.

Tim