Red Leakage on Blue Splash -- Correctable?

[Fyremelody]

Hey all! So...a search for "red leakage" yields results that are too vast for me to read in probably a month LOL.

Can you "correct" red leakage on a blue splash? I understand the faster solution is to cull it out. But can you correct it via selective crosses? My understanding is that breeding to a darker black can improve it in F1. I would assume then that F1 bred to the same non-leaky black, would eradicate the recessive even more in F2? Am I completely off?

Really don't want to cull the roo... particularly since I wasn't necessarily looking to go SQ with the splash variety, but more of backyard flock variety.

 

[Winterwolfbane]

Oh, you're welcome.

I forgot to mention. That when making blue/splash. Silver genes really do a good job of cleaning up blue. Making it a lighter shade, like Lavender. (Blue and lavender genes are different and interact differently with other genes, both are based on black though. And on the bird look a lot alike, but there are differences.) You're less likely to get dark blue birds, you can't tell from black. If it's based on silver, rather then gold or brown..... Not all black/blues that carry "gold" or are gold underneath, show red in their feathering. I found this out with cochin bantams. I'm sure it's probably true with other breeds?

Before you ask, and just for reference incase you need it? LOL!

Blue is what is called a "leaky" gene. Why blue or splash often have darker spots on their feathers. Blue birds can have darker lacing on their feathering and darker neck and sometimes tail color. And as you know will work with (or not) gold, red and buff. So can make say Buff Blue Sussex, or Blue Red Duckwing. Because it has no effect on red genes. It's a dominate, modifier of black. Blue bred to blue will give you blue (50%), black (25%) and splash (25%). It doesn't breed true to just blue.
Lavender on the other hand, is recessive and a restrictor of black, making the bird the same shade of pale blue over the entire bird. BUT it turns red, gold and buff into a cream/yellow color (about the same in looks as auto red shows up on some silver birds, only difference is auto red sometimes looks "pinkish" or a pale buff color). Lavender is also called "Self Blue". Lavender bred to Lavender will always produce Lavender.

I know, I'm a bit long winded. LOL! Just covering the bases. I know how hard it is to start learning genetics. I was there once and really wished someone would of come along and at least tried to explain things to me. Or point me in some direction. So really understand your position. I was where you are at, once too. If you have any other questions or problems. Feel free to ask.

I'll do my best to help.

 

[Winterwolfbane]

Sounds like Autosomal red modifiers? They're semi-recessive and not well understood. Can't tell from a solid black bird if it is silver or gold based or carries these without test mating it to something to find out. It's complicated figuring this all out and a common problem.

These auto red genes are not effected by the silver sex-linked genes either. Or effected by the blue genes at all. And show up as a red/gold looking leakage in birds like blue or splash. That is known to be genetically silver. Or silver based hens that have come from red birds. As seen in Light Sussex hens bred from Buff Sussex.
I have found that finding purely silver based birds to breed to. Doesn't cure the problem completely and selection against it is the only good solution. Went through this with Sussex and Columbian Marans. Most breeders don't even know what their birds are based on to tell you anyway.

Only other thing I can think of is the splash is a silver that carries gold. A sex-linked bird. Test mating will determine what he is. Bred to gold based hens if he is sex-linked silver and gold. You will get silver and gold daughters. If he's purely silver, all his daughters will be silver too, but if any show red leakage, It's auto red genes.
Sometimes the autosomal red shows as a yellowing in the hackles of an otherwise "white" bird too. It's a royal pain in the back side to deal with.

Hope I have been of some help?

Usually if you get at least two-three clean generations. Bred to each other. Where there is no sign of this red leakage. You should be able to sell them without worry of it coming back.

Otherwise, honesty is the best policy and disclosure will keep you out of trouble.

 

[Wappoke]

I know this is an old thread, thank you all for the wonderful info.....I'm just beginning with chicken genetics myself. I was trying to discover this guy's genetics:



He is a rumpless/tufted araucana, with a couple of tail feathers.....

He appears to be a black tailed white. It would carry the columbian gene or the dark brown gene and sex-linked silver. There is no white edging on the few tail feathers so I favor the columbian gene as being the restrictor. The E locus allele could be brown, wheaten or wild type. The red in the shoulders, etc. is from autosomal red. He has yellow skin so he carries two recessive yellow skin genes, He also carries sex-linked dermal melanin inhibitor. Looks like a pea comb so he is carrying two pea comb allelles at the p comb locus and recessive alleles at the rose and duplex comb loci. There are other genes he carries; I mentioned what I believe are the most important.

 

[Fred's Hens]

First, I am not a breeder of Araucana birds, to be sure. With that on the table...

However, there are traits that even I can see that show that the young cockerel is not a pure bred, standard bred Araucana. His legs are BRIGHT yellow, not willow. His beak is also bright yellow when it should be horn, a very dark burnt tone. He has tail feathers he shouldn't have and if you take a good close look under those feathers you will likely find a rudimentary tail when the standard calls for him to be "entirely absent with no uropygium and covered with saddle feathers" not the tail feathers seen. Any tail, however rudimentary, is also a DQ.

The comb is hard to see in the photo but anything other than a pea comb is a DQ as well. I won't get into his coloration.

So, if you just wish to make chickens, he'll do just as well and any other male, as far as that goes. But if you are interested in breeding true-bred Araucanas, for breed preservation, sale of true bred Araucana chicks/eggs or for exhibition purposes, you might want to consider locating better stock for your start?

Best wishes for your breeding future.

 

[Fred's Hens]

Welcome to the world of shady poultry sales. Sheeesh.

These struggles are not limited to the breed your have chosen. 80% of the sellers of birds on Ebay, Craigs, and everywhere else, are largely pawning off birds AS this or that, but are not. There's money to be had, so it's a a buyer beware situation.

Best advice? Buy only young birds. That's #1. Buy birds you can SEE. Then, you can make all the eggs you wish. Buying eggs is not the way to go, although folks still go for that "short cut" which seldom if ever works out well. Buy only from real BREEDERS. 90% of the those who sell eggs/chicks etc, are merely propagators, not breeders. Add to that picture what you stated. Rarer breeds and varieties make the huckster buying and selling even worse.

Buy only from someone with a known, public, proven reputation. How does one discern this? By checking with the breed club or clubs associated with the breed. They know the real folks, believe me. They know who has exhibited their birds and thus submitted them to peer judgement, critique and independent judging review. Showing isn't about the ribbons and plastic trophies except for those handful of people who might be called "point chasers". True breeders show for peer review and to show their handiwork to the world and take the criticism from their fellow breeders and kudos, whichever the case may be.

Anyhow. Good luck with your endeavors. A lot of folks start with the frustrating, stumbling beginning as you, but with knowledge learned go on to become important breeders and advance their breed to even greater heights.

 

[Wappoke]

Actually, he did come from a breeder that only raises Araucana. I think some of his traits (the tail feathers) are a throw back to the tailed side of the family. The breeder has both Collonca and Quechua birds, I believe.....

Yes, I realize the breeder didn't keep his colors separate, and I'm starting with rough stock, but they were all I could find.... I'm not showing anything, far from it, actually, everything I own would be DQ for one reason or another.

I have some better chicks coming in the spring, from breeders who keep approved color varieties, etc..... I spent so much money this fall, on hatching eggs that didn't hatch, I could kick myself for that....

I was hoping to use this guy to start some red pyles, but I think he's too messed up, really. I couldn't decide if he was more blue with red leakage, or something else, so I thought I'd post and see if somebody could help....

I have 5 chicks from another breeder, but again, the colors are not approved varieties. It seems to me that few Araucana breeders keep their colors separate. However, I think these other chicks will be easier to pair up in a breeding program! I'll keep this guy and maybe test breed him to see what he produces.

The rumpless trait is caused by a dominant gene. There are recessive genes that can modify the vertebrae in the pygostyle producing a bird like yours. If your bird is a hybrid between a tailed breed and an araucana, I would expect such results. He only carries one dominant gene for rumpless and a recessive modifier.

Do you have a black or a white female araucana? These are the varieties that you could produce using the male.

Willow legs are due to a chicken having yellow skin and a gene called sex-linked dermal melanin. Any female offspring he produces will not have willow legs. The males he produces will carry one sex-linked dermal melanine and they (his male offspring) can produce some females with willow legs.

The male you have would be fine for producing white females if you cross him with a bird with willow legs. The fact that his legs are yellow would indicate he is descended from a white variety. The female in your picture appears to be dominant white. It would be best to produce whites that carry recessive white. If you want to produce red pyle- you will cross a dominant white bird with a black breasted red bird producing white F1. Then backcross the F1 to a black breasted red. Which varieties are male or female ( birds used as original parents) depends on the standard shank color of the red pyle variety and the shank color of the parents.

The chabo is a black tailed white variety and the researchers that analyzed its genetic makeup concluded that it carries a gene similar to dominant white. It is possible that your bird is black tailed white because of this gene. He could carry the gene that acts like dominant white. The female in your post apperas to be dominant white.

If you test cross the male with a black female (any black will do) and he produces white offspring he is dominant white.

He could have picked up the autosomal red from a golden duckwing somewhere in his lineage.

What you do next depends on the genetic makeup of the birds you have.

One last thing, there is a recessive rumplessness that is found in commercial white leghorns. I do not believe this is the case with your bird. But anything is possible. Recessive rumplessness is also effected by modifiers. Many chicken breeds carry recessive modifiers that tend to cause the normal expression of the rump. A bird can carry genes that normally express the rumpless condition and also enough modifiers to cause the bird to have a complete tail or some intermediate expression of a tail.

If you post pictures of the birds you have to use for breeding, then I can give you more information. Print out this string or keep track of this string ( remember the address) so I can refer back to this string. It will help me if you post pictures.

Send me a pm if you post.

 

[donrae]

I'll be looking for the answer from experts, but will chime in with something else to keep in mind....

If you're just breeding for backyard birds and to sell some locally, lots of non-showing folks like the red leakage as it makes the bird more colorful. I was quite disappointed in my splash Ameraucana cockerel when he developed moderate leakage, but I've decided to keep him. I'll be using him to breed sex links, not pure bred birds, and think the red leakage will look nice on the blue hens. From what I've seen they'll sell pretty well also. Just depends on what you're looking for.

 

[rainbowrooster]

No you cant correct the red leakage if you continue to use this and similar birds. The red leakage is from using gold based black birds in a blue breeding program. If you don't want red leakage then you will need to find Silver based birds.

 

[Fyremelody]

Thank you both.

Rainbowrooster -- This may sound dumb. But do I just go about asking other breeders if their birds are silver-based until I find someone who can definitively answer me? I'm presuming there's no way to visually recognize it on an otherwise correct bird.

And is this leakage a recessive or dominant trait? I'm assuming recessive, which would not guarantee leakage every time. Now... on the other side of that coin, since I'm just learning about breeding ... and this is one of those ethics questions other people who've been in this longer would have answers to. Let's say I did cross him and he had non-leakage offspring. Is there anything unethical about offering those offspring with the disclosure that they have the potential to leak?

I ask, because I come from horses, and it was/is always my standard when dealing with "high end" foals and potential buyers to disclose everything I knew, related to improving the get and how to pair for better get. That was sort of standard if you were to be "reputable". Folks who just sold what they had, buyer beware, were not those whom I wanted to a) resemble or b) associate with. Are the worlds drastically different?