Are Satins Really Silkies?

[Slothinc]

This chick that I am growing out right now came from a reputable show breeder (hatching eggs) and it’s only 7 weeks old but is super typey and beautiful. So I am hoping to keep it in my breeding program to improve type. I love that satin feathers are a dominant gene, so they are so easy to breed out if you prefer silkie only feathering.

 

[BigBlueHen53]

This chick that I am growing out right now came from a reputable show breeder (hatching eggs) and it’s only 7 weeks old but is super typey and beautiful. So I am hoping to keep it in my breeding program to improve type. I love that satin feathers are a dominant gene, so they are so easy to breed out if you prefer silkie only feathering.

Nice! Happy hatching!

 

[Somewhere_In_The_Clouds]

My opinion.
Satins can pass as silkies, but they really are "missing" one of the key features of silkies. The normal feathering is an absence of the silkie gene. I agree that first crosses should not be called satins, cause they're not.
Showgirls are completely different to me as they are not missing any trait of the silkie. The NN is an additional gene. And I also think first cross NN/silkies should never be called showgirls

When you start crossing into showgirl/satin/frizzle all together then I draw the line and won't call that a silkie

 

[BigBlueHen53]

My opinion.
Satins can pass as silkies, but they really are "missing" one of the key features of silkies. The normal feathering is an absence of the silkie gene. I agree that first crosses should not be called satins, cause they're not.
Showgirls are completely different to me as they are not missing any trait of the silkie. The NN is an additional gene. And I also think first cross NN/silkies should never be called showgirls

When you start crossing into showgirl/satin/frizzle all together then I draw the line and won't call that a silkie

There you go! Now if we could just get everybody to agree with you!

 

[BigBlueHen53]

Don't mind me, I know nothing of silkies, I don't even belong in this thread. I'll go away now.

 

[Slothinc]

My opinion.
Satins can pass as silkies, but they really are "missing" one of the key features of silkies. The normal feathering is an absence of the silkie gene. I agree that first crosses should not be called satins, cause they're not.
Showgirls are completely different to me as they are not missing any trait of the silkie. The NN is an additional gene. And I also think first cross NN/silkies should never be called showgirls

When you start crossing into showgirl/satin/frizzle all together then I draw the line and won't call that a silkie

I suppose it could be considered an absence of the silkie gene, but really a silkie has an absence of the satin gene. Silkied feathers are recessive so a silkie has two copies of the recessive silkie gene and no copies of the satin feather gene. In that way, satin feathers are kind of an added gene to a silkie too.

Most satins that are in silkie breeding programs only have one copy of the satin feather gene and one copy of the silkie gene. For this reason two satins bred together (if they both carry recessive silkie gene) can have silkied offspring. I get not wanting to call “frizzled satin showgirls” silkies though I do have one chick that meets all of those qualifications but it isn’t a pure silkie. I also have a really cute frizzled silkie showgirl pullet though and I definitely would call her a silkie, even though Im sure some people wouldn’t!

 

[GlicksChicks]

I do respect your opinion about satins, even though my opinion differs.

If a bird has satin feathers but every other quality is that of a pure silkie, then I consider them silkies. There are so many beautiful satins out there now that are the result of breeding the original cross back to silkies for many many generations. I have satin silkies that I feel are just as typey as silkies. I personally would rather have a satin silkie from a show breeder than a hatchery quality silkie that lacks in type.

But I do not love when people breed a Cochin to a silkie and call the first generation “satin silkies”. Those should just be called a satin/cochin cross.

Just curious - do you consider frizzled silkies to be silkies? Do you consider showgirl silkies to be silkies? Both of those variations, much like satins, have had one gene bred in to silkies a long time ago and now are considered by most to be purebred silkies. I love all the fun variations that silkies come in, and I own silkies, satins, showgirls and frizzled silkies and satins!

I personally believe that if those breeds can be bred together and breed true, and make something that is not what it originally started as, then it is a whole other breed. Definitely after being approached like a completely different breed by breeding it through many generations.

Yes, it may have alot of similarities, but there are alot of breeds that look alike, but are not the same.

I am not saying they are not a breed, what I am saying is that they are not a silkie.

I have heard people saying they are trying to get satins recognized as a breed on their own. Which would mean they'd have the mindset that they are not actually silkies.

If you were to bring the satin to an event to show silkies, I am sure it would not rank high at all, if it were to even be allowed to be in it.

A satin lacks the main characteristic that makes a silkie a silkie.

 

[GlicksChicks]

Sounds like somebody needs to standardize these terms, some governing body perhaps. As it stands now, it seems to me as an outsider reading this, there is no standard and every backyard breeder can use whatever terminology they want. Making it impossible for a novice purchaser to have any idea what they are actually getting when they put their money down. it's like the Wild West of the "Americonna" world out there. Yes, I spelled it stupid on purpose. People have no idea they're getting mutt Easter Eggers when they buy something they think is a pb Ameraucana only to be disappointed when they learn the truth, that they've been conned by "bait and switch" tactics. Its not right.

I agree. I have seen so many people go to buy silkie chicks and end up with satins and confused. Because the seller, who should know better, had all the birds in the pen named silkies.

When you go to get a silkie, you want one with silkied feathers, not smooth. That is what makes a silkie a silkie. Other breeds have walnut combs and 5 toes. But silkies are the breed that have silkied feathers.

 

[GlicksChicks]

True, sadly silkies because of their popularity seem to have an “anything goes” reputation. I think that with any breed, people just need to be careful and know what they are getting when they buy any chicken. See photos of the parents. Make sure they aren’t stolen from a reputable breeder. Many good breeders watermark their photos these days.

Yes, there are many many photo thiefs wanting to pose as a breeder, then give you the wrong birds, if they give you any at all.

 

[GlicksChicks]

This chick that I am growing out right now came from a reputable show breeder (hatching eggs) and it’s only 7 weeks old but is super typey and beautiful. So I am hoping to keep it in my breeding program to improve type. I love that satin feathers are a dominant gene, so they are so easy to breed out if you prefer silkie only feathering.

I am definitely not saying they aren't pretty. They are nice to look at. But when I look at it, I do not see a silkie.