Auto-sexing breed where only the females hatch?

[sayga]

Is it possible to create a breed of chickens where the males all express a deformity or issue so they all die in shell and don't hatch, and only female chicks hatch. I know it couldn't be a pure breed, because obviously there would be no males so it couldn't be pure, but would it be possible to create such a combination? A hen and a rooster that both carry a sex-linked fatal trait but don't express it so the male carrier doesn't die, but so their male offspring never even finishes developing in the egg? But the females would all be healthy and good layers, with no physical issues, etc.

Then, if you could create it, would such a mixed-breed be humane? It seems more humane than using a chick grinder or otherwise "disposing" of already hatched male chicks, but maybe there is a downside I haven't thought of.

It might not be needed for backyard chickening so much, but if large factory farms could count on only female chicks hatching, that would change some things! You'd just have to have a line of males carrying the trait and a line of females carrying the trait so you could hatch only from their combined offspring for female-only layer birds, and you'd have to know how to breed those males and females to create more carriers too, without the males dying.

Is it impossible?

 

[tridentk9]

Well there's a theory that just the opposite occurs in dogs with cryptorchidism. The females with two genes for cryptorchidism die in utero, the males live but are cryptorchid. Though cryptorchids can still be fertile. Since chickens have the opposite of the canine's xy male, xx female- who knows, it should be possible.

 

[donrae]

I think it must be impossible, or the large production hatcheries would already be doing it. I mean, they lose 50% of their product right off the bat. If they could double profits, they'd sure do that, and there'd be enough $$ behind it.

 

[tridentk9]

I think it must be impossible, or the large production hatcheries would already be doing it. I mean, they lose 50% of their product right off the bat. If they could double profits, they'd sure do that, and there'd be enough $$ behind it.

Hmm, or they haven't found a potential gene in any of the breeds they use. Watch- it's in silkies or Cemanis or something, some breed that isn't used as a meat bird or a layer. Though I'd also wonder if chicks are even in the top 10 of their expenses
.

 

[dheltzel]

Would it save any money for the hatchery to dispose of eggs instead of chicks? I can't see how. Male chicks are more salable than rotten eggs. Just because it offends our sensibilities to kill a male chick, doesn't make it better. How would you know for certain that the embryo didn't die a long painful death in the shell from it's lethal deformity?

Cattle producers now have "sorted semen" to produce mostly female offspring, but chickens don't work that way. If there was a way to sort the eggs prior to setting them, the male eggs could be sold for eating, but until that is possible, hatcheries will hatch males chicks. I can't see the benefit of a sex-linked lethal gene.

 

[Michael OShay]

I can't see the benefit of a sex-linked lethal gene.

Even if there were some benefit in it, the benefit wouldn't be enough for hatcheries or breeders to spend the time and money it would take to develop it.