Bob Blosl's Heritage Large Fowl Thread

[buffalogal]

Bentley, to what kind of animal does the eye in your avatar belong?

Looks like a parrot, I would guess an African Grey.

 

[thedragonlady]

Looks like a parrot, I would guess an African Grey.

I think it's a mature grey too, otherwise it would have black eyes. Can't tell weather it's a Timneh,or a Congo though.

 

[Marengoite]

Well who would do that?????? Any way, ALL APA breeds are the result of crossing different breeds together, every one of them. So who decided that it was 'frowned upon' to recreate old breeds in the same manner they were originally created? Seems to me that that is REALLY 'getting back to the original breeds'. I guess the creativity and ingenuity of the original breed developers is taboo to dabble in anymore?

I'm not sure what your point is, Bentley. Are you objecting to the use of the word "pure" in breeding? Or do you honestly believe there is no such thing as a "breed"?

As for who decided it was "frowned upon" to recreate old breeds in the same manner as originally created, I'm not sure why anyone would want to do this with a breed already in existence. We joke about not reinventing the wheel, but creating a breed of chickens all over again when it is already in existence seems ludicrous.

Besides, there are at least two good reasons for not wanting to to it. The first is that it is a lot of hard work for the reward of ending up with the same thing the guy down the street has with the disadvantage that ours are not from purebred stock. The second, and probably biggest flaw in the premise, is that we have accurate records on how to create a breed from "scratch." Good luck with finding complete and accurate records on the creation of any breed.

 

[Marengoite]

By definition, what is "many generations" that you can't add new genetic diversity. Additionally, what is a "long time" that you can't add foreign blood? I am CERTAIN out crossing occurs way more often than the 'purest' will ever admit. As a matter of fact I know ' self proclaimed purests' that have out crossed to the GREAT benefit to that respective breed. If we are trying to save breeds and make them better and more sustainable, the addition of quality genetics to add hybrid vigor and much needed genetic diversity to sometimes very inbred lines, then this is to the advantage of poultry enthusiast everywhere.
I guess this is just my opinion as I have watched some breeds drift to very poor quality and very poor vigor and therefore their existence as we knew them or read about them becomes questionable. Falling back to the ways of the old breeders that routinely added other breed stock to their lines to improve quality does not seem like a bad decision to make as we strive to save or resurrect old and struggling breeds.

Bentley,

You sound like a troll raising an argument for argument's sake. Please cite particulars as recognized examples.

First of all, there is enough genetic diversity (heterozygosity) within most pure breeds of chickens that "inbreeding" is not going to be a problem. Now, the reason I use scare quotes is because the term is so widely misused by folks that it makes this former biology teacher blanch in embarrassment at the state of our country's educational system, particularly in the biological sciences. Brother-sister , father-daughter, mother-son matings represent forms of inbreeding. However, linebreeding which can encompass everything from the Felch method, spiral breeding, and even flock making are all forms of inbreeding that have been used for over a century with some flocks reporting no decrease in vigor, fertility, or health for over 80 years. So let's just say that your first argument - the need for genetic diversity - has no merit on the face of it. If you doubt me, do a study of the genetic variability of top predators like cheetahs and lions which inbreed naturally within their prides, particularly the Ngorngoro lions studied rather intensively and reported in National Geographic. They have fare less genetic variability than any breed of chicken currently in existence and they all seem to be doing fine. Clearly the genome is more resistant to perturbation than many "experts" believe.

Second, outcrossing has a place in a purebred breeding program IF and I repeat that loudly and firmly, IF there is a point to the outcross, to introduce a gene (or set of genetic complements) that is not in the current population. And then there is only a single outcross and the resulting progeny are culled ruthlessly to get back to the original breed, with the difference being that they have the desired trait bred in by the outcross. So, while there may be evidence of an outcross sometime in the distant past in some purbred chickens, that does nothing to detract from what a purebred fowl is. It's not like people are keeping pedigrees of chickens like they are horses, dogs, and cattle.

Finally, in the hands of the inexpert, outcrossing, which you seem to think sounds like a good idea, will inevitably lead to disaster. It's hard enough to maintain a high quality breed without the complications of outcrossing. So why anyone with limited experience would want to try it on their own is beyond me. Better to buy a good line of birds, set up a good line breeding program, and go with that. And if you want to outcross, do it within the breed but from a different bloodline. And do it with the understanding that it may or may not bring the desired result.

 

[Marengoite]

I'd like to hear more about breeding for the utility aspects (eggs/meat) in these Heritage breeds. Their original utility value as good foragers who would produce eggs/meat was and is a big part of the attraction of these breeds and I haven't seen on this tread much conversation about culling for _these_ traits, but I have seen on a few private websites cautions that a certain breed or strain no longer is a good layer. (One such caution was in reference to a Wyandotte which they were selling hatching eggs as Heritage). I see breeding for body type & color advice, but what are the thoughts of those on this list about for breeding for the productive qualities for which these Heritage breeds where originally so prized?

FeyRaine

I agree, Fey. I would like to hear more on utility as an important aspect of a breeding program. I was looking at Andalusians and have read in a number of places that they lay only around 200 eggs a year. That doesn't sound like the bird I read about in the book by "Silver Dun" in the 1890's. Seemed like a lot more productive breed back then. What is the place of utility and productivity in current breeding programs?

 

[Marengoite]

While this philosophy is great in theory, in reality there are many times this isn't true. Ask any educated and trained real geneticist and they will tell you you HAVE TO have genetic diversity to make genetic progress. If a breed has become so homogeneous in its genetic make up, which can easily happen after years and years of in breeding, then you lose genetic diversity. Nothing necessarily wrong with in breeding to refine a breed and 'lock in' the desired traits. The problem is that if a population has become this homogeneous in genetic make up then it also lacks genetic diversity. This means you can breed hundreds upon hundreds, even thousands, of the birds and get virtually the same offspring time and time again, all of which resemble the parents that might lack a desired trait. This is the goal of commercial geneticists, to produce virtually the same chicken by the thousands. This is when outcrossing becomes necessary.
To set the record straight, I am not promoting free breeding and freely outcrossing all breeds just for the heck of it. That is just plain stupid because then you can possibly open 'pandora a box' of genetics and get all kinds if unknown foreseen progeny. But, when carefully planned and calculated, outcrossing can be very beneficial.

Bentley,

Might I recommend that you ask any trained geneticist what the heterozygosity is of any standard breed of chicken and have them provide an opinion on the risk most current breeds face of a genetic "crash." Since you are in the business of reporting what you know based on what you've heard instead of reporting your personal findings based on experimentation, I would suggest you cite your sources and let us know what breeds they've been working with and under what circumstances.

One of the things you failed to mention is that one of the things heterozygosity produces is a bunch of mutts that look like crap. Even within pure breeds there is so much genetic diversity that quality is all over the board. If you don't believe me, join a Buckeye breed club and see how homozygous their birds are. Even the best, most intensively bred birds still show tremendous variation in offspring. It is very common to have double mating for cock lines and hen lines which guarantees genetic diversity. Are you aware of this?

Bottom line is that I think you're tilting at a windmill. Yes, there are breeds that need work. Yes there are breeds that have suffered from INDISCRIMINATE breeding (not necessarily inbreeding). But I don't see that outcrossing is the panacea you appear to think it is.

 

[OSUman]

One evident "crash" would be sprigs on combs... others are infertility and other health problems.

 

[surnikis]

marengoite, I have been quietly watching this debate , and I do not see the point of your argument , all a " pure breed " is is a bird that breeds true. I have to ask do you exhibit birds ? if you do , how well are u doing , or have you notices that your lines keep getting smaller or losing some of the type. How do you think exhibitors achieve winning stock , THEY OUTCROSS lmao , you can introduce a completly different breed and achieve the chang u need to win , you may throw a few "sports" (a good example) say a splash when producing blues ...you mentioned blue andilusion ...do you know if you dont introduce a black they will lose thier lacing? any way just making a point

 

[buffalogal]

Quote: If you want to cull your birds based on the breed's historical ability to gain weight and lay eggs while foraging, open the door to the chicken pen and let them out. Assuming you've taken some decent precautions against predators, and you're not just turning them out in a sterile suburban back yard, you'll very quickly be able to pick out the lively thriving birds from the coop potatoes that are content to hang around and wait for you to fill the feeder.

 

[buffalogal]

One evident "crash" would be sprigs on combs... others are infertility and other health problems.

I'd consider sprigs and other comb defects to be simply faults. Infertility is more serious, but it's still something I tend to think of not so much as an impending genetic crash as evidence that I have been concentrating my breeding program too narrowly on one family. (it's why I always keep at least a heir and a spare)