I have no idea if I can get unrelated roos for my birds, would it be very very bad to leave them together? They probably all come from te same roo but different hens...
Can same hatch (related) birds breed?
- Thread starter SarahIrl
- Start date
It's done all the time. Not a problem.
You'll know if it's a problem in a hurry..if they both carry a recessive gene, it will likely show up. Typically all goes well, but just keep an eye on your first few hatches for anything unusual, especially if you're not familiar with the line/parent stock. As Kathy mentioned, it is done all of the time.
Ive been waiting for a chicken with 4 drumstick for a long time.... no luck so far..
In short - Yes, it's no problem at all.
In a little more depth
This is a common misunderstanding mostly propogated because we humans think it is highly undesirable to breed within the close human family. In nature it is very common for inbreeding to occur, in some species it is the norm.
Domesticated animals, including chickens, are regularly inbred to encourage desirable traits like fast weight gain, large eggs, specific coloring etc etc. Individual breeds of domestic animals from a common ancester are created through selective inbreeding.
The problems with inbreeding are that the offspring have a higher incidence of getting two undesirable genes (undesirable in the sense that it may cause a physical problem or it may simply be that the coloring is not what is required by the breeder). Therefore through inbreeding you can select 'better' offspring but this is offset by having fewer 'better' offspring to choose from. With continuous inbreeding the undesirable traits are bred out so that further breeding gives a higher percentage of desirable offspring. This carries on until you get to the stage where you can all but guarantee what the offsprings characteristics will be like. Hence why every Cornish Rock (meat producing) is almost identical and similarly the White Leghorn (egg producers) are identical, even down to the size of egg they lay.
A simple example of genetic selection (not actually inbreeding but the same genetic principal) is the Japanese Bantam.
They carry a fatal short legged gene (really it's an allele). When two short legged JBs breed, statistically you should get 50% with short legs (short leg & long leg gene), 25% with long legs (two long leg genes) and 25% will get two short leg genes but because this is a fatal/lethal gene they will not develop fully in the egg and fail to hatch. This leaves you with only 50% of the original clutch to select the best birds from (because long legs do not meet the standards).
On the other hand, once you have eradicated the fatal gene by breeding two long legs together all the eggs will hatch (within reason) and all the offspring will be long legged.
In a little more depth
This is a common misunderstanding mostly propogated because we humans think it is highly undesirable to breed within the close human family. In nature it is very common for inbreeding to occur, in some species it is the norm.
Domesticated animals, including chickens, are regularly inbred to encourage desirable traits like fast weight gain, large eggs, specific coloring etc etc. Individual breeds of domestic animals from a common ancester are created through selective inbreeding.
The problems with inbreeding are that the offspring have a higher incidence of getting two undesirable genes (undesirable in the sense that it may cause a physical problem or it may simply be that the coloring is not what is required by the breeder). Therefore through inbreeding you can select 'better' offspring but this is offset by having fewer 'better' offspring to choose from. With continuous inbreeding the undesirable traits are bred out so that further breeding gives a higher percentage of desirable offspring. This carries on until you get to the stage where you can all but guarantee what the offsprings characteristics will be like. Hence why every Cornish Rock (meat producing) is almost identical and similarly the White Leghorn (egg producers) are identical, even down to the size of egg they lay.
A simple example of genetic selection (not actually inbreeding but the same genetic principal) is the Japanese Bantam.
They carry a fatal short legged gene (really it's an allele). When two short legged JBs breed, statistically you should get 50% with short legs (short leg & long leg gene), 25% with long legs (two long leg genes) and 25% will get two short leg genes but because this is a fatal/lethal gene they will not develop fully in the egg and fail to hatch. This leaves you with only 50% of the original clutch to select the best birds from (because long legs do not meet the standards).
On the other hand, once you have eradicated the fatal gene by breeding two long legs together all the eggs will hatch (within reason) and all the offspring will be long legged.
- Thread starter
- #6
I have lavender araucanas, and I heard something somewhere of a fatal colour gene associated with lavender. Also being fited to me, 6 silver laced brahma eggs. Not worried at all about my hybrids though.
Similar threads
New posts New threads Active threads
-
Latest threads
-
-
-
-
-
Rooster rehome in Southern Oregon
- Started by Daisydoottle
- Replies: 0
-
-
Threads with more replies in the last 15 days
-
-
-
-
Can I get some help from someone with careless neighbours who own dogs.- Started by RiDaGeckoGuy
- Replies: 102
-
-
