Debbie's Silkies

[NatJ]

I don't think there's a way, to my knowledge, to get 100% partridges though.

Partridge breeds true in other breeds, so I think it should be possible in Silkies too. Examples: Partridge Rock, Partridge Wyandotte.

Obviously they will only breed true if they are not carrying recessive genes for other coloring (example: if a recessive white Silkie produces some chicks that show partridge coloring, those chicks are carrying the recessive white gene, and have a chance of producing white offspring.)

 

[rural mouse]

The Dominant White wins, so all the black areas that would turn blue or lavender will get turned to white as well.

I think the actual explanation is that blue or lavender or chocolate affect the way the chicken's body produces black pigment, so it comes out lighter (different shades because the different genes affect different parts of the process), but Dominant White affects it in a way that means no pigment is produced. In my own mind, I think of it as black being turned to blue (or other color), and then being turned to white by Dominant White.


Sometimes yes, sometimes no. It seems to be a bit variable, as if there are some other genes that affect the amount of leakage, but we don't really understand those genes. The most basic idea is to breed for more leakage (paint) or less leakage (if you want solid white), regardless of what genes might actually be involved.


Yes.

In Old English Game Bantams, Red Pyle has the same basic genes as Black Breasted Red, with Dominant White changing the black to white. I don't know if other breeds might have a color called "Red Pyle" with a different set of genes plus the Dominant White.


White Leghorns are typically Dominant White.

I've read that they often have barring as well, and blue or splash, and they most likely have silver. All of those would help create an actual white chicken: any black leakage is made lighter (blue or splash), and black bits are made smaller (white barring), and gold leakage is turned to white (Silver instead of gold.)

How are silver and Dom white different?
And is partridge dominate or recessive to other colors?

(Sorry to derail your thread, Debbie)

 

[NatJ]

How are silver and Dom white different?

Silver turns gold/red shades to white.
Dominant White turns black to white.

If you start with a gold and black chicken (example: Gold Laced Sebright), you can add Dominant White to make that black lacing go white. Now you have a Buff Laced Sebright (white lacing on gold). Or you can start with the same Gold Laced Sebright but change the gold to silver, so you have a Silver Laced Sebright. Or you can add both Dominant White and Silver, so you have white lacing on a silver chicken, but that just looks white, so people typically don't bother (it sometimes shows up as questions like "Why did I get white chicks when I crossed my Silver Sebright with my Buff Sebright?")

And is partridge dominate or recessive to other colors?

Partridge is caused by quite a few genes working together. Some of them are dominant, some are recessive.

Silver is dominant over gold. So Silver Partridge is dominant over normal Partridge.

Extended Black (turns the whole chicken black) is dominant over the genes that allow gold-and-black patterning, so Partridge is recessive to solid black.

Dominant White would turn the black parts of the Partridge pattern into white, so the normal Partridge is recessive to whatever you call it when Dominant White is involved.

There are a lot of genes involved in how the black & gold are arranged on the chicken, to make Partridge or Lacing or Columbian or Spangling or various other patterns. Some of those are dominant, some recessive, so there's no simple answer to whether Partridge is dominant to other patterns of gold/black.

These are not all the genes that are involved in actually making a partridge chicken, just some examples to show that it is not as simple as a yes/no answer for whether Partridge is dominant.

Recessive white is recessive to Partridge or to anything else (one recessive white gene does not make any visible change), but two genes for recessive white will make the chicken white no matter what other genes it has. So a chicken that has all the other genes to be Partridge, but has two recessive white genes, will be white. I suppose you could say that Partridge is dominant over recessive white, but I find it easier to think of recessive white as it's own thing-- almost like dipping the whole chicken in whitewash. It doesn't change what other color & pattern genes the chicken has, just hides the effects.

 

[rural mouse]

Silver turns gold/red shades to white.
Dominant White turns black to white.

If you start with a gold and black chicken (example: Gold Laced Sebright), you can add Dominant White to make that black lacing go white. Now you have a Buff Laced Sebright (white lacing on gold). Or you can start with the same Gold Laced Sebright but change the gold to silver, so you have a Silver Laced Sebright. Or you can add both Dominant White and Silver, so you have white lacing on a silver chicken, but that just looks white, so people typically don't bother (it sometimes shows up as questions like "Why did I get white chicks when I crossed my Silver Sebright with my Buff Sebright?")


Partridge is caused by quite a few genes working together. Some of them are dominant, some are recessive.

Silver is dominant over gold. So Silver Partridge is dominant over normal Partridge.

Extended Black (turns the whole chicken black) is dominant over the genes that allow gold-and-black patterning, so Partridge is recessive to solid black.

Dominant White would turn the black parts of the Partridge pattern into white, so the normal Partridge is recessive to whatever you call it when Dominant White is involved.

There are a lot of genes involved in how the black & gold are arranged on the chicken, to make Partridge or Lacing or Columbian or Spangling or various other patterns. Some of those are dominant, some recessive, so there's no simple answer to whether Partridge is dominant to other patterns of gold/black.

These are not all the genes that are involved in actually making a partridge chicken, just some examples to show that it is not as simple as a yes/no answer for whether Partridge is dominant.

Recessive white is recessive to Partridge or to anything else (one recessive white gene does not make any visible change), but two genes for recessive white will make the chicken white no matter what other genes it has. So a chicken that has all the other genes to be Partridge, but has two recessive white genes, will be white. I suppose you could say that Partridge is dominant over recessive white, but I find it easier to think of recessive white as it's own thing-- almost like dipping the whole chicken in whitewash. It doesn't change what other color & pattern genes the chicken has, just hides the effects.

So...for a dark brahma, they're the basic black and gold bird partridge with silver turning the gold head and golden brown tones to white/grey while keeping the black marks. A light Brahma is a buff brahma with silver in it, and a light x dark brahma would still be silver in color, but with partridge leakage like this?

and the bird in the first pic next to the silver one has the extended black covering all the SILVER (not white) while the gold leaks through because the black doesn't cover it.

Meanwhile the

broody splash

leghorn DOESN'T have Dom white as she throws blue offspring (also in the last pic) when crossed with a gold penciled hamburg. Right? But could carry a single white recessive?

 

[NatJ]

So...for a dark brahma, they're the basic black and gold bird partridge with silver turning the gold head and golden brown tones to white/grey while keeping the black marks. A light Brahma is a buff brahma with silver in it, and a light x dark brahma would still be silver in color, but with partridge leakage like this?

Sounds right to me!

View attachment 4253028and the bird in the first pic next to the silver one has the extended black covering all the SILVER (not white) while the gold leaks through because the black doesn't cover it.

I think that's right.

Meanwhile the View attachment 4253027broody splashView attachment 4253031leghorn DOESN'T have Dom white as she throws blue offspring (also in the last pic) when crossed with a gold penciled hamburg. Right? But could carry a single white recessive?

Has she produced very many chicks? And if so, were they all blue? If yes, then I think you're right that she is splash and has no Dominant White.

But if she also produces chicks of other colors, then there are other things that could be going on genetically.

Yes, she could also have one gene for recessive white.

 

[rural mouse]

Sounds right to me!


I think that's right.


Has she produced very many chicks? And if so, were they all blue? If yes, then I think you're right that she is splash and has no Dominant White.

But if she also produces chicks of other colors, then there are other things that could be going on genetically.

Yes, she could also have one gene for recessive white.

She has 2 offspring....the blue and her twin. Comb shape is slightly different rose and 1 has spurs. Otherwise they're twins.

 

[Debbie292d]

How are silver and Dom white different?
And is partridge dominate or recessive to other colors?

(Sorry to derail your thread, Debbie)

I don't mind! I'm learning! Remember I tagged you up there somewhere lol.

 

[Debbie292d]

I got pictures of the chicks finally, right when they came out. These were hen-raised so wild as heck!

There are some older ones to the right that live with them.



I had hatched these and gave them to a broody for the purposes of helping my spring rush of people wanting chicks. I started with 40+ and we're down to 17 now. There are a couple I have my eye on, so we'll see.

 

[2ndTink]

and in the box, being broody and molting, is Marsha.

I find this hard to believe

These were hen-raised so wild as heck!

Bummer, otherwise I'd be tempted to come over and you'd find me laying in your yard covered in 30 silkies, that just sounds like fun!

 

[Debbie292d]

I find this hard to believe

Bummer, otherwise I'd be tempted to come over and you'd find me laying in your yard covered in 30 silkies, that just sounds like fun!

One of those is not like the others. I'll get a better picture, but this is yours. Yup, wild with the rest!