Discussion of Legbar Standard of Perfection for -Alternative- Legbars - SOP discussion

[ChicKat]

Everyone who is interested/participating --

it is really time for another Summary on this long thread -- please put up anything that you would like to have included to this point -- and maybe over Memorial Day Weekend I can make a bullet point version of what has been posted since the previous Summary.

THANKS!!

Happy Memorial Day Weekend (what? how is that possible, I haven't finished Thanksgiving's dishes yet)

 

[caychris]

Here is what Ive been thinking needs to be done and clarified when it comes to the SOP.

1) "Cream" needs a solid definition
2) Type descriptions should not reference Leghorn as American and UK leghorns differ and only the appropriate description should be applied
3) While hackles and saddles should both be cream due to barring expression differences they may appear to not match and this seems ok.
4) Degree of chestnut allowance should be clear. (This could give further rise to more chestnut birds)
5) Cresting should be present but have a fairly wide interpretation when it comes to color/size (as it appears that crest color and size varies a great deal even in full siblings)

As Walt indicated how you get to the cream color is not a "genetic" certainty when showing for APA so we should focus on what "Pale Butter" means?

 

[ChicKat]

Here is what Ive been thinking needs to be done and clarified when it comes to the SOP.

1) "Cream" needs a solid definition
2) Type descriptions should not reference Leghorn as American and UK leghorns differ and only the appropriate description should be applied
3) While hackles and saddles should both be cream due to barring expression differences they may appear to not match and this seems ok.
4) Degree of chestnut allowance should be clear. (This could give further rise to more chestnut birds)
5) Cresting should be present but have a fairly wide interpretation when it comes to color/size (as it appears that crest color and size varies a great deal even in full siblings)

As Walt indicated how you get to the cream color is not a "genetic" certainty when showing for APA so we should focus on what "Pale Butter" means?

This is a very good viewpoint IMO caychris -- so thanks a ton for the 'food for thought'.

1. Some of these things are 'under construction' and will be presented shortly-- and some of them -- like the type, are kind of right in front of everyone's eyes...

2. If you go to the Club's logo -- (web page) there are outlines of Cream Legbar male and female -- Those aren't just random pretty images, a lot of work went into them. It was a revision of the Club's first logo -- which was based on the Punnett images from one of his articles. The artist was Maria Oakley who is a former Club member, and members at the Logo adoption time felt that the newer one (the one you see unless you have some really early material) - was a better reflection of type. As I look at it now - I can see some areas I would change - but if you were to go toward those images -- you would probably have some good examples of type.
3. This will be an area of further discussion -- and the points you raise reflect what I am seeing in most of the CLs that I see.
4. Probably another area of future discussion -- and some like it some don't. but in SOP it is allowable - so if someone likes it they may keep it -- and if that means a chestnutless competitor beats them out in a show---for most - that is fine with them - IMO
5. Maybe someday---perhaps, there will be a discussion with great passion and depth about the crests on the female -- I think males crests are more in the accepted range, generally they are expressed less anyway - and males seem a bit less varied, than females in the cresting department from my observations.... someone on one of these threads popped in and summed up how very cool it was to see the variety of crests -- some are really light, some are dark - some combined light and dark etc. As long as they are there -- it is kind of cool to see variety.... and mine have changed a bit as the females age...they kind of lighten... ETA - whom ever it was was from UK - so you know that boosts their cred. they were a really bright and breezy individual too - I wish they would come back and post some more.

regarding Walt's remark that the show judges don't try to look at the DNA - I kind of compare it to a contest where someone is tasting the food...and not necessarialy basing the results of their judging on the recipie, but rather basing the results of their judging on the actual food. (in this case, actual individual chicken) I'm pretty sure that the recipe is the result -- but there may be that one secret ingredient (like flori de sicilia - 1 drop only) that puts it over the top -- that may not be a good analogy -- but the ingredients (in this case genetics known and unknown) make the result.

 

[caychris]

I was thinking that on #4 This is where a new variety would probably be the most likely as you could breed to a more prominent chestnut bird.

Well as soon as I can get my breeding flock together Ill probably sign up as a full member of the club and get my APA membership too so I can assist in moving this breed forward. I saw an assesment on the club page of the different qualifications. Is there a listing of the petitioning breeders yet or more detail on the planned path forward.

I have 4 breeds 2 which need acceptance (CLB, and Pita Pinta which will be a number of years yet) and 2 rare heritage breeds (Delaware, Barred holland) that I am starting to work with. I do not plan to expand beyond these breeds except as backyard layers/broodies (might work on a CLB hybrid but not sure yet) So getting involved with the clubs is going to be a must.

 

[dretd]

Here is what Ive been thinking needs to be done and clarified when it comes to the SOP.

1) "Cream" needs a solid definition
2) Type descriptions should not reference Leghorn as American and UK leghorns differ and only the appropriate description should be applied
3) While hackles and saddles should both be cream due to barring expression differences they may appear to not match and this seems ok.
4) Degree of chestnut allowance should be clear. (This could give further rise to more chestnut birds)
5) Cresting should be present but have a fairly wide interpretation when it comes to color/size (as it appears that crest color and size varies a great deal even in full siblings)

As Walt indicated how you get to the cream color is not a "genetic" certainty when showing for APA so we should focus on what "Pale Butter" means?

1) My personal definition is: Cream is the color that is produced when a chicken has two copies of the inhibitor of gold gene that in its homozygous state will produce a feather that can range between off-white and a pale buttery color, depending on the other genes (barring, autosomal red/chestnut and melanizers) the bird also has in its makeup. If you try to put a color swatch in place you will disenfranchise anyone who things that cream is lighter or darker. Who gets to make that decision? Because if you ask 10 experienced breeders I doubt you will get anything close to a consensus. What do you suggest for how cream should be defined--do you have a definition you think would be accurate and not divisive? Yes I know there is no ring-side genetic test but hopefully a breeder will have hatched enough birds to figure out what cream looks like in their flock. My personal goal is to get a male with maximal expression of the Cream coloration but still be ig/ig which I am determining by looking at the secondaries until I figure out a more accurate method--its all I've got for now. If another breeder doesn't agree with the wing triangle that's fine by me and if a breeder prefers a whiter shade of cream, that's fine by me. I don't want to tell someone else how they should interpret a color since I wouldn't want someone to tell me that my richer cream is wrong. Not sure the solution on how to define a color when there are so many views on what it is? Reminds me of the discussion on the blue vs green egg--colors are very definitely in the eye of the beholder!

2) Unfortunately people read that the bird is based on a (British) Leghorn and since we are in America all they know is the American version and the reality is that the birds that were used were actually of Danish origin. Not sure how to un-ring that bell--folks will skim history and assume things then pass that information on to others. How do we combat that other than to have the original history in there that clearly states that the birds are developed in England and the English Leghorn is different than the American one? I have seen numerous postings on FB taking about trying to get 'the swoop' or to just look at the Light Brown Leghorn as a reference --but if they would bother to read the SOPs of each bird, its clear the descriptions are quite different. IMO the CLB is closest to the Andalusian. When I reference that I pretty much get crickets and so trying to inform doesn't seem to make any headway. What would you suggest?

3) In my flock I think that the whiter a cream the bird has, the less of a mismatch there is. Also I am seeing that birds that are split for cream have more of a mismatch and birds with more chestnut have more of a mismatch. Although a mismatch is not as close to the SOP as a match--most of the colors in one bird or another have incongruities with the SOP sine it is an ideal and there are not perfect matches anywhere--you just do your best as a breeder to get a balance.

4) If you refer back to the British Standard, it says "back and shoulders cream with dark grey barring, some chestnut permissible....coverts grey barred, tips cream, some chestnut smudges permissible". Ours says: Fronts and bows: dark grey, faintly barred, some chestnut permissible, coverts: grey barred, tipped in cream, back: Cream, barred with dark grey, some chestnut permissible" both say cream and grey, some chestnut permissible. We have morphed the coverts from the Brits into wing bows as there is a difference in terminology. The original indicates some chestnut smudges so if you go by that, it would be hard to conclude that a solid chestnut block or bow would be appropriate. Just the fact that the description talks about the cream and grey/darkgrey first then has a comma and has a qualification that says some chestnut is permitted indicates that the Brits thought the default was without chestnut but they would allow 'some'---I like chestnut so I am not trying to eliminate it but rather retain 'some' but avoiding a large color block. I know that this is not ideal according to standard but since I like it it stays in my flock. We are leaving the 'some' up to the breeder but a solid chestnut wing bow would cross over into the 'too much' IMO.

5) I agree there is variation in size--I suspect there may two two genetic variants out there. Plus the males have a small and the females have a medium, so there is a slight incongruity there. In my males with the larger variant (the heads are rounder and there is a thicker fleshy pad behind the comb at hatch), I have serious issues with a wonky comb. In theory I have some chickens who are heterozygous for crest (sires are crested and hens were not) and the one roo with the larger crest and wonky comb sires offspring with the exact same comb/crest combo and the smaller crested one sires straight combs and smaller crests. There clearly seems to be some variance and also my guess is some epistasis going on for sure. I think the crest is actually pretty open to interpretation in the SOP as written. We did remove wording in the female that said the crest was attached at the forefront of the skull--we came to the conclusion that the longer feathers on each side of the comb were not part of the actual crest and there was another unknown gene that influences their size (and maybe influences the size of the larger crests as well). Do you think that the wording of the SOP is inadequate or too strict as it is written?

 

[caychris]

1) My personal definition is: Cream is the color that is produced when a chicken has two copies of the inhibitor of gold gene that in its homozygous state will produce a feather that can range between off-white and a pale buttery color, depending on the other genes (barring, autosomal red/chestnut and melanizers) the bird also has in its makeup. If you try to put a color swatch in place you will disenfranchise anyone who things that cream is lighter or darker. Who gets to make that decision? Because if you ask 10 experienced breeders I doubt you will get anything close to a consensus. What do you suggest for how cream should be defined--do you have a definition you think would be accurate and not divisive? Yes I know there is no ring-side genetic test but hopefully a breeder will have hatched enough birds to figure out what cream looks like in their flock. My personal goal is to get a male with maximal expression of the Cream coloration but still be ig/ig which I am determining by looking at the secondaries until I figure out a more accurate method--its all I've got for now. If another breeder doesn't agree with the wing triangle that's fine by me and if a breeder prefers a whiter shade of cream, that's fine by me. I don't want to tell someone else how they should interpret a color since I wouldn't want someone to tell me that my richer cream is wrong. Not sure the solution on how to define a color when there are so many views on what it is? Reminds me of the discussion on the blue vs green egg--colors are very definitely in the eye of the beholder!

2) Unfortunately people read that the bird is based on a (British) Leghorn and since we are in America all they know is the American version and the reality is that the birds that were used were actually of Danish origin. Not sure how to un-ring that bell--folks will skim history and assume things then pass that information on to others. How do we combat that other than to have the original history in there that clearly states that the birds are developed in England and the English Leghorn is different than the American one? I have seen numerous postings on FB taking about trying to get 'the swoop' or to just look at the Light Brown Leghorn as a reference --but if they would bother to read the SOPs of each bird, its clear the descriptions are quite different. IMO the CLB is closest to the Andalusian. When I reference that I pretty much get crickets and so trying to inform doesn't seem to make any headway. What would you suggest?

3) In my flock I think that the whiter a cream the bird has, the less of a mismatch there is. Also I am seeing that birds that are split for cream have more of a mismatch and birds with more chestnut have more of a mismatch. Although a mismatch is not as close to the SOP as a match--most of the colors in one bird or another have incongruities with the SOP sine it is an ideal and there are not perfect matches anywhere--you just do your best as a breeder to get a balance.

4) If you refer back to the British Standard, it says "back and shoulders cream with dark grey barring, some chestnut permissible....coverts grey barred, tips cream, some chestnut smudges permissible". Ours says: Fronts and bows: dark grey, faintly barred, some chestnut permissible, coverts: grey barred, tipped in cream, back: Cream, barred with dark grey, some chestnut permissible" both say cream and grey, some chestnut permissible. We have morphed the coverts from the Brits into wing bows as there is a difference in terminology. The original indicates some chestnut smudges so if you go by that, it would be hard to conclude that a solid chestnut block or bow would be appropriate. Just the fact that the description talks about the cream and grey/darkgrey first then has a comma and has a qualification that says some chestnut is permitted indicates that the Brits thought the default was without chestnut but they would allow 'some'---I like chestnut so I am not trying to eliminate it but rather retain 'some' but avoiding a large color block. I know that this is not ideal according to standard but since I like it it stays in my flock. We are leaving the 'some' up to the breeder but a solid chestnut wing bow would cross over into the 'too much' IMO.

5) I agree there is variation in size--I suspect there may two two genetic variants out there. Plus the males have a small and the females have a medium, so there is a slight incongruity there. In my males with the larger variant (the heads are rounder and there is a thicker fleshy pad behind the comb at hatch), I have serious issues with a wonky comb. In theory I have some chickens who are heterozygous for crest (sires are crested and hens were not) and the one roo with the larger crest and wonky comb sires offspring with the exact same comb/crest combo and the smaller crested one sires straight combs and smaller crests. There clearly seems to be some variance and also my guess is some epistasis going on for sure. I think the crest is actually pretty open to interpretation in the SOP as written. We did remove wording in the female that said the crest was attached at the forefront of the skull--we came to the conclusion that the longer feathers on each side of the comb were not part of the actual crest and there was another unknown gene that influences their size (and maybe influences the size of the larger crests as well). Do you think that the wording of the SOP is inadequate or too strict as it is written?

If you state that "Cream is a gold inhibited color resembling pale butter" then you narrow the possibilities for how it presents. I was not advocating a particular avenue just wanted some clarification. In reality if I could achieve the color through other means and keep the type and features then the genetics don't matter fro showing the bird. Since there are other factors besides the ig/ig status of the bird that result in what people call cream adding the designation of gold inhibited color would restrict the process but not limit to a particular set of inhibitors.
(this also fixes and area where different varieties could be identified)

For the rest I am in agreement with your statements I wasnt advocating a particular position in any case just looking at many of the issues involved that help create vague interpretations.

All in all I was just trying to sum up areas where things have created concern over the variations.


I honestly think that lumping them in with gold and silver legbars is the biggest mistake, that could possibly be corrected, because the additional, and quite different traits added, and breeding selection lend themselves well to developing other varieties within the "Blue Egg Legbar" group. But this is just me apparently.

 

[caychris]

On the draft standard as far as I can tell the only issues are the Chestnut one you mentioned and the broader issue of the definition of Cream.

In the history section I would probably include the information about Leghorn variances and be sure that the type descriptions fall in line with the UK.

 

[dretd]

If you state that "Cream is a gold inhibited color resembling pale butter" then you narrow the possibilities for how it presents. I was not advocating a particular avenue just wanted some clarification. In reality if I could achieve the color through other means and keep the type and features then the genetics don't matter fro showing the bird. Since there are other factors besides the ig/ig status of the bird that result in what people call cream adding the designation of gold inhibited color would restrict the process but not limit to a particular set of inhibitors.
(this also fixes and area where different varieties could be identified)

For the rest I am in agreement with your statements I wasnt advocating a particular position in any case just looking at many of the issues involved that help create vague interpretations.

All in all I was just trying to sum up areas where things have created concern over the variations.


I honestly think that lumping them in with gold and silver legbars is the biggest mistake, that could possibly be corrected, because the additional, and quite different traits added, and breeding selection lend themselves well to developing other varieties within the "Blue Egg Legbar" group. But this is just me apparently.

Well I guess it could be corrected if there was an actve Club IN GB working on it. Its possible the Autisexing group may take it on. The Brits have had their Cream standard up for well over 50 years and I doubt they care what we think about any of it. The SIlver Legbar is extinct from what I understand the and the Gold is rare. Honestly I don't see a lot of difference between the Gold Legbar and a Crele Leghorn (which is not an approved variety in GB as far as I can tell but I have seen pictures from Europe) so the uniqueness factor is just not that compelling, IMO. I think there are a few folks working on Gold Legbars (recreated) and I heard a rumor that GFF might try to import them but I don't see them gaining a lot of traction.

Defining cream is going to be the hardest thing to accomplish, IMO. I also don't see a huge rush. I think that breeders need to breed several generations and see how the color ends up looking in their flock. I have seen cream vary from white-ish to rich buttery--and that is in birds with a white (not gold barred) wing triangle so presumably they are all ig/ig. Punnett said it was unlike any color he had seen and Pease said it was like Silver so clearly there must be a range of colors I just dont want to be the one to ram my idea of cream down anyone else's throats--although I sure will invite them to my table to have a bite if they like. From my flock I can offer you 1% milk and cream from cows raised on pasture and anywhere in between, even lovely clotted cream (that crusty stuff on top is the best!--with scones and strawberry jam, yum!)--how would you like your beverage this evening

?

 

[ChicKat]

Drat! I'm so hungry now for tea and scones!!

good post dr. thanks!

caychris -- although someone could make a cream legbar look-alike that wasn't a cream legbar -- I am failing to understand the motivation to do so.

 

[caychris]

Drat! I'm so hungry now for tea and scones!!

good post dr. thanks!

caychris -- although someone could make a cream legbar look-alike that wasn't a cream legbar -- I am failing to understand the motivation to do so.

If someone wanted to "create" cream legbars in their own line for example because they found that doing a particular breading path produced a more stable outcome (in one or more areas) For APA standards if it looks and has all the characteristics (breeds 50% true) then for all intents and purposes it is that breed. It may be genetically different but APA judging doesnt care.

** edited to add
If you use the cream is a gold inhibited color idea than it restricts the path you can take to cream.