Zenmonkey
Songster
It's been a hot minute since I've been floating around, so I thought I'd see how much ire I can stir up.
My question is about the color genetics of golden pheasants (Chrysopylus pictus, if I can type properly) and probably a secondary discussion regarding ethics of crossing birds.
I've got a dark throated hen without a mate to go with her. I can pair her with a regular red golden, a yellow golden, or a peach golden.
I'm inclined to believe that the dark throated (DT) is a single gene recessive, as compared to a regular red golden (RG).
The offspring of that RG x DT, when crossed to a red golden, would produce what looks like all red goldens, but with 50% carrying a hidden DT gene. I can imagine this leading to an unhappy individual several generations later if these birds leave my hands and the knowledge of the DT gene riding along isn't successfully accompanied. Particularly since I do not believe that the regular red golden could be visually distinguished from the DT gene carrier.
But crossed to a dark throat, these red golden X DT birds would produce 50% dark throats, and 50% hidden DT gene carriers. The 50% DT carriers would be in the same class as the first breeding, but it would be obvious which were DT and which were carriers.
I suspect that the yellow is also a single gene, and that the offspring of a male yellow and a female DT would all look like regular red goldens, but with the ability to produce yellows when crossed to a yellow, and DTs if crossed to a DT.
I believe the same is true of the peach, however I *suspect* there's more than a single gene causing the yellow to look peach. That being the case, I'm not sure what happens to that downstream. If there's more than a single gene at play, getting them to resort themselves in a latter generation seems like quite a challenging hand of cards to play.
My inclination is to cross the yellow and the DT. They come from very different places and are unlikely to be much related. The females could then be crossed back to their yellow father to produce more yellows, and one male crossed back to the DT hen to produce more DTs. The 50% normal looking reds from either pairing would likely end up on a dinner plate. Or if I can't do that, segregated into single gender pens for the remainder of their days. Honestly the goldens are remarkable for their willingness to tolerate my presence, and I might not have the heart to eat them.
So, thoughts? I stated the above as a set of beliefs that I hold. It seems consistent with what I've read online. However most of the things I read online are mostly doom and gloom about being condemned to a dark afterlife for having crossed colors of birds. I'm not looking to cross in a Lady Amherst and announce hybrid stock as the latest and greatest. Nor am I interested in producing any birds if the genetics are not fairly straight forward and predictable.
On the other hand if my beliefs are correct, I can get a few more birds of some interesting colors without having to bring in new stock and wait another year or two.
Thank you kindly for your time.
(Edit for clarity where previously I had "these" and "those".)
My question is about the color genetics of golden pheasants (Chrysopylus pictus, if I can type properly) and probably a secondary discussion regarding ethics of crossing birds.
I've got a dark throated hen without a mate to go with her. I can pair her with a regular red golden, a yellow golden, or a peach golden.
I'm inclined to believe that the dark throated (DT) is a single gene recessive, as compared to a regular red golden (RG).
The offspring of that RG x DT, when crossed to a red golden, would produce what looks like all red goldens, but with 50% carrying a hidden DT gene. I can imagine this leading to an unhappy individual several generations later if these birds leave my hands and the knowledge of the DT gene riding along isn't successfully accompanied. Particularly since I do not believe that the regular red golden could be visually distinguished from the DT gene carrier.
But crossed to a dark throat, these red golden X DT birds would produce 50% dark throats, and 50% hidden DT gene carriers. The 50% DT carriers would be in the same class as the first breeding, but it would be obvious which were DT and which were carriers.
I suspect that the yellow is also a single gene, and that the offspring of a male yellow and a female DT would all look like regular red goldens, but with the ability to produce yellows when crossed to a yellow, and DTs if crossed to a DT.
I believe the same is true of the peach, however I *suspect* there's more than a single gene causing the yellow to look peach. That being the case, I'm not sure what happens to that downstream. If there's more than a single gene at play, getting them to resort themselves in a latter generation seems like quite a challenging hand of cards to play.
My inclination is to cross the yellow and the DT. They come from very different places and are unlikely to be much related. The females could then be crossed back to their yellow father to produce more yellows, and one male crossed back to the DT hen to produce more DTs. The 50% normal looking reds from either pairing would likely end up on a dinner plate. Or if I can't do that, segregated into single gender pens for the remainder of their days. Honestly the goldens are remarkable for their willingness to tolerate my presence, and I might not have the heart to eat them.
So, thoughts? I stated the above as a set of beliefs that I hold. It seems consistent with what I've read online. However most of the things I read online are mostly doom and gloom about being condemned to a dark afterlife for having crossed colors of birds. I'm not looking to cross in a Lady Amherst and announce hybrid stock as the latest and greatest. Nor am I interested in producing any birds if the genetics are not fairly straight forward and predictable.
On the other hand if my beliefs are correct, I can get a few more birds of some interesting colors without having to bring in new stock and wait another year or two.
Thank you kindly for your time.
(Edit for clarity where previously I had "these" and "those".)
Last edited:
