I need help choosing... Coronation Sussex or Silkies?

[Sonoran Silkies]

Split and recessive are not the same. Split means the bird only carries one copy of the gene; for a recessive gene, it does not show when split. With lavender, a split is Lav+/lav, whereas a bird showing lavender is lav/lav. A bird who is Lav+/Lav+ is also not split, but you cannot tell the difference between it and a split. You can only know because of breeding: either one parent was pure for lavender (and therefore showed it) or bred to a lavender or another split produced chicks showing lavender.

 

[amazondoc]

Quote:
What Sonoran said is correct. The person running the auction is using the term "recessive" incorrectly.

"Split" is actually a lay term for "heterozygous". IOW, it means that the animal is carrying one copy of a recessive gene.

If the animal is homoyzgous for lavender, then it looks lavender. If the animal is heterozygous (split) for lavender, then it looks normal.

 

[TurtleFeathers]

I hope I'm not hijacking the thread from the OP - I think its been established that everyone thinks coronation is the way to go, right?

I've got some genetic questions about these birds - and its purely to satisfy my own curiosity, as coronation sussex are definitely NOT in my budget at this time...

I'm new to the chicken world, coming from 20 years of raising parrots and working with their genetics. In psittacines, 'split' = heterozygous, and 'visual' = homozygous. (The word 'recessive' isn't used to describe the bird itself - 'recessive' simply refers to the TYPE of gene and/or mode of inheritance of the mutation, as does the words 'sex-linked' and 'dominant', etc...)

Anyway, a psittacine is guaranteed to be 'split to' a recessive gene if one of their parents was visual for that same gene. Does the same hold true with chickens and recessive genes? Lavender, for instance? Like, if the roo was a 'visual' coronation sussex (ie. homozygous lavender), and the hen was a regular light sussex (not 'split to' anything), then would all the offspring (F1) be visually light sussex that were guaranteed to be 'split to' lavender (ie. heterozygous lavender)?

And if so, and if those offspring from the F1 generation (light sussex split to lavender) were bred together, would they always produce columbian patterned offspring? (as in columbian x columbian = columbian) Or is it possible for them to produce a solid lavender bird?

The explanation is probably very simple, but please bear with me - I'm just not there yet with chickens...

Thanks!

 

[Elite Silkies]

Quote:
Big Blue, if I miss the auction I will pm you.........

 

[Elite Silkies]

The birds in question are more than likely Split

Roo is a Coronation Sussex (shows the Lavender gene)
Hen is a Light Sussex (does not show the lavender gene)

So, when their offspring is bred together they should produce a small percentage of Coronation Sussex (showing the lavender gene). Is this correct? So, say out of 100 eggs 25% would be Coronation (lavender).

Or do I have it all messed up?

 

[TurtleFeathers]

Quote:
Edited because I read this wrong - disregard previous message (sorry!). I think you're right.

 

[Big Blue]

If you are through splitting hairs. Split is the lay term that the bird has one copy of the recessive gene.

 

[Dustin Biery]

I think they create a valid point, even though you may not like it. Even a bird that is visually a Coronation Sussex is still a recessive bird. They just display their recessive trait.

 

[daps2000]

Nice eggs ... I can't wait for my Coronations to start laying! I did notice that your Sussexs don't have as white of legs as mine do ... and they seem a little smaller? I wonder why? Kinda of really hard to tell from the picture! Anyways ... NICE BIRDS!

Quote: