Icelandic Chickens

[Rafter H Farms]

I will have to look up other references to the vaulted skull deformities in Icelandic chickens so I can post it for those who care to learn but I know from personal experience that it does occur in both Icelandic chickens and Swedish Flower hens. It may be the case that the crested gene is a problem regardless of the mating but we have not seen this defect , so far , in non-crested to crested matings. Granted we are not "experts"and there are those who will continue to breed deformed chicks no matter what evidence is presented to them because they are "breeders". I am not posting about this or anything else for those 'breeders" who are self-confessed experts. We are admittedly novice poultry enthusiast' and I did not post about the lethal crested gene to stir up hate and discontent. Merely to inform other enthusiast' of our experience and worries. I assume that there are others , like us , who are not experts but who wish to learn from this site. Please, do not take my word for it. Punch it up on google and learn for yourself. I apologize for seeming to cry wolf and of course you are all welcome to do as you choose but as for us ... we will be trying to eliminate the lethal gene worry in our small flock of Icelandics and Swedish flower hens even if that means culling all crested birds at some point. We may not be true "breeders" but we won't be intentionally breeding for lethal mutation on our farm.

 

[Rafter H Farms]

Here is just one of several images I have found in a quick search on line. This is a Polish chicken I believe.

 

[Rafter H Farms]

This is an a drawing of a vaulted skull above and normal skull below. I copied this from a 2009 BYC post.

 

[NotAFarm]

Audun showing crest as an adult with Eik


Audun as a juvenile, June 2010

I have had my Icelandics for five years. The two original cockerels had crests. Not big, poofy crests, just a few feathers sticking up as juveniles and "mane like" as adults. The two original pullets did not have any crests. Cockerels are from Sigrid's line and pullets from Lyle Behl's line. Both hens hatched crested chicks, all looking very similar to their father's crests, some feathers but nothing big. I have only hatched two that I would consider to have big, poofy crests and both were pullets. One was Eik who went to live with BYCer Myrth and the other is two months old and lives here. I have never had a vaulted skull chick born here but I don't breed for crests either. Sigrid gave very good advice on page 58 (post #573) of this thread, part of it in response to a questions I asked on pg 57 (post #566). It will not allow me to quote it here so you will have to read it for yourself. (for those that may not know, you can get to page 57 or 58 by clicking between the 1.....click here...2122 and jump to the page number you type in)

Some people may think that the only way to get others interested in Icelandics (or SFHs) is to have very poofy crests and wildly mottled birds and they may be right about certain people. Some people may be interested in preserving the genetics of them and not so worried about breeding a bird that looks a certain way, just worried about their purity. We run into problems when we decide we need to breed "toward" or "away" from certain traits in our Icelandics, or any breed for that matter. Genes are lost when we do this because we breed ONLY mottled, or ONLY crested, or ONLY single comb, ONLY yellow legs, etc. Things may be "dug-up", things buried because nature buried them by not allowing birds carrying genes for those things to survive and breed....recessed deep in the genome but brought forward by "putting pressure" on certain traits. I hope that we can heed Sigrid's advice so that the breed remains a genetic treasure that many more generations can enjoy.

 

[Rafter H Farms]

Not a Farm , I respect your position and opinions and I would agree with the majority of what you and Sigrid have to say about the overall issue of the Icelandic chickens. We will be doing our part to keep the Icelandic breed pure and thriving here in Montana and we hope that many others across the US do the same because they seem to be all that we have read that they are and then some. However , on the lines of not messing the breed up .... I don't for a minute believe that all or even a few Icelandic farmers abstained from selecting for traits that they valued in there flocks. Who doesn't select the prettiest rooster to live with the hens while the others go in the stew pot? Who , hasn't kept a reject just because it was so darned friendly ? Maybe, selection was so varied from farm to farm that we don't see it in the birds we are raising here in the US but none the less it's a given of human nature to medle , even if unintentional . I'm sure that purist's would like to believe that there is something romantically Darwinian at foot with this breed but the truth remains. The Vikings raiders who brought the ancestors of the Icelandic chicken with them to Iceland or at least past them on to Norwegian settlers in Iceland had selection criteria as well , though it was likely selection based on those most easily caught in a raid. Having stated my opinion , which is all this is , I'm sure I a have offended and even angered some readers but honestly that is not my intention. I simply would like those who are capable of understanding to know that although I definitely subscribe to survival of the fittest I just don't agree with intentionally forcing a recessive , lethal trait on my birds. At the end of the day , we are indeed selecting against the trait of crippled and lethal mutation but we won't lose any sleep over it. Thanks for your understanding.

 

[NotAFarm]

Not a Farm , I respect your position and opinions and I would agree with the majority of what you and Sigrid have to say about the overall issue of the Icelandic chickens. We will be doing our part to keep the Icelandic breed pure and thriving here in Montana and we hope that many others across the US do the same because they seem to be all that we have read that they are and then some. However , on the lines of not messing the breed up .... I don't for a minute believe that all or even a few Icelandic farmers abstained from selecting for traits that they valued in there flocks. Who doesn't select the prettiest rooster to live with the hens while the others go in the stew pot? Who , hasn't kept a reject just because it was so darned friendly ? Maybe, selection was so varied from farm to farm that we don't see it in the birds we are raising here in the US but none the less it's a given of human nature to medle , even if unintentional . I'm sure that purist's would like to believe that there is something romantically Darwinian at foot with this breed but the truth remains. The Vikings raiders who brought the ancestors of the Icelandic chicken with them to Iceland or at least past them on to Norwegian settlers in Iceland had selection criteria as well , though it was likely selection based on those most easily caught in a raid. Having stated my opinion , which is all this is , I'm sure I a have offended and even angered some readers but honestly that is not my intention. I simply would like those who are capable of understanding to know that although I definitely subscribe to survival of the fittest I just don't agree with intentionally forcing a recessive , lethal trait on my birds. At the end of the day , we are indeed selecting against the trait of crippled and lethal mutation but we won't lose any sleep over it. Thanks for your understanding.

Rafter, I am not offended or angered by your post(s). It is a good thing to spark conversation about anything that could affect our flocks. I stated how long I've had my flock to show that I am not, and will never be, an expert on these wonderful birds. To "sort of quote" T. Jefferson, I am an old woman, but a young poultry keeper. I don't think the vaulted skull is a trait that would have been desirable among the settlers because they have a higher chance of brain injury due to the conformation of the skull. I agree that some type of selection has to have been made throughout the centuries that the landrace was developed. The ability to forage, raise young, flock protection, thriftiness, etc would have been highly desirable. While it is verboten to speak of here on BYC, one of the traits often bred for among many early groups was for aggressive cocks, not to people, but to other cocks. Vaulted skulls would have most definitely been something that would have been bred against. This could be why at this time in history, this trait has surfaced. It is not an imminent danger among birds used for utility and not for sport, but could be if not properly bred against. It is good that we have been informed that this trait is something we should be watchful for in our flocks. As I said, I have bred crested to crested here without issue but don't have any heavily crested birds so things here may not reflect what others see in their flocks.
I don't have the luxury of keeping hundreds of birds so I have to chose which stay and which go. I love it when I am able to put together a starter flock from what I have for someone that is interested. In order to do that, I need to keep a certain amount of stock (much to my DH's chagrin). I must choose... you must choose...we all must choose to some degree... but we need to choose wisely....often with our head, occasionally with our heart.
I agree that it is a given of human nature to meddle, whether intentional or unintentional, and we more often than not don't understand all of the implications of our meddling until it is too late.
I hope to see you post here often in the future and let us know how your flock is. We are a small, but passionate, group and all Icelandic lovers are welcome.

 

[drumstick diva]

amen

 

[Rafter H Farms]

Thank you , Not a Farm , for your response. It gave me a smile straight away this morning and I have been looking forward to telling you how much I appreciated reading your note. I will have to admit that I am prone to becoming impassioned about animals and issues that I care about and though I do try to calmly and rationally make my point I know that I do not always come across tactfully. I do hope that other BYC members , especially Icelandic thread folks , will accept my information for what it's worth to them. We love our Icelandic chickens , as I'm sure you all love yours , and we enjoy reading about everyone's experience. Thanks again for your last post Not a Farm.

 

[KaldakurFarm]

I'm always learning by asking, so I ask if I have questions. Plus I like genetics, I am geeky like that. I mean in no way to poke, prod or otherwise irritate. My questions are in pure curiosity, nothing more.

In regard to the vaulted skull issue... does it only happen with crested birds? Has it ever come about when crossing two uncrested birds that anyone knows of?

@ Rafter H - Do you know if the parents of the eggs you hatched had vaulted skulls or were they just crested? Heavily crested or smaller crests?

I know some think the landrace type seems to be depicted as a "free love" type breed sometimes... but I don't think anyone here is naive enough to think that nobody ever chose a bird for a certain trait or reason. I don't think anyone is saying there was some random crapshoot at the farm and whoever won got to stay out of the pot and make the next generation. I personally believe that they are just trying to say that there wasn't anything in particular that was bred for, like lavender coloring, or blue legs... or large crests... There was no "standard of perfection." Please, do correct my interpretation if I am wrong. I'd rather be knowledgeable than right .

I am really interested in the genetics of the skulls though. I'm very interested to know if it can crop up several generations forward.

 

[Rafter H Farms]

KaldakurFarm , the Icelandic chicks that we unfortunately hatched with vaulted skull were from matings of hens with small to maybe medium crests and the roo we put over them in that first cross had even a smaller crest. None of which have vaulted skull. The SFH chicks who were deformed came from an outside breeder who appear to have several roos over a batch of hens both crested and non-crested. To be painfully honest we were ignorant of the dangers. To be fair it seems that many folks here and elsewhere are having good luck with these lightly crested matings and perhaps we are just unlucky in our pens. Even the farm we got our start from emailed my wife back to say that they had not seen any vaulted skull in any of their birds either. We are going to steer clear of the crested to crested matings to try to avoid the problem in the future but you do bring up an interesting point. Can two non-crested birds pass on the vaulted skull ??? I'm assuming that it is not only possible but probable if vaulted skull has appeared in the bloodline at any point . For the same reason that my son looks more like my father than he does me. I am just barely beginning to wrap my noggin around poultry genetics but even in my Angus based commercial cows I will occasionally get a Hereford looking calf and that is several generations back. I would assume just about any trait , either dominant or recessive could pop up at any given time. That is after all how some breeds got their start in the beginning. Simply cropping out as a sport and someone liked it. I very much liked the way you describe the landrace. The thought of free-love hippy chickens gave me a giggle. Not that I'm against hippies I just imagine a rooster in Iceland saying " All we need is love baby ."