Icelandic Chickens

[The Sheriff]

Quote:
Good luck Shawn! I just candled the 36 eggs in the incubator at barely Day 3 and all but two have definite veining. Of the two that don't, the yolks are the characteristic red that they get just before veining so I am sure that they are fertile as well. So the issues seem to have more to do with shipping than anything else. I can ship you replacement eggs at the end of the week and we can try one more time before I give up on shipped eggs. I would be happy to do that.

Mary

 

[centrarchid]

BoldogKennel,

I am zoologist / agriculture researcher that spends a lot of effort on issues related to genetics. My experience and position on this is a function of my selective breeding efforts on one hand and wildlife conservation efforts on the other. Breeds as generally considered today are artificial and usually not viable without considerable stabilizing selection, based on SOP or similar criteria. Populations like Icelandic chickens might best be described as a landrace rather than as a breed. Look up landraces to see how criteria for them are typically vague. The following my efforts to answer questions you pose.


#1: 900 years is a pretty long time. Does it not make sense that new birds were brought over all during the time that Icelandwas being colonized? Time does not always reduce diversity. If a population is large enough to where inbreeding does not remove remove alleles faster than they are generated by mutation, then diversity can persist or increase. If only a single chicken population existed on Iceland, then that is a distinct possibility. Low rates of introduction cannot be ruled. Almost certainly some birds traded but not enough to make significant difference either because of small numbers or they were not majorly different from those already present on island.

#2: I would imagine sheep, horses, goats, dogs, etc were brought over about the same time as chickens. I KNOW the dogs breed true to type, and I think the horses and sheep do to. So is there any other breed of animal on Iceland that had this strange trait of not breeding to type? Why are the chickens the only ones who did this? The chickens as I understand are valued for their low maintenance / low management requirements. That suggest selection by farmers was not serious. It is quite possible the environment and the chickens themselves had greater selection on characteristics of the Icelandic that define the population making it unique. With possibly no selection pressure for anything other than performance will give something like the mustang or American game chickens (the latter I, and probably you based on your website, know something about). Lots of variation that would give someone breeding for shows (SOP) a conniption fit would not be a problem if animals have constitution to meet selection criteria that truly matter.

#3: Where can I read about the genetic "uniqueness" of the Icelandic chicken? Specifically, I'm interested in seeing how "far away" they are from other chicken populations. I have not found studies of that nature either. But, if theory correct which I think it is, then Icelandic chickens with their very suite of characters have concern over are a potential gold mine in respect to genes that no other domestic breeds have. These genes could be the future savior to some aspect of our poultry if some disease or the like threatened most of our other inbred strains.


I certainly appreciate any information given. My little guys are cute and sweet, but until I can get some reassurance that my common sense is incorrect, I'm not comfortable thinking I want to promote these birds as "pure". Once I read some scientific info on them, and by what genetic mechanism they are unlike ALL other animal breeds that tend to breed toward type, I am just a bit uncomfortable. I'm not one to just repeat what I have been told. The ALL above is incorrect. Examples to contrary are wolves, Cape hunting dogs, Labrador retriever (black, yellow, chocolate), guppies (wild-type), humans (even siblings look different), many species with alternative mating morphs, game chickens except those bred for show, many grasshoppers and Carolina mantids to name but a few. You change rules on that and I can site examples that will not breed to type but meet your criteria.
You are thinking in terms of a breed which in this context is an artificial (human) selected population from which you intentionally remove variation, usually to promote some change in performance. When dealing with modern dog and non-production chicken breeds, selection is overwhelmingly towards some look. Best example is where you conduct linebreeding back to same animal which has desired and often very narrow set of attributes, which in your eyes approaches some measure of perfection. If looks were not overwhelming concern; coat color, type, size, etc. would be much more variable.

 

[BoldogKennel]

Thank you very much for your detailed reply.

On #3, on one website I found reference to testing which would have the results due in early 2011. I would have thought that with the importance of genetic variation in today's livestock, this would have been one of the first things looked at? My guess is that these birds are going to be found to have a good dose of leghorn in them. I just find it counter intuitive to have huge combs on a "landrace" bird from a very cold country. Kinda like having thompson gazelle there instead of icelandic sheep... After all, even if none of the farmers cared about selection, NATURE does! : )

I'm curious about the wild animals you say that do not breed true to type? Wolves and cape hunting dogs? Wolves (to my untrained eye) appear to come in just a few genetically explained color patterns, sorta like German shepherd dogs, and the cape hunting dogs appear "different" to the eye due to the merle type (I'm sure its not called that) pattern to their coat. But they are ALL that color - not some pure white, some pure black and some spotted. I could understand a LARGE pool of colors, but when you add in different combs, different leg colors, feather feet, no feather feet, tassle, no tassle, head and body shape - etc, then all I ask is that someone explain to me how these can really be considered "a breed"? If, as you seem to be saying, I should call them a "landrace" instead of a breed, then how is that different from taking one chicken from every backwoods farm in Kentucky, mixing them together and calling them "Kentucky Chickens?" They would still be scatterbred mutts from an area. And they wouln't breed true. Which would mean they were NOT A BREED.

I hope you take this in the spirit it is written. I'm one of those people who'se hair just crawls when I hear people repeating the same inane (and untrue) crap about dog breeds that they read over and over again in dog books (i.e., like "ridgebacks were BRED to hunt lions" because a very few people used them for that purpose). I just want to be REALLY sure that this story about these birds being "unique" is true, and that what information I pass on is accurate. I'm just a little curious why no DNA results are available yet. Maybe they are? I hope so! I'd love this lovely "remote chicken" story to be true!!

 

[Mahonri]

I've had legohorns and I don't see similarities between my Icelandics and Leghorns other than the earlobes.

 

[centrarchid]

I'm curious about the wild animals you say that do not breed true to type? Wolves and cape hunting dogs?

Genetic variation within the wild dogs is not limited to characters used to define a breed. Variation in the abundance of alleles that are important for responding to disease, complexity of behavior, ability to deal with a broad range of toxins or parasites over broad geographic ranges. Generally wild species such as gray wolves and red jungle fowl shine in such respects while only the landrace version of their domesticated kin hold even a candle to what the wild populations repressent. Comparatively the breeds, most of which are of very recent origin, exist as inbred messes that within wach approaches being clonal. In the long-term, the scatterbred mutts are the more enduring route for domesticated populations. Evidence for that is that in virtually all, possibly all cases of existing breeds are derived from mutt populations. Their are very few instances of multiple breeds being derived from a single breed, unless considerable influence comes from outcrossing with other breeds. The genetic variation within a breed simply is not adequate.

Icelandic chickens as a group are not a breed, they are a landrace. Breeds are artificial while landraces, despite being under influence of artificial and natural selection pressures tend to be persistant without guidance from an arbitrary set specifications as to who should be used as brood stock.

Icelandics may very well prove related to Mediteranian class chickens yet broods it own offspring. The climate of Iceland in coastal areas is milder than what my birds in central Missouri must contend with. Those areas of Iceland do not get as cold or as hot. The Icelandic chickens did not get babied with supplemental grains and had to genuinely forage for their own nutrition on a forage base likely more vegetative plant based than landrace flocks in other areas.

The variation noted for Icelandics may have, under most conditions, no impact on selection therefore if the population is sufficiantly large, such variation is not removed by selection / inbreeding / bottlenecking.

To find out if Icelandics are as indicated, you may have to concentrate your search elsewhere and contact poultry researchers in Iceland and other parts of world, or fund your own research. Otherwise your are in same boat as game chicken people, do you trust what you read and hear?

 

[tazcat70]

This may help to understand landraces.

http://www.englishshepherdhome.com/landrace.htm

 

[Jake Levi]

Hi Diane

You live in a beautiful area for sure, I love it there, I picked the NE because I worked there ~ 30 years ago and loved it, across the border in ID too, I also love the area southwest of Spokane.

We share an interest, rather interest on my part and passion on yours, the American Pit Bull, I had a Staff and she wasnt of the temperament needed on a farm, she loved to kill, since then I have been around a number of Pit Bulls on farms, and a breed developed from them the Boerbull in South Africa, they are great dogs, and I have seen a number of American Pit Bulls the same, really hard to match let alone beat as a companion dogs, I have been wondering about getting a pup to raise up packing with goats. To transfer that human bond to the goats as his extended family. The Boerbulls in SA totally ignore stock, goats and chickens other then as something to also guard.

Re the Leghorns, I turn the wondering around, in that I think the Leghorn has some of the Norwegian stock in its ancestry early on. On my SC Icelandics the comb is much thicker then I am used to seeing on Leghorns. So I think it is a trait that was able to survive in those flocks along the coastal areas. Speculation on my part, but so much is right now until we can learn far more about them. Frankly I would love to visit Iceland and spend some serious time seeing what I can find out, including the research farm and the folks who preserved them as we know them.

I have a huge number of questions on them that is going to take time to get answers to, but it will be time well spent.

Re the Landrace/Breed question, that comes up always on isolated livestock. Do Icelandics breed true?? Certainly on everything but esthetics, I really dont think that appearance was at all a selection factor for the Icelandic flock owner, hardiness was, egg production , and stew pots for the unproductive.

If we pair Icelandics we get Icelandics, with a wide variation in colors , comb types. I think the crests did have a survival factor in a bit more warmth for the heads. I am just speculating here too. I really want to talk to some famers and flock owners in Iceland. There is a LOT to learn.

I know that, just being around my little flock has been an experience and a half, I have been around chickens all of my life, my grandmother was a very serious farm breeder of RIRs, she let no unstandard ones survive in her flock. She had a big family that loved chicken and dumplings. But she had good RIRs and local folks were often coming by to get chicks which she sold for what my grandfather thought was incredible price back then.

So voice your questions, chances are excellent that others have asked them, and/or thought them. They are good questions. For my part it is well worth while to continue on with them as I get the answers. For certain it is a breed that has long been in isolation more then most any other breeds we know about. How isolated will take awhile to determine. In the meantime I am enjoying mine !

Life is good, and better with Icelandic Chickens and Goats !

 

[kathyinmo]

Quote:
WHOA! Working these darn 12 hour night shifts, I find myself late to the party!

In a nutshell ..... my opinion ......

You say: "As someone who is intensely interested in genetics and breeding in dogs."
Maybe you should consider sticking to dogs.

You say: "I am trying to decide if I want to keep them or not, as many of my dog friends are telling me that I've been chumped."
My suggestion would be that you listen to your friends. After all, they are your friends.

You say: I'm not comfortable thinking I want to promote these birds as "pure". I am just a bit uncomfortable. I'm not one to just repeat what I have been told.
I am thinking you may be more comfortable outing yourself from the Icelandic preservation program we have here. Yes?

Again, just my opinion.

 

[Happy Chooks]

Mary....that goat video is HILARIOUS! OMG my kids and I were busting up!

Boldog........So much of the research Mary has done is on this thread. She has generously shared her wealth of knowledge on these birds. If you aren't convinced by her research, then by all means research them yourself. There has been genetic testing on the Icelandic birds - and the results are that they are 78% different than all other breeds today. They also have 22 alleles instead of 24. I don't see how it's possible for them to be "mixed breeds" as you suggest and still have this genetic difference. If mixed, this genetic uniqueness would be lost, or at the very least diluted. If you don't believe that information either, then have your own birds tested.

Studies on the Galapagos have proven that there can be genetic differences when a breed of any animal is isolated. Just because visually, these birds have different patterns, doesn't mean they are not pure. It tells you that they likely had no predator, so it wasn't a trait needed for survival.

 

[tazcat70]

Quote:
What a great way to put it!

Icelandics diversity is not for some. Some people like to have something to strive for. With the Icelandics it is what they are...no improvement needed.