Lavender hen to black rooster

[pipdzipdnreadytogo]

Curious cause another lady has Mille de fleur Cochin. Do those breed true if I had a rooster and hens?

In that you should get a bird with red black and white somewhere on its body, yes. But the pattern and colors aren't solidified like they are in actual Mille fleur breeds

Agreed. Mille Fleur Cochins are still very much a work in progress, so when breeding them you'll often get birds with red, white, and black on them in different proportions instead of neat patterning like in Mille Fleur d'Uccles. They're pretty birds regardless, but not very consistent in coloring yet.

 

[RememberTheWay]

Lavender is genetically a solid black bird with two copies of the lavender gene. The lavender gene is recessive, so a bird must inherit two copies, one from the father and one from the mother, to express it. If inherited from only one parent, they will carry the gene and can pass it on to their own offspring, but will not express it because of it being recessive.

That means that, assuming your Black rooster is unrelated to any Lavenders and thus does not, himself, carry the gene, crossing him to a Lavender hen will just make Black offspring, all of which will carry a lavender gene from their Lavender mother. If you take one of their male offspring and cross him back to the Lavender hen, then about half of the resulting chicks from that cross will be Lavender.

Speckled can mean a lot of things, so I'd agree that we would need more details to know what the results would be in that cross. Most likely you would not get Lavender from a first generation cross in this case, either.

Isn't lavender a completely different gene? What your describing sounds like what I learned for black, blue, splash genetics. In the blue and splash birds are actually black birds, with one or two copies of the dilution gene. One copy makes a blue bird, and two copies makes a splash bird. Lavender and chocolate are completely different genes. At least from what I understand so far?

Am I wrong?

 

[pipdzipdnreadytogo]

You are not wrong at all! Reread my post, I was definitely not describing blue.

Blue is a partial dominant gene; one copy gives a partial effect, diluting black to blue-gray, and two copies give a more complete effect, diluting it further to grayish white with blue-gray flecks. That means that if a bird inherits one copy of the gene from just one parent, you still see some kind of expression of the gene.

Lavender, as I described in the post you quoted, is a recessive gene; two copies of the gene are necessary for it to express, one inherited from the mother and one from the father. If a bird inherits only one copy from one parent and not from the other, then there is no outward expression of lavender. However, such birds will still carry the gene and can pass it on to their own offspring.

Blue and lavender are two completely different genes, Bl for blue and lav for lavender. However, when speaking of Blue and Lavender as in the varieties instead of as in the specific genes, they are both dilutions of solid black, as is the Chocolate variety.

Now, the chocolate gene is also recessive, but differs from lavender in that chocolate is also sexlinked. That means it is found along the Z sex chromosome and not along the W sex chromosome. In birds, males have the matching pair ZZ and females have the mismatched ZW sex chromosomes. The chocolate gene does not express if any other gene is present at its particular locus and paired with it, but since it is only along the Z chromosome, females with their ZW pairing only need one copy on their Z chromosome to express it because there is no locus for the gene on the W chromosome and thus no other gene from that chromosome to pair with it. Males, however, need two copies of the gene to express it because otherwise there is another gene to effectively block it. So females are either chocolate (choc/-) or not (Choc+/-), but males can be chocolate (choc/choc), not-chocolate but carrying the gene (Choc+/choc), or not-chocolate and not carrying the gene (Choc+/Choc+).

I hope that clears some things up!

 

[BGMatt]

You are not wrong at all! Reread my post, I was definitely not describing blue.

Blue is a partial dominant gene; one copy gives a partial effect, diluting black to blue-gray, and two copies give a more complete effect, diluting it further to grayish white with blue-gray flecks. That means that if a bird inherits one copy of the gene from just one parent, you still see some kind of expression of the gene.

Lavender, as I described in the post you quoted, is a recessive gene; two copies of the gene are necessary for it to express, one inherited from the mother and one from the father. If a bird inherits only one copy from one parent and not from the other, then there is no outward expression of lavender. However, such birds will still carry the gene and can pass it on to their own offspring.

Blue and lavender are two completely different genes, Bl for blue and lav for lavender. However, when speaking of Blue and Lavender as in the varieties instead of as in the specific genes, they are both dilutions of solid black, as is the Chocolate variety.

Now, the chocolate gene is also recessive, but differs from lavender in that chocolate is also sexlinked. That means it is found along the Z sex chromosome and not along the W sex chromosome. In birds, males have the matching pair ZZ and females have the mismatched ZW sex chromosomes. The chocolate gene does not express if any other gene is present at its particular locus and paired with it, but since it is only along the Z chromosome, females with their ZW pairing only need one copy on their Z chromosome to express it because there is no locus for the gene on the W chromosome and thus no other gene from that chromosome to pair with it. Males, however, need two copies of the gene to express it because otherwise there is another gene to effectively block it. So females are either chocolate (choc/-) or not (Choc+/-), but males can be chocolate (choc/choc), not-chocolate but carrying the gene (Choc+/choc), or not-chocolate and not carrying the gene (Choc+/Choc+).

I hope that clears some things up!

Lavender will also cover blue (and splash) if the bird has two copies, just thought that was worth noting, but introducing lav into a blue program or vice versa is a headache.

Side note: Do you know how it interacts with recessive white out of curiosity? Like if both birds are homozygous for both recessive white and lav?

 

[RememberTheWay]

Lavender will also cover blue (and splash) if the bird has two copies, just thought that was worth noting, but introducing lav into a blue program or vice versa is a headache.

Side note: Do you know how it interacts with recessive white out of curiosity? Like if both birds are homozygous for both recessive white and lav?

How does lavender work with recessive white? Any tips for resources on poultry genetics?

 

[BGMatt]

How does lavender work with recessive white? Any tips for resources on poultry genetics?

I was asking pipd, I don’t know on that one.

Brian Reeder did a great book on color genetics. I’d recommend that.

 

[RememberTheWay]

You are not wrong at all! Reread my post, I was definitely not describing blue.

Blue is a partial dominant gene; one copy gives a partial effect, diluting black to blue-gray, and two copies give a more complete effect, diluting it further to grayish white with blue-gray flecks. That means that if a bird inherits one copy of the gene from just one parent, you still see some kind of expression of the gene.

Lavender, as I described in the post you quoted, is a recessive gene; two copies of the gene are necessary for it to express, one inherited from the mother and one from the father. If a bird inherits only one copy from one parent and not from the other, then there is no outward expression of lavender. However, such birds will still carry the gene and can pass it on to their own offspring.

Blue and lavender are two completely different genes, Bl for blue and lav for lavender. However, when speaking of Blue and Lavender as in the varieties instead of as in the specific genes, they are both dilutions of solid black, as is the Chocolate variety.

Now, the chocolate gene is also recessive, but differs from lavender in that chocolate is also sexlinked. That means it is found along the Z sex chromosome and not along the W sex chromosome. In birds, males have the matching pair ZZ and females have the mismatched ZW sex chromosomes. The chocolate gene does not express if any other gene is present at its particular locus and paired with it, but since it is only along the Z chromosome, females with their ZW pairing only need one copy on their Z chromosome to express it because there is no locus for the gene on the W chromosome and thus no other gene from that chromosome to pair with it. Males, however, need two copies of the gene to express it because otherwise there is another gene to effectively block it. So females are either chocolate (choc/-) or not (Choc+/-), but males can be chocolate (choc/choc), not-chocolate but carrying the gene (Choc+/choc), or not-chocolate and not carrying the gene (Choc+/Choc+).

I hope that clears some things up!

Definitely. Thank you for that. Love these kind of conversations. Sorry for the confusion. Think it was me not you

 

[pipdzipdnreadytogo]

Side note: Do you know how it interacts with recessive white out of curiosity? Like if both birds are homozygous for both recessive white and lav?

As far as I'm aware, regardless of other genes a bird carries, if it's homozygous for recessive white then it will just be white. Recessive white works by inhibiting the production of tyrosinase, the enzyme used to make the melanins that color feathers. Without that enzyme, there's simply no pigment to deposit within the feathering, regardless of other genes present.

Definitely. Thank you for that. Love these kind of conversations. Sorry for the confusion. Think it was me not you

No problem at all! I'm always happy to help if I can with genetics

 

[BGMatt]

As far as I'm aware, regardless of other genes a bird carries, if it's homozygous for recessive white then it will just be white. Recessive white works by inhibiting the production of tyrosinase, the enzyme used to make the melanins that color feathers. Without that enzyme, there's simply no pigment to deposit within the feathering, regardless of other genes present.

That’s what I thought, but I wasn’t sure. Thank you.