Lilac Turkeys?

[MissTurkey4]

In 2000, Paula Johnson of the SPPA said we should refer to the b+b+DD genotype as lilac.
She also stated that what Sandhill raises is not a lilac, but actually a red slate, b+b+Dd basically, but lots of his also carry b1 ,cg ,ng and r as well from what I have seen in the results.

So she is the one who officially named these.



Kevin

So who was it in the SPPA that first called them a three way cross in the 1998 census?

Lilac:

Lilacs are silvery blue with red flecking, wings are white and the tail has a wide band of red. This is an old variety that actually produces four color types. When breeding Lilac to Lilac, only 1/4 of the offspring will be Lilac. Another 1/4 will be fawn (tan colored), which will breed true. Another 1/4 will be red slate (slate with reddish tint and red tail), which will breed true. The last 1/4 will be a light bronze color. Just 13 hens and 11 toms were listed which makes up less than 1% of the Historical turkey population reported. The largest flock has 5 hens​

 

[crj]

Quote:
From your picture you do not have a slate gene in your turkeys.

Oh, bummer

 

[MissTurkey4]

I was reading about "Lilacs" dated 1945 and recessive slate genes on page 313 and 314. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1209290/pdf/305.pdf

When recessive slates of the constitution RR sl sl were

mated to Bourbon Reds (ASMUNDSO19N40 ), birds with the slate color modified

to a reddish slate were obtained in the F2 generation. These apparently resembled

what TAILE(1933)called lilac.



Blue lilac (B r sl)

Lilac (b r sl)

It does not copy well so i did not include it all.

 

[MissTurkey4]

Quote:
What Glenn Drowns of Sandhill calls a lilac is not the same geneotype so IMO should not be called a lilac. He has the genotype of his all mixed up anyway.He lists sl as his slate gene and that is the recessive slate gene, (No longer in the US as far as anyone knows). I have also seen pics of what Glenn calls lilacs and also asked the people what the results were when they bred them to non slate birds and it was obvious to me from the results that the dominate slate gene D is what is actually in his combo not sl. As when you breed sl to a non slate then you will not get any slate phenotypes out of it, but with dominate slate D to non slate, slate phenotypes will come out, and that is what happened so that proves right there that his are actually dominate slate.


Anyway we should not be using the exact same names for birds of different genotypes, each should have their own unique variety name.

Marsden and Martin put the name lilac on b+b+DD first so that should be the one we use for this genotype and not for any other one.



Kevin

I find it interesting that the example they use in the above link that I posted is exacty what you say proves it can't be recessive slate.

 

[Porterturkeys]

Quote:

So who was it in the SPPA that first called them a three way cross in the 1998 census?

It was her as well but in the 2000 SPPA census report, she decided we needed to clear up all the confusion and stop calling all kinds of variations by the name lilac that sort of looked the same and actually pin it down to a specific genotype.
Guess you don't have a copy of the 2000 SPPA census report for your notes or you would have known that.




Kevin

 

[Porterturkeys]

Quote:
I haven't read that info for awhile but remember reading other comments that it was doubted as well they had their genotypes correct. I believe one genotype listed homozygous for red but that will not make a lilac coloration at all, as red will dominate the slate.
The sl gene is no longer in the US anyway so we cannot do anything with that gene anymore.

Names can and do change over the years, So we need to put a name on what we want to call a lilac today, Do you want a lilac to be a mish-mash of this and that of something that doesn't and never will breed true or would you prefer a true breeding lilac that someday could be able to be admitted to the APA for recognition?

That is my point here,




Kevin

 

[watchdogps]

Quote:
Just a note on genetic inheritance here - the math above is not quite accurate...In the above situation, EACH egg/bird will have a 50/50 chance of being either fully or carrying bronze. It does not mean that if you have 10 eggs, 5 will be full, and 5 will be half. So, you COULD have 10 eggs that all turn out to be fully bronze.

 

[MissTurkey4]

Quote:

So who was it in the SPPA that first called them a three way cross in the 1998 census?

It was her as well but in the 2000 SPPA census report, she decided we needed to clear up all the confusion and stop calling all kinds of variations by the name lilac that sort of looked the same and actually pin it down to a specific genotype.
Guess you don't have a copy of the 2000 SPPA census report for your notes or you would have known that.




Kevin

The SPPA has done a poor job of updating their website. Maybe the information in it was not important enough for them to put it on line. The last census listed for turkeys is 1999. http://www.feathersite.com/Poultry/SPPA/SPPA.html If you do have a copy, I am sure the people here would love to read why she renamed the Lilac turkey. Personaly I will stay with the historical name. To me a turkey that was already named Lilac in 1933 from TAILE that was not the genotype that you now call Lilac only adds to the confusion. It is very clear that your genotype was called slate at that time and if it needed a name it should have been something like bronze slate to give the history it came from, and different from the Lilac turkey that TAILE wrote about in 1933.

I haven't read that info for awhile but remember reading other comments that it was doubted as well they had their genotypes correct. I believe one genotype listed homozygous for red but that will not make a lilac coloration at all, as red will dominate the slate.
The sl gene is no longer in the US anyway so we cannot do anything with that gene anymore.

Below is from Oregon State. I think it explains a little about the recessive slate gene. http://oregonstate.edu/instruct/ans-tgenes/TG7.html#plumage
Slate, Recessive
Reference
J. Hered. (1940) 31 : 215-217.

A recessive slate plumage color of turkeys.

Asmundson, V. S.

Description
This is a second source of slate colored plumage, resulting from a recessive allele. Interaction of this recessive gene with alleles at the red locus resulted in two colored phenotypes slate color with barred flight feathers and penciled tail feathers (R+/R+ and R+/r ).

Inheritance: Recessive, Autosomal

Gene Symbol: sl

This also talks about the recessive slate gene on the red locus. http://books.google.com/books?id=VM...v=onepage&q=red locus recessive slate&f=false​

 

[Porterturkeys]

Actually Taibel(1933) was not working with recessive slate, he had birds that were dominate slate on a bronze base.

Reread that info on Taibel's slate research and you will see that what was originally called lilac by him had to be b+b+DD, the results of his study proved that genotype.
So what I raise is the original historic lilac genotype, what Asmundson had in 1936 was recessive slate which appeared out of a bronze flock at that time. He said his cross looked similar to Taibel's lilac. But it was not the same genotype of course.


Kevin



Quote:

 

[HallFamilyFarm]

Quote:
Steve,

Orange Ribbon over on the Sussex thread is trying to contact you about some Speckled Sussex. The thread is at https://www.backyardchickens.com/forum/viewtopic.php?id=279509&p=117 and is post #1161.