Scovie Ducklings - MANY NEW PICS!

[Birch Run Farm]

OK John, tell me what you think these ducklings are going to look like...

They are starting to get some length to their bodies now, no noticeable size differences yet so I cannot tell males from females at the moment.

 

[Cottage Rose]

Adorable!
I want some!!!

It would seem to me that where they have dark down they will be black and where they have yellow down they will be white. Can you post pics of the parents?

 

[Cottage Rose]

PS
The drakes typically have bigger feet and beaks even when small like yours but sometimes its hard to tell
for sure until they get bigger.

Fr. John, so sorry to hear your MP eggs didn't make it.

 

[jmc]

I am no expert, that's for sure. But I am happy to give my studied opinion.

They will all be black and white--generally speaking.

On Wild Types

You have at least one nice Wild Type baby in there. In photo 2, the little one in the middle standing up, and the one at 4 o' clock in rel'n. to him, sitting down, look like fine Wild Types--at least from what I can tell.

Baby Mallard pattern, in other words.

Dark eye line on yellow face. Dark patch from forehead extending over top of head, down back of neck and spilling onto wings and back. Presence of yellow 'sun-spots' on back and wings.

Yellow front of neck, yellow chest and yellow underparts, yellowish legs WITH DARK SHADING ON THE LEGS/FEET, as distinct from dark spots on yellow feet/legs. very dark NOT PINK bill.

Such a bird--if a perfect specimen--will be all black, with SMOOTH caruncling, with much black pigment therein. I think I can see two at least, in there like that. Since it is uncommon to find Wild Types with perfect markings it may be that your Wild Types may end up having too much white. That is the typical fault w/the WT

Babies showing the best 'mallard pattern' and the most BROWN in their juvenile feathering, should be kept as breeders if you want future good WT.

In the Wild Type, it is unique that the yellow areas too become black. Every wild muscovy duckling--I mean the real wild birds, which are black--have the 'chipmunk'/ 'baby mallard'/dark and yellow pattern.

But a baby mallard-looking Muscovy with a pink bill or partly pink bill--when a day old--clearly will be another messy black and white, as such a bird's genome is 'corrupted' by a single gene for white. Such a baby, too would not have partly 'just yellow' feet.......

I really think you have some real WT in there, even if they don't come out perfect as adults; they seem to have the full array. That is GOOD!!!

More to come..................yawn

 

[jmc]

On Pieds

In that last pic, esp. (Nice job of getting their attention to look all the same way!), the bird on the far left--the one we've been following--it seems we could have a Pied. Notice those yellow legs and feet, also and half-pink bill.... (S)he may have too much color on the back, but that don't change the genome. Let's keep watching.........

The other one, with the eyeline. Interesting. I don't have much experience with scovies as you know (I just have a hobby of reading and studying their color genetics), but it almost makes me think of that bird as being a poorly marked Wild Type. It only lacks that dark stripe down the back of the neck, as far as I can tell. It at least carries a single gene for white, evidenced by the pink bill, if it is not a homozygous Magpie. But again, the presence of the eyeline means nothing. THAT WILL DISAPPEAR. I find that little one interesting..........

The other Duclair-ish one, with the nearly all-dark face (as distinct from the cap of the best-looking one) could also be a less-than-perfect Pied. Too much color on head. But hey, most Magpies are imperfect specimens, anyway!!!

Gonna be neat watching them develop.

Another thing: If you decide to breed them in some way in future, the appearance of offspring will also help us determine their genome.

But all that said, I DO NOT SEE HOW A BIRD CARRYING MERELY A SINGLE GENE FOR WHITE (WHICH PRODUCES A MOTTLED MESS) COULD MANIFEST A FAIRLY SYMMETRICAL PIED APPEARANCE WITHOUT ACTUALLY BEING A PIED

In other words, if our three birds, when feathered out, look like Pied birds--even if not the best--it seems to me that they are true Duclairs and not just more splotchy black and whites.

I don't think the Magpie pattern can happen "accidentally", and the colored and white pattern of the birds carrying only a single gene for white DOES LOOK LIKE, WELL...............AN ACCIDENT!!!!

 

[Birch Run Farm]

Here's the parents of this group:

 

[jmc]

Lovely pictures, Ann!

My Little Dufuss...............!

Neat, he has Wild Type feet, not the feet a 'Black' would have. He may actually be a poor Wild Type. I only say 'poor' in that he has bumpy red, and not mainly black and smooth, caruncles.

Black feet are the color of a Black, yellowish with dark shading/'racing stripes'??? (just like he has) is the foot color of the WTs.

An expert could correct me on the foot and Wild Type thing, and on what Dufuss really is; but this much is certain: 100% Blacks have black feet; WTs have yellowish with black shading on legs and feet.

So it seems the conclusion is.................

eh???

And such a pretty little Momma.
Remember I couldn't get a pic of her at your place? Well now here it is!!

nice fourth to you

 

[Cottage Rose]

Quote:
Bumpy and red curuncles are desirable according to the breed standard and the more (within reason of course)the merrier.
Smooth curuncles is not desirable.
Black on the curuncles is called "gypsy face" and not desirable.
I know some people don't like heavy curuncling and think its "ugly" but
if you think about it its what makes Muscovies unique and so prehistoric looking.


When you say wild type do you mean mallard
(vs. dusky)?
I've been told the mallard variety is desirable.
Forget why.

John did you get some more Muscovies??

 

[jmc]

Hi Vicky. Always nice to have you around!!!

Yes, as you say, bumpy red caruncles -- and in good quantity -- is what the standards want and demand.

There are APA standards for Blacks, Whites, Blues, and Chocolates--I know you know all this -- but not for anything else, as far as I've read.

There is no standard for the Wild Type Muscovy, other than what a wild muscovy looks like--and that is what the Wild Type refers too: both babies' and adults' appearance.

A Wild Type muscovy should have smooth, largely black caruncles, unlike the mutated Blacks, Whites, Blues, & Chocolates. Eventually white forewings with age, also........ A Wild Type muscovy having bumpy red caruncles, like our dear Dufuss, would not be the best example of a WT because of that

A Wild Type domestic muscovy has no manifest mutations. All other APA recognized varieties are the results of mutations. In fact, even the UNrecognized varieties are the result of mutations.

I say "no manifest mutations" because there are many mutations that are recessive; hence a beautiful Wild Type could actually be 'split bird' for many other color characteristics--a 'carrier' in other words, all the while being a picture perfect Wild Type.

BUT a WT scovy--duckling or adult--definitely does NOT have these mutations: limitation of black pigment; blue dilution; canizie. However, any baby or adult muscovy can display perfect Wild Type appearance and have at least one mutation of color at all the other sites, e.g. Lavender, Duclair, Barred, etc............ But that is probably highly improbable, eh?

I am no expert--heavens no!--but if you have the stamina, Vicky, I think I went into something about the Mallard thing re. babies in another of my long winded posts above

I find Dufuss an interesting little guy! Even if he needs a spankin' once in a while

YES, WE HAVE SIX NEW BABIES FROM BIRCH RUN FARM HERSELF!

 

[Birch Run Farm]

Well, Dufuss got to meet the kids face to face today. He bullied them a bit and they now know he is not a nice daddy so they stay away from him.

Which Muscovy plumage colors can be shown?