Shadrach's Ex Battery and Rescued chickens thread.

Something I've been thinking about lately is how we think about camouflage with our chickens. A lot of people aim for plumage that matches the color of the environment exactly. This is still a very important consideration, but maybe not how people think. It's easy to forget, but no chicken predator sees the world the way we do. Most mammals are dichromats (only see two primary colors). Birds as a whole (including chickens and hawks) are tetrachromats (see 4 primary colors). Since there's no way for us to perceive the world the way that birds do, we can hardly guess at what camouflages a chicken from hawks, if it's even possible. However, there are ways to get a very rough idea of how a mammalian predator sees its environment. It's in no way perfect, but I found an app meant to simulate colorblindness in humans that gives an approximation of dichromatic vision. I'll show some examples of how it looks:

Here's a trio of youngsters at the in-laws place, who MIL has named the Three Stooges. From the human perspective, they have okay camouflage with this backdrop, but could be better. They have nice patterns that break up their silhouettes, but their deep red color is much more saturated than the greys of their surroundings.
2476.jpg

However, from a dichromatic perspective, it's totally different:

2530.jpg


They appear to blend in beautifully. Their rusty red patterns become a benefit rather than a hindrance. This puzzled me at first, though the reason should have been obvious. A more striking example would spell it out for me:
2508.jpg

I had this picture of a British standard araucana on my phone, so I decided to use it. She sticks out like a sore thumb on this lawn, right?

2516.jpg

Again, perfectly matched! (Though obviously, she has no cover to hide in)

The reason is, of course, because dichromats find red and green indistinguishable. Because of this, saturated red plumage matches excellently with deep green plants. This might mean that red from the mahogany gene is advantageous even if it doesn't match your soil, tree bark, or anything else, so long as there's green. That's certainly my takeaway. Either way, it appears that patterning and brightness levels are much more important to a chicken's camouflage than specific color. Noisy patterns that break up a chicken's shape should do well, even if the colors don't exactly match.

My hypothesis could definitely be off here though, especially considering that any simulation of dichromat vision is likely a little bit flawed.

I also have more examples I've saved if anyone wants to see, and I can also link the app I used so you can try it yourself

P.S. this is my first time using spoilers, I hope I did it right :p
 
What can you tell me about Nybro, Glais and Lulia @Perris ?
I've lost rack of who is related to who in your group. I'm interested in whether the parent/s were large birds and their temperament, position in the group.
I think I'm looking for a mid size to small rooster mainly because possibly at some point I'll take in two or three rescue hens who would also be on the small size. Henry was a gent, even if it was due a lack of interest in his later years. A maturing cockerel on the other hand...

Are any of them crowing?
Nybro and Lulea are Swedish Flowers from the hatching eggs I brought in as new blood, so I can't tell you anything about their parents' temperaments etc. I want to keep Lulea (and Visby) here to supply that new blood to the gene pool, so he's not available. Perhaps have a look at Merioneth to retain a shortlist of 3?

Nybro has started occasional hackle flaring with Visby, but none of the cockerels have started fighting yet, nor have I seen any of the cockerels attempt to mate any of the females as yet. Apart from being very noticeable as mostly white, he has not drawn attention to himself in any way to date. He fits in without fuss. He may have started crowing - not caught in the act, but there are some new squeaky voices in the mornings now. He has been roosting out (with his brothers, in a holly tree near the back door) since the end of June. Should be carrying genes for an off-white egg.

Glais is probably son of Fforest (3 yr old SFH, No. 2 to Killay, a proper gent, and the most popular roo in the flock) and Dyffryn (who is a home-grown hybrid, also 3 [1 month older than Fforest], and one of the best layers in the flock, 'best' in the sense of no odd eggs, consistent layer etc.). He hasn't been seen crowing or fighting or trying to mate as yet either. Like the other cockerels he's not drawing attention to himself, so the older roos don't bother them and they can still enjoy first dibs at feeding times while the older roos squabble among themselves about their access order :lol:. He roosts in a coop with other males without issue. Likely carrying genes for a light brown egg.

Merioneth is almost certainly Janeka's son by Fforest. Janeka is a 6 yr old Silver Duckwing Welsumer. She is one of my favourites; she gets on with everybody, never bullies anybody, is a real easy-going hen. Merioneth hasn't been seen crowing or fighting or trying to mate as yet either, and also eats with the rest and roosts in a coop without issue. Likely carrying genes for a mid brown egg.

None of the birds here are Henry sized; they are all more Mediterranean build, and overall smaller, than he was. Glais is probably a tad taller and Merioneth a bit more solid than Nybro; at least, I haven't seen Glais or Merioneth fly, whereas Nybro is capable of getting up on the roof of a one-storey building.
 
The egg sexing is working. It goes by feather color, so it must be sexlinks... aborting the males before term.

https://www.poultryworld.net/poultry/layers/nestfreshs-humanely-hatched-programme-sets-new-standard/
so it brings the destruction of male chicks forward to just before hatch, instead of just after?

"The technology works by analysing light spectra to determine a chick’s gender based on its feather colour"

At what point does the foetus have feathers sufficiently developed to determine their colour? It's covered in down when it hatches. This is hardly what I'd call a big step forward in humane treatment of male chicks in the poultry industry. Just another minor marketing tweek.
 
this picture of a British standard araucana
That isn't a British Standard type, it's a US one. The British one has a tail (among other differences).
The reason is, of course, because dichromats find red and green indistinguishable. Because of this, saturated red plumage matches excellently with deep green plants.
That might explain the common red shoulder trait on the plumage of males; it would break up the appearance more or less in the middle of the bird and make survival more likely.
Noisy patterns that break up a chicken's shape should do well, even if the colors don't exactly match.
Irregular patterns like mottling work best for birds that freeze in place to avoid predation, regular patterns like barring work best for birds that run to get away, according to Jenni and Winkler (The biology of moult in birds 2020 chapter 1).
 
so it brings the destruction of male chicks forward to just before hatch, instead of just after?

"The technology works by analysing light spectra to determine a chick’s gender based on its feather colour"

At what point does the foetus have feathers sufficiently developed to determine their colour? It's covered in down when it hatches. This is hardly what I'd call a big step forward in humane treatment of male chicks in the poultry industry. Just another minor marketing tweek.
I've looked into it, it appears they can determine sex reliably as early as day 13. They say that their goal is to get that to day 4, but clearly they'd need to be looking at something other than feathers for that
 
That isn't a British Standard type, it's a US one. The British one has a tail (among other differences).

I was pretty sure that there was both a tailed and a rumpless variant in Europe at least, maybe I'm mistaken. But US standard araucanas have ear tufts and no beards, and as such are the closest phenotypically to Mapuche fowl.
2509.jpg


2510.jpg

We also have ameraucanas, a standardized breed which lack the rumpless and tuft alleles, since they're both lethal. They're apparently almost indistinguishable from European tailed araucanas, but are distinct from easter eggers
 
I was pretty sure that there was both a tailed and a rumpless variant in Europe at least, maybe I'm mistaken. But US standard araucanas have ear tufts and no beards, and as such are the closest phenotypically to Mapuche fowl.
View attachment 4212970

View attachment 4212971
We also have ameraucanas, a standardized breed which lack the rumpless and tuft alleles, since they're both lethal. They're apparently almost indistinguishable from European tailed araucanas, but are distinct from easter eggers

“European” (specifically German, if I’m not mistaken) Araucanas are in fact rumpless, but they are also bearded and sometimes tufted. UK and Australian Araucanas are bearded, crested, and tailed.

It’s my understanding that Ameraucanas are not supposed to have a crest, so that would make them quite easy to distinguish from their British and Australian relatives
 
source for that?
I first read it on Wikipedia, but struggled to find a specific source. I've dug around on the company's website and found some information, but it's pretty vague corporate speak. However, they say that sex specific coloration is clearly visible from day 11, and they state that their goal is to determine the sex of the embryo before it develops pain sensitivity. Apparently as it stands, they administer anaesthetic through the eggshell before dispatching the males, which is at the very least better than the current (very grisly) standard
 

New posts New threads Active threads

Back
Top Bottom