Silkie breeding, genetics & showing

[thedragonlady]

Okay, the first bird (your splash) that I thought might have a wry tail-- I agree, she looks pretty straight. Thank you for posting the straight on above shot of her back and more outdoor pics. She looks like she's naturally holding herself very well. She also looks like her back is shorter now... crazy how photos don't capture everything. I think she looks very decent and has a nice chest on her, not to mention a great crest. Paired with the right boy, I bet she'd make a really great breeder.

For this split wing pictured above-- this doesn't look like split wing to me at all. It looks like an immature wing growing in or a molted wing coming back in. I would wait before you get too anxious about her wings being bad. This bird also looks very nice. I think you're doing very well so far!

For comparision (I've already shown this before on this thread) but THIS is what I would consider split wing-- where the secondaries are swept back towards the body and don't create a natural fan.

as you can see-- the feathers aren't missing, but they will never fan out properly and this effect causes a horrible split or divide. You have a gap that I do believe is caused by feathers that have not grown in, but it's some what clear that the pins might be there and that the feathers do look like they will be coming in. I'd still watch your wing closely and keep checking it BEFORE you ever breed. Boy, did I make that mistake! Anyway, if that wing comes in like it should, then breed.

That wing is slipped, with the primaries folding outside the secondaries, NOT split, if the folicle is there. This has been a problem in Silkies for over 40 years.If you see a curve like that in the secondaries, you have a problem.

 

[Hawkeye95]

That wing is slipped, with the primaries folding outside the secondaries, NOT split, if the folicle is there. This has been a problem in Silkies for over 40 years.If you see a curve like that in the secondaries, you have a problem.

Indeed, I think you are likely correct. However, this is not how it's being judged. I was told at my last showing she was considered a "split". The judge went on to say that any gap in the wings is considered a split. This is why Janine polled all those judges to ask them what they are looking for when they judge splits. It is also why perhaps the SOP needs to be re-worded. Apparently, there is a very big gap between how it reads and how birds are being judged. Even though they should be judged exactly how it reads in the SOP. Either way, it is not desirable. I have no birds that actually have missing follicles-- every feather is there. But a lot of them have this swept back look on the secondaries. Is there a definition for a slipped wing for silkies? I would love to nail down where exactly this is labeled! If it were labeled a slip, then is that a deduction or a disqualification. A split is a DQ, correct? I was deducted, but not DQ'd (maybe because all the feathers were there??). ALTHOUGH-- then my cockerel who was perfect (or so I thought!) was DQ'd for being too heavy! LOL I'm not complaining!! Not by any means... just learning!

So let me pick your brain... if you see this problem popping up and you have your hens that have nice wings and your cockerel has a very weak wing-- but no "slip" or split... would you assume that he was responsible for the wings I just posted? This is showing up in my grow outs. I am guessing he is the issue and will not be using him. How would you go about culling these wings if they are not missing folicles, but have the secondaries swept back? I am culling all of them... is that necessary? What kind of gene am I dealing with? Is this a dominant or incomplete D?

 

[thedragonlady]

Indeed, I think you are likely correct. However, this is not how it's being judged. I was told at my last showing she was considered a "split". The judge went on to say that any gap in the wings is considered a split. This is why Janine polled all those judges to ask them what they are looking for when they judge splits. It is also why perhaps the SOP needs to be re-worded. Apparently, there is a very big gap between how it reads and how birds are being judged. Even though they should be judged exactly how it reads in the SOP. Either way, it is not desirable. I have no birds that actually have missing follicles-- every feather is there. But a lot of them have this swept back look on the secondaries. Is there a definition for a slipped wing for silkies? I would love to nail down where exactly this is labeled! If it were labeled a slip, then is that a deduction or a disqualification. A split is a DQ, correct? I was deducted, but not DQ'd (maybe because all the feathers were there??). ALTHOUGH-- then my cockerel who was perfect (or so I thought!) was DQ'd for being too heavy! LOL I'm not complaining!! Not by any means... just learning!

So let me pick your brain... if you see this problem popping up and you have your hens that have nice wings and your cockerel has a very weak wing-- but no "slip" or split... would you assume that he was responsible for the wings I just posted? This is showing up in my grow outs. I am guessing he is the issue and will not be using him. How would you go about culling these wings if they are not missing folicles, but have the secondaries swept back? I am culling all of them... is that necessary? What kind of gene am I dealing with? Is this a dominant or incomplete D?

Bad wings are carried by both sexes, but your cock bird is half your flock. I would cull him. The APA standard has a very good definition of slipped wing. It is a DQ.. I'm sure it's in the ABA standard also, but I just lent mine to a friend as required reading. It is called an angel wing also in waterfowl with the primararies folding outside the secondaries. The softer your feathers get, the more prevelant this fault seems to be. Cocks tend to throw this fault on the opposite wing from which they have it, if it is on just one wing. Faulty cock on right wing, throws faulty wings on left on pullets. Shorty got this through my head years ago. The APA boys catch it the most often.Obviously a dominant gene if your pullets' mothers didn't have it, and your boy is to blame.

 

[Hawkeye95]

Bad wings are carried by both sexes, but your cock bird is half your flock. I would cull him. The APA standard has a very good definition of slipped wing. It is a DQ.. I'm sure it's in the ABA standard also, but I just lent mine to a friend as required reading. It is called an angel wing also in waterfowl with the primararies folding outside the secondaries. The softer your feathers get, the more prevelant this fault seems to be. Cocks tend to throw this fault on the opposite wing from which they have it, if it is on just one wing. Faulty cock on right wing, throws faulty wings on left on pullets. Shorty got this through my head years ago. The APA boys catch it the most often.Obviously a dominant gene if your pullets' mothers didn't have it, and your boy is to blame.

unless it's an incomplete and they have it somewhere in their background, or would I be wrong on that. But I've never heard of a chicken having angle wing-- I have raised waterfowl and that is the word we use for an excess of protein in the diet that usually results in the angel wing, which can then be taped and corrected. On chickens, this is not a matter of taping wings and correcting them so could the same term be used for something that is not caused by excess of protein in the diet. I do realize the look is sort of similar, but waterfowl wings usually really stick out from the body and these wings I am dealing with still lay flat against the body, but the tips of the feathers do curl outward a bit. This is only on the secondaries, of course. Whatever it is, I'm very frustrated to be having this problem. Very interesting observation about how the cock throws opposite on the wings. My rooster has no obvious signs of this slip, they are just weak. I'm definitely not using him again, for sure, and I hope that will solve my problem when I also get rid of the grow outs that are showing this trait as well. Not all of his offspring have had this problem, but a good number of them have. That would also likely make them carriers of this gene somewhere, too (even though it is not expressed in them)...??? I wonder how that will play out as I get further on. Sigh.

 

[Sonoran Silkies]

Angle wing in waterfowl and angel wing in chickens are not the same thing. In chickens, angel wing is twisted wing feathers; not that different than a sebastapol's feathers. The wing feathers do not stick out like on waterfowl.

 

[ChicksNherps]

Off topic question, the splash in your avatar is gorgeous( unless it's a paint, but still)! Does she naturally stand like that or do you have to train them to stand that way? If so how do I go about doing this?

 

[PNWGirl]

Off topic question, the splash in your avatar is gorgeous( unless it's a paint, but still)! Does she naturally stand like that or do you have to train them to stand that way? If so how do I go about doing this?

Hi, if you are talking about Sonoran's, I believe that is a Paint. I agree it is gorgeous!!

Sheila

 

[ChicksNherps]

Yeah I am, after taking a look after posting I realized it was a paint. My girls don't stand that close together naturally, but they do hold themselves nice. Is it something you have to train into them for showing?

 

[Sonoran Silkies]

Well, some will always stand like that, and others need to be worked with. Polly always stood like that.

 

[ChicksNherps]

How do I go about training them?