Silkie color. Lavender or blue?

[NatJ]

This statement seems like they're calling him LAV split to blue.. which would be inaccurate, according to MY understanding.. Lav is lav is lav and will breed as black when bred to anything else but Lav. Obviously Lav when bred to blue that's not carrying the lav gene will throuw 50/50 black and blue. When bred to splash.. should throw 100% blue.

So he could be Blue, true blue.. and split to Lav (hidden).. aka carrying the gene.. but he cannot be "self Blue" and split to true blue. Maybe @NatJ can clean up any details I flubbed.

What you said sounds right in general.

"Split to" usually means the chicken is carrying a recessive gene without showing it. With the way blue works, "split to blue" doesn't usually make sense. Either a chicken has no blue gene (black), or it has one blue gene (blue), or it has two blue genes (splash). There is no way most colors of chicken can carry blue without showing it.

But I know that a white chicken can have the blue gene without showing it. I wonder if lavender can too?

If a chicken is lavender (two copies of the lavender gene) and also blue (one copy of the blue gene), it may look the same as a normal lavender. If so, I can see why someone might call it "split" to blue. It would be one of the few cases where a chicken could have the blue gene and not show visible effects.

If I’m looking to add a blue rooster to my silkie breeding flock (I’m new to this) and I have black, and splash hens how do I ensure I get a blue rooster and not something split to lavender. I messaged a breeder and she said “Most of our flock is shades of blue. From lavender to dark blue almost black.Lavender is the self blue gene. Our rooster is self blue split "true" blue.”

So could I get a rooster from her and confidently breed to get, blue, black, and splash chicks from the parings ?

It sounds like that flock has some birds with the blue gene, some with the lavender gene, and some with both.

If the current breeding rooster is pure for lavender (self blue), then every one of his chicks will inherit lavender from him. They may not show it (depending on what they inherit from their mother), but they will carry it, and can pass it on to their chicks.

If you get a rooster from that flock and he looks blue (not lavender), he should produce black & blue chicks from your black hens, and blue & splash chicks from your splash hens. But he will probably pass the lavender gene to half of his chicks, who won't show it, but will be able to pass it to their offspring. Some time in the future, when you happen to breed two chickens that both carry lavender, you will start seeing lavender chicks.

If you want to be sure of avoiding the lavender gene, I would not buy birds from that flock. If you don't mind having lavender, then a blue rooster from that flock might work just fine for you.

 

[Summerjade1357]

What you said sounds right in general.

"Split to" usually means the chicken is carrying a recessive gene without showing it. With the way blue works, "split to blue" doesn't usually make sense. Either a chicken has no blue gene (black), or it has one blue gene (blue), or it has two blue genes (splash). There is no way most colors of chicken can carry blue without showing it.

But I know that a white chicken can have the blue gene without showing it. I wonder if lavender can too?

If a chicken is lavender (two copies of the lavender gene) and also blue (one copy of the blue gene), it may look the same as a normal lavender. If so, I can see why someone might call it "split" to blue. It would be one of the few cases where a chicken could have the blue gene and not show visible effects.


It sounds like that flock has some birds with the blue gene, some with the lavender gene, and some with both.

If the current breeding rooster is pure for lavender (self blue), then every one of his chicks will inherit lavender from him. They may not show it (depending on what they inherit from their mother), but they will carry it, and can pass it on to their chicks.

If you get a rooster from that flock and he looks blue (not lavender), he should produce black & blue chicks from your black hens, and blue & splash chicks from your splash hens. But he will probably pass the lavender gene to half of his chicks, who won't show it, but will be able to pass it to their offspring. Some time in the future, when you happen to breed two chickens that both carry lavender, you will start seeing lavender chicks.

If you want to be sure of avoiding the lavender gene, I would not buy birds from that flock. If you don't mind having lavender, then a blue rooster from that flock might work just fine

 

[Summerjade1357]

What you said sounds right in general.

"Split to" usually means the chicken is carrying a recessive gene without showing it. With the way blue works, "split to blue" doesn't usually make sense. Either a chicken has no blue gene (black), or it has one blue gene (blue), or it has two blue genes (splash). There is no way most colors of chicken can carry blue without showing it.

But I know that a white chicken can have the blue gene without showing it. I wonder if lavender can too?

If a chicken is lavender (two copies of the lavender gene) and also blue (one copy of the blue gene), it may look the same as a normal lavender. If so, I can see why someone might call it "split" to blue. It would be one of the few cases where a chicken could have the blue gene and not show visible effects.


It sounds like that flock has some birds with the blue gene, some with the lavender gene, and some with both.

If the current breeding rooster is pure for lavender (self blue), then every one of his chicks will inherit lavender from him. They may not show it (depending on what they inherit from their mother), but they will carry it, and can pass it on to their chicks.

If you get a rooster from that flock and he looks blue (not lavender), he should produce black & blue chicks from your black hens, and blue & splash chicks from your splash hens. But he will probably pass the lavender gene to half of his chicks, who won't show it, but will be able to pass it to their offspring. Some time in the future, when you happen to breed two chickens that both carry lavender, you will start seeing lavender chicks.

If you want to be sure of avoiding the lavender gene, I would not buy birds from that flock. If you don't mind having lavender, then a blue rooster from that flock might work just fine for you.

Shes now saying "My blue split lav presents as lavender and throws only blue unless bred to a black then her dominant colour comes through."

Would this not be inaccurate then

 

[NatJ]

Shes now saying "My blue split lav presents as lavender and throws only blue unless bred to a black then her dominant colour comes through."

Would this not be inaccurate then

"Throws only blue" sounds odd. That should only happen in a black/splash cross.
So if the rooster is genetically black (no blue at all), and most hens are splash, it could work: blue chicks from the splash hens, and black chicks from black hens. A flock with black hens and splash hens, and no blue hens, seems unlikely but not impossible.

It sounds like this breeder has hatched quite a few chicks, but I can't be positive. If she only hatched only a few chicks, she might be not be seeing all the possible chick colors (similar to a person hatching just two or three chicks and finding them all the same gender: small numbers can give odd results.)

Regardless of the genetic explanation of the "blue" part, if you want to avoid the lavender gene, you want to avoid chicks from that rooster and probably from that whole flock.