The American Cemani Breeders Club...open forum

[Blue Eager]

As a side note, I noticed that the purple banded one has feather stubs. Don't breed that one unless you want a lot of feather stubs down the line.

Well I wasn't intending to breed this one because of the tan mouth so nothing lost. I am also waiting to see what color their wattles are. If there is even a hint of red their out as well.

 

[Pyxis]

Well I wasn't intending to breed this one because of the tan mouth so nothing lost. I am also waiting to see what color their wattles are. If there is even a hint of red their out as well.

You may find that when they mature you don't have a male with no red or mulberry in the wattles. Even males that are nice and dark as chicks can develop it. If that does happen, just pick the best one and breed forward with him. You can get nice dark offspring out of males that have mulberry, so if you don't get one that's all black, you can still breed.

My first cockerel had mulberry in the wattles and all my nice black birds are his descendants

 

[Blue Eager]

You may find that when they mature you don't have a male with no red or mulberry in the wattles. Even males that are nice and dark as chicks can develop it. If that does happen, just pick the best one and breed forward with him. You can get nice dark offspring out of males that have mulberry, so if you don't get one that's all black, you can still breed.

My first cockerel had mulberry in the wattles and all my nice black birds are his descendants

Ok now I’m totally confused. I am one that believes not out of chance but by fact that all good & bad genetic traits are buried in all forms of life. To say it is ok for mulberry wattle roos to mate & not feathered stub roos doesn’t make sense. If it is possible for MWR to father “Excellent” true to breed Cemanis then why wouldn’t the same hold true for the later? For that matter wouldn’t same hold true for tan mouth, pink mouth, white toed & white-tip beaks?

I think we are all striving for the “Perfect Cemani” but I think we can all agree that nowhere in the U.S. does one/a pair of perfect Cemanis exists. A seemingly perfect Cemani can still parent offspring with genetic traits we are trying to avoid.

With all due respect, & I mean this sincerely, please clarify because I fail to see the reasoning here.

 

[Pyxis]

Ok now I’m totally confused. I am one that believes not out of chance but by fact that all good & bad genetic traits are buried in all forms of life. To say it is ok for mulberry wattle roos to mate & not feathered stub roos doesn’t make sense. If it is possible for MWR to father “Excellent” true to breed Cemanis then why wouldn’t the same hold true for the later? For that matter wouldn’t same hold true for tan mouth, pink mouth, white toed & white-tip beaks?

I think we are all striving for the “Perfect Cemani” but I think we can all agree that nowhere in the U.S. does one/a pair of perfect Cemanis exists. A seemingly perfect Cemani can still parent offspring with genetic traits we are trying to avoid.

With all due respect, & I mean this sincerely, please clarify because I fail to see the reasoning here.

The reasoning is feather stubs are recessive. Breed that and your birds are going to carry it, and you'll never know which ones without a lot of test breeding to find out which ones and it's a total nightmare to find and cull the carriers. So, can you breed them and get babies without feather stubs? Yes, absolutely. But they WILL carry the feather stub genetics, and that's something that really sucks to try to breed out. Just when you think you've got it gone, another chick hatches with them.

Fibro expression, however, what you see is what you get. If you breed a rooster with mulberry and then some of his sons have mulberry, that's visible, you see that and can cull it right away. Much easier to deal with.

White toes, mouth coloring, white nails etc, that all falls under the same bracket. You CAN breed them. The offspring from them that don't have good fibro expression will be readily and easily apparent. You just need to cull hard the next generation if you breed them, and the culling is comparatively easy since you know right away which to cull.

The genetics are totally different, so the breeding of them must be treated differently too.

Birds that have these flaws can be bred and produce better birds. But the more you select for the better birds, the higher the ratio of better birds to lesser birds you will produce.

 

[Blue Eager]

Thank you for the explanation, however recessive as opposed to dominate phenotypes is what one hopes for when selecting certain inherit traits whether it be fibro or otherwise. There is no difference. With respect to wattle color; this trait takes much longer to show itself than feather stubs, & even though this trait (red wattle color) seemingly disappears will eventually reappear in time just like all the other less desirable traits. There is no avoiding them because of the stock we are using.

My point is, why not breed all combinations until breeders accumulate sufficient numbers with those traits “True to the breed”? It just seems like such a waste to single out undesirable stock simply because it was their time to display an unwanted trait.

 

[Blue Eager]

I took another look at “Purple” & the feather stubs look horrible. It’s too bad because other than this he is absolutely beautiful. It is difficult to remain impartial when you spend so much time nurturing any kind of animal but there is no question he has to go. It is much easier knowing I have at least two additional roos that are certainly (at least at this point) up to standards.

 

[Ms Biddy]

BE, I think your chicks are really cute. I love their fat bottomed shape and wide stance. They have a lot of personality. I think feather stub inheritance and FM expression are very different. This is a good article about FM expression, you might have already read it. I got the link from an old BYC thread on the same topic. Can't say it all sunk in but it does help.

Research Article: http://tru.uni-sz.bg/ascitech/3_2013/001-Fibromelanosis in domestic chickens.pdf

From the article, "The phenotype expression is determined by a group of genes within the Fm locus in chromosome 20 (10.2–11.7 Mb), together with the modifying action of genes from the Id locus of the sex Z chromosome. According to contemporary research, the EDN3 gene is the primary gene responsible for the appearance of the mutation. A number of other genes-modifiers (intensifiers or inhibitors) could influence the expression of the main Fm genes."

So there are numerous factors in FM inheritance and completely black birds are anomalies. I agree they're drop dead beautiful and it's the ideal but single trait selection has pitfalls too. Some breeders only chase color and basic things like legs, tails, combs etc. fall to the wayside. Structurally sound birds with less than perfect color seems like a good place to start.

 

[Blue Eager]

BE, I think your chicks are really cute. I love their fat bottomed shape and wide stance. They have a lot of personality. I think feather stub inheritance and FM expression are very different. This is a good article about FM expression, you might have already read it. I got the link from an old BYC thread on the same topic. Can't say it all sunk in but it does help.

Research Article: http://tru.uni-sz.bg/ascitech/3_2013/001-Fibromelanosis in domestic chickens.pdf

From the article, "The phenotype expression is determined by a group of genes within the Fm locus in chromosome 20 (10.2–11.7 Mb), together with the modifying action of genes from the Id locus of the sex Z chromosome. According to contemporary research, the EDN3 gene is the primary gene responsible for the appearance of the mutation. A number of other genes-modifiers (intensifiers or inhibitors) could influence the expression of the main Fm genes."

So there are numerous factors in FM inheritance and completely black birds are anomalies. I agree they're drop dead beautiful and it's the ideal but single trait selection has pitfalls too. Some breeders only chase color and basic things like legs, tails, combs etc. fall to the wayside. Structurally sound birds with less than perfect color seems like a good place to start.

Thank you Ms Biddy. This is a great resource & thank you for summarizing.

From what I gather the US Ayam Cemani Club is working on a standard of perfection. Do you or anyone have ideas of what this will consist of? I’m curious because below is the Dutch standard of perfection & nowhere does it include mouth color.

The standard description below is from the Dutch standard of perfection.

o The bird should stand upright, alert – almost ‘game-like’.
o The body is of medium size, slim, firm and muscular.
o It will have a fairly broad breast and a medium back which slopes from the neck. The wings are long and strong arising from wide shoulders.
o The tail is held moderately high. Thighs are powerful and muscular. The bird should have 4 toes to each foot.
o Feathers are all black and are close fitting to the body. Skin, eyes, wattles and comb should all be black. No other color should be seen.
o The feathers may show a beetle-green to purple iridescence in sunlight.

 

[Ms Biddy]

I saw the previous draft of the American standard when it was posted. I don't remember it being that different than the Dutch standard, maybe a little more specific. I do remember that mouth color was mentioned. Here is an excellent article that I pulled from the ACBA website. The genetics infographic is great. It does talk a little bit about the gypsy face modifier, but doesn't go into detail. The research article says there are others as well. The thing is, before working on color, the other kinks should be worked out so the foundation is structurally sound. To my eye you have a great starting point, better than mine at least. My roo is with a couple of Blue Marans hens. I'm tempted to hatch out some of the eggs to see if he has 1 or 2 copies of EDN3. I assume by looking at him that he's missing gypsy face.
https://docs.wixstatic.com/ugd/56b8ba_72f46459899546cd8b6e2913233420f7.pdf

 

[Pyxis]

The thing is, before working on color, the other kinks should be worked out so the foundation is structurally sound.

Excellent advice The phrase usually used is "You can't paint a barn before you build it." Structure first, color later. This goes for all breeds.

Got a bird with great coloring but it has wry tail? Nope, don't breed that. Ameraucana with good color but has feather stubs? Also shouldn't be bred. Split wing? Don't wanna pass that on (unless you breed ko shamos like I do, lol). Etc etc.

But do you have a bird with amazing type and form, but his color is a little off? Don't cull that one, breed him to a female that has better coloring and see what you get for offspring.