The genetics of buff coloring (specifically silkies)

[CityGirlintheCountry]

Red was really the only color I was thinking about mixing in, and that was mainly just to see what would happen. But, I figured the genetics gurus could likely tell me what would happen, so it would save a lot of breeding to just ask first. If I ever came across really high quality reds I might still consider it. I could potentially have a seperate pen for them so I could keep them seperate. Dunno. It was just a random thought as I sat at watched the babies play.

The babies have made the move outside and are getting bigger. One of them is substantially larger than the others. I'm wondering if it is a roo. Two of them are a couple of weeks older than the others, but this one is really big. Dunno. They are about 3 months old now. I'm just waiting to see gender at this point. Nobody is crowing yet. A couple have more of an Elvis look about them, but not so much that I feel confident saying that they are boys. My luck they will all be roosters.

The darkest one does have black tips to the wings and tail. It has a really pretty shape though and a lot of personality. It is possible that the black tips will go away with the next molt too. I think they probably have at least one more adolescent molt. Each molt has had progressively less black, so that is good.

Again, I'm not planning anything drastic. I just wanted to know what would happen.

 

[Henk69]

Quote:
Yes, het Columbian Co/co+ is paler i.m.o.

Check.

====

CGITC,
If your buffs are just plain golds, as often is the case in buff, then crossing with red would give you red. Nothing wrong with red...

If your buffs have gold diluters then crossing with reds could be a way to get rid of some of them.
If your buffs have gold diluters but lack Mahogany/Red to compensate than I would strongly recommend crossing with red.

Crossing with any other color would introduce extra black and possibly compromise the Columbian gene.
You don't want black to darken the gold. Black and red are opposites.

 

[Smoky73]

This has been my experience with the Buff.

I have some nice hens, but this lighter one is OBVIOUSLY too light, however they all exhibit almost white undercoat.
I personally have not starting breeder yet but have had others do so and these chicks are turning out well so far.

Yes, the ideal is a nice shade of buff but with no black or blue in them. Yes, many people have stated for me to try breeding blue to buff to lighten the black int he tail (nothing to do with the buff coloring, it just dilutes black as I understood it) I got nothing in buff color when I tried that at the time. Just blue chicks.

I am trying something new this spring as I found a rich dark buff. (he may be from partridge, lady was not sure.) I think that there is nothing wrong with a little black int he tail or so, actually thats what I want because I want the darker buff color they almost always have black in them.

This is my new rooster and although he has a small crest (and is very young) he is very rich in color. I will be breeding him two two of my lightest hens this spring.

 

[BeverlyH]

Quote:

When you cross a buff to a black you get 100% Partridge...I think is how it goes, I dont fool with Partridge! So when using a partridge generally a dark partridge to darken the buff all that you are doing is covering the partridge pattern or deluting it!

The reason for darkening the buff!!!

Buff Silkies in the past few year have become to light, they have a tendency of throwing white down which is a major defect and so breeders are trying to prevent that.

Hope that this is right but it could be wrong Im kindof looking into it myself

No; black to buff will not give partridge. A black silkie is almost certainly e^b/e^b plus melanizers. e^b plus Pg giives partridge, melanizers or not.

I have not seen a problem in too light buffs, but perhaps that is occurring in other parts of hte country.

Buff can be based upon e^b or E^Wh. The clearest buffs are wheaten based. Silkies, however are almost always brown based. You can tell the difference by looking at the undercolour. Buff is diluted red. Blue dilutes black pigment, but has little effect on red pigment. What blue does to a buff is dilute the black feathers so that they are less noticeable; it does little or nothing to the buff colouring, and knowledgeable breeders would not expect it to. If you want to dilute buff, you need lavender, inhibitor of gold or champaign blonde as well as dilute. Theoretically any of these dilution genes would change a red to buff. Add a second diluter and you further dilute the colour. Tim may be able to tell us how this works; I've never heard the cellular level of how dilution actually works--my usual analogy is that the pigment spigots are turned towards, but not completely, off.

Question for you, So I wanted to get I to Buffs so I'm researching their genetics and such, I see you said they can be bred to lavender do you mean breed buff to lavender then breed those chicks (now carriers for but not expressing, splits) together to get nice Buffs? Isnt that how Blue Creams are made though? I'm not sure if you can help explain exactly what you mean by adding in lavender. Since I already have lavenders and lavender based BCs (test breeding that to be 100% right now) I'm wondering how I'll be able to use that in with my Buffs. I've hatched 1 egg and have another batch in the bator and will be getting chicks at Nationals, from a really good breeder so I expect to have a decent starting point. But have a good almost year to become knowledgeable on Buff genetics before any of my birds are old enough to breed.
Thank you for any advise you can give