Virgin Mary chicken?

[Ginmary]

But the 'halo' in the OP's first post is not the same as the definite 'ring' shown in this post:
https://www.backyardchickens.com/threads/virgin-mary-chicken.1283904/page-4#post-20741966

That is a much clearer depiction of the halo. It has to be within the spot not just surrounding it.

My Buff also has a larger comb and wattles and just hatched 2 chicks. Granted they weren't her eggs but she's only 7 months old and has been laying since September and then went broody.

 

[fur-mum]

So a halo that's not part of the bullseye is much larger and less defined? is that what I'm seeing?

 

[aart]

So a halo that's not part of the bullseye is much larger and less defined? is that what I'm seeing?

What we are calling a 'halo'(because that's kind of what it looks like) is not normally part of a fertilized egg...not sure what the 'halo' is there.

 

[Ginmary]

The OP's picture shows the spot and then surrounding it is a larger different color "halo" That does not indicate a fertilized egg. It has to be the "bullseye" that is within the small spot just like the recent example picture.

 

[ctesta]

But the 'halo' in the OP's first post is not the same as the definite 'ring' shown in this post:
https://www.backyardchickens.com/threads/virgin-mary-chicken.1283904/page-4#post-20741966

Okay so we kept the egg in the fridge to eventually cook up but I had to take another picture for all the non believers of my Virgin Mary chicken
Maybe this picture will help show it more clearly. And for the people saying that all eggs have that same mark, I cracked store bought eggs to compare and they do not have this halo. Also, everything I looked up with example pictures of fertile eggs, said that the halo means fertile, so I’m confused I just put her other egg in the incubator so we’ll see what happens lol stay tuned everyone! But thank you to everyone who has replied, I appreciate it

 

[EggWalrus]

It's fertile.

 

[55fingers]

I say it looks fertile. Do post the incubation result!

 

[ShannonR]

I'm really surprised nobody has mentioned parthenogenesis to the OP. The egg could well be self-fertile, but the probability of it developing into an actual chick are really low. Please read up on this.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parthenogenesis

 

[Henrik Petersson]

I'm really surprised nobody has mentioned parthenogenesis to the OP. The egg could well be self-fertile, but the probability of it developing into an actual chick are really low. Please read up on this.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parthenogenesis

It seems to be able to happen in chickens:

BirdsEdit
Parthenogenesis in birds is known mainly from studies of domesticated turkeys and chickens, although it has also been noted in the domestic pigeon.[37] In most cases the egg fails to develop normally or completely to hatching.[37][85] The first description of parthenogenetic development in a passerine was demonstrated in captive zebra finches, although the dividing cells exhibited irregular nuclei and the eggs did not hatch.[37]

Parthenogenesis in turkeys appears to result from a conversion of haploid cells to diploid;[85] most embryos produced in this way die early in development. Rarely, viable birds result from this process, and the rate at which this occurs in turkeys can be increased by selective breeding,[86] however male turkeys produced from parthenogenesis exhibit smaller testes and reduced fertility.[87]

UK, AU... and BYC.com

... I like to say chooks on here sometimes... shorter to type and ... I dunno ... why not?

I write chooks sometimes because I don't want to repeat myself and write chickens four times in the same post. Guess I could vary it a bit more and start to write höna?

 

[Mosey2003]

That Buff stands more like a male than a pullet, unless that was a quick moment and something it wanted was being held up, like a treat? My non-hatchery Buffs took ages to mature, I had a real dickens of a time telling males for months almost, especially since they were my first chickens.

Like this guy, they didn't get saddles and hackles for ages. Pretty sure they were at least 4-5 months old here. If I remember correctly, that's another male to his left, too. You wouldn't know it by the typical signs though. They didn't crow for ages, either. I'm not saying the OP's Buff is definitely male, but I wouldn't 100% rule it out.