Quote:
Make sure I'm first on that list!!
I have two EE's at my house and we can definitely use more, especially pretty ones like those!!!
Make sure I'm first on that list!!
What's wrong with their feathers?
- Thread starter Jubaby
- Start date
Quote:
Make sure I'm first on that list!!
I have two EE's at my house and we can definitely use more, especially pretty ones like those!!!
Nope. Not until you go back and read all 1700 posts
Make sure I'm first on that list!!
Nope. Not until you go back and read all 1700 posts
Quote:
I apologize for creating confusion; I was referring to Godzillakitty [Pat?] of Josephine, TX at that time; selling birds that ' layed blue, green, or olive , but mostly olive colored eggs ' from ' a flock of multi-colored colored birds including lilac ' [her words, though not directly quoted] that she had bred from true, blue variety Ameraucanas purchased from a breeder [Jean Ribbeck] from WA, crossed to EEs from McMurray.
I have no idea if Jean started with purchased birds or was one of the developers of the breed. She's a breeder I respect for working deligently to purify her birds; not add McMurray EE blood to them years after they were already developed. By the time Godzillakitty purchased hers from Jean, they were already an accepted breed with an SOP for 8 varieties in both bantam and large fowl; and it was Godzillakitty mixing them with EE to produce, what were in her opinion, pure Ameraucanas...................... regardless of the fact that her own description of her birds showed many of them to be EEs. At the time, she was also breeding and selling " large fowl Silkies ", and the picture she showed in her add was a large, silkie feathered, splash roo, with red skin showing on the face, and either a small crest or none at all. Of course all of this prooves nothing, except that it is Godzillakitty's word to depend on that there was no EE or Silkie blood added to these beautiful birds.
I think possibly you should check again with Pips n Peeps [Jean Ribbeck, President of the Ameraucanas Breeders Club] about you're statement that she was useing EEs and never claimed her birds were true Ameraucanas. I do remember she said none of her birds had ever sported silkie feathers, and did not seem supportive of Godzillakitty's statement that hers [Godzillaskitty's] were Ameraucanas just because some of the crosses had blue feathers, muffs and beard, and tails.
I apologize for creating confusion; I was referring to Godzillakitty [Pat?] of Josephine, TX at that time; selling birds that ' layed blue, green, or olive , but mostly olive colored eggs ' from ' a flock of multi-colored colored birds including lilac ' [her words, though not directly quoted] that she had bred from true, blue variety Ameraucanas purchased from a breeder [Jean Ribbeck] from WA, crossed to EEs from McMurray.
I have no idea if Jean started with purchased birds or was one of the developers of the breed. She's a breeder I respect for working deligently to purify her birds; not add McMurray EE blood to them years after they were already developed. By the time Godzillakitty purchased hers from Jean, they were already an accepted breed with an SOP for 8 varieties in both bantam and large fowl; and it was Godzillakitty mixing them with EE to produce, what were in her opinion, pure Ameraucanas...................... regardless of the fact that her own description of her birds showed many of them to be EEs. At the time, she was also breeding and selling " large fowl Silkies ", and the picture she showed in her add was a large, silkie feathered, splash roo, with red skin showing on the face, and either a small crest or none at all. Of course all of this prooves nothing, except that it is Godzillakitty's word to depend on that there was no EE or Silkie blood added to these beautiful birds.
I think possibly you should check again with Pips n Peeps [Jean Ribbeck, President of the Ameraucanas Breeders Club] about you're statement that she was useing EEs and never claimed her birds were true Ameraucanas. I do remember she said none of her birds had ever sported silkie feathers, and did not seem supportive of Godzillakitty's statement that hers [Godzillaskitty's] were Ameraucanas just because some of the crosses had blue feathers, muffs and beard, and tails.
Last edited:
These are beautiful and very interesting birds. My verdict is still out as to whether they are a mutation or not. On the one hand (and not bringing the history of the bird into account) they are a very unhardy bird which leads me to think mutation (cross breeds are typically hardy birds).
On the other hand mine have legs that at times have the tiniest greenish tinge--(whereas my purebred Ameraucana's do not) therefore the thought that these are not purebred pops into my mind.
Tough one, but still a lovely bird to behold.
On the other hand mine have legs that at times have the tiniest greenish tinge--(whereas my purebred Ameraucana's do not) therefore the thought that these are not purebred pops into my mind.
Tough one, but still a lovely bird to behold.
Recently found this thread and have to admit, after reading the first 95 pages, I skipped to the end. So if this has been discussed, I apologize!
From what I remember of numerous genetic theory classes many moons ago, it's not uncommon when breeding for/with multiple recessives to have other unwanted recessives "hitch a ride", like those that cause genetic diseases or increased mortality. What I was wondering is if there has been enough successful hatches yet after introducing the blue/black ameraucanas to see if there are less than expected numbers of hatching silkied splash vs blue/black? Ie could there be something specifically hitching a ride with the h-bb combo, where focusing on breeding the blue/blacks for now to increase the overall numbers would be beneficial?
From what I remember of numerous genetic theory classes many moons ago, it's not uncommon when breeding for/with multiple recessives to have other unwanted recessives "hitch a ride", like those that cause genetic diseases or increased mortality. What I was wondering is if there has been enough successful hatches yet after introducing the blue/black ameraucanas to see if there are less than expected numbers of hatching silkied splash vs blue/black? Ie could there be something specifically hitching a ride with the h-bb combo, where focusing on breeding the blue/blacks for now to increase the overall numbers would be beneficial?
Quote:
Make sure I'm first on that list!!
I have two EE's at my house and we can definitely use more, especially pretty ones like those!!!
Nope. Not until you go back and read all 1700 posts
Oh, fine!
I guess my mom would kill me anyway... oh well... I can always dream
Make sure I'm first on that list!!
Nope. Not until you go back and read all 1700 posts
Oh, fine!
Quote:
If Jean's birds purchased by Pat were never crossed to an EE or EE carrying a gene for silkie, they have been linebred and inbred through 3 owners now before producing the two spontaneous mutations that everybody's birds have descended from.
If somehow that splash colored, silkie feathered, large fowl roo with red skin showing on his face and either no crest or a very small one, produced a chick from a regular feathered EE or Ameraucana, the chick would most likely be blue or splash and might also be lacking the 5th toe or feathered legs [Dad cant be pure for those traits and Mom can't be carrying genes for them period.] If this chick gets mixed in with the blue's from Jean, its carrying one copy for silkie feathers, possibly related to them; and descendents would be linebred and inbred by both Jubaby and the person that originally bought some eggs from Pat. This inbreeding would increase the probability of two birds getting together that carried a single copy for silkie. They would likely have been brother/sister, and the first silkied feathered offspring also brother/sister...................... making the birds you are working with inbred to the max.
If Jean's birds purchased by Pat were never crossed to an EE or EE carrying a gene for silkie, they have been linebred and inbred through 3 owners now before producing the two spontaneous mutations that everybody's birds have descended from.
If somehow that splash colored, silkie feathered, large fowl roo with red skin showing on his face and either no crest or a very small one, produced a chick from a regular feathered EE or Ameraucana, the chick would most likely be blue or splash and might also be lacking the 5th toe or feathered legs [Dad cant be pure for those traits and Mom can't be carrying genes for them period.] If this chick gets mixed in with the blue's from Jean, its carrying one copy for silkie feathers, possibly related to them; and descendents would be linebred and inbred by both Jubaby and the person that originally bought some eggs from Pat. This inbreeding would increase the probability of two birds getting together that carried a single copy for silkie. They would likely have been brother/sister, and the first silkied feathered offspring also brother/sister...................... making the birds you are working with inbred to the max.
Last edited:
Quote:
If Jean's birds purchased by Pat were never crossed to an EE or EE carrying a gene for silkie, they have been linebred and inbred through 3 owners now before producing the two spontaneous mutations that everybody's birds have descended from.
If somehow that splash colored, silkie feathered, large fowl roo with red skin showing on his face and either no crest or a very small one, produced a chick from a regular feathered EE or Ameraucana, the chick would most likely be blue or splash and might also be lacking the 5th toe or feathered legs [Dad cant be pure for those traits and Mom can't be carrying genes for them period.] If this chick gets mixed in with the blue's from Jean, its carrying one copy for silkie feathers, possibly related to them; and descendents would be linebred and inbred by both Jubaby and the person that originally bought some eggs from Pat. This inbreeding would increase the probability of two birds getting together that carried a single copy for silkie. They would likely have been brother/sister, and the first silkied feathered offspring also brother/sister...................... making the birds you are working with inbred to the max.
So.... what did you really mean to say Steve. Yes/No? That was too much to process right now and I need it simple today
If Jean's birds purchased by Pat were never crossed to an EE or EE carrying a gene for silkie, they have been linebred and inbred through 3 owners now before producing the two spontaneous mutations that everybody's birds have descended from.
If somehow that splash colored, silkie feathered, large fowl roo with red skin showing on his face and either no crest or a very small one, produced a chick from a regular feathered EE or Ameraucana, the chick would most likely be blue or splash and might also be lacking the 5th toe or feathered legs [Dad cant be pure for those traits and Mom can't be carrying genes for them period.] If this chick gets mixed in with the blue's from Jean, its carrying one copy for silkie feathers, possibly related to them; and descendents would be linebred and inbred by both Jubaby and the person that originally bought some eggs from Pat. This inbreeding would increase the probability of two birds getting together that carried a single copy for silkie. They would likely have been brother/sister, and the first silkied feathered offspring also brother/sister...................... making the birds you are working with inbred to the max.
So.... what did you really mean to say Steve. Yes/No? That was too much to process right now and I need it simple today
Quote:
If Jean's birds purchased by Pat were never crossed to an EE or EE carrying a gene for silkie, they have been linebred and inbred through 3 owners now before producing the two spontaneous mutations that everybody's birds have descended from.
If somehow that splash colored, silkie feathered, large fowl roo with red skin showing on his face and either no crest or a very small one, produced a chick from a regular feathered EE or Ameraucana, the chick would most likely be blue or splash and might also be lacking the 5th toe or feathered legs [Dad cant be pure for those traits and Mom can't be carrying genes for them period.] If this chick gets mixed in with the blue's from Jean, its carrying one copy for silkie feathers, possibly related to them; and descendents would be linebred and inbred by both Jubaby and the person that originally bought some eggs from Pat. This inbreeding would increase the probability of two birds getting together that carried a single copy for silkie. They would likely have been brother/sister, and the first silkied feathered offspring also brother/sister...................... making the birds you are working with inbred to the max.
So.... what did you really mean to say Steve. Yes/No? That was too much to process right now and I need it simple today
No one can say yes or no for sure, but if you work it out mathmaticlly, the chances of a highly linebred offspring cropping out from the second scenario as silkie feathered are very near 100%................................ less for them not showing stubble on the legs, or an extra toe, or a walnut comb, or heavy red bleed on the males; but still probable. [I'm not knowledgable enough to figure the percentages of an impure Silkie crossed to an EE to figure out the chance of 4 toe offspring being produced when the roo is impure for 5; but since some of the offspring show more of a walnut look than pure pea combs, and heavy red bleed, I have always thought the second scenario is probable.]
If Jean's birds purchased by Pat were never crossed to an EE or EE carrying a gene for silkie, they have been linebred and inbred through 3 owners now before producing the two spontaneous mutations that everybody's birds have descended from.
If somehow that splash colored, silkie feathered, large fowl roo with red skin showing on his face and either no crest or a very small one, produced a chick from a regular feathered EE or Ameraucana, the chick would most likely be blue or splash and might also be lacking the 5th toe or feathered legs [Dad cant be pure for those traits and Mom can't be carrying genes for them period.] If this chick gets mixed in with the blue's from Jean, its carrying one copy for silkie feathers, possibly related to them; and descendents would be linebred and inbred by both Jubaby and the person that originally bought some eggs from Pat. This inbreeding would increase the probability of two birds getting together that carried a single copy for silkie. They would likely have been brother/sister, and the first silkied feathered offspring also brother/sister...................... making the birds you are working with inbred to the max.
So.... what did you really mean to say Steve. Yes/No? That was too much to process right now and I need it simple today
No one can say yes or no for sure, but if you work it out mathmaticlly, the chances of a highly linebred offspring cropping out from the second scenario as silkie feathered are very near 100%................................ less for them not showing stubble on the legs, or an extra toe, or a walnut comb, or heavy red bleed on the males; but still probable. [I'm not knowledgable enough to figure the percentages of an impure Silkie crossed to an EE to figure out the chance of 4 toe offspring being produced when the roo is impure for 5; but since some of the offspring show more of a walnut look than pure pea combs, and heavy red bleed, I have always thought the second scenario is probable.]
Well, I'm down to a silkied pullet, a smooth blue pullet, and two silkied roos. Spontaneous death in these is horrible. I had 11 birds to begin with.
I have hatched a smooth splash cockerel from the smooth blue pullet, and I'm hatching every egg I get, but many are not fertile, so only one chick so far.
*sigh*
A steady exercise in frustration, but I'm still in it!!
I have hatched a smooth splash cockerel from the smooth blue pullet, and I'm hatching every egg I get, but many are not fertile, so only one chick so far.
*sigh*
A steady exercise in frustration, but I'm still in it!!
Similar threads
New posts New threads Active threads
-
Latest threads
-
-
-
-
-
10 wks EE I guess. The one in questions pullet or Cockrell- Started by Kcollins36
- Replies: 2
-
-
Threads with more replies in the last 15 days
-
Racoon attack; wing torn and toes gone.- Started by NewBeeChickGurl
- Replies: 85
-
Help vets offices closed
- Started by SouthDakotaLiving
- Replies: 71
-
-
URGENT hen with potential water belly not eating or drinking
- Started by Belovedturkey
- Replies: 62
-
Investigating Problems Uploading Images to the Gallery & Posts- Started by casportpony
- Replies: 62
-
