When is it no longer a cross?

[The Yakima Kid]

I do believe the original point of the cross was to improve laying yield; the ones with lighter lobes lay more eggs than the pure. They are being crossed back to Cemani to get rid of the lighter lobes, but in the meantime, this is the result.

Is increased laying yield even a reasonable goal for an exotic, such as the Ayam Cemani? I can see breeding for increased laying yields in dual purpose and laying stock - but I don't understand why it would even be a goal for a breed which - correct me if I am wrong - is not considered as a layer in its home country?

 

[Laingcroft]

After an outcross a breed is considered pure when it again meets the standard and breeds true.

+ 1

Based strictly on percentages and assuming one is breeding each successive generation back to a purebred of the original breed - let's call it 'A' - it can be anywhere from 5 to 8 generations to reach "purity" depending on the requirements of a breed registry (other species than chickens).

F1 = 50 / 50 (50% of breed A)
F2 = 75 / 25 (75% of breed A)
F3 = 87.5 / 12.5 (88% of breed A)
F4 = 93.75 / 6.25 (94% of breed A)
F5 = 96.625 / 3.375 (97% pure A)
F6 = 98.3125 / 1.6875 (98% pure A)
F7 = 99.15625 / 0.84375 (99% pure A)

 

[The Yakima Kid]

I don't know anything about them, really, but there is another FM bird known as the Swedish Black Chicken. It is believed to descend from FM stock brought in by Dutch traders and merchants. It is smaller than the Ayam Cemani, has better fertility (and apparently also better livability), and it lays pure white eggs.

One thing that really bothers me, and I will state up front and personal, that it is only my opinion, and you are free to disagree - is the tendency to indulge in outcrosses to "improve" traits in chickens that were originally bred for an entirely unrelated trait - at the sacrifice of the original valuable traits.I don't understand the tendency of some breeders to try and "improve" the cuckoo breeds to have barring more like Rocks; the idea of breeding the black boned birds that were bred as medicinal cures for table use, or as sacrificial animals for egg production at the cost of the important FM trait leaves me cold.

If you want layers, get a good dual purpose or layer breed - but please leave critical populations of rare chickens alone. There aren't enough of them to let someone with more money than sense pollute the gene pool.

If you want improved rare layers, go for something like the Dominique, and you can probably achieve your goal without much in the way of outcrossing or destruction of the cuckoo trait or the festive combs or the temperament of the intense foraging focus. There are plenty of dual purpose and laying breeds that need preservation and dedicated breeders willing to improve the existing bloodlines. Of course, Dominques, Javas, and many others aren't considered as glamorous as they lack the overtones of the exotic of the imported. We have some excellent threatened American heritage breeds that need proponents. We have apparently have already lost the Lamona and the black Java was iffy until a museum took them up as a project - recently the first white Java chicks were hatched in something like fifty years.

The US had three breeds produced in the early 20th Century by dedicated poultry breeders searching for the ultimate, easily handled white egg laying dual purpose breed. Professor Dryden after his retirement from Oregon Agricultural College developed a barred dual purpose white egg layer with a wonderful disposition known as the California Gray. In New Jersey, the Holland chicken, another dual purpose white egg layer - this one available as a white or barred bird - was created by diligent poultry scientists by crossing American and European breeds. Harry S. Lamon developed the now believed to be extinct Lamona using White Rocks, White Leghorns, and Silver Gray Dorkings at what was then known as the Bureau of Animal Industry, now the research wing of the USDA; this bird retained good carcass quality in two and three year old spent layers. All of these could use dedicated breeders; Jeremy Trost has attempted to recreate the Lamona using the original foundation breeds, and I suspect he might like some help out there. Of these three breeds, two were recognized by the APA; but the untimely death of Professor Dryden meant that the California Gray became solely a useful farm bird, still used in some pastured poultry operations as it is a non-flighty, friendly, easily inspected bird on pasture. It is much easier to do large pasture operations and keep an eye on the health of the flock if you can walk right up to them without them disappearing over the horizon.

I am also sick of the "chicken of the year" fad. Marans, then Welsumers, then Cream Legbars, and no doubt the poor Ayam Cemani, to be taken up briefly by breeders who have no long term commitment to the breed who then wander off in a few years for the next fad breed.

Rant over.

 

[Laingcroft]

I am also sick of the "chicken of the year" fad. Marans, then Welsumers, then Cream Legbars, and no doubt the poor Ayam Cemani, to be taken up briefly by breeders who have no long term commitment to the breed who then wander off in a few years for the next fad breed.

Rant over.

I would agree with you in general about 'fad' chickens in general, but each of the breeds you reference do have a core of folks who are truly serious about the breed. There are several of us who formed a breed club and are currently working, with APA Judge Walt's (Fowlman) assistance, toward getting the Crested Cream Legbar standardized (as adopted from the U.K. standard) and accepted by the APA. And we're in it for the long haul.

 

[The Yakima Kid]

I know that there are people who are into breeds for the long haul - that is a completely different thing than the fad of the year breeders. Fad of the year breeders seem to divide their attention between three or even more extremely expensive breeds, and every year or two are busy selling off one breed and replacing it with another, newly fashionable one.

They never keep an American class breed as a rule, preferring imported stock over domestic, and breeds from other continents to those originating in the US or Canada.

They come up with ideas that leave me confused - including insisting that Serama colors should "breed true." What one quickly learns about Seramas from people who actually had them in Malaysia is that the shorter legged, more nervous birds called Serama in the US are actually members or crosses of some other breeds of Bantam (apparently the Malaysian word for Bantam is literally "pretty chicken") that do not match the bold, gentle, calm, non-aggressive temperament and warrior stance of the true Serama. Not only that, but apparently Malaysians don't breed for color, and part of the surprise is seeing what colors hatch out. I gather that in Malaysia, Seramas are very much a valued, friendly pet of the most affluent.

People with more time and money than sense have already ruined the once wonderful Quarter Horse, turning it into a nervous mongrel of predominantly Thoroughbred ancestry with a nasty tendency to fall down on riders and not be able to get up. Please don't do it to the poor biddies - there are plenty of already ruined cat, dog, and horse breeds to experiment on and everyone already knows not to expect much of those breeds.

 

[NYREDS]

I know that there are people who are into breeds for the long haul - that is a completely different thing than the fad of the year breeders. Fad of the year breeders seem to divide their attention between three or even more extremely expensive breeds, and every year or two are busy selling off one breed and replacing it with another, newly fashionable one.

They never keep an American class breed as a rule, preferring imported stock over domestic, and breeds from other continents to those originating in the US or Canada.

They come up with ideas that leave me confused - including insisting that Serama colors should "breed true." What one quickly learns about Seramas from people who actually had them in Malaysia is that the shorter legged, more nervous birds called Serama in the US are actually members or crosses of some other breeds of Bantam (apparently the Malaysian word for Bantam is literally "pretty chicken") that do not match the bold, gentle, calm, non-aggressive temperament and warrior stance of the true Serama. Not only that, but apparently Malaysians don't breed for color, and part of the surprise is seeing what colors hatch out. I gather that in Malaysia, Seramas are very much a valued, friendly pet of the most affluent.

People with more time and money than sense have already ruined the once wonderful Quarter Horse, turning it into a nervous mongrel of predominantly Thoroughbred ancestry with a nasty tendency to fall down on riders and not be able to get up. Please don't do it to the poor biddies - there are plenty of already ruined cat, dog, and horse breeds to experiment on and everyone already knows not to expect much of those breeds.

That's how they do it in Malaysia but it's not how we do it here. At least as far as recognition & sanctioning from the APA & ABA are concerned. One approach isn't inherently superior to the other they just represent different ways of doing something. If you want to breed Seramas in such a way as to result in unpredictable, random coloursby all means do so. When I was a kid some of us had flocks of what we called "Banties". They were mixed breed, OEGB based bantams that produced a rainbow of offspring. They were fun & made a very colourful flock. They weren't the birds we showed though.
Your first 2 paragraphs sound like a description of you in paragraph 3- "preferring imported stock over domestic, and breeds from other continents to those originating in the US or Canada'

 

[The Yakima Kid]

That's how they do it in Malaysia but it's not how we do it here. At least as far as recognition & sanctioning from the APA & ABA are concerned. One approach isn't inherently superior to the other they just represent different ways of doing something. If you want to breed Seramas in such a way as to result in unpredictable, random coloursby all means do so. When I was a kid some of us had flocks of what we called "Banties". They were mixed breed, OEGB based bantams that produced a rainbow of offspring. They were fun & made a very colourful flock. They weren't the birds we showed though.
Your first 2 paragraphs sound like a description of you in paragraph 3- "preferring imported stock over domestic, and breeds from other continents to those originating in the US or Canada'

I don't think you get it. What you breed then are not actually Seramas. You are producing a new breed that is distinct and alien to the actual Serama which has no color standard for good reason; because color is seen as superficial, and temperament, carriage, and conformation are considered critical.

All I know about Seramas comes from Americans who have what they think are Seramas and Malaysian co-workers who insist that the birds in the American shows are not Seramas at all.

In any event, the last time I checked, Rocks, Dominiques, and California Grays were considered American breeds. I'd consider Orpingtons, but they have white skin which doesn't meet my preferred color for a table bird.

 

[NYREDS]

Quote: I guess my question would be how does that harm you?
Those people serve a valuable purpose actually. By increasing interest & exposure to these breeds they help to spread them around and increase gene pools.
I suppose in a sense I meet the criteria you described. On the one hand there are breeds I've kept for 20+ years. On the other hand there have been many breeds I've kept for only 2-3 years before passing them off [I usually give them to someone who shows interest]. I do this for a specific reason-I think watching these birds develop over time makes me a better Judge.

 

[Bullitt]

If you cross one breed with another to improve a trait - say, size, or egg production, etc - and then breed the cross chicks back to the original breed for several generations... at what point is it no longer considered a 'cross', but just that breed? 3 generations? 10? Or is it based on the chicken's appearance (if it retained any non-standard traits, like wrong lobe color, or egg color slightly different)? Is it still considered a cross even after 5gen back to the original breed if it happens to keep a trait from the cross (that you weren't breeding for to improve)? Or is it 'xyz breed with x trait'?

The definition of a breed is that it breeds true the majority of the time, which means 51% or more.

 

[The Yakima Kid]

I guess my question would be how does that harm you?
Those people serve a valuable purpose actually. By increasing interest & exposure to these breeds they help to spread them around and increase gene pools.
I suppose in a sense I meet the criteria you described. On the one hand there are breeds I've kept for 20+ years. On the other hand there have been many breeds I've kept for only 2-3 years before passing them off [I usually give them to someone who shows interest]. I do this for a specific reason-I think watching these birds develop over time makes me a better Judge.

It doesn't directly hurt me - it hurts the breeds. I am afraid it is passing ridiculous when someone decides to breed Ayam Cermani by crossing them to a non-FM breed in order to increase egg production; or to decide that colors are an important attribute for Seramas. Call them something else, then - but they are no longer Ayam Cermani nor Serama.