Playing with parblues

[Recio]

Hi everybody,

I think that the best thing to make understandible my idea about parblue alleles is to play this game: We are going to imagine a control model with the following premises:

1. Let's imagine that we have several heterozygous parblues (ParblueBlue) able to produce 20, 40, 60 or 80% of psittacins.
2. Let's imagine that the homozygous form of each parblue (ParblueParblue) is able to increase psittacin production in 50%
3. Let's imagine that the optical phenotype of these psittacines appear saturated at 80%

Questions:
1. Which will be the % of psittacin production for each homozygous bird?
2. Which will be the observed phenotype respective to the % of psittacin?

Do not think in terms of Sapphire, Indigo, Turquoise, ... but you can call the phenotypes corresponding to these mutations A, B, C, D

Regards

Recio

[Sherjil]

Hi everybody,

I think that the best thing to make understandible my idea about parblue alleles is to play this game: We are going to imagine a control model with the following premises:

1. Let's imagine that we have several heterozygous parblues (ParblueBlue) able to produce 20, 40, 60 or 80% of psittacins.
2. Let's imagine that the homozygous form of each parblue (ParblueParblue) is able to increase psittacin production in 50%
3. Let's imagine that the optical phenotype of these psittacines appear saturated at 80%

Questions:
1. Which will be the % of psittacin production for each homozygous bird?
2. Which will be the observed phenotype respective to the % of psittacin?

Do not think in terms of Sapphire, Indigo, Turquoise, ... but you can call the phenotypes corresponding to these mutations A, B, C, D

Regards

Recio

Hi Recio if I understand your question correct then the homozygous forms will be simple arithmetic sum of different combinations of hetrozygous parblues, keeping in mind the saturation of phenotype at 80%.

So the answer is :-

20+20 = 40
20+40 = 60
20+60 = 80
20+80 = 100 genotype but phenotype will look like 80 (i.e. due to saturation)

40+40 = 80
40+60 = 100 genotype but phenotype will look like 80 (i.e. due to saturation)
40+80 = 100 genotype but phenotype will look like 80 (i.e. due to saturation)

60+60=100 genotype but phenotype will look like 80 (i.e. due to saturation)
60+80=100 genotype but phenotype will look like 80 (i.e. due to saturation)

80+80=100 genotype but phenotype will look like 80 (i.e. due to saturation)

hope I am correct

[Recio]

Hi Sherjil,

You were almost correct ... and you have grasped the main idea.

Let's go:
Expression of psittacin in the homozygous forms (I will consider only the homozygous forms of identical alleles):
A : 20+20/2 = 30
B : 40+40/2 = 60
C : 60+60/2 = 90
D : 80+80/2 = 120 (this is only theorical since it can not be higher than 100%)

Observed phenotypes for these homozygous parblues will be:
For A ... 30% expresion of psittacin
For B ... 60% expresion of psittacins
For C ... 80% expression of psittacins (saturated system)
For D ... 80% expression of psittacins (saturated system)

If we consider that the threshold of yellow psittacin for production of red psittacin is 50% ... how will you call the phenotypes corresponding to A, B, C & D using our present terminology for parblues : turquoise, indigo, ...?

Regards

Recio

[Johan S]

2. Let's imagine that the homozygous form of each parblue (ParblueParblue) is able to increase psittacin production in 50%

Hi Recio, not quite sure what you mean by 2. as I think it can be interpreted in more than one way.

Example one:
A: 20 + 20 * 0.5 = 30 (when thinking that heterozygous adds 20%, and then homozygous only increasing psittacin production further by 50%

or

A: (20 + 20) * 1.5 = 60 (when thinking that homozygous adds 20% and 20% normal production, but then "is able to increase psittacin production in 50%". Almost like the McDonalds "Would you like to supersize that?"

Why did you decide on the number 50%? I have some thoughts, and don't think it will be constant, but will let you have the floor first.

[Recio]

Hi Johan,

You are rigth. I was not very clear in my expressions .. but now you know what I was refering to.

Why to choose 50% as the threshold point for red psittacin synthesis? Just to be able to get homozygous and heterozygous birds under and over this point ... as you are guessing. This would allow to compare with various possibilities in reality.

Come on, jump and make your bet

Recio

[Sherjil]

Hi Recio;

Before discussing my mistake let me answer your nxt question , so assuming below %age of psittacin :-

Saphire = 20 to 40 %
Indigo = 40 to 60 %
Turquoise = 60 to 80 %

Then below are the phenotype of A, B , C & D :-

A is saphire with white/black ringneck
B is indigo with cream/black ringneck
C & D are turquoise with pink/black ringneck

This also qualify the 50% red psittacin production threshold.


Now can you please explain why have you taken 50% effect of the second allele to produce homozygous ?

[Recio]

Hi Sherjil

Observed phenotypes for these heterozygous parblues will be:
For A ... 20% expresion of psittacin
For B ... 40% expresion of psittacins
For C ... 60% expression of psittacins
For D ... 80% expression of psittacins (saturated system)

Observed phenotypes for these homozygous parblues will be:
For A ... 30% expresion of psittacin
For B ... 60% expresion of psittacins
For C ... 80% expression of psittacins (saturated system)
For D ... 80% expression of psittacins (saturated system)

If the red psittacin appears at 50% of yellow psittacin production we could say that:
A = Saphire : no red psittacin in either heterozygous or homozygous bird
B = Indigo : red psittacin only in homozygous birds, white and black ring in heterozygous
C = Ligth Turquoise : similar to homozygous indigo in the heterozygous bird and "heavy" turquoise with marked red psittacin in homozygous birds
D = Heavy turquoise : marked red ring in both heterozygous and homozygous birds.

This model can explain some facts as the existence of "heavy turquoise" phenotypes in homozygous and heterozygous parblue birds, as Johan pointed to me some months ago.
As you can see we can get the same phenotype with different allele combinations. If you add the possibility of homozygous birds made up of different alleles, each one with a different capacity to affect the synthesis of psittacins, you will understand that it is better to speak of morphotypes than of alleles/mutations. Something else : I am not saying that there are 3 or 4 different parblue alleles. I think that there are far more. We could have chosen any other allele with a different % of psittacin production and the resulting bird could always be classed in one of the above categories.

Should we think that it is not possible in real life to identify each independent allele?
Not at all. We can identify them by looking at the heterozygous birds, which own a blue allele (inactif on psittacin synthesis) and a parblue allele (which will be completely expressed). In this way we can avoid some confusing phenomena as the presence of different alleles in the homozygous birds and the effect of saturating the system.

How to detect the heterozygous birds? Very simple : every parblue (or creamino) born from a phenotypic parblue (or creamino) and a blue (or albino) will be heterozygous whatever the parents genotype is (homozygous or heterozygous).

We could try to detect all those parblue alleles if you have birds fullfilling these conditions and you can post the pics. Ideally we could see the patched psittacin in heterozygous Par-Ino adult males, in order to:
1. Keep in mind that the expression of psittacin in parblues increases till adulthood .. so do not send pics of young birds which could induce to confusion.
2. Avoid interference with melanin
3. ... and to get the red ring for easier identification.

Regards

Recio

PS: I decided that the second allele increase in 50% the production of psittacin because it is the closest to reality, where the presence of the homozygous form does not "double" the production of psittacin. Anyway the phenomenon is probably far more complex, with an almost lineal relation for very low amounts of psittacin production (like in Indigo) and a progressive lost of the contribution of the second allele when we consider higher levels of psittacin production (as in Turquoise). This is different than the saturation phenomenon which is related to the colour saturation despite an increased production of psittacin (like when you mix primary colours for painting).
Congratulations to those reading till here.

[Johan S]

...
How to detect the heterozygous birds? Very simple : every parblue (or creamino) born from a phenotypic parblue (or creamino) and a blue (or albino) will be heterozygous whatever the parents genotype is (homozygous or heterozygous).
...
PS: I decided that the second allele increase in 50% the production of psittacin because it is the closest to reality, where the presence of the homozygous form does not "double" the production of psittacin. Anyway the phenomenon is probably far more complex, with an almost lineal relation for very low amounts of psittacin production (like in Indigo) and a progressive lost of the contribution of the second allele when we consider higher levels of psittacin production (as in Turquoise). This is different than the saturation phenomenon which is related to the colour saturation despite an increased production of psittacin (like when you mix primary colours for painting).
Congratulations to those reading till here.

The alternative test to find a heterozygous bird (if the parents are unknown) is that, irrespective of the mating (with a blue or another parblue), they MUST produce at least one blue offspring.

Regarding your afterthought on 50%, I share your view about linear addition initially that will taper off.

Now for some pictures, all birds have proven themselves to be heterozygous.

Mature cock that have produced turquoise and blue offspring:


Son of above with blue sisters (2 years old and fathered chicks, but no ring yet. Shouldn't confuse as it is already very close to saturation and shows inheritance of a single mutant gene. Granted, a picture in 2013 would be better):


Mature cock that have produced turquoise and blue offspring:


Unfortunately, no light turquoise or indigo morphotypes in mature males.

PS: I have only noticed this now, but these pictures don't show any rose colour in the ring, which is rather strange for 'heavy turquoise'...

[Recio]

Hi Johan,

Great pics and birds !!!

Your adult male birds match the phenotype of the heterozygous Indigo. To me "heavy turquoise" birds show a green head and green wing covert feathers (similar to wild birds), with a blue-green body and blue primary flying feathers.

Let's see in the son of the first male develop the same psittacin pattern distribution than his father after reaching adulthood.

Let me reformulate your thought :
You wrote : The alternative test to find a heterozygous bird (if the parents are unknown) is that, irrespective of the mating (with a blue or another parblue), they MUST produce at least one blue offspring.

May be it is better : Any parblue producing at least one blue offspring MUST be an heterozygous parblue.
It is almost the same ... but clearer.

Regards

Recio

[Johan S]

May be it is better : Any parblue producing at least one blue offspring MUST be an heterozygous parblue.
It is almost the same ... but clearer.

Or, one last time to summarize everything: Any parblue a) with one blue parent OR b) producing at least one blue offspring MUST be an heterozygous parblue.

[Recio]

Or, one last time to summarize everything: Any parblue a) with one blue parent OR b) producing at least one blue offspring MUST be an heterozygous parblue.

I like it : short and clear. In Spanish we say : "Lo bueno, si breve, dos veces bueno" ("if good and short, it is twice good").

Let's go on parblues : would it be possible to get a "heavy turquoise" morphotype whithout any red pigment in the ring neck? ... and why, of course?

Regards

Recio

[Ring0Neck]

Great subject !

I can not add much but rather follow and learn as a good student does.
I don't think i got a full grasp on the game but i'll have a go, to start somewhere.

Q was:

Let's go on parblues : would it be possible to get a "heavy turquoise" morphotype whithout any red pigment in the ring neck? ... and why, of course?

I say No, we can not, since this bird would be a Mutation D, therefore red psittacin appears at 50% of yellow psittacin and this bird would be over 80% saturation point.

Question: Based on this model if you pair up two genotype B (say indigo) you'll end up with a mutation C or D and cocks will show red in the ringneck ?
I guess i am missing something but i better ask so i can get an answer.

Ps. I asnwer my own Question.. we do get a df indigo without red being homozygous bird
B : 40+40/2 = 60

Ben

[Recio]

I say No, we can not, since this bird would be a Mutation D, therefore red psittacin appears at 50% of yellow psittacin and this bird would be over 80% saturation point.

Hi Ben,

You are rigth : parblues appear as a consequence of a mutation acting on the production of yellow psittacins. Red psittacins are produced through a transformation of yellow psittacins. Thus if we do not have enough yellow psittacins (in our model the threshold is 50%) we will not get red psittacins.
Nevertheless we can imagine a mutation specifically blocking the enzyme transforming yellow to red psittacins. In this situation we could have a phenotype of "heavy turquoise" or even a wild type phenotype without any red psittacin, but it would not be a parblue. It would be just a different mutation. Maybe this bird exists and has been classed as a "heavy indigo" because the lack of red pigment in the ring???

Question: Based on this model if you pair up two genotype B (say indigo) you'll end up with a mutation C or D and cocks will show red in the ringneck ?
I guess i am missing something but i better ask so i can get an answer.

Ps. I asnwer my own Question.. we do get a df indigo without red being homozygous bird
B : 40+40/2 = 60

Ben

The parblue morphotypes can be classed as follows according to the presence or not of red psittacins and the homo/hetero-zygosity of the bird:
Saphire : no red psittacin in either homozygous or heterozygous birds
Indigo : red psittacin only in homozygous birds
Turquoise : red psittacin in both homozygous and heterozygous birds

Your question : Based on this model if you pair up two genotype B (say indigo) you'll end up with a mutation C or D and cocks will show red in the ringneck ?You are right : if you pair two heterozygous birds without red in the ring you can get an homozygous bird with red in the ring .... or not. This is the reason to better speak of morphotypes instead of alleles/mutations.

Following your exemple and going into reality:
Imagine that you have some parblues and that all your birds are heterozygous for the parblue because you, like most breeders, have always paired a parblue to a blue. Now you are reading this post and you are wondering what kind of parblue you have (Saphire? Indigo? Turquoise?). You know that your heterozygous parblues do not show any red psittacin, and thus they can not be Turquoise. Then you decided to pair some parblues together and see the outcomes. You finally made two pairings: first pairing with the male and the female showing more psittacin, and second pairing with the male and the female showing less psittacin.Here are the outcomes:

Pair1:
You get 4 male chicks and 3 year later you can see their rings and class them as:
1 Normal Blue
2 Indigo morphotype (little psittacin and no red in the ring)
1 Turquoise morphotype (more psittacin and red in the ring)

Pair2:
You get 4 male chicks and 3 year later you can see their rings and class them as:
1 Normal Blue
3 Indigo morphotype (no red in the ring), but one of them with some more psittacin than the others.

Of course we were lucky enough to get 100% males and the % of chicks in the nest matches the expected probabilities

Can you tell me which is the morphotype of the parents?

Regards

Recio

[Ring0Neck]

Pair1: Indigo morphotype X Indigo morphotype
Bred 4 male chicks and 3 year later you can see their rings and class them as:
1 Normal Blue
2 Indigo morphotype (little psittacin and no red in the ring)
1 Turquoise morphotype (more psittacin and red in the ring)

Pair2: Indigo morphotype X Saphire morphotype
Bred 4 male chicks and 3 year later you can see their rings and class them as:
1 Normal Blue
3 Indigo morphotype (no red in the ring), but one of them with some more psittacin than the others.

Ben

[Ring0Neck]

This is the reason to better speak of morphotypes instead of alleles/mutations.

This is easier said then done
Like saying: Think in English, not in your native language (easy for some harder for others).

Let me ask you a question:
Where do we get after 5 generations of breeding a Turquoise morphotype to a blue, and their offspring Turquoise morphotype again to a blue and so on? What bird will we end up with?
As you mentioned.. as most breeders do.

I think you know the underlaying idea that i'm thinking of.

[Recio]

Pair1: Indigo morphotype X Indigo morphotype
Bred 4 male chicks and 3 year later you can see their rings and class them as:
1 Normal Blue
2 Indigo morphotype (little psittacin and no red in the ring)
1 Turquoise morphotype (more psittacin and red in the ring)

Pair2: Indigo morphotype X Saphire morphotype
Bred 4 male chicks and 3 year later you can see their rings and class them as:
1 Normal Blue
3 Indigo morphotype (no red in the ring), but one of them with some more psittacin than the others.

Ben

I agree for pair 1.
For pair 2 ... why not Saphire x Saphire?
Saphire x Indigo will give you red psittacins or not depending on the relative amount of psittacin production depending on each parent. In our theoretical model an homozygous SaphireIndigo will produce 45% of psittacins (I let you make the maths), and thus will not show any red in the ring (it is under the 50% threshold to activate the production of red psittacins).
This is another example of why we should speak of morphotypes and not of alleles when refering to the phenotipic expression, and why alleles identification should be made by looking at the phenotype of heterozygous birds.

Regards

Recio

[Recio]

This is the reason to better speak of morphotypes instead of alleles/mutations.

This is easier said then done
Like saying: Think in English, not in your native language (easy for some harder for others).

Let me ask you a question:
Where do we get after 5 generations of breeding a Turquoise morphotype to a blue, and their offspring Turquoise morphotype again to a blue and so on? What bird will we end up with?
As you mentioned.. as most breeders do.

I think you know the underlaying idea that i'm thinking of.

Hi Ben,

After 5 or after 100 generations you will get the same Turquoise phenotype. The parblue allele has a very well conserved expressivity: if you look at the parblue offspring of an heterozygous parblue paired to a blue, you will notice that all the parblue siblings show exactly the same pattern.

A different question is the probability of seing new parblue mutations (let's say with 10 or 15 or 27% of expressed yellow psittacin) emerge with the years passing. This is a very likely possibility. I am convinced that the Parblue/Blue system is made up of two tween genes : one of them coding for even psittacin and the other for the patched psittacin. The gene coding for patched psittacin woudl be prone to mutate and produce the great variability in the amount of patched psittacin that we can see in parblues. The gene coding for even psittacin would be older, more stable and, for me, the only known mutation to date would be the Emerald mutation. I hope that Deon could shed more ligth on this subject after the next breeding season.

Your underlying idea? I bet for a possible "dilution" of the expression of psittacins after pairing to a Blue for many generations, as some breeders claim for Pallid and SL-ino after being paired for generations. To me it is non sense because the concerned allele is not "diluted". A different thing is adding man selection so that in each generation man choose the lightest turquoise to be paired. In this case you will get lighter and lighter parblues ... but by another mechanism.

Best regards

Recio

[Johan S]

Hi Recio and Ben

Apologies for not having time to work with the percentages presented, so I will rather only comment now on breeding reports. Regarding pair 2, I would think it likely to be indigoblue x indigobluel. There has been more reports of homozygous indigo birds with no pink in the ring, than of ones that do have. I have actually only very recently learnt of one such a report where pink was visible.

if you look at the parblue offspring of an heterozygous parblue paired to a blue, you will notice that all the parblue siblings show exactly the same pattern.

What I find very ironic is that I have not met anybody that have been able to confirm this 100% for 10+ birds. Most breeders 'think' they look 'mostly' the same. This still leaves room for variation. There are two parblue lines in our collection that I will keep back for this experiment. The one line has 3d generation chicks in the nest, the other only 2 generation. This is going to take some time.

[Ring0Neck]

Thanks Recio It's great that you take the time to explain to less knowledged.


Johan - Recio & others
a. Do you think that DF Turquoise is the correct naming?

b. Pair 1 example. Has this been proven to be so or still theoretical? to breed Turquoise out of the pair of Indigo?


c. This pic is of a DF Indigo as the breeder called it, what do you think?

[Johan S]

Thanks Recio It's great that you take the time to explain to less knowledged.


Johan - Recio & others
a. Do you think that DF Turquoise is the correct naming?

b. Pair 1 example. Has this been proven to be so or still theoretical? to breed Turquoise out of the pair of Indigo?


c. This pic is of a DF Indigo as the breeder called it, what do you think?

a. No, I don't think it is strictly correct. The SF/DF notation is used for mutations that are incomplete dominant when compared to the wildtype. Parblues only behave this way when compared to blue. However, we shouldn't compare one mutation to another, but always to the wildtype. For the case of parblues, it is recessive to the wildtype, thus I prefer the use of hetero-/homozygous when trying to use the strictly correct terminology. Sometimes I also slip up though, and talk about SF/DF turquoise.

b. One Australian breeder have reported that he had bred a homozygous indigo that appears like a turquoise morphotype. I haven't spoken to him directly and heard via Recio.

c. I would agree with the breeder on indigo, but don't know the history to be 100% sure on hetero-/homozygous.

[Ring0Neck]

Johan,

I agree on point a. - I guess referring to sf/df turq. is normal as is understood by most .
I think we should upload pics of genotypes ABCD and to work visually with pictures.
Recio mentioned that your turquoise is a light Turq (C). would be great to see a pic of what he means by heavy Turq (D)
even if the bird is someone else's.
This way anyone who reads this thread can understand easier the model.

[Johan S]

I think Recio should upload some photos...

[Recio]

Thanks Recio It's great that you take the time to explain to less knowledged.


Johan - Recio & others
a. Do you think that DF Turquoise is the correct naming?

b. Pair 1 example. Has this been proven to be so or still theoretical? to breed Turquoise out of the pair of Indigo?


c. This pic is of a DF Indigo as the breeder called it, what do you think?

a. No, I don't think it is strictly correct. The SF/DF notation is used for mutations that are incomplete dominant when compared to the wildtype. Parblues only behave this way when compared to blue. However, we shouldn't compare one mutation to another, but always to the wildtype. For the case of parblues, it is recessive to the wildtype, thus I prefer the use of hetero-/homozygous when trying to use the strictly correct terminology. Sometimes I also slip up though, and talk about SF/DF turquoise.

b. One Australian breeder have reported that he had bred a homozygous indigo that appears like a turquoise morphotype. I haven't spoken to him directly and heard via Recio.

c. I would agree with the breeder on indigo, but don't know the history to be 100% sure on hetero-/homozygous.

Hi Ben, Johan and everybody

a. The use of SF/DF is reserved for dom mutations (Ex : Grey, Violet, Dark). The idea is that SF and DF phenotypes are the same (or near the same) and saying if it is SF or DF allows for quick understanding of the genotype. Incomplete dom mutations (Ex : Dom pied) should be called heterozygous or homozygous instead of SF or DF. Anyway this is just terminology and the important thing is that we all understand what we are speaking about. Far more this terminology is not accurate. Ex: Dark is considered a dominant mutation and everybody speaks of SF/DF Dark. In fact it is an incomplete dominant mutation since SF Dark birds (dark green and cobalts) are different than DF Dark birds (olive and mauve). We could discuss longer on this subject but it will lead nowhere.

b. Willy Stobart was the first breeder to identify an heterozygous IndigoBlue phenotype. It is from this specific parblue that he has a bred an homozygous Indigo showing a faint red ring. Since it is the same breeder identifying the heterozygous and homozygous phenotypes, on the same parblue strain, I understand that we could be confident. More : this identification allows for classing parblues as previously indicated :

Saphire : no red psittacin in either heterozygous or homozygous bird
Indigo : red psittacin only in homozygous birds, white and black ring in heterozygous
Turquoise : similar to homozygous indigo in the heterozygous bird and "heavy" turquoise with marked red psittacin in homozygous birds

I am not saying that those morphotypes are the counterpart of specific alleles. On the pic we can see an homozygous bird without red psittacin. Thus we can conclude that it belongs to a "saphire" morphotype. Which is his genetic make up? In our theoretical model it could be an homozygous SaphireIndigo, an homozygous Indigo, or any other homozygous combination of parblue alleles producing less psittacin than our threshold (50%). This is the reason I ask for heterozygous parblue pics to detect single parblue phenotypes.

I must say that Willy Stobart does not at all agree with this classification and that he thinks that the Saphire mutation does not exist (or that its existence has not been proven). He thinks that there are only 2 patched mutations (Turqquoise and Indigo) ... but, then, how to explain the existence of homozygous birds as the one in the pic, without any red psittacin???

I own a "heavy turquoise" morphotype. This is an homozygous parblue made up of two different alleles : when paired to a blue hen he has produced two types of chicks: a turquoise morphotype with psittacins being detectable at feathering, and an indigo morphotype with psittacins detected only after 3 months of age. I will try to take a pic next week (I am expecting my camera back).

About the reproductibility pattern of parblues : the best is to compare among heterozygous parblue siblings from an heterozygous parblue parent. Do not compare directly to the parent because the psittacin pattern depends on the age and on the sex. I have directly made these observations with my birds and with a friend's birds. Deon has also made such observation (private communication). It would be great if other people could confirm.

Regards

Recio

[Johan S]

Recio, I have a light turquoise or indigo morphotype hen bred to a cobalt that are on 4 chicks. I think I have sent you pictures of her at some stage. I don't know yet if she is hetero-/homozygous, but we'll be able to establish this. I'll specifically try and pic up similarities in the parblues. I didn't bother posting the picture of her, as you are a sexist and only interested in males.

[Recio]

Psshhh !!!

That was our secret ...!!!

Lovely

Recio

[Johan S]

[Johan S]

About the reproductibility pattern of parblues : the best is to compare among heterozygous parblue siblings from an heterozygous parblue parent. Do not compare directly to the parent because the psittacin pattern depends on the age and on the sex. I have directly made these observations with my birds and with a friend's birds. Deon has also made such observation (private communication). It would be great if other people could confirm.

I have run across an interesting statement when I was reading up on some stuff, this from Inte Osman:

"I have visit well known breeders of ringnecks in my country and it came to my notice that parblue mutations in ringnecks behave very much unstable.
A heterozygous parblue male mated to a non parblue hen shows often different coloured (heterozygous) parblue offspring with various amounts of yellow even after moulting.
This phenomenon is poorly understood and hard to research"

1) It seems in direct contrast to your own (and Deon's) observations, but I will have look at the chicks developing here if they carry parblue. This brings us right back to variation, maybe by modifiers?
2) Hard to reseach = a challenge ... And Recio loves a challenge, right?

[Recio]

Hi Johan,

I have 3 pairs of blue to parblue ready for the next season (from mars to juin in Europe). Two of them are heterozygous parblue to blue, and the other is homozygous parblue to blue. I hope we could answer this question quite quickly. If any other has already done this kind of pairing and can help ... it would be great.

Regards

Recio

[Johan S]

Recio, to be honest, I don't know how on earth this has not been investigated to death already. Parblues have been with us for many many years. Are any of your parblues cocks? When do we get to see the pictures?

[Recio]

Hi Johan,

Probbaly it has not been investigated to death because:

1. If I am rigth it is quite likely that there are at least half a dozen different parblue alleles, and when they combinate they can produce an enormous array of variations in the homozygous birds.

2. The hypothesis of a high variability in the expression of parblues has been accepted for a long time. Once you accept such hypothesis you will not even wonder for streaking results because in your mind is written "high variability = I can expect anything".

3. Many times parblues are added to other mutations acting on melanin (Ex pallid to produce "rainbow", pieds, ...). Since melanocytes are able to regulate at some point psittacin production, these combinations are likely to change the phenotypic appearence of the psittacin let by parblues.

4. Even when keeping just one parblue strain in his breeding program and always mating parblue to blue, so that every phenotypic parblue is an heterozygous parblue, we can see little differences in the expressed parblue if we compare youngs to adults or males to females. This is the reason I think it is better to compare among siblings of the same age, sex and nest.

I have an heterozygous indigo morphotype and an homozygous heavy turquoise morphotype cocks. Next week, if the camera runs, I will post the pics.

Regards

Recio

[Recio]

... I have forgotten the most imporatant reason:

You can get the same morphotype with different allelic combinations. If you think that this specific morphotype corresponds only to a specific mutation ... and when breeding with this bird you get different offspring phenotypes your conclusion can erroneously be that there is a great variability in the expression of that mutation.

Recio

[Ring0Neck]

Mature heterozygous Turquoise 4-5 Y O

[willowisp71]

WOW, Ring0!!! Noice bird!!

[Johan S]

Finally got around to take some pictures of the heterozygous male in my flock.

Mauve TurquoiseBlue cock



PS: Recio, here is a picture of the hen that I'm not supposed to upload to your 'males only club'. You'll have to come visit SA to dish out my punishment. This is what I consider as a low percentage of psittacin, i.e. indigo.

[Recio]

Hi Johan,

Thanks for the pics ... and yes, it could be an indigo female ...

I have some pics of our "bests" for analyses : heterozygous creamino IRN, including an adult male and its heterozygous offspring. Here follow the pics of the "familly": creamino father, lutino mother and 5 chicks 7 months old (3 creaminos, 1 lutino and 1 albino). You should notice how much psittacin is present in the father, showing a red ring, even being an heterozygous bird. You can also notice that the 3 creamino chicks are almost identical (in fact they are identical but the lighting conditions on each bird are not exactly the same). They appear ligther than the father because they are younger. The last pic is an older sibling female (2 years) from the same pairing : here you can notice that the amount of psittacin is far more important than in her younger siblings. That's why I said to always compare among birds of same nest, age and sex if possible.

Since I have two left feets for managing pics I will send them to Johan to post them here after.
Thanks in advance Johan.

Recio

[Sherjil]

Hi Johan,

Thanks for the pics ... and yes, it could be an indigo female ...

I have some pics of our "bests" for analyses : heterozygous creamino IRN, including an adult male and its heterozygous offspring. Here follow the pics of the "familly": creamino father, lutino mother and 5 chicks 7 months old (3 creaminos, 1 lutino and 1 albino). You should notice how much psittacin is present in the father, showing a red ring, even being an heterozygous bird. You can also notice that the 3 creamino chicks are almost identical (in fact they are identical but the lighting conditions on each bird are not exactly the same). They appear ligther than the father because they are younger. The last pic is an older sibling female (2 years) from the same pairing : here you can notice that the amount of psittacin is far more important than in her younger siblings. That's why I said to always compare among birds of same nest, age and sex if possible.

Since I have two left feets for managing pics I will send them to Johan to post them here after.
Thanks in advance Johan.

Recio

The topic is shaping up really nice

looking forward to see snaps of the hetrozygous turquoise ino IRN and its offsrping ...

[Recio]

Let's see if Johan has correctly teached me how to do it.
Here are the pics:








You are a great teacher, Johan

Publicly thanks a lot

Recio

[Ring0Neck]

Recio

I finally understand the play


If one wants to play the game and follow your lead with the pairing of creamino male X lutino hen
is there a particular Creamino that we should look to get?

Or should we get a different pairing? which would best suit the purpouse of the game?
would a turquoise/ino X creamino be the next step up? if so, any creamino?

Ben

[Johan S]

Let's see if Johan has correctly teached me how to do it.
Here are the pics:

X

You are a great teacher, Johan
Publicly thanks a lot
Recio

Wonderful to see somebody with two left feet successfully upload pictures! May this be the start of MANY more. Give a man a fish, hey?

[Recio]

Recio

I finally understand the play


If one wants to play the game and follow your lead with the pairing of creamino male X lutino hen
is there a particular Creamino that we should look to get?

Or should we get a different pairing? which would best suit the purpouse of the game?
would a turquoise/ino X creamino be the next step up? if so, any creamino?

Ben

Hi Ben,

The "game" is a little bit different.

We can class any parblue patched mutation in one of 3 morphotypes according to its inheritance mode (homozygous or heterozygous) and the presence or not of the red ring psittacin. Nevertheless this does not mean that there are 3 different alleles. I think that there are far more than 3 and the game consists in identifying these alleles.

The birds I am showing were produced by pairing a Heavy Turquoise Blue SL-Ino male to a SL-ino/Blue hen. We can get these heterozygous parblues from other combinations but the important thing is identifying each parblue allele by the phenotype expressed by the heterozygous bird. It can be done in either blue or green series although it is easier to appreciate the amount of psittacin in creamino birds.

The allele I am showing correspond to the extreme heavy turquoise with a lot of yellow psittacin and complete red ring in the heterozygous form.

Let's go to the opposite extreme : Could anybody post a pic of an heterozygous creamino male whithout any red psittacin in the ring?

Regards

Recio

[asifsuun]

A really nice idea. I appreciate it much !

[Ring0Neck]

Would you classify this Turquoise Blue Pallid as Heavy Turquoise ?

http://parakeet.me/irn/pallidturq.jpg

[Recio]

Would you classify this Turquoise Blue Pallid as Heavy Turquoise ?

http://parakeet.me/irn/pallidturq.jpg

Hi Ben,

Is this bird an heterozygous turquoise? If your answer is yes ... I would say that it is a "heavy turquoise" because we see the red ring and a big amount of yellow psittacine, despite the presence of pallid in the mix (I know that pallid would primary act on melanin and not on psittacins ... but do not forget that there is a likely regulation of the expression of psittacins by melanocytes, and that this regulation could be related to the production of melanin).
If the bird is homozygous for parblues we can not conclude anything because its genetic make up concerning parblues could be made of different allelic combinations.

Regards

Recio

[Ring0Neck]

Recio
He is heterozygous turquoise

[trabots]

Hi folks,

Willy Stobart here. Recio has asked that I join your forum. Deeps are my main interest which I will adress in the appropriate thread. My thoughts on Parblues:

Firstly I disagree totally with this identification of Parblue mutations using only the heterzygous forms and the relative psittacin showing on the bird. The full expression of a mutation can only be seen in its homozygous phenotype. I have bred several df Turquoise birds and until a hawk killed it I had a df Indigo, I am trying to breed another. I pestered Terry Martin's forum members until finally Chris Whipps paired 2 EmeraldBlues and produced a df Emerald which is hard to identify unless you look for the increased psittacin in the flights, they are greener than in an EmeraldBlue. I have seen much reference to a 'Sapphire' but nobody has produced a df Sapphire so until that happens I ignore. I bred a Violet IndigoBlue Pallid now mature which according to the believers would have to be classed as a Sapphire. It cannot be as its mother was an IndigoBlue. This is my main point, ParblueBlues have 2 different alleles contributing to the appearance of the phenotype. We all know that Blues can have slightly different phenotypes, some brighter some duller, and I know that df Turquoise birds can be slightly different so in TurquoiseBlues you logically will have greener ones and bluer ones. In fact there is probably some overlap between a bluer TurquoiseBlue and a greener IndigoBlue. The df Turquoise and the df Indigo are unmistakenly different. If a df Sapphire is produced that is different again then I will accept it as the 4th known IRN Parblue.

You notice that I use 'df' for homozygous Parblues. I use 'DF' for homozygous dominant mutations. In this thread alone I see many examples of the 'correct' name for a homozygous Parblue eg: Turquoise, used when the writer clearly is referring to a TurquoiseBlue. We are not going to stop this so that is why I use 'df' to distinguish. Everyone understands.

I do not believe that the df ParBlue lovebird (there is no Blue in that species) called Aqua by the gurus, which has an even distribution of psittacin over the body is the same as the Emerald mutation in IRNs. The df Turquoise IRN has an even psittacin distribution also. In the IRN therefore we have two homozygous Parblues, df Turquoise and df Emerald which both fit the description of even psittacin. So which is the same as that lovebird? We won't know until the Blue mutation of that Lovebird is discovered. If then the AquaBlue lovebird has an even psittacin distribution we could reasonably infer that Aqua and Emerald are the same. Until then ................

Much is made of the existence or not of a red ring in images thus conclusions are formed which may be incorrect. The main point is that only half the birds have a ring so useful with cocks only. Unfortunately the camera and our monitors can lie. If you have something like Adobe Photoshop to play with you can see that increasing or decreasing saturation can make the red ring intensify or turn white. Also the redness of the ring can increase with age I have found. I have had the same TurquoiseBlue bird as in this thread which confused me with its white ring and a year later the ring is red. The same with the various shades of blue, images are unfortunately not a great identification tool UNLESS reference birds are used in the image.

Why can we spot a TurquoiseBlue in the nest when combined with other mutations other than Blue yet often we can barely see any psittacin in young with only Blue and Turquoise involved? Even when only split for CHCT or CH Fallow the TurquoiseBlue splits show their psittacin in the nest.

Lots to learn. I look forward to a forum where logic prevails.

My interest is confined to what we can see so that I can confidently pick my breeding pairs. I will leave the explanations of what happens microscopically etc to Recio and the gurus.

[Ring0Neck]

Hi Willy,

Welcome to the forum and we appreciate you sharing your knowledge and your input.

Could you have a look at this thread as well? we are talking about Deep and CHF's also.
http://www.indianringneck.com/forum/vie ... &start=100

Ben

[Johan S]

Hi Willy, welcome to the forum. It certainly is going to be interesting to pick your brain, esp. regarding 'deep'.

[Ring0Neck]

Test upload

Picture is of a 1 y old male, he was attacked by hen, he survived the divorce, not without scars
http://parakeet.me/irn/redz/turq3.jpg

[Sherjil]

Let's see if Johan has correctly teached me how to do it.

Beautful birds Recio

Please help me understand , in the above pic , I believe the father is on the extreme right and mother in the middle on the perch, right ?

I can see the creamino offspring express of two types of turquoise. 1st type of offspring with relatively lesser turquoise are in the back sticking on the cage gauze and 2nd type sitting on the left to the mother showing almost the same expression of turquoise as the father.

Now if the father is hetrozygous turquoise blue ino then all the creamino offspring should look like father ? how come two diff allel of turquoise from a hetrozygous bird ?

[Recio]

Hi Sherjil,

As I wrote above the offspring is one lutino, one albino and 3 creamino (turquoise-SL Ino). The 3 creamino are exactly the same phenotype but the different ligth incidence can make appear one or the other ligther than the others. Those are not my birds but from a friend, so I will not be able to take more pics with different views for a while.

Regards

Recio