Deep and Emerald

madas · Post by **madas** » Fri Jan 18, 2013 1:49 am

trabots wrote:These images show the greenish tinge to the front of the young Deep Blue

young Deep and Dark Blues
[img]http://i1305.photobucket.com/album ... .jpg[/img]
[img]http://i1305.photobucket.com/album ... .jpg[/img]

Is it my eyes or do all your "deep" blue youngsters have lighter beaks too?

Recio · Post by **Recio** » Fri Jan 18, 2013 3:08 am

Hi Willy,

I guess you have had a look under uv to your SF Emerald TurquoiseBlue (or EmeraldTurquoise if you prefere). What did you see?

Recio

trabots · Post by **trabots** » Fri Jan 18, 2013 3:24 pm

I guess you have had a look under uv to your SF Emerald TurquoiseBlue (or EmeraldTurquoise if you prefere). What did you see?

Recio, that is what I said I had done. It was definitely not Emerald, just looking like a normal ParblueBlue either TurquoiseBlue or IndigoBlue under UV. What Ben had also confirmed with his photoshopped image of the bird is that you would swear the two birds are the same colour as an Emerald apart from the patches. Definately keepers for further study.

trabots · Post by **trabots** » Fri Jan 18, 2013 3:47 pm

that result can be consistent if your pairing was: emerald green / parblue x deep violet blue

Johan, you are correct about that pairing being able to give the results I have. There is something else going on however as I have said above, the two green birds are the same colour to the eye as an EmeraldBlue. The colour seems independent of the '3rd psitticin' type that we wee under UV. The Deep EmeraldBlue and Violet EmeraldBlue flouresced with the same intensity as the EmeraldBlue.

we have SF/DF deep green and SF/DF deep blue phenotypes

The comment about Deep being Parblue was thrown in for thought. I knew it can't be Parblue for the reasons you have mentioned. I still cannot come around the dominance theory however because of the lack of straight Green /Blue young in all the breedings done around the world so far. Out of 12 young I have now bred from the pair none have been Green.

Emerald Green x Blue =

Emerald Green /Blue
Green /Blue

Emerald Green /Blue x Blue =

Emerald Blue
Emerald Green /Blue
Blue
Green /Blue

Emerald Green /Parblue x Blue =

Emerald ParblueBlue
Emerald Green /Parblue
ParblueBlue
Green /Parblue

trabots · Post by **trabots** » Fri Jan 18, 2013 6:51 pm

Emerald Green /Parblue x Blue =

Emerald ParblueBlue
Emerald Green /Parblue
ParblueBlue
Green /Parblue

Should be:

Emerald Green /Blue
Green /Blue
Emerald ParblueBlue
ParblueBlue

Ring0Neck · Post by **Ring0Neck** » Sat Jan 19, 2013 5:58 am

The colour seems independent of the '3rd psitticin' type that we see under UV

This is the area we need to concentrate on - it is the key.

We should throw some questions/brainstorming and then cross out the ones that can not be.
Does Emerald have it's own "blue type chromosome" ?

'3rd psitticin' = another/independent mutation ?

Let's call it BluX (BluX being the flourescence we see unde UV)
and the non flourescent Emeralds are in fact: Emerald Indigo/BluX or Emerald IndigoBlue/BluX?
& we could also breed: Emerald Indigo/BluX/Blue?
( I personally find Indigo very similar to Emerald and not so close to Turq. )

I also wonder how many of these Emeralds are around?
It could also mean that a Parblue?/ IndigoBlue can be split BluX -
- It would also answer Molossus's question..

All the above is likely to be non-sense but i don't mind admiting of being wrong more often then right (all humans are) as long as i learn and don't repeat being wrong.

I think this is where Recio should put his thinking cap on

83IV

PS: This Turquoise Emerald Grey Cleartail Indian Ringneck would be
Turquoise EmeraldBluX Grey Cleartail Indian Ringneck ?/blue??
We can see in that pic the white (albinism) is gone. replaced by a yellow cream instead.

http://www.ourringnecks.com/apps/photos ... =172255701

Since i said so many wrongs in 1 post i will say 1 more: What if the Emerald is the true Turquoise with it's own blue (BluX)?

Recio · Post by **Recio** » Sat Jan 19, 2013 1:35 pm

Johan S wrote:
trabots wrote:I bred from an Emerald (no patches) and a Deep Violet Blue (no visible psitticin). Somehow I have bred from this pair last year 2011 a ParblueBlue Violet and 2012 2 x ParblueBlues which fluoresce like TurquoiseBlues or IndigoBlues.
Willy I know you are not a fan of the hypothesis, but that result can be consistent if your pairing was:

emerald green / parblue x deep violet blue

That would mean that we could interpret it as emerald green and emerald blue having an almost identical phenotype, and emerald being an incomplete dominant mutation not allelic to blue and parblue. You'll only have a 25% chance of breeding a normal green phenotype (with or without deep/violet etc.) too, so one should expect a green series bird to pop out at some stage. Interesting that it hasn't, though!

Hi Johan,

Here you make a good point: the phenotype we know as Emerald, according to Willi's results, should be an Emerald Green instead of an Emerald Blue as I have been thinking for a while. In this case we could think that the Emerald locus and the Green locus must be in the same chromossome and probably that they are neighbours, because probably one of them has evolved from the other (both are involved in psittacin synthesis). If it was the case it would be very difficult to get green birds because Emerald and Green would be highly linked. This could explain that till now no one single green bird has been obtained. If this is rigth phenotypic Emeralds are in fact SF Emerald Green/Blue birds and when paired to blue we can obtain in the offspring only the same phenotypes and genotypes we see in the parents. Probably the male of Willi is, as you say, Emerald Green/Parblue and it has allowed to get your conclusions.
Reinterpreting the last pairing of Willi:

Emerald Green /Parblue x Blue =

Emerald ParblueBlue ..... no possible to be produced if Emerald is linked to Green... and no one chick out of 12.
Emerald Green /Parblue ... like the father
ParblueBlue .... the non fluorescent offspring
Green /Parblue .....no possible to be produced if Emerald is linked to Green .... and no one chick out of 12.

It remains the question of the patched non fluorescent offspring showing a phenotype similar to the "true" Emeralds (fluorescents under uv). Here I agree with Willi: we should see how the colour evolves with aging.

Regards

Recio

trabots · Post by **trabots** » Sat Jan 19, 2013 5:56 pm

These images with the hue maxed out in Photoshop confirm as Ben's did that these new ParblueBlues do not look like TurquoiseBlues, at least at this age. They look like EmeraldBlues with patches and are a different colour to a TurquoiseBlue, both live and with the hues maxed . The birds in the top image are not related.

EmeraldBlue, ParblueBlue hue
[img]http://i1305.photobucket.com/album ... .jpg[/img]

df Turquoise, TurquoiseBlue hue
[img]http://i1305.photobucket.com/album ... .jpg[/img]

Recio · Post by **Recio** » Sun Jan 20, 2013 4:16 am

Hi Willi,

Very interesting results. Till now we had the idea that the flashing effect of Emerald under direct sun ligth was related to the reflected fluorescence due to the uv radiation present in the sun ligth. You can not find this specific fluorescence typical of Emerald under uv in your young Emerald-like Patched IRN .... can you see the flashing effect under sun ligth or has it also disappeared?

Recio

trabots · Post by **trabots** » Sun Jan 20, 2013 2:56 pm

can you see the flashing effect under sun ligth or has it also disappeared

If you mean is the bird as bright as an Emerald, then yes.

Recio · Post by **Recio** » Sun Jan 20, 2013 3:52 pm

trabots wrote:
can you see the flashing effect under sun ligth or has it also disappeared
If you mean is the bird as bright as an Emerald, then yes.

... So the brightness we see in Emerald (both types: fluorescent and non fluorescent birds) under sun ligth seems not to be related to the fluorescence we see under uv. This kind of brightness is seen very often in structural colours producing iridescence (metalic colours; due to goniochromisme) and we know that changes in the structure of a feather can produce any colour, from reds and yellows to blues and uv, even without any psittacofulvine (Ex: the Ara araurana shows oranges and yellows colours produced by structural changes in the feather ... but do not ask me where I read it). So we could speculate (once more Willi) that Emerald could be a structural mutation able to produce structural yellows (whithout psitacins) in both green and blue series birds. It would explain why Blue is unable to block the production of the yellow colour in blue series birds. It could also explain the change in the quality of the fluorescence of Emerald Green birds under uv: only psittacins present in green series birds are able to fluoresce ... and the fluorescence we see could be altered by the change in the feather structure producing a different quality of fluorescence (it becomes bluish instead of yellowish). I know that somebody is already thinking that this has not sens because psittacins are in the cortex of the feather ... but there are many possibilities to explain it (structural mutation of the cortex, change in the wavelength of the refracted and reflected ligth leaving the medula, ...). It could also explain the lack of fluorescence of Emerald blue series birds under uv, since they do not own any psittacin.

Of course this is not even a hypothesis. Just some ideas to think about looking for a logical explanation. Some things that could help to verify: to look for changes in fluorescence under uv in green series birds showing structural mutations. That is ideally in Grey Inos, Dark Inos and Violet Inos. If the produced fluorescence is different than the perceived fluorescence in Lutinos it would mean that the structural mutations can also act in the way birds perceive psittacins under the effect of uv lighting (sun ligth) ... and the different fluorescence we see in Emeralds would not be related to a different psittacin type.

Other things we can do: we can try to "digest" with acids and/or alcalis the keratin of the feather. The resistence to those chemicals is probably related to the structure, and we could determine the concentration, pH, ... we need to make disappear/change the fluorescence we see under uv. That is we could determine the chemical conditions allowing to detect the characteristics of each structural mutation .... and we will not need expensive studies of electronic microscopie. We could also destroy the feather structure "physically" by hitting the feathers with a hammer ... and to see if the bluish fluorescence of an Emerald feather becomes a yellowish fluorescence after "hammering" ...

As you can see there are a lot of ideas to check but, as Willi said, I do not have the rigth birds or even the rigth feathers.

Regards

Recio

Ring0Neck · Post by **Ring0Neck** » Sun Jan 20, 2013 7:12 pm

Hmmm,

Good job Recio.

If the idea of the flourescent under UV emerald being a green emerald, it would mean that by now... most emeralds are split blue & emerald blues - in essence contaminating them with blue at a very fast rate. It would also mean that pairing the emerald to a green is in fact essential.

To be honest, my observations on emerald gave me the impression as if there are 2 types of emeralds, Phenotypically speaking.
which at first i thought it was the other type aquas that we had here in OZ. Perhaps it was the green & blue series.

* For new readers: Above said is purely speculative by no means facts, just brainstorming, munching on ideas, narrowing down possibilities.

83IV

trabots · Post by **trabots** » Sun Jan 20, 2013 10:14 pm

I have just heard from the breeder of the EmeraldBlue father of the mystery Parblues. It was bred from an EmeraldBlue (Smith brother's bird) to a VioletBlue and neither had any signs of being Parblue. One could still have been split Parblue of course, however he has never bred anything like I have from those or any other EmeraldBlues in his collection. I think the Deep has more to it than we know, especially the theory about some yellow colours being possibly structural.

Ring0Neck · Post by **Ring0Neck** » Mon Jan 21, 2013 12:09 am

Just away from the main subject

Deon mentions this in his new book Chpt 2

Very little is known about Deep's mutation's characteristics, but it is without doubt a structural color mutation.

Johan S · Post by **Johan S** » Mon Jan 21, 2013 12:22 am

Willy, how would you feel about whacking the living daylights out of an emerald feather? And as a control to the experiment, do the same to a blue feather. It would be a very quick way to put us on the right track. And maybe a deep blue or possibly even a deep emerald (blue-series) as well.

trabots · Post by **trabots** » Mon Jan 21, 2013 5:27 am

Firstly how about somebody giving us a lesson in taking a picture of a UV lit bird? Cheers

Ring0Neck · Post by **Ring0Neck** » Mon Jan 21, 2013 6:35 am

I found this tutorial, might help
http://www.ehow.com/how_7794353_digital ... light.html

It would be great if we could all use the same procedure once we find the right settings and agree on it, for obvious reasons.

Recio · Post by **Recio** » Mon Jan 21, 2013 3:25 pm

Hi everybody,

I have just received Deon's book today. In the chapter about Emerald he spents a lot of time considering that the underlying mutation could, in fact, be structural. He does it by analogy with other species showing a similar colour with a perturbed feather structure readily visible in the flesh. Willi's results also point to this possibility.... but there are a lot of questions to be answered: why the only reported non fluorescent Emeralds show also a patched pattern? If Emerald is a structural mutation and that it is not linked to the blue locus (codes for psittacin) we should have about 50% of Green series Emeralds and about 50% of Blue series Emeralds .... that is about 50% of fluorescent Emeralds and about 50% of non fluorescent Emeralds, .... but nobody else than Willi has reported on these non fluorescent Emeralds .... why?

Could all of you owing Emeralds have a look to the birds under uv to know if anybody has a non fluorescent Emerald without any patch? Just to know if patchiness is necessarily associated to the lost of fluorescence ... or not.

Effectively we need to know the offspring of a green Emerald paired to a non split wild green ... but it would be really valuable also to pair one of Willi's non fluorescent Emeralds to a green and to check if the offspring "recovers" its special fluorescence under uv. In this way it could be proven that the bluish fluorescence is related to the presence of normal psittacins, with a reflected ligth altered by the change in feather structure.

Your thoughts.

Recio

trabots · Post by **trabots** » Mon Jan 21, 2013 10:16 pm

nobody else than Willi has reported on these non fluorescent Emeralds .... why?

Nobody else has paired EmeraldBlue to Deep Blue

Ring0Neck · Post by **Ring0Neck** » Tue Jan 22, 2013 12:42 am

Back on UV subject:
From what i have read, after taking the pics a bit of software editing is in order.

I have had a quick attempt with a cheap UV torch back in December.

first pic is original as taken by the camera - no special setting to camera.
the following 2 some changes through software like Paint.net & IrfanView, mainly to remove the dark/blue hue

Original : http://parakeet.me/irn/f/emeralduv.jpg

Edited:
http://parakeet.me/irn/f/emeralduv1.jpg

http://parakeet.me/irn/f/emeralduv2.jpg

how far off am i?
Can someone upload UV pics of birds as reference as to how they should look?

83IV

Recio · Post by **Recio** » Tue Jan 22, 2013 2:53 am

trabots wrote:
nobody else than Willi has reported on these non fluorescent Emeralds .... why?
Nobody else has paired EmeraldBlue to Deep Blue

... but Deep is not in the offspring showing the non fluorescent Emerald like phenotype ...

Recio

trabots · Post by **trabots** » Tue Jan 22, 2013 3:07 pm

Quote:
nobody else than Willi has reported on these non fluorescent Emeralds .... why?

Nobody else has paired EmeraldBlue to Deep Blue

... but Deep is not in the offspring showing the non fluorescent Emerald like phenotype ...

just coincidence then that Deep Blues have unexplained yellow pigments?

Recio · Post by **Recio** » Tue Jan 22, 2013 3:37 pm

trabots wrote:
Quote:
nobody else than Willi has reported on these non fluorescent Emeralds .... why?

Nobody else has paired EmeraldBlue to Deep Blue

... but Deep is not in the offspring showing the non fluorescent Emerald like phenotype ...

just coincidence then that Deep Blues have unexplained yellow pigments?

Hard to say what the yellow colour of Deeps means. Is it a pigment? Is it structural?

If it was fluorescent we could be almost sure that it is a pigment as you say ... and the ever coming question will reappear : why is it not bloked by Blue? But if it was a pigment its regulation seems completelly different than for the even or the patched psittacin, since it disappears with aging. Could you detect any fluorescence in your young Deeps? I know that the intensity is very low, but if there was any fluorescence it would be a good argument for the psittacin hypothesis.

If it was structural we should think that the feather structure changes with aging, since the yellow colour disappears. We know that the intensity/type/distribution of pigments change with aging, but if we detect something similar (I think it is quite probable) in feather structure, the possibilities of interaction structure/pigments should be always considered. Ex: if Emerald acts primarily on feather structure ... why Green Emeralds do not show the red ring? why the addition of psittacins does not make "more yellow" a Green Emerald than a Blue Emerald? I thougth that both phenotypes should be very similar (it was Mada's question several months ago) but what your birds show is even more incredible : the same phenotype under normal lighting and a big difference under uv. Is there a change in the structure of the feather cortex so that the deposition of psittacins is altered and they are not visible under normal lighting?

Coming back to Deeps : if you produce a Deep Ino you will know for sure if the yellow colour is structural or a pigment. If you destroy the feather structure hitting the feather with a hammer you will find either a lost of the yellow colour (if structural) or the yellow colour will remain unchanged (if pigment).

Regards

Recio

prodigy · Post by **prodigy** » Thu Jan 31, 2013 9:50 pm

Hi Willy,

Can you please give me your opinion of the bird on the right?

Thanks

Peter

Paint Dot Net

trabots · Post by **trabots** » Mon Feb 04, 2013 11:39 pm

It looks like a Violet Green however without the primary tail feathers it is just a guess. The violet blush on the wings is different.

prodigy · Post by **prodigy** » Tue Feb 05, 2013 7:19 am

thanks Willy much appreciated

trabots · Post by **trabots** » Wed Feb 06, 2013 5:18 am

Something I hadn't thought of is why a Deep EmeraldBlue shows the same even psitticin of an EmeraldBlue yet a Violet EmeraldBlue is patched really. In the former the flights and tails are nearly the same colour as the Body while the latter has a lot of violet colouration without psitticin which is concentrated around the back and head. Does anyone have an image of a Dark EmeraldBlue? [img]http://i1305.photobucket.com/album ... .jpg[/img][img]http://i1305.photobucket.com/album ... .jpg[/img]

Ring0Neck · Post by **Ring0Neck** » Wed Feb 06, 2013 6:55 am

A young 1 from our ringnecks.com
http://www.ourringnecks.com/apps/photos ... =172255562

madas · Post by **madas** » Wed Feb 06, 2013 11:42 am

What is the "blue" bird on the following pic? Aqua?

Thx.

madas · Post by **madas** » Wed Feb 06, 2013 12:51 pm

molossus wrote:Madas hi,
Is it my imagination or is that psittacin patches on the belly of this bird?

May be. But my question was referring to the base resp. ground body color.

madas

Ring0Neck · Post by **Ring0Neck** » Wed Feb 06, 2013 6:58 pm

Madas,
My first thought was an Indigoblue.
Ronz mature indigos

83IV

madas · Post by **madas** » Wed Feb 06, 2013 11:23 pm

Ring0Neck wrote:Madas,
My first thought was an Indigoblue.
Ronz mature indigos

83IV

Do they show an aqua like body color? This bird is some steps darker (clearly visible) then a normal blue. But i haven't seen an aqua in real so i can't tell
if the bird fits or not.

Here a side view:

thx.

Johan S · Post by **Johan S** » Wed Feb 06, 2013 11:30 pm

Ring0Neck wrote:Madas,
My first thought was an Indigoblue.

As was mine.

madas wrote:This bird is some steps darker (clearly visible) then a normal blue.

Not that clear on the pics to me, Madas. To me it seems more an effect of the light/camera. You have some more pictures?

madas · Post by **madas** » Thu Feb 07, 2013 12:39 am

Johan S wrote: Not that clear on the pics to me, Madas. To me it seems more an effect of the light/camera. You have some more pictures?

I will search through my archive. ;)

madas

madas · Post by **madas** » Thu Feb 07, 2013 6:25 am

Hi Johan,

here are two pics of the back view:

I know that there are psittacine patches on it. But the question is: Is indigo (sapphire???) changing the body color towards an aqua phenotype? And is it darkening the body color?

thx.

madas

Johan S · Post by **Johan S** » Thu Feb 07, 2013 6:43 am

Hi Madas,

to me it still looks like an indigo blue. What I have seen on my cobalt indigo hen is that she also shows a similar 'silvery sheen' on the head and neck as is apparent with this bird. The indigo mutation (for my eyes) does change the base colour of the bird, but for me it isn't necessarily darker and rather more silver. Also, a fresh moult will also look darker than an old set of feathers.

Ring0Neck · Post by **Ring0Neck** » Thu Feb 07, 2013 6:47 am

Johan S wrote:
madas wrote:This bird is some steps darker (clearly visible) then a normal blue.
Not that clear on the pics to me, Madas. To me it seems more an effect of the light/camera. You have some more pictures?

Indigo to me is darker then normal blue (almost Cobalt like) and my own take: Indigo mutation is very close to Emerald.

see pic below of a 1 y old Indigoblue i acquired from Trabots

Also Indigoblue in WHWT young from P. S.
http://parakeet.me/irn/f/069.jpg

Recio · Post by **Recio** » Thu Feb 07, 2013 8:22 am

Hi Madas,

I can see psittacins mainly in the saddle area and on the belly ... oh, oh, oh. This is not really typical either of Turquoise or of Indigo.
Here I join Willy : we need the homozygous phenotype.
My bet : another different parblue.

Regards

Recio

Recio · Post by **Recio** » Thu Feb 07, 2013 9:53 am

molossus wrote:Recio hi, Not sure about something new here.
I had saddled psittacins on violet irns and this spread over the shoulders and head during following moults.

... but it spreads from the area of the wing patch which is always the area most heavily pigmented. In Madas' bird the wing patch area appears without any psittacin, at least on my screen, and there is a triangle of psittacin in the saddle area. This is what is different in this bird respective to Turquoise or Indigo, and this is the reason I would like to see an homozygous bird (could this parblue combined with Dom pied be the basis of the Saddleback?).

Regards Lee

Recio

Recio · Post by **Recio** » Thu Feb 07, 2013 2:24 pm

Hi Lee,

We are all mutation seekers

My thougth:

1. Perhaps the patched mutations so far described (Turquoise, Indigo, Saphire?) are homoallelic mutations (mutations of the same point) of the blue gene, so that there is just a question of gradient among them:
Gradient inside the feather with the highest psittacin concentration at the tip of the feather
Gradient in the affected surface: higher (Turquoise) or lower (Saphire) ... but always following a gradient with a maximal at the wing patch areas and the area behind the bill/eyes.
Gradient in the concentration ... similar/coupled to the surface.
Gradient in the concentration of red psittacins in the ring (higher in Turquoise, intermedial in Indigo and nothing in Saphire)
Gradient in the time dependent evolution: the quicker in Turquoise (at fledging) and the lower in saphire (after several months).
So, maybe, those parblues could be named gradual or gradient parblues. I think that there are more than the 3 described types.

2. Parblue mutations showing a different behaviour (not so "gradient like", or originating in other locations than the wing patch and head, as the saddle area, ...) could be related to heteroallelic mutations (mutations of different points) of the blue gene. Maybe it is one of these alleles which is in the genetic make up of saddlebacks.

Of course this is just speculation.

Regards

Recio

trabots · Post by **trabots** » Thu Feb 07, 2013 4:08 pm

Something I hadn't thought of is why a Deep EmeraldBlue shows the same even psitticin of an EmeraldBlue yet a Violet EmeraldBlue is patched really. In the former the flights and tails are nearly the same colour as the Body while the latter has a lot of violet colouration without psitticin which is concentrated around the back and head. Does anyone have an image of a Dark EmeraldBlue?

Recio??

As far as the mystery bird following my post, it is similar in colour to my Deep EmeraldBlues but in other angles is similar to the Deep IndigoBlue I have. A quick check with a UV torch could tell if it is EmeraldBlue or not. We are still trying to deal with an image that has no reference bird beside it so no conclusions can be drawn. The patch location is unusual but in a different location to the patched 'Emeralds' I posted which also had them in an unusual position for a TurquoiseBlue or IndigoBlue.

madas · Post by **madas** » Thu Feb 07, 2013 11:57 pm

Recio wrote:Hi Lee,

We are all mutation seekers

My thougth:

1. Perhaps the patched mutations so far described (Turquoise, Indigo, Saphire?) are homoallelic mutations (mutations of the same point) of the blue gene, so that there is just a question of gradient among them:
Gradient inside the feather with the highest psittacin concentration at the tip of the feather
Gradient in the affected surface: higher (Turquoise) or lower (Saphire) ... but always following a gradient with a maximal at the wing patch areas and the area behind the bill/eyes.
Gradient in the concentration ... similar/coupled to the surface.
Gradient in the concentration of red psittacins in the ring (higher in Turquoise, intermedial in Indigo and nothing in Saphire)
Gradient in the time dependent evolution: the quicker in Turquoise (at fledging) and the lower in saphire (after several months).
So, maybe, those parblues could be named gradual or gradient parblues. I think that there are more than the 3 described types.

2. Parblue mutations showing a different behaviour (not so "gradient like", or originating in other locations than the wing patch and head, as the saddle area, ...) could be related to heteroallelic mutations (mutations of different points) of the blue gene. Maybe it is one of these alleles which is in the genetic make up of saddlebacks.

Of course this is just speculation.

Regards

Recio

Hi Recio,

this kind of "parblue" is very common here in Germany and in East Europe. At birth the youngsters only have a patch of psittacine between the wings which could grow to go on into the wings then matured. Attached some pics:

madas

Lushen1600 · Post by **Lushen1600** » Fri Feb 08, 2013 12:46 am

madas wrote:
Recio wrote:Hi Lee,

We are all mutation seekers

My thougth:

1. Perhaps the patched mutations so far described (Turquoise, Indigo, Saphire?) are homoallelic mutations (mutations of the same point) of the blue gene, so that there is just a question of gradient among them:
Gradient inside the feather with the highest psittacin concentration at the tip of the feather
Gradient in the affected surface: higher (Turquoise) or lower (Saphire) ... but always following a gradient with a maximal at the wing patch areas and the area behind the bill/eyes.
Gradient in the concentration ... similar/coupled to the surface.
Gradient in the concentration of red psittacins in the ring (higher in Turquoise, intermedial in Indigo and nothing in Saphire)
Gradient in the time dependent evolution: the quicker in Turquoise (at fledging) and the lower in saphire (after several months).
So, maybe, those parblues could be named gradual or gradient parblues. I think that there are more than the 3 described types.

2. Parblue mutations showing a different behaviour (not so "gradient like", or originating in other locations than the wing patch and head, as the saddle area, ...) could be related to heteroallelic mutations (mutations of different points) of the blue gene. Maybe it is one of these alleles which is in the genetic make up of saddlebacks.

Of course this is just speculation.

Regards

Recio

Hi Recio,

this kind of "parblue" is very common here in Germany and in East Europe. At birth the youngsters only have a patch of psittacine between the wings which could grow to go on into the wings then matured. Attached some pics:

madas

Hi Madas what mutation is the bird in the background with the reddish head and yellowish wings

Recio · Post by **Recio** » Fri Feb 08, 2013 1:46 am

madas wrote:Hi Recio,

this kind of "parblue" is very common here in Germany and in East Europe. At birth the youngsters only have a patch of psittacine between the wings which could grow to go on into the wings then matured.
madas

Hi Madas,

If this "saddle" pattern is inherited from parents to offspring in a predictible way it should be considered as a different allele in the parblue group. Do you have any pic of an homozygous bird, young and adult, to verify the psittacin evolution with aging?

Recio

McmillanBirds · Post by **McmillanBirds** » Fri Feb 08, 2013 2:26 am

Hi Lushen

If I am not mistaken those are lovebirds in the background.

Madas can correct me if I am wrong

Lushen1600 · Post by **Lushen1600** » Fri Feb 08, 2013 2:43 am

Hi Carmen, they also looked like lovebirds to me, but I was doubting myself as they seem to be in the same cage as the ringnecks

Thanks
Lushen

McmillanBirds · Post by **McmillanBirds** » Fri Feb 08, 2013 2:54 am

Hi Madas

If I am correct in my assumption that the birds in the background are lovebirds, can ringnecks and lovebirds co exist providing the avairy is large enough?

Thanks
Carmen

madas · Post by **madas** » Fri Feb 08, 2013 3:10 am

Recio wrote:
madas wrote:Hi Recio,

this kind of "parblue" is very common here in Germany and in East Europe. At birth the youngsters only have a patch of psittacine between the wings which could grow to go on into the wings then matured.
madas
Hi Madas,

If this "saddle" pattern is inherited from parents to offspring in a predictible way it should be considered as a different allele in the parblue group. Do you have any pic of an homozygous bird, young and adult, to verify the psittacin evolution with aging?

Recio

Yeah i think i have an actual pic of the second bird. So evolution could be verified.

But unfortunately not at work and not of a homozygous bird. I haven't breed this kind of parblue in a homozygous form. Until now my main focus isn't situated on parblues or finding new parblues.

madas

madas · Post by **madas** » Fri Feb 08, 2013 3:12 am

McmillanBirds wrote:Hi Madas

If I am correct in my assumption that the birds in the background are lovebirds, can ringnecks and lovebirds co exist providing the avairy is large enough?

Thanks
Carmen

Sure. I haven't lost any lovebird by a ringneck attack.

But i don't have them in the same aviaries any more. the ringecks got thier own aviaries combined with a bird house.

greetings.

madas · Post by **madas** » Fri Feb 08, 2013 3:15 am

Lushen1600 wrote:Hi Madas what mutation is the bird in the background with the reddish head and yellowish wings

Perhaps a red headed dom. pied ringneck with a short tail.