Case Closed: Emerald = Parblue Mutation

Moderator:Mods

trabots
Posts:597
Joined:Tue Oct 23, 2012 5:18 pm
Re: Case Closed: Emerald = Parblue Mutation

Post by trabots » Fri Nov 22, 2013 5:42 am

What we have here on this thread is a detailed argument hell bent on uncovering the true nature of this beast
Yes, but at some point when the answer has been confirmed by the breedings which we all discussed a year ago, the argument has to logically stop. Nobody expressed concern with those breedings, in fact there was consensus among this same group on these breedings. We have had 2 breedings relayed directly to this group or to a poster which met the requirements we all agreed on. Yet on and on we go heart in hand waiting on the definitive proof of a 2nd Blue locus and therefore Emerald is dominant or vice versa. Most illogical and un-scientific. You folks that have privately emailed me about this, what is stopping you from saying anything? I feel like the Lone Ranger, hi ho Silver!!

Mikesringnecks
Posts:218
Joined:Sun Oct 06, 2013 11:45 pm

Re: Case Closed: Emerald = Parblue Mutation

Post by Mikesringnecks » Fri Nov 22, 2013 5:21 pm

Hi Willy
What has been worrying me all along is scientific method, not your well respected understanding of avian genetics which I think is of great value to all of us, very much me included, as I have learned quite a bit from this debate. I will explain, but first understand that I was employed for some time as a researcher and I do have a bit of a thing about scientific method.
When you set out to prove a hypothesis, like emerald is a par blue gene, you need to very carefully design a test or series of tests that prove the hypothesis, but such tests must particularly not include any inappropriate assumptions. The simple hypothesis in this case is that the emerald, turquoise and blue genes all occur at the same locus and that obviously only any two of them can occupy that site in a single chick.
My breeding model provides such a test, simply because the mother has turquoise and emerald genes at the blue locus. Therefore, if my pair produce a single chick that is not either emerald or turquoise, then it establishes, beyond any doubt whatsoever, that emerald does not reside at the blue locus. As they have so far produced 7 chicks, all of which seem to show emerald or turquoise (I'm still a little worried about the 7th) we have extremely solid support for the hypothesis that emerald is a par blue gene. The only real shortcoming in the test is that it is asymptotic and a tiny area of doubt remains however many chicks are produced. (I would be inclined to accept 99.9% as sufficient proof and I think that equates to 9 chicks).
Aaron's single chick simply does not constitute application of good scientific method. We start by assuming that the green parent has an emerald gene at the blue locus along with a wildtype gene at the other site, a fact which I take as proven Willy. However, the fact that a single chick is produced with a phenotype that indicates the probability of blue and emerald genes existing at the blue locus provides little if any proof of the hypothesis. This shortcoming in the scientific method is clearly borne out by all the various "blue sky" possibilities contributors to this forum have been continuing to raise. Finally, by way of direct comparison, the test involved with my breeding results does rule out most , if not quite all, of those possibilities.
Finally, if I am wrong genetically about the test involved in my pairing ruling out most of the "sky blue" possibilities can someone please explain why (Recio?).
Kind regards
Persistent Mike

Mikesringnecks
Posts:218
Joined:Sun Oct 06, 2013 11:45 pm

Re: Case Closed: Emerald = Parblue Mutation

Post by Mikesringnecks » Fri Nov 22, 2013 7:08 pm

Hi Willy
i think I'm being too long winded again, probably for you and others. I will summarize.
When you look at Aaron's chick as a proof of EmeraldBlue you are making the classic scientific method mistake. In order to prove that the green parent carries an emerald gene at the blue locus you have to assume that it is a recessive gene found at that locus. Then, when the chick arrives, you make the same assumption IE that its appearance satisfies the EmeraldBlue model you started with. What you are in effect doing, is using the same assumption at the end of the test to "prove" the assumption you made at the start.
It simply doesn't work scientifically.
Kind regards
Mike

User avatar
Ring0Neck
Posts:1714
Joined:Thu May 22, 2008 2:24 am
Location:Brisbane QLD AUS

Re: Case Closed: Emerald = Parblue Mutation

Post by Ring0Neck » Fri Nov 22, 2013 7:24 pm

Mike,


The world is not ending today.


If you have something new please share with us, otherwise stop persisting

Time will prove beyond doubt one way or the other, you just need patience.

EDIT: PS: A debate is welcome when new evidence comes to light, till then logic results prevail.





cheers
Ben
Last edited by Ring0Neck on Fri Nov 22, 2013 8:58 pm, edited 1 time in total.
I'm an Explorer
10% luck, 20% skill, 15% concentrated power of will, 50% pleasure, 5% pain$ and a 100% reason ..I just gotta know

trabots
Posts:597
Joined:Tue Oct 23, 2012 5:18 pm

Re: Case Closed: Emerald = Parblue Mutation

Post by trabots » Fri Nov 22, 2013 8:32 pm

Aaron's single chick simply does not constitute application of good scientific method. We start by assuming that the green parent has an emerald gene at the blue locus along with a wildtype gene at the other site, a fact which I take as proven Willy. However, the fact that a single chick is produced with a phenotype that indicates the probability of blue and emerald genes existing at the blue locus provides little if any proof of the hypothesis.
Mike, if a bird can carry a mutant gene without showing it (you have agreed that this is Aaron's bird), the mutation that gene confers HAS TO BE recessive and the bird carrying the single mutant gene is split for the recessive mutant gene. If Emerald is recessive and has been proved that it is dominant over Blue, it is allelic to Blue, and that makes it a Parblue. There is no other scenario in which an invisible hetrozygous mutant is also dominant.

If we back up again to what you have said, you agree that Aaron's bird has an Emerald gene at the Blue locus. That in itself proves Emerald is a Parblue because if it wasn't, the gene would have to reside on another locus. Ignoring the obvious is also not scientific Mike.

Mikesringnecks
Posts:218
Joined:Sun Oct 06, 2013 11:45 pm

Re: Case Closed: Emerald = Parblue Mutation

Post by Mikesringnecks » Fri Nov 22, 2013 9:28 pm

Hi Ben and Willy
I give up trying to get you to understand. As you know, my problem is not with the EmeraldBlue hypothesis, I think my breeding results pretty well prove it. It is with your failure to understand scientific method. But no matter, lets move on to more useful things.
Kind regards
Mike

trabots
Posts:597
Joined:Tue Oct 23, 2012 5:18 pm

Re: Case Closed: Emerald = Parblue Mutation

Post by trabots » Fri Nov 22, 2013 11:00 pm

Mike, I don't quit so easily. If you could explain where the below fails scientific method we might all learn something. By the way I am a Mechanical Engineer, Bsc University of Calgary 1978. Far more than opposing view points is my annoyance at those who have a lot to say but when pressed to qualify refuse to play. That is not you Mike, your persistence requires a resolution.

I said:
Mike, if a bird can carry a mutant gene without showing it (you have agreed that this is Aaron's bird), the mutation that gene confers HAS TO BE recessive and the bird carrying the single mutant gene is split for the recessive mutant gene. If Emerald is recessive and has been proved that it is dominant over Blue, it is allelic to Blue, and that makes it a Parblue. There is no other scenario in which an invisible heterozygous mutant is also dominant.

If we back up again to what you have said, you agree that Aaron's bird has an Emerald gene at the Blue locus. That in itself proves Emerald is a Parblue because if it wasn't, the gene would have to reside on another locus. Ignoring the obvious is also not scientific Mike.

Recio
Posts:966
Joined:Thu Mar 26, 2009 2:09 am
Location:France

Re: Case Closed: Emerald = Parblue Mutation

Post by Recio » Sat Nov 23, 2013 7:01 am

Hi persistent gentleman Mike,

Do not change, we need people like you here :lol: Let's analyse your results and see how they support the existence of a second blue locus. I would not consider cleartail in the discusion because it adds nothing to the debate.

The female: you tell us that the female is a phenotypic Emerald and Turquoise based in what you think she is but not in what you see. What I see is a mainly Green bird without any patch. You say that we can not see the Turquoise patches, possibly because they "melt" in the global colour. If it was the case then your Turquoise should have been a very ligth parblue, but the chick is already showing turquoise at feathering, so it is a heavy parblue (Turquoise). We also know that Emerald does not mask parblue patches. Our basic genetics tells us that a mutation which we can not see but which is present in the genetic make up of the bird (she has turquoise offspring) is a split mutation. So this female is split for turquoise.
A blue series bird can not be split for Turquoise .... so your female is Wild Green/Turquoise (this also explains her overall Green color when compared to other Emeralds previously posted).
Emerald is in single factor form (otherwise every chick should have been Emerald). If Emerald was a parblue the bird would not be Split Turquoise but EmeraldTurquoise .... so Emerald is not a parblue allele.
So your female is Wild Green/Turquoise SF Emerald. If you look at the posible offspring of this bird you will say that I am wrong excepting if you consider that Emerald is highly linked to the wild gene of the Blue locus. Your female is thus Wild Green/Turquoise SF Emerald, with the Emerald allele linked to the wild allele of the Blue locus.

The genetics of the female parents and family should be reviewed through this new optic.

Does this make any sens? I think so. Several years ago we discussed in the Yahoo forum that a second blue locus probably would be located near the Blue-1 locus because probably it would have been produced by a duplication of the Blue-1 locus (tween genes), and later it would had evolved independently by succesive mutations. Nevertheless, since both loci have the same origin, probably they share some regulators. The Blue mutation could act on one of these shared regulators so that one single mutation could block both loci and induce a psittacin free phenotype.

You say that, may be , the last chick could be Emerald Turquoise?. This hypothesis could also explain this possibility: a crossing over could allow to link Emerald to Turquoise, so that both Emerald and Turquoise would be present in the same chick. The crossing over rate between the blue locus and the emerald locus (second parblue) probably is not extremely high as already Blue series SF Emerald birds exists: Every patched Emerald is a blue-1 (and from now on also Blue-2) series bird. Non fluorescents Emeralds (some of Willy's Emeralds) probably are Blue SF Emeralds.

So Mike with your birds you have shown:
1. The first for sure Green Emerald phenotype.
2. The two parblue loci theory.
3. The location of the second blue locus (same chromosome).
4. The linkage between both blues loci.
5. .... and you open the door to the understanding of why some Emeralds are not fluorescent (they are Blue SF Emeralds?), explain Willy's patched Emeralds, open the door to the correct naming and understanding of the Blue-1 and Blue-2 genetic combos, open the door to the study of the blue-2 locus in the chromosome (between Dark and Blue-1?, further tan Dark? Closer tan Blue-1? ... study of crossing over rates for the years to come), open the door to the understanding of interactions between both blue loci (ex on control of the red ring,...), the study of DF Emeralds in both Green and Blue series... A lot of nice work to do for years ...

Kind regards

Recio

trabots
Posts:597
Joined:Tue Oct 23, 2012 5:18 pm

Re: Case Closed: Emerald = Parblue Mutation

Post by trabots » Sat Nov 23, 2013 4:34 pm

Mike, what is the bird in the image you posted on 21 November? Have you ever posted an image of your TurquoiseEmerald CHCT hen?

Mikesringnecks
Posts:218
Joined:Sun Oct 06, 2013 11:45 pm

Re: Case Closed: Emerald = Parblue Mutation

Post by Mikesringnecks » Sat Nov 23, 2013 4:40 pm

Hi Recio
Thanks very much, I just this minute sat down at the computer to ask how my breeding "proof" might be wrong and you have beaten me to the punch by answering before I asked. I don't fully understand where you are coming from yet, but I will read and reread until I get a better grasp of it and then I will probably start to ask questions.
I came to the conclusion last night that Aaron's chick proved that the mother was split emerald.
However, I also convinced myself that the EmeraldBlue "proof" associated with that chick did not work at all. We started with a grandparent and assumed that its phenotype owed its existence to the EmeraldBlue hypothesis. We then looked at the chick at the end of the process, and again assumed that it owed its phenotype to the same hypothesis. I believe that making the same assumption at the beginning and end of the process can really only prove that one has made the same assumption twice.
In the case of my breeding results, I assumed the hen was EmeraldTurquoise as with Aaron's chick, but I went on to look for a chick that was not emerald or turquoise because I thought that would have provided proof that the EmeraldTurquoise hypothesis was wrong. I haven't found one yet, and I believed that that gave considerable weight to validity of the original EmeraldBlue hypothesis. However, I hadn't even faintly imagined the scenario you have just raised.
I do have some concerns still regarding the identification of my 7 chicks and you have thrown that all back into a "cocked hat" but an exciting hat.
The 7th chick fledged this morning. It is 1 of 2 supposedly Turquoise Violet Cleartails, but its turquoise signature is very feint so
far. Nonetheless, I think it fits that phenotype (albeit not with total certainty yet). The other turquoise shows slightly stronger evidence.
My real identification concern is now with the emerald chicks, I have been relying on their yellow cleartail bellies that I thought were a different yellow hue to the mother's belly. However, in light of your last post, I am now by no means confident that I could detect a low level of pastel yet in either the Violet EmeraldBlue or the Violet Cobalt Emerald Cleartails. I will try to get some high resolution photos of all 7 in the coming days and learn how to post them (at present I seem to be only able to post pics at 100KB, which is apparently the forum limit, but I have been viewing lovely high resolution photos from others so there must be a way).
Kind regards
Mike

trabots
Posts:597
Joined:Tue Oct 23, 2012 5:18 pm

Re: Case Closed: Emerald = Parblue Mutation

Post by trabots » Sat Nov 23, 2013 4:47 pm

What I see is a mainly Green bird without any patch.
Recio, what bird are you looking at? If it is the bird Mike posted on 21 November, the one that is "mainly green" then that is not the mother of Mike's CHCT chicks. That bird is clearly not a CHCT. Both of the parents were CHCT.

trabots
Posts:597
Joined:Tue Oct 23, 2012 5:18 pm

Re: Case Closed: Emerald = Parblue Mutation

Post by trabots » Sat Nov 23, 2013 4:55 pm

I am now by no means confident that I could detect a low level of pastel yet in either the Violet EmeraldBlue or the Violet Cobalt Emerald Cleartails.
What do you mean by "pastel" Mike? If you mean the patches on a TurquoiseBlue you won't see them on a CHCT. Please show us an image of the mother TurquoiseEmerald CHCT as this is what Recio has based his theory on, yet I can find no image of that bird yet having been posted.

Mikesringnecks
Posts:218
Joined:Sun Oct 06, 2013 11:45 pm

Re: Case Closed: Emerald = Parblue Mutation

Post by Mikesringnecks » Sat Nov 23, 2013 5:06 pm

Sorry Willy
I usually write on the photos, it makes ID very difficult when I forget.
The 21 Nov photo is my other emerald hen, she is a cleartail split or what I think I should call an EmeraldBlue/cleartail (never sure whether all 3 should be capitals or not).
I have attached a couple of pics of my EmeraldTurquoise Cleartail hen. She is a young bird, but never showed any sign of patches which has always intrigued me. I think I can send higher resolution photos direct if that will help, just ask if you want them.
Incidentally, I suffer the same problem as you, I too was an engineer until I retired. You can imagine the fun I had in a research job in my youth, within an engineering organization.
Kind regards
Mike
Attachments
DSCF3121.JPG
DSCF3121.JPG (54.97KiB)Viewed 2263 times
DSCF3114-002.JPG
DSCF3114-002.JPG (31.95KiB)Viewed 2263 times

trabots
Posts:597
Joined:Tue Oct 23, 2012 5:18 pm

Re: Case Closed: Emerald = Parblue Mutation

Post by trabots » Sat Nov 23, 2013 6:24 pm

Thanks for the images Mike.

Recio you have based your theory on the appearance of Mike's EmeraldTurquoise CHCT without even mentioning CHCT. You fail to appreciate the changes CHCT does to a TurquoiseBlue. The CHCT partially eliminates the patches, it is an more even coloured bird on the back than without CHCT. How can you arrive at your conclusion below when you haven't even looked at an EmeraldTurquoise? The fact that such a bird was not even involved in Mike's results makes your analysis and conclusion of what Mike's EmeraldTurquoise CHCT is genetically, politely unsupported.

[quote]The female: you tell us that the female is a phenotypic Emerald and Turquoise based in what you think she is but not in what you see. What I see is a mainly Green bird without any patch. You say that we can not see the Turquoise patches, possibly because they "melt" in the global colour. If it was the case then your Turquoise should have been a very ligth parblue, but the chick is already showing turquoise at feathering, so it is a heavy parblue (Turquoise). We also know that Emerald does not mask parblue patches. Our basic genetics tells us that a mutation which we can not see but which is present in the genetic make up of the bird (she has turquoise offspring) is a split mutation. So this female is split for turquoise.
A blue series bird can not be split for Turquoise .... so your female is Wild Green/Turquoise (this also explains her overall Green color when compared to other Emeralds previously posted).
Emerald is in single factor form (otherwise every chick should have been Emerald). If Emerald was a parblue the bird would not be Split Turquoise but EmeraldTurquoise .... so Emerald is not a parblue allele.
So your female is Wild Green/Turquoise SF Emerald. If you look at the posible offspring of this bird you will say that I am wrong excepting if you consider that Emerald is highly linked to the wild gene of the Blue locus. Your female is thus Wild Green/Turquoise SF Emerald, with the Emerald allele linked to the wild allele of the Blue locus./quote]

EmeraldTurquoise
Image

Recio, whether a bird is "light or heavy" Parblue can only be confirmed when the bird is mature and certainly no conclusions about what a parent is or isn't in this regard can be made just by looking at it's young. You also cannot grade an EmeraldTurquoise in this manner. You state that "Emerald does not mask parblue patches" which conflicts with the image above. CHCT also blends in the patches to some extent. I am sorry I don't have a back image of such a bird but below is an image of a mature TurquoiseBlue CHCT of mine which I can say that what you see on the wings carries on over the back of this bird. Mike's 1st posted image in the previous post of the hen EmeraldTurquoise CHCT shows no patches.

In light of all of this why not go back and with the knowledge that the hen in question is CHCT and armed now with the information that CHCT and Emerald can eliminate patches in an EmeraldTurquoise, revisit your theory, with most of your premises now invalid because you were looking at the wrong bird. No valid conclusions can be made about Parblue alleles in a bird with a significant psitticin altering mutation such as CHCT.


Image

trabots
Posts:597
Joined:Tue Oct 23, 2012 5:18 pm

Re: Case Closed: Emerald = Parblue Mutation

Post by trabots » Sat Nov 23, 2013 8:34 pm

Your female is thus Wild Green/Turquoise SF Emerald, with the Emerald allele linked to the wild allele of the Blue locus.
Recio, this is your conclusion so let's pair this bird with a Blue as Mike did.

SF Emerald /Turquoise x Blue =

25% Green /Blue
25% TurquoiseBlue
25% SF Emerald /Blue
25% SF Emerald TurquoiseBlue

Mike bred ONLY EmeraldBlue and TurquoiseBlue birds.

Furthermore you have decided that Emerald is both dominant and an allele of the Blue locus. On the basis that all alleles of the same locus found in any parrot so far are always of the same inheritance mode, you are saying a a dominant mutation is an allele of a recessive mutation. Just how do you think the heteroallele of a dominant and a recessive mutation will inherit?

Recio I'll have whatever it is you are smoking :?

Johan S
Posts:1215
Joined:Wed Mar 30, 2011 1:24 am
Location:Pretoria, South Africa

Re: Case Closed: Emerald = Parblue Mutation

Post by Johan S » Sat Nov 23, 2013 10:31 pm

Recio wrote:Several years ago we discussed in the Yahoo forum that a second blue locus probably would be located near the Blue-1 locus because probably it would have been produced by a duplication of the Blue-1 locus (tween genes), and later it would had evolved independently by succesive mutations. Nevertheless, since both loci have the same origin, probably they share some regulators. The Blue mutation could act on one of these shared regulators so that one single mutation could block both loci and induce a psittacin free phenotype.
trabots wrote:Furthermore you have decided that Emerald is both dominant and an allele of the Blue locus. On the basis that all alleles of the same locus found in any parrot so far are always of the same inheritance mode, you are saying a a dominant mutation is an allele of a recessive mutation. Just how do you think the heteroallele of a dominant and a recessive mutation will inherit?

Recio I'll have whatever it is you are smoking :?
Willy, where does the underlined fit in? Recio models blue2 at a second blue locus, a different one. A few days ago, I went down the second blue (blue2) road at the same locus/different allele path, but this is a different approach.

User avatar
Ring0Neck
Posts:1714
Joined:Thu May 22, 2008 2:24 am
Location:Brisbane QLD AUS

Re: Case Closed: Emerald = Parblue Mutation

Post by Ring0Neck » Sat Nov 23, 2013 10:42 pm

Johan & Recio

Should open a new thread on Blue 1-2 locus possiblity.
We can all contribute positively, and we could get somewhere.
We need to learn what it does, how? why what to look for etc.

We should find all info on second blue locus in other species and try to learn from there.

Deep & other mutations could be at this B2 ?
we don't have to be stuck on emerald=B2 open mindness can take us further, and if anything proves relevant then we can see which mutation fall into this B2.

If there is no B2 we will still benefit for a great lesson and if B2 does come around we know what to look for/expect.



I'm an Explorer
10% luck, 20% skill, 15% concentrated power of will, 50% pleasure, 5% pain$ and a 100% reason ..I just gotta know

Johan S
Posts:1215
Joined:Wed Mar 30, 2011 1:24 am
Location:Pretoria, South Africa

Re: Case Closed: Emerald = Parblue Mutation

Post by Johan S » Sat Nov 23, 2013 10:50 pm

Recio wrote:Does this make any sens? I think so. Several years ago we discussed in the Yahoo forum that a second blue locus probably would be located near the Blue-1 locus because probably it would have been produced by a duplication of the Blue-1 locus (tween genes), and later it would had evolved independently by succesive mutations. Nevertheless, since both loci have the same origin, probably they share some regulators. The Blue mutation could act on one of these shared regulators so that one single mutation could block both loci and induce a psittacin free phenotype.

You say that, may be , the last chick could be Emerald Turquoise?. This hypothesis could also explain this possibility: a crossing over could allow to link Emerald to Turquoise, so that both Emerald and Turquoise would be present in the same chick. The crossing over rate between the blue locus and the emerald locus (second parblue) probably is not extremely high as already Blue series SF Emerald birds exists: Every patched Emerald is a blue-1 (and from now on also Blue-2) series bird. Non fluorescents Emeralds (some of Willy's Emeralds) probably are Blue SF Emeralds.
Recio, the location of the two blue loci and the low crossing over probability is not consistent. The probability of the crossing over should be very unlikely (like cinnamon and ino). So, which is more likely; the very rare crossing over so soon, or the two blue loci being far apart? Both seems very unlikely to me, but as always I'm open for being convinced. :D

You never responded to the alternate proposal of having a blue2 at the same locus as blue1. Maybe one day when you are less busy you can show me where my reasoning was wrong. :wink:

Johan S
Posts:1215
Joined:Wed Mar 30, 2011 1:24 am
Location:Pretoria, South Africa

Re: Case Closed: Emerald = Parblue Mutation

Post by Johan S » Sat Nov 23, 2013 11:28 pm

Ring0Neck wrote:Johan & Recio

Should open a new thread on Blue 1-2 locus possiblity.
Oh damn, I just posted on that again. Sorry Ben!

Let's get back to Aaron's pairing, and hopefully I will now show why it isn't case close. Mike heavily hinted on this already.

In the scientific method, one always has two points of view, the accepted and the new. So, if we apply it to Aaron's pair, we can set up the experiment. We start with the commonly accepted truth, which is used as our null hypothesis. In this case, that emerald inherits like a parblue. We will not make the mistake to state that it is or isn't. For that we will need microscopic or chemical analysis. We say it like it is, we have birds, not a lab, so we look at inheritance only. So we have, by removing the irrelevant,

Green / emerald X BlueBlue

Possible offspring:

Green / emerald (1)
EmeraldBlue (2)

Now let's formulate one possible alternate hypothesis to challenge the accepted. Let's consider emerald as an incomplete dominant mutation with low expressivity. We see this in "EmeraldBlue", so not that far fetched.

Green Emerald / Blue X BlueBlue

Possible offspring:

Green / Blue (3)
Green Emerald / Blue (4)
BlueBlue (5)
Emerald Blue (6)

How do we need to approach this experiment?

First and foremost, the birds above marked in blue (numbers 2 and 6) will for all intents and purposes express the same phenotype. We can not prove or disprove either hypothesis in this experiment. Secondly, we can not use the defence or motivation "because it is a parblue", simply because in our null hypothesis we have already accepted that it is. This is what Mike was referring to. It's like saying the sky is blue. Why? Because it is blue. That isn't a reason. The third thing, we can not prove the null hypothesis with the alternate hypothesis, we can only prove that the null hypothesis is less or more likely than the alternate. Never that it is right. The null hypothesis is already assumed as proven until something more likely (statistical analysis) is given.

So, proceeding, we remove birds 2 and 6 from our experiment, because they both have the same phenotype in both hypothesis. We can not prove which hypothesis is more likely from them. They fail to contribute and shows the overlap between the two hypothesis. This leaves us only with green series birds (1, 3 and 4), and BlueBlue (5). From this we can draw a very important first conclusion, Aaron's experiment is actually not about parblues at all, but about green series birds, and blue birds. So fourth, anybody feeling that Aaron's experiment needs knowledge of Mike's experiment to justify it, will again be going along the wrong path. We can not contaminate one experiment with another. This experiment is not about allelic interaction with other parblues. Mike's is.

Aaron's experiment can therefore be used as follows. IF ALL offspring (1) looks exactly like the green/emerald parent, then the null hypothesis will be valid. A blue bird should never be forthcoming. Otherwise, if there is a slight difference between the green offspring, or between the offspring and the parent, we have sufficient proof to support the alternative hypothesis as more likely. A single blue bird will prove the alternative hypothesis without any doubt.

To close the case, a close examination of the green series offspring is required. It would also aid if somebody would pair them up together for DF emeralds (we have too few to investigate emerald in a shorter timescale), or with more blue birds to keep breeding the EmeraldBlue. Until that time, the null hypothesis holds and emerald is a parblue. But... The case is not closed. It has only just started in green series and we need some numbers. Exciting times! :D

trabots
Posts:597
Joined:Tue Oct 23, 2012 5:18 pm

Re: Case Closed: Emerald = Parblue Mutation

Post by trabots » Sun Nov 24, 2013 12:43 am

Willy, where does the underlined fit in?
On the basis that all alleles of the same locus found in any parrot so far are always of the same inheritance mode
Johan, Recio is saying Emerald is dominant but at the Blue locus also. There so far as I am aware only sex-linked and recessive allelic mutations. I have never heard of a dominant mutation being allelic to another dominant mutation let alone a recessive one.

User avatar
Ring0Neck
Posts:1714
Joined:Thu May 22, 2008 2:24 am
Location:Brisbane QLD AUS

Re: Case Closed: Emerald = Parblue Mutation

Post by Ring0Neck » Sun Nov 24, 2013 12:51 am

Oh damn, I just posted on that again. Sorry Ben!

:lol: It was a suggestion only.


+1 to Johan

good job on stating what is fact and what is assumed to be because of the facts ;) but also due to lack of known alternatives.
clears up the fog

Aaron's breeding results as you said proves inheritance same as parblue.

That's all fine but what happends when we throw in Mike's results? and i'm sure other breeders's same results that paired an Emerald-Turquoise X Blue?

It proves allelic to Blue1 to Parblue.
What other variants/alternative hypothesis could be used to be able to incorporate B2 being allelic to B1?
Where a second blue locus was found in other species, was there allelic interaction between the 2 blues?

I asked Aaron to take a pic of the /emerald for us and he said too easy, just not sure when...

I'm an Explorer
10% luck, 20% skill, 15% concentrated power of will, 50% pleasure, 5% pain$ and a 100% reason ..I just gotta know

trabots
Posts:597
Joined:Tue Oct 23, 2012 5:18 pm

Re: Case Closed: Emerald = Parblue Mutation

Post by trabots » Sun Nov 24, 2013 1:03 am

Johan you are saying 'what if' Aaron's split Emerald cock is in fact a Green Emerald. Surely John Friske who bred the bird from an EmeraldBlue would have noticed a different phenotype in the Green bird, enough that would justify the bird being a SF Emerald? This is what I am getting at, so much BS based on a 'what if' scenario. There is no 'what if' with Aaron's bird and the ONLY thing of importance is that a Green bird bred a heterozygous Emerald bird when paired to a Blue bird therefore it had to be split Emerald.

You also keep ignoring the fact the bird we call EmeraldBlue cannot be BlueBlue or it would have no psitticin. If that was the case, the bird IS a Green Emerald /Blue already. Aaron's bird certainly doesn't look like the bird we call EmeraldBlue.

Mikesringnecks
Posts:218
Joined:Sun Oct 06, 2013 11:45 pm

Re: Case Closed: Emerald = Parblue Mutation

Post by Mikesringnecks » Sun Nov 24, 2013 3:39 am

trabots wrote:
I am now by no means confident that I could detect a low level of pastel yet in either the Violet EmeraldBlue or the Violet Cobalt Emerald Cleartails.
What do you mean by "pastel" Mike? If you mean the patches on a TurquoiseBlue you won't see them on a CHCT. Please show us an image of the mother TurquoiseEmerald CHCT as this is what Recio has based his theory on, yet I can find no image of that bird yet having been posted.
Hi Will
I am a great liker of or both the turquoise and cleartail mutations and I have kept quite a few over the years. I have never had the pleasure of getting an Indigo, all my "pastel" genes are turquoise (sorry about slipping back into the old terms before, I will attempt to eliminate it).

I have attached 4 photos taken today that may or may not be of any use:

1. What I thought was my EmeraldTurquoise Cleartail hen before Recio's brainstorm which i have to admit I find extremely interesting (read it twice but still haven't fully grasped it because it is "outside the square" of my avian genetic understanding).
She is young, she has no turquoise patching and she has a very yellow belly that is a different hue to the bellies of her emerald chicks. I was using that difference as a means of identifying them as emeralds. I do believe I can reasonably assume they are emeralds because I have 2 identical chicks from my EmeraldBlue split cleartail hen.

2.A fully mature TurquoiseBlue Cleartail cock. He was patchy as a young bird but it has fully disappeared with maturity.

3. A 1 year old Violet TurquoiseBlue Cleartail cock. Mo;ting heavily but the patches of yellow pigment are still obvious, even on the belly and tail, let alone the back. He was born with extensive areas of yellow pigment and they don't seem to have changed much in extent yet. I kept him because he had so much yellow pigment.

4. A 2 year old Violet TurquoiseBlue Cleartail hen. Full sister of the cock above, borne with absolutely no yellow pigment visible at all. She only got a couple of green feathers at the juvenile molt and I kept her because of her low level of turquoise. However, now they look very similar to each other as you can see.

I'm not sure what to make of it all but it may be of use. I will carefully photograph the TurquoiseEmerald Cleartail hen's 7 chicks but not for a couple of weeks because the 4 fledging now are like flying bombs. They are in one of my breeding aviaries that is a bit too big and I don't want a broken neck or injured wing.

Kind regards
Mike
Attachments
DSCF3448.JPG
DSCF3448.JPG (22.41KiB)Viewed 2197 times
DSCF3431-001.JPG
DSCF3431-001.JPG (83.32KiB)Viewed 2197 times
DSCF3406-001.JPG
DSCF3406-001.JPG (53.15KiB)Viewed 2197 times
DSCF3415.JPG
DSCF3415.JPG (70.01KiB)Viewed 2197 times

trabots
Posts:597
Joined:Tue Oct 23, 2012 5:18 pm

Re: Case Closed: Emerald = Parblue Mutation

Post by trabots » Sun Nov 24, 2013 4:24 am

Great pics Mike, it would seem I am wrong about at least those CHCT with Violet. Your TurquoiseBlue CHCT has a much more blended in affect on his back. Your young EmeraldTurquoise CHCT shows an even distribution.

User avatar
madas
Posts:973
Joined:Thu Dec 18, 2008 11:12 am
Contact:

Re: Case Closed: Emerald = Parblue Mutation

Post by madas » Sun Nov 24, 2013 6:08 am

cleartail dark turqblue:

Image

Image

still with patchiness.

Johan S
Posts:1215
Joined:Wed Mar 30, 2011 1:24 am
Location:Pretoria, South Africa

Re: Case Closed: Emerald = Parblue Mutation

Post by Johan S » Sun Nov 24, 2013 10:42 am

Ring0Neck wrote:
Oh damn, I just posted on that again. Sorry Ben!

:lol: It was a suggestion only.

+1 to Johan

good job on stating what is fact and what is assumed to be because of the facts ;) but also due to lack of known alternatives.
clears up the fog
Ben, I'd like to caution to the over emphasising what is commonly accepted as fact. It kind of reminds me of a time when the sun was the center of the universe. Fact. And the earth was flat. Fact. And we know how that ended up. :lol: Science is a beautiful thing. Like beings on earth (and the rest of the universe?), it is an ever evolving thing. But you understand the process. :wink:
trabots wrote:Surely John Friske who bred the bird from an EmeraldBlue would have noticed a different phenotype in the Green bird, enough that would justify the bird being a SF Emerald?
Willy, I do not know John and can not discuss his ability. I won't even speculate on it, even though I have my opinion. However, perhaps you have some pictures of either the EmeraldBlue or the green / emerald so that we have something substantial to take this discussion forward? :idea:

Johan S
Posts:1215
Joined:Wed Mar 30, 2011 1:24 am
Location:Pretoria, South Africa

Re: Case Closed: Emerald = Parblue Mutation

Post by Johan S » Sun Nov 24, 2013 10:54 am

trabots wrote:
Willy, where does the underlined fit in?
On the basis that all alleles of the same locus found in any parrot so far are always of the same inheritance mode
Johan, Recio is saying Emerald is dominant but at the Blue locus also. There so far as I am aware only sex-linked and recessive allelic mutations. I have never heard of a dominant mutation being allelic to another dominant mutation let alone a recessive one.
Willy, I don't know any examples as well, but that does not prove that they don't exist. Only that neither of us now about them. That did not stop you and Ron breeding deep to violet and dark, though. For deep you were hell bend on proving it something new, so you put in the miles and it paid off. You developed the alternate hypothesis. You have done the experiments and shown that your findings are valid and very likely. You were the blue sky thinker. That's why I find it so ironic that you are not at least open to emerald being anything other than a parblue. I'm not judging, though. Like a coin, a good debate needs two sides. This would have been terribly boring if all fell in line with the first strong argument. :D

Recio
Posts:966
Joined:Thu Mar 26, 2009 2:09 am
Location:France

Re: Case Closed: Emerald = Parblue Mutation

Post by Recio » Sun Nov 24, 2013 11:55 am

trabots wrote:
What I see is a mainly Green bird without any patch.
Recio, what bird are you looking at? If it is the bird Mike posted on 21 November, the one that is "mainly green" then that is not the mother of Mike's CHCT chicks. That bird is clearly not a CHCT. Both of the parents were CHCT.
Sorry Willy,

I was not looking at the bird with my "anatomical eyes" but just a way to say what I was interpreting from Mike's words. Sometimes language is more a barrier than a tool to communicate.

Recio

Recio
Posts:966
Joined:Thu Mar 26, 2009 2:09 am
Location:France

Re: Case Closed: Emerald = Parblue Mutation

Post by Recio » Sun Nov 24, 2013 12:01 pm

trabots wrote:
Your female is thus Wild Green/Turquoise SF Emerald, with the Emerald allele linked to the wild allele of the Blue locus.
Recio, this is your conclusion so let's pair this bird with a Blue as Mike did.

SF Emerald /Turquoise x Blue =

25% Green /Blue
25% TurquoiseBlue
25% SF Emerald /Blue
25% SF Emerald TurquoiseBlue

Mike bred ONLY EmeraldBlue and TurquoiseBlue birds.

Furthermore you have decided that Emerald is both dominant and an allele of the Blue locus. On the basis that all alleles of the same locus found in any parrot so far are always of the same inheritance mode, you are saying a a dominant mutation is an allele of a recessive mutation. Just how do you think the heteroallele of a dominant and a recessive mutation will inherit?

Recio I'll have whatever it is you are smoking :?
Willy,

You should read twice before asking ... underlined and in bold for you. Then you can applied a 5-10% crossing over and you will get the rigth offspring matching Mike's results, and even explaining why the seventh chick could be different (could it be a SF Emerald TurquoiseBlue?). Expecting Mike's pics.

Recio

Recio
Posts:966
Joined:Thu Mar 26, 2009 2:09 am
Location:France

Re: Case Closed: Emerald = Parblue Mutation

Post by Recio » Sun Nov 24, 2013 12:27 pm

@ Johan,

I do not know which is the actual crossing over of these two blue loci but it should not be lower than cinnamon SL-Ino since we know for sure that (at least it is clear for me) there are already green and blue series birds.

About the possibility of the Blue-1 and the Blue-2 loci being in the same gene ... it is not possible due to the definition of a gene, just coding for a protein. But I agree with you that définitions do not stick to reality many times. If we were to make a graduation between 2 alleles genetic distance, inside the same chromossome, it could be something like this:
1. Two equal alleles
2. Two different alleles of the same gene:
2.1: Homoalleles (mutation of the same or very closed nucleotide producing very similar products, but ex. in different quantity as for Indigo and Turquoise)
2.2: Heteroalleles (mutation of different points of a gene producing different effects, Ex: maybe the saddle parblue producing a different distribution of psittacin). Your hypothesis of Blue-1 and Blue-2 would fit in this category.
2. Tween genes: very closed genes with a common ancestor, sharing some properties (Ex: regulation by other genes) and interacting one with the other by means of non allelic non complementation (http://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/Gene ... pics/22870, http://pets.dir.groups.yahoo.com/group/ ... sage/20509)
3. Linked genes

The distance inside the chromossome between two genes with the same origin (ex: produced by duplication) is a function, specially, of the time of evolution. If Blue-1 and Blue-2 separated long ago their crossing over rate should not be very low, if they spread away each from the other recently, then the crossing over rate should be lower, as you noted ... and , then, the interactions between both alleles should be higher.
Time will tell us the real crossing over rate ... but we will have a bit problem to determine it (I will treat this problem in a different post).

Regards

Recio

Recio
Posts:966
Joined:Thu Mar 26, 2009 2:09 am
Location:France

Re: Case Closed: Emerald = Parblue Mutation

Post by Recio » Sun Nov 24, 2013 12:33 pm

trabots wrote:
Willy, where does the underlined fit in?
On the basis that all alleles of the same locus found in any parrot so far are always of the same inheritance mode
Johan, Recio is saying Emerald is dominant but at the Blue locus also. There so far as I am aware only sex-linked and recessive allelic mutations. I have never heard of a dominant mutation being allelic to another dominant mutation let alone a recessive one.
Willy,

Please re-read my post calmly. I have never said that Emerald is dominant at the Blue locus. Emerald is dominant over the Wild gene of the Blue-2 locus, and since DF Emerald is a different phenotype than SF Emerald, then we should say that Emerald is an incomplete dominant mutation ... of the Blue-2 locus.

Recio

Johan S
Posts:1215
Joined:Wed Mar 30, 2011 1:24 am
Location:Pretoria, South Africa

Re: Case Closed: Emerald = Parblue Mutation

Post by Johan S » Sun Nov 24, 2013 12:41 pm

Recio wrote:About the possibility of the Blue-1 and the Blue-2 loci being in the same gene ... it is not possible due to the definition of a gene, just coding for a protein. But I agree with you that définitions do not stick to reality many times.
Recio, are you saying that the approach of two different blue alleles in the budgerigar is wrong?

Recio
Posts:966
Joined:Thu Mar 26, 2009 2:09 am
Location:France

Re: Case Closed: Emerald = Parblue Mutation

Post by Recio » Sun Nov 24, 2013 1:33 pm

Some questions:

How does the parblue hypothesis explain ...
1. ... that there are Emerald Turquoise combos with patches and others without patches?
2. ... that the patched Emeralds look Blues series birds (Willy's, pics posted by Ben) and the non patched combos look green series birds (Mike's and Chris' pics)?

My working hypothesis was that green and blue series emeralds dysplayed a similar phenotype not allowing to an easy identification. The iridescence of these birds and the possibility of a structural yellow could explain this similarity, but only under natural ligthing (full spectrum litgh).
Ben and Lee suggested that we should test our birds under different ligthing conditions for a better identification. When I see the pics posted in the forum I can remark that most of the high quality ones have been made under indoor conditions or in a cloudy day (Ben's pic of patched Emeralds), and I can clearly see blue and green series birds, which very probably would look very similar in a sunny day.

Chris' bird was labelled TurquoiseEmerald because at that time it was believed that Emerald was a parblue mutation, but if you look at this bird you will see a mostly green bird without patches ... that is a Green/Turquoise Sf Emerald.

Regards

Recio

Recio
Posts:966
Joined:Thu Mar 26, 2009 2:09 am
Location:France

Re: Case Closed: Emerald = Parblue Mutation

Post by Recio » Sun Nov 24, 2013 1:37 pm

Johan S wrote:
Recio wrote:About the possibility of the Blue-1 and the Blue-2 loci being in the same gene ... it is not possible due to the definition of a gene, just coding for a protein. But I agree with you that définitions do not stick to reality many times.
Recio, are you saying that the approach of two different blue alleles in the budgerigar is wrong?
Hi Johan,

I have just have a look to the budgies genetics and you are rigth: there are two different mutations of the same Blue gene able to produce two different blue types.

Regards

Recio

Recio
Posts:966
Joined:Thu Mar 26, 2009 2:09 am
Location:France

Re: Case Closed: Emerald = Parblue Mutation

Post by Recio » Sun Nov 24, 2013 3:33 pm

... and now time for brainstorming. Let's fly very high, just like if smoking something :lol:

There is a question I was expecting ... but nobody followed: if the blue-1 and the blue-2 loci are both coming from the same gene ... why are we invoking an action on pigment synthesis (enzymatic action) for blue-1 and an action on structure (keratin synthesis or assembling) for blue-2? If their origin is the same they should play a similar game. Far more ... they could be two genes located in the same chromossome (und thus linked) but with different actions.

Answer: I think that both genes act on the same substract because there is a phenotypic interaction (the elimination by Emerald of the red ring that should be present in green series birds and Turquoise combos) ... but I agree, they should both be acting by a similar mechanism.
Possibilities:
1. Both loci would act on pigment synthesis: Blue-2 would not act directly on structure but on pigment production, so that the produced psittacin would be located in a very ordered manner at the outer part of the cortex, allowing to produce iridescence. I think that this hypothesis is not good because in this situation there would be a friction with the environemnt and a bleching effect. Probably also studies with the ME would have been able to detect such structures.
2. Both loci would act directly on structure: Blue-1 would not act directly on pigment synthesis but on the deposition of this pigment in the feather cortex, by acting on microtubules. A similar mechanism has been proved for melanin (I think it was in the dilute mutation and the action was in the developement of dendrytes by melanocytes). Do not ask me why but I prefere this explanation. Till now we know nothing about the synthesis of psittacofulvines and we do not have any evidence of the mechanism of action of the blue mutation (enzymatic, structural, ?).

The hypothesis that both Blue-1 and Blue-2 genes would act on structure could help to understand the apparent differences in offspring ratio (still to be confirmed ... but we are in brainstorming and our imagination is free to fly) between green series Emeralds (80-100% emerald offspring) and Blue series Emeralds (50% emerald offspring). We all know that to improve fertlility we should keep in the green series birds (developed by Johan recently). Till now the idea was that by breeding back to the wild type we decrease our level of consanguinity and allow to recover fertility ... but perhaps the presence of yellow psittacins could be a marker of an improved fertility due to a higher production of gamets. I'll try to explain this: if both blue loci are involved in the synthesis of structural proteins they could act on various process leading to gamets production and which are dépendent on the presence of microtubules (ex. mitosis and the formation of the kinetochoric microtubules) or in the mobility of spermatozoids. The same protein can perform different tasks depending on how it is assembled (Ex: we have the same keratin in our nails, skin and hear) so a mutation acting on structural proteins charged of microtubules formation could produce different effects depending where these microtubules are acting (pigment deposition, mitosis, spermatozoid mobility, ...).

Since Emeralds have been bred to Blues, most of green series Emeralds are split for Blue, and the Emerald allele is linked to the Wild allele of the blue-1 locus. Gamets can only hold one allele of each locus. So in gamets of green emeralds, the Emerald allele would be linked to the wild allele of the blue-1 locus, allowing a higher fertility (by increased number of gamets, better mobility, better introduction of the head of the spermatozoid during the fusion phase, ...). The non emerald allele would be linked to the blue (or parblue) allele, which would decrease fertility.

In Blue Emeralds there is not difference in the allele of the Blue-1 locus to which Emerald is linked (both are blue) and thus the offspring ratio is not affected. It would be great to study which is the situation when the Emerald allele of the Blue-2 is linked to a parblue (indigo or turquoise) of the Blue-1 ... would we get an intermediate offspring ratio? .. around 60% Emerald offspring?

Since the offspring ratio depends on which Blue-1 allele (wild, blue or parblue) is linked to Emerald, we should use Blue (Blue-1) series birds to study the crossing over rate between Blue-1 and Blue-2 loci. The use of green series emeralds, which are split to blue, would yield wrong results.

Maybe, some of you, after reading this, you are thinking : I am going to breed my phenotypic Emerald to a green bird and I will get near 100% emeralds. Do not do that if you want to have more emeralds: if the wild gene is present in every gamet, the gamets carryng Emerald would not be selected. To get a maximal of Emerald offspring (green SF Emerald) you should keep on pairing your green/blue SF Emerald birds to Blue birds (homozygous Blue).

Sorry for the long writing but I had too much free time tonigth.

Regards

Recio

trabots
Posts:597
Joined:Tue Oct 23, 2012 5:18 pm

Re: Case Closed: Emerald = Parblue Mutation

Post by trabots » Sun Nov 24, 2013 3:43 pm

I am fed up with you both Johan and Recio for time and again ignoring basic genetics of what a bird can and can't be with regard to the heterozygous Emerald. The df Emerald is Green series (or Blue according to you) needs no discussion at this stage. The other far more common heterozygous Emerald that we all have (except Recio?) is what?? Tell us. If it is not a ParblueBlue then what is it?? I dare you both in one line tell us.

trabots
Posts:597
Joined:Tue Oct 23, 2012 5:18 pm

Re: Case Closed: Emerald = Parblue Mutation

Post by trabots » Sun Nov 24, 2013 3:46 pm

Yes Stefan, I accept I am wrong, I have just started CHCT breeding and only had TurquoiseBlue CHCT to relate, none of them have patches. My argument still stands however that you can't make conclusions about what a Parblue is or isn't by using only CHCT versions for reference.

Recio
Posts:966
Joined:Thu Mar 26, 2009 2:09 am
Location:France

Re: Case Closed: Emerald = Parblue Mutation

Post by Recio » Sun Nov 24, 2013 3:53 pm

trabots wrote:I am fed up with you both Johan and Recio for time and again ignoring basic genetics of what a bird can and can't be with regard to the heterozygous Emerald. The df Emerald is Green series (or Blue according to you) needs no discussion at this stage. The other far more common heterozygous Emerald that we all have (except Recio?) is what?? Tell us. If it is not a ParblueBlue then what is it?? I dare you both in one line tell us.
Hi Willy,

You can get DF Emeralds in both green and blue series birds. I think that Chris bird is a DF Emerald in blue series birds because the SF Emerald posted in the same pic is a mostly blue bird, but not sure. As you say it is too early to discuss those birds. Hope you can get them very quickly.

As you know I do not own any Emerald ... and it allows me to easierly built theoretic models because my eyes do not cheat me.
Your birds seem to be BlueBlue SF Emeralds and ParblueBlue SF Emeralds. Wonderfull birds and great quality pics Willy.

Regards

Recio

Mikesringnecks
Posts:218
Joined:Sun Oct 06, 2013 11:45 pm

Re: Case Closed: Emerald = Parblue Mutation

Post by Mikesringnecks » Sun Nov 24, 2013 4:58 pm

Hi Recio and Willy
I am getting there with where you are coming from now Recio, thanks but I still have a little way to go.

I don't know if this is relevant, but I have bred a lot of turquoise birds since I started keeping ringnecks. They may start off with very little yellow pigment, but whether they start with a little or a lot they always end up patchy whilst they are young.

The supposedly TurquoiseEmerald Cleartail hen that has produced my seven chicks was very young when I bought her and even now she has not yet had her first adult molt IE she is only one year old. However, she shows none of what I consider are the usual patches found on young turquoise birds, be they cleartail or not.
Kind regards
Mike

Mikesringnecks
Posts:218
Joined:Sun Oct 06, 2013 11:45 pm

Re: Case Closed: Emerald = Parblue Mutation

Post by Mikesringnecks » Sun Nov 24, 2013 5:13 pm

Hi Ben

I don't know whether or not I have got you to agree with me that Aaron's chick is no proof the EmeraldBlue hypothesis. If I have, then the value of what I am about to ask will be obvious. If I haven't, you might be kind enough to humor me and consider what I am about to ask anyway.

For me, the importance of Aaron's chick lies in the undeniable fact that its green parent carries an emerald gene. I don't believe we know anything more about that gene for certain yet, in terms of this debate, but we do know it is present in that green parent bird. Therefore, that bird is important in terms of the debate, and I think we need more than a casual photo of it. Would it be possible to arrange for a close visual comparison between it and a known wild type green, plus photos if any significant differences appear?

I do appreciate it might have to await completion of the molt.

Kind regards
Mike

trabots
Posts:597
Joined:Tue Oct 23, 2012 5:18 pm

Re: Case Closed: Emerald = Parblue Mutation

Post by trabots » Sun Nov 24, 2013 5:54 pm

I think that Chris bird is a DF Emerald in blue series
Recio, lets now progress. How is Chris' df Emerald a Blue series when it clearly has psitticins? Just answer this please then to the next step.

trabots
Posts:597
Joined:Tue Oct 23, 2012 5:18 pm

Re: Case Closed: Emerald = Parblue Mutation

Post by trabots » Sun Nov 24, 2013 8:44 pm

Your birds seem to be BlueBlue SF Emeralds and ParblueBlue SF Emeralds.
Recio, same thing, how can a bird with psitticins be Blue? You are evading the obvious as I think you are smart enough not to overlook the obvious. I wonder however.

I'll try again and this is the last time I will enter into an exchange with either you or Johan and quite possibly this forum if you don't give me (us) some courtesy, that of directly answering a question put to you. Mike you are getting there also. Nobody can accuse me of ignoring direct queries of me so how about playing fair for a change? I always admit when I have said something which turns out to be wrong, as in the posts just prior to this. I have yet to have a single person on Terry's forum admit they were wrong about Deeps or df Parblues. Answer to this logic Recio/Johan (you too Mike, Stefan please), using only what we currently know about psitticins and Blue series birds. If you disagree with this first criteria, we have nothing more to discuss and I write you off as not worth discussing genetics with.

1. We have found a Green series bird (visible or otherwise) in Aarons' bird which obviously has an Emerald gene. Yes/No
2. That bird is either SF Emerald or Green /Emerald. Yes/No
3. Either way that bird is not Parblue. Yes/No
4. There can only be one Green series heterozygous Emerald. Yes/No
5. That being the case our full coloured heterozygous Emerald is not Blue series and it is not Green series, what is it?

User avatar
Ring0Neck
Posts:1714
Joined:Thu May 22, 2008 2:24 am
Location:Brisbane QLD AUS

Re: Case Closed: Emerald = Parblue Mutation

Post by Ring0Neck » Sun Nov 24, 2013 9:27 pm

Some questions:

How does the parblue hypothesis explain ...

2. ... that the patched Emeralds look Blues series birds (Willy's, pics posted by Ben) and the non patched combos look green series birds (Mike's and Chris' pics)?
Recio,

Combo / Homozygous Parblue non emerald -
greener than widltype
(hen is a bit rough feathered as she is moulting ATM)

** It seems that any combo between the parblues, be it emerald-turq; emerald-Indigo, Indigo-Turq gives us a green phenotype !
So, emerald is no exception.


Image

Image
I'm an Explorer
10% luck, 20% skill, 15% concentrated power of will, 50% pleasure, 5% pain$ and a 100% reason ..I just gotta know

User avatar
Ring0Neck
Posts:1714
Joined:Thu May 22, 2008 2:24 am
Location:Brisbane QLD AUS

Re: Case Closed: Emerald = Parblue Mutation

Post by Ring0Neck » Sun Nov 24, 2013 10:14 pm

My reason for suggesting to open a new thread to disect the idea of 2nd Blue locus
is that i fear if we continue here linked to emerald we could lose some friends and that would be a shame.

forsee => forplan :)

but i guess some of you are thinking: if emerald is not at B2 then it is a pointless discussion. :?



I'm an Explorer
10% luck, 20% skill, 15% concentrated power of will, 50% pleasure, 5% pain$ and a 100% reason ..I just gotta know

User avatar
madas
Posts:973
Joined:Thu Dec 18, 2008 11:12 am
Contact:

Re: Case Closed: Emerald = Parblue Mutation

Post by madas » Sun Nov 24, 2013 11:54 pm

TurqEmerald youngster and two months later:

Image

Image

Recio
Posts:966
Joined:Thu Mar 26, 2009 2:09 am
Location:France

Re: Case Closed: Emerald = Parblue Mutation

Post by Recio » Mon Nov 25, 2013 1:09 am

trabots wrote:
Your birds seem to be BlueBlue SF Emeralds and ParblueBlue SF Emeralds.
Recio, same thing, how can a bird with psitticins be Blue? You are evading the obvious as I think you are smart enough not to overlook the obvious. I wonder however.

I'll try again and this is the last time I will enter into an exchange with either you or Johan and quite possibly this forum if you don't give me (us) some courtesy, that of directly answering a question put to you. Mike you are getting there also. Nobody can accuse me of ignoring direct queries of me so how about playing fair for a change? I always admit when I have said something which turns out to be wrong, as in the posts just prior to this. I have yet to have a single person on Terry's forum admit they were wrong about Deeps or df Parblues. Answer to this logic Recio/Johan (you too Mike, Stefan please), using only what we currently know about psitticins and Blue series birds. If you disagree with this first criteria, we have nothing more to discuss and I write you off as not worth discussing genetics with.

1. We have found a Green series bird (visible or otherwise) in Aarons' bird which obviously has an Emerald gene. Yes/No
2. That bird is either SF Emerald or Green /Emerald. Yes/No
3. Either way that bird is not Parblue. Yes/No
4. There can only be one Green series heterozygous Emerald. Yes/No
5. That being the case our full coloured heterozygous Emerald is not Blue series and it is not Green series, what is it?
Hi Willy,

This is the third time I am going to answer the same question ... but it will be the last one. Once again, bolded and underlined for you:

3. Let's suppose that we are dealing with an EmeraldWild BlueBlue. Willy's logics (very correct) is that if BlueBlue is present it is not possible to see any psittacin. Since this bird show psittacins it would mean that it is a parblue. This logic is sound whenever we are dealing with a single Blue locus, but we have two different psittacins (fluorescent and not fluorescent) with different distribution and regulation, making me think that the Blue mutation acts on a master gene controling (at least) two different genes, coding each for each psittacin type. Whenever a mutation appears in one of the controled genes, this could scape to the control of the master gene, and allow to express psittacins even if Blue is present.Somehow feather structure and psittacin deposition seems to be interconected. Could this "conexion" appear at the genetic level? Could this explain the apparent higher Emerald offspring? Digenism?
1. We have found a Green series bird (visible or otherwise) in Aarons' bird which obviously has an Emerald gene. Yes/No
Always waiting for pics and comparison with a wild green bird besides, if possible under sun ligth and under indoor conditions. You can not pass to the other points without an answer to the first one.

Recio

User avatar
Ring0Neck
Posts:1714
Joined:Thu May 22, 2008 2:24 am
Location:Brisbane QLD AUS

Re: Case Closed: Emerald = Parblue Mutation

Post by Ring0Neck » Mon Nov 25, 2013 1:16 am

Yesterday Aaron said "too easy" (re pics) I can give you his number if you want to talk to him maybe you can persue him to hurry up

Madas, Nice Pics !
I'm an Explorer
10% luck, 20% skill, 15% concentrated power of will, 50% pleasure, 5% pain$ and a 100% reason ..I just gotta know

User avatar
madas
Posts:973
Joined:Thu Dec 18, 2008 11:12 am
Contact:

Re: Case Closed: Emerald = Parblue Mutation

Post by madas » Mon Nov 25, 2013 1:33 am

trabots wrote:Yes Stefan, I accept I am wrong, I have just started CHCT breeding and only had TurquoiseBlue CHCT to relate, none of them have patches. My argument still stands however that you can't make conclusions about what a Parblue is or isn't by using only CHCT versions for reference.
Yeah. But i can only tell from what i ahve seen in the last 10 years. I have never seen a cleartail turq without patches on the wings. :(
And then you look at the pics provided by Ron on his website all turq cleartail birds shown there show patches too. Perhaps in a more fade way regarding the body color but still visible. :)

Do you have some pics of your turq cleartails?

User avatar
Ring0Neck
Posts:1714
Joined:Thu May 22, 2008 2:24 am
Location:Brisbane QLD AUS

Re: Case Closed: Emerald = Parblue Mutation

Post by Ring0Neck » Mon Nov 25, 2013 1:45 am

Stefan,

Would you have a turquoiseblue & a truquoiseblue cleartail from same bloodline? say father/son?

I still think that Willy was partially right. Turq. CT birds show less patches then TurquoiseBlue.
Most Turq CT birds look like Indigo judging by the patches.
You might want to look at your last pic posted, bird next to that nice Turq-Emerald.

;)
I'm an Explorer
10% luck, 20% skill, 15% concentrated power of will, 50% pleasure, 5% pain$ and a 100% reason ..I just gotta know

User avatar
ellieelectrons
Posts:2708
Joined:Mon Jul 19, 2010 1:17 am
Location:Sunshine Coast, Queensland, Australia

Re: Case Closed: Emerald = Parblue Mutation

Post by ellieelectrons » Mon Nov 25, 2013 2:05 am

Hi All

I'm sensing a bit of frustration in this thread... and a couple of people might be about to say something they might regret later. Since it's already 5 pages long, I thought I'd lock it.

Some great discussion here though.

Ellie.

Locked