EmeraldBlue logic bit by bit.

Moderator:Mods

Post Reply
trabots
Posts:597
Joined:Tue Oct 23, 2012 5:18 pm
EmeraldBlue logic bit by bit.

Post by trabots » Sun Nov 17, 2013 6:50 pm

Recio et al here is your new thread however I have decided to work it back from my logic. Please, please save your non to the point discourses for the other threads on the subject. Here is the logic re-posted for reference.
Again, the hetero. Emerald IRN we know and I have bred has come from pairings with Blue. That said we know that they must have at least one Blue gene. The hetero. Emerald IRN has psitticin so it cannot have 2 Blue genes. The bird then is Emerald /Blue or is EmeraldBlue. If the former then we already have a Green series Emerald as any bird with BlueWildtype at the Blue locus is Green series split Blue. So where are all the Emerald Blue birds? All the hetero. Emerald IRNs have at least one Blue gene and if Emerald is dominant it is highly unlikely that a homo. Blue Emerald has never been bred. Recio, anyone, please dissect this sentence by sentence and come up with another logical explanation, no diverging into yellow structure and the like, just tell me where this logic fails and at which sentence. This is not scientific to keep ignoring facts, especially when the facts have been backed up by breedings and fit perfectly the story of the first Emerald obtained from the wild.

SF Emerald /Blue x Blue =

25% Green /Blue
25% SF Emerald /Blue
25% Blue
25% SF Emerald Blue where are these birds???
To start;
Emerald IRN we know and I have bred has come from pairings with Blue. That said we know that they must have at least one Blue gene.
Yes or No?

Now let's take just this bit:
The hetero. Emerald IRN has psitticin so it cannot have 2 Blue genes.
Recio has today said
Willy's logics (very correct) is that if BlueBlue is present it is not possible to see any psittacin.
That is agreed then that the Emeralds we know are not homozygous Blue? Yes or No? If No you are disagreeing with Recio :shock:

Now let's take this bit:
The bird then is Emerald /Blue or is EmeraldBlue.
Yes or No?

Now this bit:
If the former then we already have a Green series Emerald as any bird with BlueWildtype at the Blue locus is Green series split Blue.
Yes or No?

If we can get this far with a consensus on just these Yes/No answers we have made far more progress than before. Please play along and participate. Those who don't and who I know have an answer will be named. :oops: From here we can then move rapidly forward.

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

Re: EmeraldBlue logic bit by bit.

Post by trabots » Sun Nov 17, 2013 10:47 pm

Due to a lack of audience participation this thread is dead. I have agreement on the logic from Recio, that is all I need.

John Shannon
Posts:47
Joined:Sun May 05, 2013 5:00 pm

Re: EmeraldBlue logic bit by bit.

Post by John Shannon » Mon Nov 18, 2013 5:02 am

Is parblue simply Blue split green

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

Re: EmeraldBlue logic bit by bit.

Post by trabots » Mon Nov 18, 2013 5:42 am

John Shannon wrote:Is parblue simply Blue split green
John, genetically BlueGreen is the same a GreenBlue or Green split Blue. That bird has a wildtype gene sharing the Blue locus with a Blue gene. A Parblue mutation is allelic to Blue meaning it can only reside on the Blue locus. So we have TurquoiseBlue, EmeraldBlue and IndigoBlue now identified as the 3 heterozygous Parblue mutations in IRNs. Of course these all can be homozygous or df as I see it. BlueBlue is the visual Blue and the others having all been bred are TurquoiseTurquoise, IndigoIndigo and EmeraldEmerald. To simplify I use df lower case as in df Emerald. In the case of TurquoiseGreen, IndigoGreen and EmeraldGreen these will all be like GreenBlue, or Green split Blue. They are Green birds split for a Parblue mutation. That is to say parblue is recessive in Green series but dominant in Blue series.

John Shannon
Posts:47
Joined:Sun May 05, 2013 5:00 pm

Re: EmeraldBlue logic bit by bit.

Post by John Shannon » Mon Nov 18, 2013 12:55 pm

It just seems to me that mother nature has tried to go back to correct itself from the blue adding wild green. indigo to emerald with double factors having in each parblue being more green.
Indigo and Turquoise taking until maturity to be there greenest and Emerald being closest to wild green. The wild green gene is just showing us that it is the top of the tree.
This is just an observation. regards john

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

Re: EmeraldBlue logic bit by bit.

Post by Recio » Mon Nov 18, 2013 1:39 pm

Hi Willy,

You are repeating the same arguments again and again asking for discussion... but your arguments have already been discussed. A different thing is that you do not agree with the comments (master gene, two blue loci, structural yellow...). By the way ... you did not comment about the lack of red psittacin in Emerald Turquoise combo birds, about the DF Emerald phenotype, about pigments distribution and regulation, about differences in fluorescence and iridescence ... and how all this stand (or not) in the parblue theory.

You were asking for a detailled discusion of your patched Emeralds .... but now you do not want to discuss about them!!! And what about your phenotypic Emeralds with two different unexpected fluorescences? ... These birds could give us the oportunity to test which one of these hypothesis better matches reality. You know that they do not fit in our stablished knowledge .... so, please, fair play and respectfull discussion.

Recio

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

Re: EmeraldBlue logic bit by bit.

Post by Johan S » Mon Nov 18, 2013 2:41 pm

Willy, I'll try not to go off the beaten path in this thread. I agree with the first statement. Then:
trabots wrote: The hetero. Emerald IRN has psitticin so it cannot have 2 Blue genes.
If we look at this statement, this is where the difference of opinion lies. I will stick to the facts, but please correct me if I'm wrong. I recall Recio reporting back to the forum that you personally looked at heterozygous emerald and parblues under UV and your observation was that you clearly saw a difference in the colour of UV fluorescence between emerald and (other) mature parblues. This was prior to you joining from personal communications with him. Deon has also shared his opinion and pictures showing a difference under UV as well. Further to this, emerald shows UV reflectance right from the start, while (other) parblues only shows yellow fluorescence when approaching maturity. Going along with your yes/no to get to answers quickly, I'll ask if you would confirm that you observed the same as Deon. Yes/No?

If no, please elaborate on the differences between my understanding and your observations. Thanks in advance. :)

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

Re: EmeraldBlue logic bit by bit.

Post by trabots » Mon Nov 18, 2013 2:59 pm

As I said I have quit this thread.

Post Reply