Emerald and Emerald turquoise

[cleartail]

Hi all.
I have read a lot of the threads on the emerald mutation.
I thought I had a basic understanding but..... The identification of this colour when combined with others seems difficult.
I am so confused.
As I am on the verge of purchasing an emerald turquoise split cleartail male I thought I might ask you good people for some
reinforcement or otherwise of my understanding.
An emerald turquoise should only breed emeralds and turquoises when paired with a blue series bird(no emerald turquoises should be bred unless paired to a turquoise)?
In this case my thoughts for a pairing would be a blue cleartail or violet blue cleartail hen for this male(since he is split cleartail).

Another question - basic I know. Is the easiest wat to identify Emerald vs turquoise by the undertail and underwing areas?
And turquoise is usually always patchy - correct??

Thanks in advance. All the reading about this mutation has blown my mind..

[Ring0Neck]

Hi,

You pretty much got it, Yes to all
If you did not see this thread here's the link

http://www.indianringneck.com/forum/vie ... 26&t=18322

You said:

As I am on the verge of purchasing an emerald turquoise split cleartail male

ask the breeder to show you the emerald & turquoise parents (cleartails or splits) and other siblings from the same nest.

[cleartail]

Thanks.
I think all the reading was too much for my brain to process in one sitting.
I will ask on the parent thing.
I have an emerald grey split cleartail and it is a great looking bird.
Just that all over change in tone of the grey.
I also got some pics of an emerald grey split cleartail I was offered
with a lot of blotches on the wing.
In my opinion not an emerald.
What do you think?

[Ring0Neck]

It should match the phenotype of your bird & the pics in the link i posted in my prev. post.

Sounds like you're ready ;)

Good luck next season, hope you'll breed some amazing birds.

Cheers
Ben

[Johan S]

Cleartail, that is the way we currently understand and accept the emerald mutation. If somebody manages to breed an emerald turquoise or just plain blue from the pairing you have in mind, we'll know that a model that fits better will need to be developed and adopted. The other thread is mostly speculation on how such a model could look, as UV photos suggest that we might be missing something. We need people like you and Mike with that exact pairing to report back here. We should be able to conclude with very good certainty what the situation is next season after another round of chicks.

[Mikesringnecks]

Hi Ben
Just got a call from Michael Laffey. His EmeraldTurquoise Cleartail hen to Violet Blue split cleartail cock apparently produced 3 EmeraldBlue Cleartail chicks and 3 Violet Turquoise Cleartail chicks.I congratulated him on six out of six cleartails from that pairing.
Kind regards
Mike

[Ring0Neck]

Hi Mike,

Thanks for the update. Nice results indeed.

It also reinforces your results, inheritance same as a parblue.
I got no pic from Aaron yet guys, be sure that when i do i will post it for all to see.

Peter S. sent me a pic of what he said is the original hen Jack Smith got from UK
I will post that pic soon
As Deon said in his book, some where lucky to breed 100% emeralds here in Oz in early days.

Certainly looks Homozygous/DF Emerald & as it was a pair more Homo/DF Emeralds were bred.
Once we started putting it to blue Hetero/SF EmeraldBlues was bred.
Peter S told me Jack got a pair, i have not seen pics of the male yet.(Another breeder has the hen now)

See here
http://www.indianringneck.com/forum/vie ... 86#p106786

[Johan S]

Hi Ben
Just got a call from Michael Laffey. His EmeraldTurquoise Cleartail hen to Violet Blue split cleartail cock apparently produced 3 EmeraldBlue Cleartail chicks and 3 Violet Turquoise Cleartail chicks.I congratulated him on six out of six cleartails from that pairing.
Kind regards
Mike

6/6 cleartails! Just goes to show how unpredictable these things are.

Mike, without going back to the other topic, you had 7 chicks, right? So we are now on 13/13 chicks from such a pairing being either TurquoiseBlue or EmeraldBlue (possibly Emerald Blue). That's already very strong evidence of the allelic interaction and emerald being a blue locus mutation.

[cleartail]

Coincidentally Michael Laffey is the person from whom I am buying the emerald turquoise split cleartail male.

[Gratz]

hello again

I have been thinking about the Turquoise Emerald and it reminds me of a Violet Cobalt
my reasoning for this is
with pairing a Violet Cobalt to a Blue we breed . Blue, Violet and Cobalt NO Violet cobalt
from what I have been reading the Turquoise emerald to a blue produced either Emerald or Turquoise NO Turquoise emerald

just my observation

regards
Gratz

[sheyd]

hello again

I have been thinking about the Turquoise Emerald and it reminds me of a Violet Cobalt
my reasoning for this is
with pairing a Violet Cobalt to a Blue we breed . Blue, Violet and Cobalt NO Violet cobalt
from what I have been reading the Turquoise emerald to a blue produced either Emerald or Turquoise NO Turquoise emerald

just my observation

regards
Gratz

As long as the Violet Cobalt is a Violet Cobalt (sfDark, sfViolet) and not say a dfViolet, then it is completely possible to breed a Violet Cobalt in the nest when one is paired to a Blue.

[cleartail]

on the subject of violet cobalt (running the risk of getting off topic here)
Identification of this mutation?

I have a violet cobalt that appears just like a violet to my eye.
Is it only a subtle difference or is the difference very noticable?
Or is it markedly different in different birds just as some violets and some cobalts differ from others?
I have also bred what I believe to be a violet cobalt (its not a violet, it could be a cobalt) and a violet cobalt green split blue.
they came from a Cobalt green/blue male x violet hen pairing.

Do you mind if I post some pics of them here to get your opinions?
Flash on and flash off pics?

[sheyd]

your topic..derail if you wish!

best pics are in the morning or afternoon (I prefer early morning) in natural light- but not direct sunlight.

also helps to have a reference bird (of same series ie- Blue or Wildtype Green or better yet, the parents) in the pic- though if these aren't available then other 'proven' mutations can be used- so long as they are of the same series as the bird/s in question.

keeping in mind that it is very difficult to tell the difference between a sfDark sfViolet (Violet Cobalt) and a dfViolet- if parentage/offspring/siblings are unknown or not in the pic.

............ Just re-read what you said- it should be easy to compare your 'unproven' Violet Cobalt- just compare it next to the Violet parent- if it's darker or the same shade then it's probably a Dark Violet (Violet Cobalt), if a lighter colour then a Violet Blue, if different yet again it could be Dark Blue (Cobalt). but yes, pics would help

Violet Green pics here:
http://www.indianringneck.com/forum/vie ... 100#p98100

[Johan S]

with pairing a Violet Cobalt to a Blue we breed . Blue, Violet and Cobalt NO Violet cobalt

Gratz, you were unlucky not to get one, but the chances are not very good to begin with. It could also go the other way. We have bred cobalt violet from such a pair, a TurquoiseBlue opaline x cobalt violet that gave a cobalt violet turquoiseblue opaline hen.

[Recio]

Hi Ben
Just got a call from Michael Laffey. His EmeraldTurquoise Cleartail hen to Violet Blue split cleartail cock apparently produced 3 EmeraldBlue Cleartail chicks and 3 Violet Turquoise Cleartail chicks.I congratulated him on six out of six cleartails from that pairing.
Kind regards
Mike

6/6 cleartails! Just goes to show how unpredictable these things are.

Mike, without going back to the other topic, you had 7 chicks, right? So we are now on 13/13 chicks from such a pairing being either TurquoiseBlue or EmeraldBlue (possibly Emerald Blue). That's already very strong evidence of the allelic interaction and emerald being a blue locus mutation.

Hi Johan, Mike, Ben, ...

This is the good pairing to test whenever the birds really are what you say that they are. I am meaning:
1. If you say that the bird is Emerald and Turquoise it must show the Turquoise patches to be sure it is a blue series bird carrying the Blue gene.. Otherwise the bird probably is a Green/Turquoise ... and the results can match both hypothesis, as previously shown, and so, be useless.
2. Be sure that the bird can not be homozygous turquoise, that is that the Turquoise gene is present in only one of the grand parents and the other one can not be split Turquoise (and this taking in consideration both hypothesis).
3. It would be great that the Emerald and the Blue genes of the same parent come each from the grand father and the grand mother, in order to avoid linkage between both of them, and allow its separated expression in the chicks.

If you do not do this specific setup the results would not allow to differenciate between both hypothesis, as seen with Mike's results, whenever no new crossing over appears in the offspring.

Regards

Recio

[madas]

Hi Ben
Just got a call from Michael Laffey. His EmeraldTurquoise Cleartail hen to Violet Blue split cleartail cock apparently produced 3 EmeraldBlue Cleartail chicks and 3 Violet Turquoise Cleartail chicks.I congratulated him on six out of six cleartails from that pairing.
Kind regards
Mike

6/6 cleartails! Just goes to show how unpredictable these things are.

Mike, without going back to the other topic, you had 7 chicks, right? So we are now on 13/13 chicks from such a pairing being either TurquoiseBlue or EmeraldBlue (possibly Emerald Blue). That's already very strong evidence of the allelic interaction and emerald being a blue locus mutation.

Hi Johan, Mike, Ben, ...

This is the good pairing to test whenever the birds really are what you say that they are. I am meaning:
1. If you say that the bird is Emerald and Turquoise it must show the Turquoise patches to be sure it is a blue series bird carrying the Blue gene.. Otherwise the bird probably is a Green/Turquoise ... and the results can match both hypothesis, as previously shown, and so, be useless.
2. Be sure that the bird can not be homozygous turquoise, that is that the Turquoise gene is present in only one of the grand parents and the other one can not be split Turquoise (and this taking in consideration both hypothesis).
3. It would be great that the Emerald and the Turquoise genes of the same parent come each from the grand father and the grand mother, in order to avoid linkage between both of them, and allow its separated expression in the chicks.

If you do not do this specific setup the results would not allow to differenciate between both hypothesis, as seen with Mike's results, whenever no new crossing over appears in the offspring.

Regards

Recio

What should be linked here? And can crossover? I don't understand, sorry

[Recio]

Hi Madas,

We have two hypothesis:
1. Emerald is a parblue mutation, that is Emerald is a mutation of the Blue locus like Indigo or Turquoise.
2. Emerald is an independent incomplete dominant mutation linked to the Blue locus, that is the Emerald locus and the Blue locus are in the same chromossome, and, thus, are linked.

The experimental setup must be made in order to avoid the masking effect of this linkage of Emerald to one of the alleles of the Blue locus. If you do not pay attention you can have Emerald linked to Blue, and then you will not find either Emerald Turquoise nor Blue birds in the offspring. If you only get Turquoise birds and Emerald birds you will not be able to say which hypothesis is rigth because both hypothesis can explain these results (Mike's results).

Recio

[Ring0Neck]

Recio,

We have two hypothesis:
1. Emerald is a parblue mutation, that is Emerald is a mutation of the Blue locus like Indigo or Turquoise.
2. Emerald is an independent incomplete dominant mutation linked to the Blue locus, that is the Emerald locus and the Blue locus are in the same chromossome, and, thus, are linked.

Not ignoring Aaron's green/emerald how would point 2 differ from point 1 in breeding results?
What pairing would prove / disprove point 2 ?

to me 1 & 2 is the same, worded differently.
mutation of & linked, what difference do you see in that?
How was Indigo classified as Parblue? through what tests? and why aren't those tests used on Indigo good enough to use for Emerald?


You've told us that birds we call turquoise-emerald are in fact green/ which no one here will agree with that statement, but you're saying the green/emerald of Aaron's although 2 breeders sees it as green is in fact emerald green
Bit of a stretch on all counts. We have real data yet you're ignoring it totally as if we're talking of an unseen mutation.


Respectfully
Ben

[Recio]

You've told us that birds we call turquoise-emerald are in fact green/ which no one here will agree with that statement, but you're saying the green/emerald of Aaron's although 2 breeders sees it as green is in fact emerald green
Bit of a stretch on all counts. We have real data yet you're ignoring it totally as if we're talking of an unseen mutation.


Respectfully
Ben

Hi Ben,

We have two types of birds called TurquoiseEmerald: patched and not patched. If genetically they are the same ... why they do look differents?
What I say is that the patched birds are the true blue series birds Turquoise Emerald, while the unpatched birds probably are Green Emeralds/Turquoise.
Which type of Turquoise Emerald has been used by Michael Laffey? If it was an unpatched Emerald (like Mike) the results can not be conclusive: you will never get Blue birds because there is not any Blue allele in the so called TurquoiseEmerald (but genetically Green Emerald/Turquoise). Let's do the same pairing but with true patched Turquoise Emeralds

Very respectfully²

Recio

[madas]

while the unpatched birds probably are Green Emeralds/Turquoise.

Yeah because they are completely green. Thats why they aren't patched.

[Johan S]

Recio, just to make sure I follow correctly. If we are going with option 2 of a linked gene, are you also saying that a green emerald / turquoise and a green emerald / blue will look the same?

The reason I ask, you say unpatched emerald (like Mike's) are genetically green emerald/turquoise. This bird clearly shows emerald features, right? What happens when we compare that to the bird that Aaron purchased as a possible split emerald? Here we have to assume that Aaron's bird looks very close to a wildtype, otherwise it would have been sold as a definite split bird (probably much more expensive too). So genetically Aaron's bird should be green emerald / blue. And that should look like a green emerald / turquoise (Mike's bird).

Unless I'm missing the trick, something isn't adding up. So what am I missing? Between all these patches and no patches I'm losing the plot a bit. I'll have to spend the entire evening looking at pictures of emeralds.

[Ring0Neck]

while the unpatched birds probably are Green Emeralds/Turquoise.

Yeah because they are completely green. Thats why they aren't patched.

There is 1 problem talking about patches
Mike's bird is 1 year old

I have young turquoiseblue with no patches, yet i know 100% it is a turquoiseblue
logic has gone out of fashion it seems

We need to be consistent & a 1 year old bird does not have the mature phenotype, therefore we should not build hypothesis on it.

PS: This is a 1 y old Homozygous Indigo Pallid - in 2 years time this bird will look nowhere near to how it looks now, don't you agree?

Back in April 2013 below


Why would breeders sell/name emerald greens as emerald-turquoise ? and get it right !


Recio, Your B1 B2 could very well apply to Deeps or ...
Quick example: Dark B1= Cobalt
____________Dark B2= Deep Blue or Briliant Blues of Tienie or NT Violet ....

Lot's of work out there and we rely on you heavily to come up with possible explanations.

[Recio]

Recio, just to make sure I follow correctly. If we are going with option 2 of a linked gene, are you also saying that a green emerald / turquoise and a green emerald / blue will look the same?

Hi Johan,

I think that you are grasping the main idea. In a classical system a green emerald / turquoise and a green emerald / blue would look the same, but if the Emerald and the Blue loci show some similarities (since both would have evolved from a common ancestor) then there can be an interaction between both genes (both loci), so that one allele from one of the genes could modify the expression of the other gene. If this allele is different (/Turquoise versus /Blue) the final expression could not be the same.
Could you make a theoretical study of all possible combinations of such a system (two linked genes in the same chromosssome)? Now I do not have much time, but I will do it next week. We will compare our models.

Regards

Recio

[Mikesringnecks]

Hi Cleartail et al,

A have a few quick points to make that may help, no new ideas.

1. Thanks for the reiteration Recio, I finally think I now understand where you are coming from. My avian genetics understanding doesn't yet spread that far outside the square defined in Terry Martin's book but you are slowly expanding it.

2. Cleartail, using my hen as an example, TurquoiseEmerald Cleartails do not have patches even as young birds, possibly because they are not in fact TurquoiseEmerald as Recio suspects. According to Recio, she might have her turquoise and emerald genes located at different loci and that is what the debate is about. In a practical sense, it shouldn't make much difference to your breeding outcomes because, as I now think I understand it, linked genes can/will produce very similar breeding results to alleles (genes at the same locus). I have attached a pic of my hen for your information.

3. Someone was worrying about my supposed TurquoiseEmerald Cleartail possibly not having patches because she was 1 year old. I bought her as a very young bird and she never had patches. She did double clutch, which surprised and worried me, but I think the vendor would have charged me more not less for a mature bird. Also, her DNA certificate is dated October 2012 so I really don't think there is much doubt there about her age.

4. I did see 1 photo of Michael Laffy's Turquoise Emerald Cleartail as a very young bird, it looked like mine without patches, but it was a "hold in the hand" shot so not clear evidence at all.

5. Cleartail, before you buy that "TurquoiseEmerald" you should find out what the parents are and post that finding on this thread. It could be very interesting.

Kind regards
Mike

[cleartail]

your topic..derail if you wish!

best pics are in the morning or afternoon (I prefer early morning) in natural light- but not direct sunlight.

also helps to have a reference bird (of same series ie- Blue or Wildtype Green or better yet, the parents) in the pic- though if these aren't available then other 'proven' mutations can be used- so long as they are of the same series as the bird/s in question.

keeping in mind that it is very difficult to tell the difference between a sfDark sfViolet (Violet Cobalt) and a dfViolet- if parentage/offspring/siblings are unknown or not in the pic.

............ Just re-read what you said- it should be easy to compare your 'unproven' Violet Cobalt- just compare it next to the Violet parent- if it's darker or the same shade then it's probably a Dark Violet (Violet Cobalt), if a lighter colour then a Violet Blue, if different yet again it could be Dark Blue (Cobalt). but yes, pics would help

Violet Green pics here:
http://www.indianringneck.com/forum/vie ... 100#p98100

I saw that thread.
Different variations in colour depending on camera and natural lighting.
I will take some pics and post.
Might take me a while.

And sorry to the others for rekindling this debate.....

[cleartail]

Mike,
thanks very much for the information and advice.
I will try and find out some more information.
I dont know if this bird (that I am attempting to buy) was purchased or bred.
It is a mature bird.

[Johan S]

Could you make a theoretical study of all possible combinations of such a system (two linked genes in the same chromosssome)? Now I do not have much time, but I will do it next week. We will compare our models.

Sorry Recio, I have the same problem.

[Indian Ringneck Vic]

Hi Mike,

Thanks for the update. Nice results indeed.

It also reinforces your results, inheritance same as a parblue.
I got no pic from Aaron yet guys, be sure that when i do i will post it for all to see.

Peter S. sent me a pic of what he said is the original hen Jack Smith got from UK
I will post that pic soon
As Deon said in his book, some where lucky to breed 100% emeralds here in Oz in early days.

Certainly looks Homozygous/DF Emerald & as it was a pair more Homo/DF Emeralds were bred.
Once we started putting it to blue Hetero/SF EmeraldBlues was bred.
Peter S told me Jack got a pair, i have not seen pics of the male yet.(Another breeder has the hen now)

See here
http://www.indianringneck.com/forum/vie ... 86#p106786

This is contrary to JS account and should have been varified before printing refer to ABK volume 21 issue 3 this article also match other wittness accounts.

[Ring0Neck]

And sorry to the others for rekindling this debate.....

No problem at all. It is not really a debate
thus far, only hypothesis are challanging the proven & accepted logic & breeding results.


Here's a short version of Willy's Logical Points:
1. We have found a Green series bird in Aarons' bird which obviously has an Emerald gene so it is either SF Emerald or Green /Emerald.

2. There can only be one Green series heterozygous Emerald.

3. That being the case our full coloured heterozygous Emerald is not Blue series and it is not the same as Aaron’s Green series, so it can’t be Green series therefore it has to be of the only remaining series; Parblue.


Frankly, I don't like where i find myself, i've been drawn into an opposition position, and out numbered. yet all I do is state what is logic & proven.
Not sure where i'm going wrong here , last thing i wanted to do is oppose my fellow breeders.

I don't get a rush from this as others obviously do, I just want to know facts & share them ;)

What is amazing that the breeders that don't own this mutation knows all about it

[Ring0Neck]

Hi Molossus,

Recio in his theories is not integrating the facts/breeding results we already have .
The possibility of having second Blue is an interesting idea but we have to construct a theory based on what we already know and build from there, his theory might fit the bill for Alexs but contradicts all facts in ringnecks.

Alexs might have a second Blue and ringnecks might not. We should keep the 2 separate for the time being to avoid confusion

1. Green bird of Aaron's has an Emerald gene. 2 breeders say its a green bird unseen by us but facts nontheless.
I can give you or Recio, Aaron's number to talk directly with him if you wish.
Looking for patches of turquoise in 1 year old bird is not acceptable or conclude its phenotype
We now have more facts about emerald being parblue than we do about Indigo being parblue.


Lee, I like to explore & I'm all for it but we don't have a model/theory to match what we have experienced in real life.

Before last breeding season we talked about putting an emerald x green to prove inheritance, now i'm glad i didn't do it becuase i'm sure breeding all greens would have easily been discarded as maybe i did not breed any emeralds and its not conclusive.
Aaron's bird is a step further a green bird was bred by Friskie & Aaron bred Emerald out of it, what further proof do we need? how can one ignore all this & all the breeders breeding results of turquoise-emeralds that fit the bill for parblue.

[Ring0Neck]

J S's article

[Ring0Neck]

Agreed !
All I'm saying We do need to take into account what we already have.

[Ring0Neck]

Molossus

take some pics of the mature Azure while in moult pls. ;)

[Mikesringnecks]

Hi Ben
I keep hearing the term Azure and I know Babu talks about Azures in his writings on the origin of emeralds but I don't actually know what an Azure phenotype looks like or what it comprises genetically. Can you please enlighten me?
Kind regards
Mike

[Ring0Neck]

Hi Mike,

Molossus is the man to ask.

Azure has a close phenotype to Oz Deep Blue.

[cleartail]

So after reading that article.
I am convinced the emerald grey I was offered must not be an emerald - too many blotches on the wings.
Maybe and emerald turquoise grey though???

Hopefully after next breeding season I can contribute more to this and can report my findings re: Emerald turquoise/CHCT and what I get out of it
when paired to a blue CHCT.

PS I am going to post pics of the birds I would like you all to help me identify in a seperate thread.
Thanks.

[Mikesringnecks]

Hi Cleartail
EmeraldTurquoise is not patchy at all. I got one last year and it worried me a lot because it did not have the patches I expected. However, it produced emerald and turquoise chicks so it was an EmeraldTurquoise after all.
One possible complication, mine was also a cleartail and maybe that has something to do with the loss of patches, but I doubt it because my turquoise cleartails are always patchy when they get enough yellow for it to be obvious.
Kind regards
Mike

[Johan S]

Hi Molossus,

Recio in his theories is not integrating the facts/breeding results we already have .
The possibility of having second Blue is an interesting idea but we have to construct a theory based on what we already know and build from there, his theory might fit the bill for Alexs but contradicts all facts in ringnecks.

Ben, I don't quite agree with your statement. Recio wouldn't have developed a model that didn't fit the bill of our current results. His model does take the current breeding results into account. Perhaps if you read it again it will make more sense?

I think the whole thing is close to settled. All we need is an open minded fella (or lady) to go have a look at Aaron's adult green bird and green offspring and compare them with a UV light. If there is no difference, we continue with the parblue model. If there is a slight difference, we keep on investigating and find an answer.

[Recio]

So after reading that article.
I am convinced the emerald grey I was offered must not be an emerald - too many blotches on the wings.
Maybe and emerald turquoise grey though???

Yes, and probably it is a genetic Emerald TurquoiseBlue Grey

Hopefully after next breeding season I can contribute more to this and can report my findings re: Emerald turquoise/CHCT and what I get out of it
when paired to a blue CHCT.

Be sure that your phenotypic Emerald Turquoise is patched : in this way we all be sure that it is a blue series bird (for some it will be EmeraldTurquoise and for others it will be Emerald BlueTurquoise) ... and we'll see if there are blue chicks in the offspring

Recio

[Mikesringnecks]

Hi Recio
I think there is a problem with my breeding result "proof" over and above your genetic input. As I have said before, I will take quality pics in due course to see if the eyes of others can help, however in the interim I have a problem as itemized below.

1. The mother is not patchy but she carries turquoise and emerald genes as proven by 2 turquoise and 5 emerald chicks.

2. The turquoise signature in the 2 turquoise chicks is very faint so far, as is often the case with turquoise in my experience and I have bred a lot of turquoise over many years. The faintest chick only has very pale yellow "short socks" and whilst I am certain it is turquoise, I can only see it because of the cleartail phenotype.

3. The 5 emerald chicks are certainly emerald but I don't now believe it is possible to tell whether or not one or more of them is carrying turquoise as well. The fact that the supposedly TurquoiseEmerald mother is not patchy makes for a real ID problem in the chicks.

4. If the father had been a Blue rather than a Violet Cobalt Cleartail, then chances of picking a difference between 5 supposedly EmeraldBlue chicks may have been better.

5. I now think the value in my pair lies solely in whether or not they produce a blue series chick over coming years. If they do, then the TurquoiseEmerald model is disproved, whist they don't, as far as my results are concerned, the book remains open I think.

Kind regards
Mike

[cleartail]

As soon as I get this bird(emerald turquoise split CHCT) - If I get this bird!!
I will post pics as it is a mature bird with a proven breeding history - as far as I am aware.

[Ring0Neck]

As soon as I get this bird(emerald turquoise split CHCT) - If I get this bird!!
I will post pics as it is a mature bird with a proven breeding history - as far as I am aware.

Cleartail,

Before you purchase the bird. Can you ask the breeder for the breeding history?
What we're interested in confirming if all offspring was either emerald or turquoise and what was it paired to.

[Recio]

Hi Mike,

I think that you have perfectly analyzed the present situation and the reasons why I ask Cleartail to look for a patched Turquoise Emerald.

Have you had a look at your birds under uv? I am always thinking about Willy's non fluorescent Emeralds and his anormally patched Emeralds, with fluorescence only expressed in the patched areas (parblue areas) but not in the non patched ones (Emerald areas). I think that those birds with general Emerald phenotype but without the Emerald fluorescence are the key for the two loci model I am working in.

Probably fluorescent Emeralds are the green series Emeralds and non fluorescent ones the blue series Emeralds. If your female and the chicks are fluorescents under uv .... it would point to green series Emeralds, and thus Turquoise would be present in the mother as split.

Regards

Recio

[Mikesringnecks]

Hi Recio
I haven't looked at them under UV yet, but I do intend taking them to Chris Whipps place to have them photographed, including hopefully under UV. However, it will be a while yet as I have to line up both Chris and John Shannon, who has the UV lighting, and the second clutch birds need to get weaned.
Has anyone sent you emerald feathers yet, if not what do you need?
What is the talk around non patched turquoise about, do they exist and, if so, what do they look like as young birds. I have bred turquoise for years, simply because the variability is interesting and they are very attractive. However, whilst I have seen very low levels of turquoise in young birds, they always get a good dose of it later and they then go patchy before it all blends in at about 2 or 3 years of age. Are these non patchy birds actually turquoise or are they actually indigos which I am told are not patchy (I don't have indigos)?
Kind regards
Mike

[Recio]

Hi Mike;

So many questions ....

Indigos are similar to Turquoise in psittacin distribution but with a lower amount/intensity of psittacins, and do not show the red ring (typical of Turquoise either heterozygous or homozygous) or just a very faint one in the homozygous birds. Thus Indigos also show patches of psittacin. When Emerald is present, somehow the red ring of Turquoise is not expressed, and it becomes hard to say if the bird is Turquoise or Indigo, excepting in the extreme cases.

About fluorescence: Emeralds show a special fluorescence under uv which has been described as more intense, affecting the whole bird, present from feathering and of a different hue (bluish) than the fluorescence present in wild, lutinos and parblue birds (yellowish and mainly expressed in the patched areas). With this idea in mind we could wander how would look an Emerald Turquoise bird under uv. Would it show two different types of fluorescence? Far more people is describing as Emerald Turquoise various different birds:
1. Non patched ... as your female
2. Patched : with typical patched distribution (.... pics posted by Ben) and with atypical patches distribution (Willy's birds showing patches of fluorescent psittacin at places which usually just show non fluorescent psittacin).
It would be really important to verify the emitted fluorescence of all those birds under uv to be able to correlate a specific phenotype with its genotype, since under normal lighting the differences between green and blue series seem to be minimal (remember that Willy has detected Emerald birds with the same phenotype but some are fluorescent and others not)

I do not think that all those phenotypes are related to the same genotype but to various combinations of Blue-1 (Wild-1, Blue and Parblue alleles) and Blue-2 (Emerald and Wild-2 alleles) genes. I am going to develop this on another post.

About feathers: I want to look at them under a yellow LED ligth and under uv ligth trying to separate/correlate pigment and structure dependent yellow colours (pigmentary yellow and structural yellow). I have not received any feather .... yet. It would be great to have some primary flying feathers of Emerald Turquoise (at priori they do not own any psittacin in parblues but should show some kind of fluorescence in Emeralds) and some coverts feathers belonging to the wings patches... and, if I may ask for the Top Best, it would be great to get similar feathers from "normal" fluorescent Emeralds not mixed with other mutations.

Regards

Recio

[Mikesringnecks]

Hi Recio
I will get feathers from my only 2 mature emerald hens, one EmeraldTurquoise and the other EmeraldBlue.They are both just finishing weaning chicks and starting to molt. I will pull feathers so that I am sure I have the correct ones but there will only be a couple from each as I don't like pulling flight feathers. If you need more, I will have plenty of molted feathers but they could get mixed up with the molting males' contributions.
Kind regards
Mike

[madas]

Hi Recio
I will get feathers from my only 2 mature emerald hens, one EmeraldTurquoise and the other EmeraldBlue.They are both just finishing weaning chicks and starting to molt. I will pull feathers so that I am sure I have the correct ones but there will only be a couple from each as I don't like pulling flight feathers. If you need more, I will have plenty of molted feathers but they could get mixed up with the molting males' contributions.
Kind regards
Mike

I would like to receive some of the flight feathers of both emeralds too.

thx in advance.

[Recio]

Hi Recio
I will get feathers from my only 2 mature emerald hens, one EmeraldTurquoise and the other EmeraldBlue.They are both just finishing weaning chicks and starting to molt. I will pull feathers so that I am sure I have the correct ones but there will only be a couple from each as I don't like pulling flight feathers. If you need more, I will have plenty of molted feathers but they could get mixed up with the molting males' contributions.
Kind regards
Mike

Thanks a lot, Mike.
Fluorescence is very stable in time. Even now scientists are studing the fluorescence emited from feathers of birds that have disappeared one century ago and are kept in museums as stuffed. So we can use even molted feathers whenever you can be sure that they really belong to Emerald birds.

Recio

[Mikesringnecks]

Hi Ben
I have been trying to persuade you to have a close visual examination done of Aaron's Violet Green split emerald parent, with a view to establishing whether it is a split, as is doubtless most likely the case, or a sf emerald (a remote possibility). I realize that any visual comparison test will introduce its own controversy and will therefore be of limited value and I apologize for not coming up with a better idea before. My only excuse lies the fact that I was more focused on my own breeding results at the time.

It now occurs to me that there is a simple, and I think inarguable, test available to prove that the chick is in fact a par blue and I can't imagine why it didn't occur to me before.

I now believe that all we need to do is take a photo of the parent and the chick under UV. In the unlikely event that they were sf emeralds their UV signatures would be very similar. If their UV signatures are different, with the chick showing more florescence, then we have visual confirmation that they are a split emerald parent and an EmeraldBlue chick, thereby confirming your initial proposition. Sorry again that this didn't occur to me before.
Kind regards
Mike

[Recio]

Hi Mike,

You are 100% rigth.
One more thing: I was not aware that Aaron's "green split Emerald" was also Violet. This changes everything since we have some evidence that Violet could act on cortex structure, and thus mask the action of other mutations (Emerald) at this level.

Regards

Recio