Underwing patch

Moderator: Mods

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

Underwing patch

Post by Recio »

I am posting these pics on Chris behalf to discuss about the underwing patch as a possible marker of Saddlebacks:

Image
Image
Image
Image
Image
Image
Image
Image
Image
Image

It is still lacking a pic but I can not do better with my photobucket. Sorry Chris
Regards

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

Re: Underwing patch

Post by Mikesringnecks »

Hi Recio and Chris
Those underwing photo are really interesting. Nathan Harris and I and others were using underwings to try to identify Turquoise in combination with other things that made it hard to see. We also suspected it might be possible to distinguish Turquoise from Indigo using underwing signatures but I think the jury is still out on that one.
There were two results as I see it so far from what we were doing. One: we as breeders don't make nearly as much use of underwing signatures as we probably could. Two: Turquoise does seem to have a consistent signature but it doesn't start to become visible at all until either the juvenile moult or the first adult moult. It seems to be entirely absent in newly fledged chicks in my flock but it is consistently present in all adults.
Your saddleback underwing photos show the marker in the same place as Turquoise, but it looks to be much much richer and if your birds are juveniles, it is becoming evident earlier than the Turquoise marker.
I reckon this underwing signature thing is a field just waiting for input from a multitude of breeders with cameras. I suspect that all sorts of identifiers are there but we just haven't looked hard enough. It might even one day be time for an addendum to Deon's book on the subject of underwing signatures.
Congratulations and thank you!
Mike
Recio
Posts: 966
Joined: Thu Mar 26, 2009 2:09 am
Location: France

Re: Underwing patch

Post by Recio »

Hi Mike,

This is the pic it was lacking.

Image

Expecting for Chris Comments.

Recio
mcw-indianringnecks
Posts: 53
Joined: Wed Sep 16, 2009 1:44 am
Location: Australia
Contact:

Re: Underwing patch

Post by mcw-indianringnecks »

The underwing patch is yet another difference between Turquoise & saddleback ?
The Turquoise Opaline cock is a good example - No underwing marker at all before 1 year old molt ,After the 1 year old molt it has the Turquoise marker.
My opinion here is different to Mikes , all my Turquoise have the marker in the centre row of wing feathers [ under wing ] running from the body to about 1/3 of the wing.
I do agree with Mike that no Turquoise shows this underwing marker before the 1year old molt.
Saddleback i beleive are born with this marker in a faint form easily reckonised by time they fledge ,this is visable in the emerold saddleback photo ,but enhanced by the emerold. The Saddleback marker is contained near the body in a small patch ,as shown in photos.
My Other observations are ?
1 Underwing Marker.
2 All saddleback are born visual in the nest
3 Constant colour changes
4 There main colour change is at 8 months without molting , no turquoise have a colour change at that age .
5 As in Deons DF Harlequin Saddleback ,You can see by the shade of yellow its dark or violet factor , ive seen violet albinos ,it never inhanced the colour much.
6 The solid yellow in Deons bird compared to Turquoise df harlequins or creaminos are completely different.With Turquoise displaying a patchy apperance.
7 I beleive there main feature is the richness of there colour , this is a feature that even shows in the babies born from saddleback that are not born saddleback , but are born better richer colour .
8 Turquoise i beleive softness or diluates the colour were saddleback enhancess the colour.
9 Reduced breeding numbers ,Turquoise being a DOMINATE Mutation produces at 50% which is roughly my experience Saddlebacks in my experance is less than 25%.
Recio
Posts: 966
Joined: Thu Mar 26, 2009 2:09 am
Location: France

Re: Underwing patch

Post by Recio »

Some more pics from Chris:

Image

Image

Image

@ Chris: which is your experience in the male/female offspring ratio of SB?

Regards

Recio
mcw-indianringnecks
Posts: 53
Joined: Wed Sep 16, 2009 1:44 am
Location: Australia
Contact:

Re: Underwing patch

Post by mcw-indianringnecks »

The first picture was a Photo taken by Gary , This was the first Saddleback born in Australia [ breed by Gary ] .Gary & Babu spent months sending emails , pics etc to each other to establish the naming of Saddlebacks .
10 . In this pic [ it was pointed out to me ] you can see the colour in the pin feathers of SB extends the full length of the feather , where as Turquoise is only visual part of the feather?
The second pic shows the solid colour ,deapth of colour , not what i would from Turquoise.
The third photo shows the richness of colour expected in SB compared to a turquoise violet harlequin?
In my opinion there is NO Turquoise in Saddleback , Its the only point ive been trying to make?
The ratio of hens & cocks has started to even out , Garys first year with saddlebacks was 1 cock to 3 hens ,with cock birds being rear for a number of years
Recio
Posts: 966
Joined: Thu Mar 26, 2009 2:09 am
Location: France

Re: Underwing patch

Post by Recio »

Hi Chris,

If the male/female ratio of SB production is close to 50% we can say that there is not any sex linked mutation in the combo (not Opaline, not SL-Edged, ...).
Another question: which are the outcomes of SB X SB? I am clearly meaning SB X SB and not SB x Dom Pied in any combo.

If SB was a combo of Dom Pied and TurquoiseBlue we should get some Turquoise outcome when pairing SB to blue series birds ... but is seems that this is not the case (Maybe Madas could add controversial data about this).

If SB was a combo of Dom Pied and a Parblue belonging to a different Blue locus (Blue2); we should get, in a SB X SB pairing, for both males and females:

1. If the parblue is heterozygous (ParblueBlue), recessive to the wild allele and dominant over Blue2

12.5% blue dom.pied(sf)
6.25% blue dom.pied(df)
6.25% blue
25.0% parblueBlue dom.pied(sf)
12.5% parblueBlue dom.pied(df)
12.5% parblueBlue bltq/bl;
12.5% parblue dom.pied(sf)
6.25% parblue dom.pied(df)
6.25% parblue

2. If the parblue is dominant over the wild gene and it is present in the parental generation as heterozygous (ParblueWild):

12.5% green dom.pied(sf)
6.25% green dom.pied(df)
6.25% green
12.5% ParblueParblue dom.pied(sf)
6.25% ParblueParblue dom.pied(df)
6.25% ParblueParblue
25.0% ParblueWild dom.pied(sf)
12.5% ParblueWild dom.pied(df)
12.5% ParblueWild

Any real data about SB X SB outcomes?

Regards

Recio
mcw-indianringnecks
Posts: 53
Joined: Wed Sep 16, 2009 1:44 am
Location: Australia
Contact:

Re: Underwing patch

Post by mcw-indianringnecks »

I have never heard of anyone breeding Saddleback x Saddleback ,possibly due to small numbers of these birds & the short time they have been available,Phil Highland & I
didnt buy these birds from Gary until 2010 as rising 1 year olds.I have also exported all of Phils young saddlebacks + mine to people like Tienie , Deon & Antinio etc
I think there studies would help determine a more scientific answer.
Phil has mainly mated his violet saddleback cock to a green harlequin hen producing a lot of S F & D F green & blue harlequins + S F Saddlebacks ,almost all the green harlequins were exported to S,Africa breed from that mating.
I breed my Violet Saddleback hen [ ring nu, GB 26 ] to a green normal cock , producing normal blue + normal green & green harlequins , the only birds from this mating that stood out as something very different were 2 normal Violet Green birds , But the birds were almost fluorscent or really really shiny .Although i have only breed 4 saddlebacks in that time =2 cocks & 1 hen + 1emerold saddleback hen = 50 x50 hens & cocks ,i will point out i only breed from saddleback hens & due to very low numbers ive produced its another reason i DONT beleive they are Turquoise?
Indian Ringneck Vic
Posts: 91
Joined: Thu Aug 23, 2012 8:24 pm

Re: Underwing patch

Post by Indian Ringneck Vic »

I note there hasn't been much response to this thread and it may be due to the same/similar topic being discussed on FB concurrent. The topic on FB is on South African Asiatic site where interestingly it is being claimed that the SB Dom Pied is abundant both here in Aus and overseas though most fanciers who are breeding this mutation seem to be in favor of changing its title to ADM pied as this they feel gives it a more pleaseing price tag. The idea of yellow under wing marker indicates Emerald in the birds background and now to claim it also indicates SB is hard to beleive.
Recio
Posts: 966
Joined: Thu Mar 26, 2009 2:09 am
Location: France

Re: Underwing patch

Post by Recio »

Hi Chris,

Probably SB is the result of combining Dom Pied with a very special Parblue. This Parblue would non belong to the same locus than Blue since you have never produced any Parblue after pairing SB to blue series birds. This parblue is probably also possible to detect in "split" birds as a shining appearence as you describe in the Violet Green offspring. This shininess has been described as a special feature of the psittacins present in SB and, thus, we can easily accept that it comes from the psittacin component in the Violet Green offspring. This shining appearence can not be due to Dom Pied because Dom Pied is not present in this offspring (not posible to be Split for a dominant mutation).

From this reasoning I would say that the parblue component belongs to a second Blue locus (Blue2) and that it mainly acts as recessive respective to the wild gene (similar than Parblues1). The Split birds, following your description, could be detected by its shininess in Green series birds (owing psittacins) but not in Blue1 series birds.

Pairing one of the Violet Green offspring (probably Split Parblue2) back to the SB parent will allow you to get 75% Parblue2 offspring, and 1/3 from those would be homozygous Parblue2. Whether you get these odds or not would also depend on the presence of alleles from Blue1, and the interaction between Blue1 and Blue2 loci.

@ Chris: one question which is being asked but not answered in the FB group: in your experience ... how does evolve the yellow saddle in adult birds with aging? Is it always restricted to the saddle área or it does spread to the wings and the rest of the body as in Turquoise birds?

Best regards

Recio
Last edited by Recio on Sat Jan 31, 2015 12:14 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Molossus2
Posts: 353
Joined: Fri Sep 09, 2011 4:01 am

Re: Underwing patch

Post by Molossus2 »

Paul the name saddleback has long been accepted as 'uncharacteristic ' or not-representative of the true description.
Consequently a name change is fitting..
I am not certain that much thought was given in naming the bird ADM...It would appear that those involved in the naming did not consider the confusion of the Anti Dimorphic Pied and the Saddleback...
Countries in the world where both the anti dimorphic and the dominant pied are established will battle in separating one from the next in trying to sell each unique mutation...
Countries that are introducing these mutations will be wrong in insisting the anti domorphic is actually the dominant and vice versa....
But then again what do I know???..
Paul the underwing patch that Chris alludes to in the sb is unique: ie the yellow is unlike the turq or emerald and I find this finding very interesting...I hope this finding holds true in all sb phenotype..
Indian Ringneck Vic
Posts: 91
Joined: Thu Aug 23, 2012 8:24 pm

Re: Underwing patch

Post by Indian Ringneck Vic »

Sorry I got the proposed name wrong it is ADP (Advanced Dom Pied) The last post on the Asiatic site has a photo of a typical J Smith green pied that R Atwel is claiming to be a SB this bird (photo'd) shows all the characteristics of a Spangle. Lee remenber our last encounter on this subject.Recio please consider carefully I beleive that these Dom Pieds are not Pieds at all nor have they ever been they are an early form of Spangle now the futher their development towards Spangle the brighter their hue and the reason for this is the altered pattenation of each and every feather this gives you collectively a brighter overall appearance. I am sure with out doubt that if a breeder of these birds were to take the time and make the effort to develop these birds towards improved Spangle instead of crossing and mixing other mutations in an attempt to make money this person would have the best examples of this mutation and wouldn't need the name or endless proper gander to prove their point. I firmly beleive the past and current debate about this mutation has all been based on supposition ,financial gain . ingnorance, all by breeders that haven't taken the time to investigate the true identity of the mutation their meant to be representing.
Recio
Posts: 966
Joined: Thu Mar 26, 2009 2:09 am
Location: France

Re: Underwing patch

Post by Recio »

Hi Paul,

Most of us agree with you and think that IRN Dom Pied is the same mutation than the Budgie Spangle. It was discussed long ago and based on the phenotype of the homozygous birds (White or yellow black eye birds), the deeper yellow in Green series birds and the increased fluorescence under uv ligth. I think it was Tienie Carr the first to report about this analogy.

Incomplete mutations such as Parblues and Dom Pied show a great variability in its expression. This can be due to different alleles or to different regulations by hormonal mechanisms. Those mutations with great variability can be easily worked through selection to get birds showing specific markings. Saddlebacks seem to be a combo of Dom Pied and a specific Parblue, and, as specified above, both components can be worked through selection to get specific markers. As you say the specific Dom Pied involved could be a selective type close to the Spangle Budgie, but I think that the key in this combo is the Parblue at work as it has been discussed above.

Any input about the Saddle evolution of SB after adulthood?

Best regards

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

Re: Underwing patch

Post by Mikesringnecks »

Hi Recio. I don't have Saddlebacks or ADPs or Spangles. However, my advice from one who does have saddlebacks is that the saddle is subsumed by psitticins in the adult bird, just as it is in Turquoise birds when they on occasion start life with a saddle.
Having said that, I note from the SA site hosting this same debate that Babu advised that his Saddlebacks retain the the saddle into adult life.
Given those understandings, and the fact that Garry denies having sold Saddlebacks, could we maybe be dealing with two different mutations?
Sorry to complicate things.
Kind regards
Mike
mcw-indianringnecks
Posts: 53
Joined: Wed Sep 16, 2009 1:44 am
Location: Australia
Contact:

Re: Underwing patch

Post by mcw-indianringnecks »

G,Day Paul , Lets address the great money grab your accusing me of , Since buying my first saddleback from Gary Baldwin in 2010 i have breed 4 saddlebacks
1, I gave to Deon Smith as a Birthday present & to help sort out there Genetics ?
2nd , I keeped 1 bird for my own breeding program.
3 rd ,The Emerold Saddleback i still have , i havent yet decided what to do with this bird as yet ,
4th , I sold to Tienie also beleiving he could help sort out this mutation .
So to suggest i have gone to this amount of effort to sell 1 bird [to Tienie ] over 5 years is truly a measure of your ?
Mikesringnecks
Posts: 218
Joined: Sun Oct 06, 2013 11:45 pm

Re: Underwing patch

Post by Mikesringnecks »

Hi Chris. I would politely suggest that just ignoring Paul is probably the preferred tactic, I don't think he has anything useful to offer to any debate on the genetics of this particular mutation.
Now that you have both Deon and Recio on the ADP/Saddleback case I think there is one very useful move you, Philip Highland and any others with the ADP/Saddleback mutation in Australia could make to help them solve the riddle. That is to co-ordinate a collection of a fully detailed breeding history thus far in Australia. I mean year, parents, all chicks (not just ADP/Saddlebacks) sex and any other features the breeders may have noted/recorded. Then follow that up with answers to any questions that the breeding history might illicit from Deon and/or Recio.
Given your library, photos where they exist of both parents and chicks would of course also be very useful but, if you do that, please write on the photos what the birds depicted are.
Indian Ringneck Vic
Posts: 91
Joined: Thu Aug 23, 2012 8:24 pm

Re: Underwing patch

Post by Indian Ringneck Vic »

Hi Chris I suggest you read my post again as I never adddressed or made any comment concerning you. My grievence with this topic is to do with all the proper gander spitefull fighting to do with this topic is all being carried out by breeders (you included) that not only haven't had the mutation long enough non have even tried to develop any thing. For the others on the ZA forum who want to change the name with out knowing what their dealing with is simply nonsense as for you to make claims that you have the exclusive on these birds is equally rediculous.The late J Smith developed this mutation in Australia from a bird from Babu all the credit for any thing that currently exists in this country can only be attributed to that breeder. You nor any of the others making claims in this debate have no wright to make any further development claims as it simply is true. Developing any mutation takes many years then once achieved it takes many more years testing and quantifying it's true value. These weren't realeased by Jack untill around 2008 there were many of these birds distrubted by Jack and then by his benefactors up untill 2013 so any claims of exclusiveness or advancement is very untrue.
mcw-indianringnecks
Posts: 53
Joined: Wed Sep 16, 2009 1:44 am
Location: Australia
Contact:

Re: Underwing patch

Post by mcw-indianringnecks »

Paul i have never claimed to have exclusive on these birds , they were breed by Gary , The effort i have been involved in has always been to work out there Genetics , ive simply stated ,THEY ARE NOT SIMPLE TURQUOISE ,my only point .
Twice you claimed these birds are common , i have exported to 4 breeders overseas , Babu i beleive has exported to 2 breeders , how does this make them common, As you pointed out we have only been breeding this line for a very short time , + they have a low reproductive rate , from me 4 saddlebacks in 4 years , yet you claim they are common .Have you ever seen a saddleback ?
Molossus2
Posts: 353
Joined: Fri Sep 09, 2011 4:01 am

Re: Underwing patch

Post by Molossus2 »

Chris,
Your observations on the saddleback underwing patch is a pioneering piece of work...I did a test on my own saddleback and a turq pied born at about the same time...the turq pied has little or no patch of yellow...I attach a pic of my own saddleback chick...not yet on its first moult ..
I believe more evaluation of more specimen birds will add relevance to your claim..but I for one congratulate you on the underwing work..it may be the key to identification of the saddleback mutation.Image
Image

At this stage I concur with Chris that the underwing patch is prominent and concentrated at the flight secondaries...
Recio
Posts: 966
Joined: Thu Mar 26, 2009 2:09 am
Location: France

Re: Underwing patch

Post by Recio »

From Chris:

Image

He will comment.

Regards

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

Re: Underwing patch

Post by Recio »

Hi everybody,

Image

The bird above is the same adult male you can see in the link below from the FB forum, given by Chris to Deon, and who has already bread those stuning chicks. This is a DF Violet Dom Pied SB (or maybe a DF Violet DF Dom Pied Heterozygous Parblue2).

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid ... 850&type=1

This male phenotype is close to the phenotype of a creamino (Turquoise Sl-Ino) but I want to notice some particularities:

1. About the Dom Pied part: it produces an almost completelly white bird meaning that the pied type in SB and Dom Pied are very probably alleles of the same locus, and as comented by Paul, it represents an advanced phorm of Dom Pied, without melanocytes let in the skin in the homozygous birds (DF). We have seen in the past some DF Dom Pied birds showing a blue head (Chris could add some pics), meaning that some melanocytes are kept on the head, and thus, this would be a "less advanced" mutation ... although, IMO, they show a nice looking phenotype.

2. About the Parblue part: in this adult male psittacins are mostly concentrated in the saddle area. In Turquoise birds showing a saddle, psittacins spread to the wing at sexual maturity producing the wing patches which are the areas with the highest amount of psittacins. This is remarkably noticed under uv, and is similar for other species of psittacula (Ex: Psittacula eupatria). At the time of sexual maturity Turquoise birds also show an increase in head yellow psittacins and a red ring. In SB, the parblue component seems to have lost the increase in wing, head and ring psittacins induced by sexual steroids at sexual maturity (have a look at Deon's male above), and the highest amount of psittacins remain on the saddle area.
I think this is a major difference with Turquoise birds: the lack of regulation of psittacin expression by sexual steroids.

It has been detected a different fluorescence between head and wing psittacins in wild birds and lutinos under specific uv ligth (395 nm) as you can see here:

Image

It would be interesting to have a look to the saddle psittacins of SB and Turquoise birds under uv looking for differences, since SB psittacins have been described as deeper, richer and brigther.

Regards

Recio
mcw-indianringnecks
Posts: 53
Joined: Wed Sep 16, 2009 1:44 am
Location: Australia
Contact:

Re: Underwing patch

Post by mcw-indianringnecks »

The reason ive added these sexing certificates is i have herd Gary Baldwin now claims hes never owned Saddleback ,therefore hes never breed saddleback hence hes never sold Saddleback ,
When i by an expenscive bird i always re-sex the bird , as i did with the Saddlebacks i BOUGHT From Gary,Due to the level of Garys Honesty his sexing Certificate only shows 1,, ringneck 2,,male ,, it doesnt show colour split opaline type of mutation etc , so therefore it cant be used as evidence at a later date ?
If you look at these certificates they show Saddleback/opaline GB-38 This is the green harlequin NOT split Opaline that Gary sold me 2010 ,, GB-26 is the Violet Saddleback Gary Sold ME in 2010 he also sold Phil Highland The Violet Saddleback cock Garanteed Split Opaline , This was a great year for Gary ,selling Me Phil Highland , Amaroo Averies + others Garanteed split opalines Unfortunitly they are yet to produce opalines Although 5 years on Gary still claims they are split ???
Bob Ervine a Good friend of Garys also bought Saddlebacks from gary [ or so ive herd ]Bod has also posted his breeding results on this Forum from his Saddlebacks , So Bob can you tell us where you obtained your saddleback.???
As i have said on my Web Site - the only way to deal with Dishonest , Deceptive breeders is simply to NOT deal with them at all, the bird game has to be run on honesty a mans word or his hand shake .
Recio
Posts: 966
Joined: Thu Mar 26, 2009 2:09 am
Location: France

Re: Underwing patch

Post by Recio »

Hi,

From what has been reported and discussed about SB we could make some conclusions about the Parblue at work:

About its phenotype:
1. It shows a rich, deep and brillant yellow colour with the highest concentration in the saddle area.
2. Psittacins regulated by sexual steroids are lacking, and thus the increase in patch wing psittacins, head psittacins and red ring psittacins do not appear at maturity, contrary to Turquoise birds. Some yellow feathers can appear at those locations but in low amount and with a ligther colouring.
3. The underwing patch is located closer to the body than in Turquoise, shows a higher intensity and appears earlier, following the same pattern than the saddle (centripetal location, higher intensity and earlier time dependency).

About its genotype:
1. Not parblue offspring has been produced after pairing to Blue series birds pointing to the presence of an incomplete mutation of a second Blue locus. Thus we can call this mutation a Parblue2 type.
2. Parblue2 behaves as recessive respective to the Wild type 2, but it seems to behave as dominant respective to the induced brillance, whenever psittacins are present, and thus green series birds split for Parblue2 can de detected by its brillance (Ex: Violet Green offspring from SB as reported by Chris).
3. Further speculation: to get an homozygous Parblue2 is necessary to know whether it acts through a partial inhibitory mechanism (like Emerald) or through a partial activatory mechanism (like patched parblues1). If the first case, we should consider the possibility of both mutations (Emerald and Parblue2) being alleles of the same locus since they also would share other markers as the earlier presence, the brillance, the lack of sex related psittacins, ... further: the apparent behaviour of Emerald as another allele of Blue1 (or very highly linked gene to Blue 1 gene) and the lack of parblue offspring from SB x Blue series birds could mean the same: high linkage between Blue 1 and Blue 2 genes with Emerald and Blue 1 in linkage type 2 position (in the same chromatide) and with Blue 1 and Parblue 2 (from SB) in linkage type 1 position (in different chromatides).

@ Chris: could you show us a pic of your SB Emerald combo? ... and tell us from which pairing it comes. Thanks.

Rgards

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

Re: Underwing patch

Post by Mikesringnecks »

Hi Recio
I have a problem with what you say about the phenotype. I may be wrong here, and like you i don't have a SB. However, as I have heard it, Babu says his SB birds retain the saddle into maturity whilst in the Australian birds the saddle is simply subsumed by the spread of psitticin over the back of the bird as we see in Turquoise mutations.
If I am incorrect can someone owning SB of either variety please say so.
Kind regards
Mike
Recio
Posts: 966
Joined: Thu Mar 26, 2009 2:09 am
Location: France

Re: Underwing patch

Post by Recio »

Hi Mike,

What I am meaning is that the true SB could not be a combo of Dom Pied and Turquoise, but a combo of an advanced Dom Pied and a Parblue belonging to a second Blue locus, with the specific characteristics that I have listed above.

Babu's birds would be the true SB, and the australian birds would be a combo of Dom Pied and Turquoise.

Regards

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

Re: Underwing patch

Post by Johan S »

Gentlemen, I find this discussion very interesting, however the owners of these birds are spreading a lot of confusion. Chris refers to SBs as a mutation showing a yellow underwing marker, therefore a mutation acting on psittacin and akin to parblue, but definitely not turquoise. Babu showed a green series saddleback, therefore a mutation acting on melanin. So... Psittacin... Melanin... Are we not discussion very different things here? :?:

From what I can read between the lines here, with Babu showing a green SB, and Phil breeding harlequins from his SB as mentioned by Chris, that we are dealing with a combination of dom. pied morph and some yet to be named (but not turquoise) parblue.

PS: Whas it not Gary that bred parblues without dom. pied from a saddleback?
mcw-indianringnecks
Posts: 53
Joined: Wed Sep 16, 2009 1:44 am
Location: Australia
Contact:

Re: Underwing patch

Post by mcw-indianringnecks »

Bob Ervine is supposed to have purched a saddleback from gary baldwin , it is a stunning bird , it has 1 normal violet win and the rest of the bird is normal saddleback , similar to a half sider but only shows on 1 wing ?
Bob added a post claiming to have breed a violet that displays similar to Turquoise ?
Mikesringnecks
Posts: 218
Joined: Sun Oct 06, 2013 11:45 pm

Re: Underwing patch

Post by Mikesringnecks »

Hi Johan I do share your confusion. I think we need some clear data from the SB holders if Recio or anyone else is going solve riddle.
Mike
Johan S
Posts: 1215
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2011 1:24 am
Location: Pretoria, South Africa

Re: Underwing patch

Post by Johan S »

Chris, you mention the word supposed, so I propose we completely move away from hearsay and focus only on your and Babu's results.

You propose that SB acts on yellow pigment (psittacin) as can be seen in the underwing, yet Babu presented a green SB that acted on blue pigment (melanin) on the saddle. How can we explain this? This is the part I find confusing.
mcw-indianringnecks
Posts: 53
Joined: Wed Sep 16, 2009 1:44 am
Location: Australia
Contact:

Re: Underwing patch

Post by mcw-indianringnecks »

I breed 2 violet green normal birds ,they showed a very brilliant sheen [no breeding results from them ] , all the other green harlequins breed from saddlebacks i exported to Tienie & Deon ,from the breeding results i know of No green series bird has reproduced saddleback type gene .
I hope Tienie or Deon may have breed from them last year . i beleive they have breed 3 saddleback type birds last season from there violet blue saddlebacks , i again dont think our green series birds carry the saddleback gene .I also exported Phils Green Harlequins breed from saddlebacks to S,Africa.
Phil mating was Violet Saddleback cock x Green Harlequin hen .
My early matings green/blue x violet saddleback =1 normal blue & 2 green harlequins / one of these i beleive was born violet green harlequin ,but seemed to fade to green harlequin at 3 months of age , Deon now has this bird.
Unhappy with this mating i changed to green harlequin cock x violet saddleback hen , i bought the cock birds as a Green Saddleback cock ,but by now realised my mate Garys honesty level and beleived these birds were unrealated, the hen simply wouldnt mate to a blue series bird.
They produced 1 ordinery nest i unfortunility didnt record but Double clutched a second nest producing 1 Violet Harlequin ,1 Violet Saddleback ,1 Violet DF Harlequin + Saddleback & 1 Blue DF Harlequin + Saddleback ,Tienie now has the breeding pair.
Recio
Posts: 966
Joined: Thu Mar 26, 2009 2:09 am
Location: France

Re: Underwing patch

Post by Recio »

Hi,

I also think that there are many possible combinations of Dom Pied and different Parblues. My analysis is restricted to Chris' results as compared to Dom Pied Turquoise combos.

Regards

Recio
Molossus2
Posts: 353
Joined: Fri Sep 09, 2011 4:01 am

Re: Underwing patch

Post by Molossus2 »

I dont believe its the breeders that are 'causing confusion'. It is the uninformed breeder that is confused.
The breeder often is the source of information that is used badly.
Should the breeder not provide information as practically and honestly as possible? or lets deny what is seen and submitted by the breeder...
IMO as a breeder with some albeit dismal level of understanding of practical genetics I would like to once again state:
Presently it is the bright color of the Babu version of non parblue saddle type(he also has parblue saddleback which must rank as the best I have seen) and the so called ADP parblue (coined by some of Oz and SA)that are at the centre of this confusion...
My only bit of knowledge to be shared now is : This bright pigment is not limited to non parblue with a so called saddle or parblue with extraordinary brightness...I have seen it in other form of dominant pied and I believe it will recur in normal green / blue series birds..I take note of Chris Whipps comment of the extraordinary violet he speaks of earlier...

My question to the guys who insist on the name Saddleback ( Babu, Chris et al) and all the guys who coined ADP :

I know you speak of one and the same birdtype,, most (myself included) agree that the saddleback is not the appropriate a name :::

But to coin a name for a mutation or genotype that IS NOT LIMITED TO PIEDS , is downright shortsighted.. heres the question:
What happens when you all eventually learn more of this genotype or morph or modification?
Indian Ringneck Vic
Posts: 91
Joined: Thu Aug 23, 2012 8:24 pm

Re: Underwing patch

Post by Indian Ringneck Vic »

Lee 's question somes up the situation in a nut shell. What does happen when more is known about the morph / mutation in question???
mcw-indianringnecks
Posts: 53
Joined: Wed Sep 16, 2009 1:44 am
Location: Australia
Contact:

Re: Underwing patch

Post by mcw-indianringnecks »

The underwing patch is solid proof Saddlebacks are NOT a Turquoise mutation ,Therefore it also would indicate they must be another type par blue ?
Johan S
Posts: 1215
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2011 1:24 am
Location: Pretoria, South Africa

Re: Underwing patch

Post by Johan S »

mcw-indianringnecks wrote:The underwing patch is solid proof Saddlebacks are NOT a Turquoise mutation ,Therefore it also would indicate they must be another type par blue ?
But didn't everybody agree on this already? Most of the disagreement was based on the observation that you never bred a plain saddle type parblue without pied from your saddlebacks. But I think it was Garry who did, so it would appear like we are dealing with a different type of parblue, as you also state.
Post Reply