# Dirty factor



## Bobuki (Sep 26, 2013)

Hello all,
I have a huge interest in learning the color genetics involved with pigeons. It seems like such a large canyon to cross right now.
I've done a lot of browsing and searching so I'll try not to ask things that have been asked a million times over.
Right now, I'm curious from reading another thread... Why is dirty factor considered bad?
I have a pair of Show Kings that produced a pure black hatchling. Imagine how surprised I was!
After searching, I've found he's dirty.
Right now he's fledgling and a bright red color.
His parents were brown and red phenotype and he's much darker. I equate it to liver chestnut in horses...

So is dirty typically considered a bad trait?
Thanks!


----------



## Henk69 (Feb 25, 2010)

I don't think so, because I doubt it would have been documented then...


----------



## LisaNewTumbler (Jun 24, 2013)

I'm new to the genetics but got hooked pretty quickly too! 

From what I understand, its not that it is necessarily bad. But when you are breeding for a specific colour it changes and dulls the colour, so in that case is unwanted.
Also I have read that it is difficult to remove from a line, so that if you do not want it and end up with a bird that carries it, you will have a lot of hard work ahead of you breeding it out of the line.

I think it looks really nice in some colours, especially spread, but I personally do not like it on barred birds, or check either.

I believe it would make a very good combination with red spreads, but that is just a matter of choice.

For instance, I don;t like ash reds. Not unless they are really intense. So for me, finding that a bird in my flock produces ash red is not desirable.

PS
I know ash red is the most dominant but things like recessive red can cover it and therefore it might still crop up by surprise


----------



## MaryOfExeter (Sep 30, 2007)

No, dirty is certainly not a bad trait. In fact, it is essential in certain colors. Such as classic almonds and ice. It really helps make ash-reds more rich in color. Good for blacks as well, unless a clear beak is desired. Also, archangels and other breeds with mimic blacks are dirty, among the other darkeners.

Now, if you are showing blue bars for example, and the standard wants a nice clean, wildtype color, then you want to stay away from dirty of course as it would make the bird darker in color.


Dirty is dominant so it can quickly take over your loft unless you breed against it.


----------



## NZ Pigeon (Nov 12, 2011)

As Becky said, It is needed for some colours. Your bird sounds interesting, Do you have pics of the parents, We could help ascertain what genes are involved, If your birds is blue - spread with dirty it should be a nice black phenotype. Is the tail bar all one colour or does it have a sub-terminal tail bar.


----------



## Print Tippler (May 18, 2011)

Dirty may help with spread but I haven't seen my birds lacking any without it and just having smokey and iridescence .I don't know it may help but I don't think it's at all necessary. Lisa, what do you mean by red spread? Do you mean ash-red spread? As in the lavender phenotype? I really don't think dirty is good there either and again I have seen very good examples that are for sure free from dirty.


----------



## NZ Pigeon (Nov 12, 2011)

I have found dirty to be useful with het spread birds, When spread is in a **** form I have seen that it is not so necessary to have dirty. It doesn't seem to cause harm when aiming for a black phenotype however.


----------



## LisaNewTumbler (Jun 24, 2013)

Print Tippler said:


> Dirty may help with spread but I haven't seen my birds lacking any without it and just having smokey and iridescence .I don't know it may help but I don't think it's at all necessary. Lisa, what do you mean by red spread? Do you mean ash-red spread? As in the lavender phenotype? I really don't think dirty is good there either and again I have seen very good examples that are for sure free from dirty.


yes, i meant ash-red. I don't really understand what people mean by lavender. But from reading and watching peoples posts it waas mentioned more than once that dirty helps deepen the colour in the ash red.


----------



## LisaNewTumbler (Jun 24, 2013)

MaryOfExeter said:


> No, dirty is certainly not a bad trait. In fact, it is essential in certain colors. Such as classic almonds and ice. It really helps make ash-reds more rich in color. Good for blacks as well, unless a clear beak is desired. Also, archangels and other breeds with mimic blacks are dirty, among the other darkeners.
> 
> Now, if you are showing blue bars for example, and the standard wants a nice clean, wildtype color, then you want to stay away from dirty of course as it would make the bird darker in color.
> 
> ...


I didn't know it helped ice! Thank you for that info. I plan to get ice birds one day, love them


----------



## Print Tippler (May 18, 2011)

Lavender is a silvery phenotype. Two different Genotypes (sets of genes) are called lavender. One is blue spread (black) with the milky gene. This is what is present in lahores. This is the better of the two. The other is ash red (bar pattern) spread. It looks close to just removing the bars on a ash red bad. While it may be true dirty deepens the color of ash red in ash red spread your not looking to have any red show on the bird at all.


----------

