# Ash red in feral pigeons



## amumtaz (Jun 13, 2007)

*Hello everyone,

I am currently studying the pigeon genetics and writing my research on my website. When I wrote about the 3 base colors in pigeons Ash Red, Blue/Black, Brown I came up with a mystery that I can’t figure it out. We know that ash red is dominant to wild type (Blue/black) color and brown is recessive to wild type. We know this because it is scientifically proven.

But why then we don’t see so many ash red in the wild? Just look around at any flock of pigeons you see around where you live. Most of the pigeons you see are either blue bar (wild type) or blue checker birds right? Some of them might have white flights, few are spread blacks and maybe one or two ash red colors. So, how do we explain that? 

Why don’t we see a lot more ash red colors than blue/black pigeons in the wild if ash red is dominant to wild type?

My only idea was that raptors love to eat red & yellow and light color birds first but a study done by James B. Armstrong, Department of Zoology and Wildlife Science and Alabama Agricultural Experiment Station, Funchess Hall, Auburn University, AL wrote in 1991 that there is not much of a correlation between pigeon colors and vulnerability to raptor attacks. 

You can read his article and pigeon genetics on my website if you like, at :

http://mumtazticloft.com/PigeonGenetics.asp

But, what do you think? Why don’t we have dominant ash red color in the wild, if it is dominant to blue/black color?*


----------



## Birdman79 (Aug 9, 2007)

Nice genetic page Arif!!I glanced through it,but i will definitely be reading the whole thing.


----------



## sreeshs (Aug 16, 2009)

II too thought that the predators would spot and get attracted to a different color in the flock and attack them. Otherwise wise may be there is a genetic signal in that color which makes male/female put them into a second option category ?


----------



## MaryOfExeter (Sep 30, 2007)

I think it's because blue/black is the wildtype. Ash-red is found in domestic birds, and the chances of lost domestics living in the 'wild' long enough to breed with ferals, is slim. Most likely when rock doves were first introduced to America, the majority of them were wildtype as new colorations and mutations had not yet been bred.


It still doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me how a wildtype color can be recessive. Unless ash-red is considered a mutation? As well as other dominant modifiers not usually expressed in wild rock pigeons?


----------



## jbangelfish (Mar 22, 2008)

*Good question*

I've seen this one kicked around before with no real answer to the problem.

Ash red is a mutation but it is dominant to wild type blue. You would think that this would take over feral populations but it doesn't. It remains a rare color in most feral populations. Maybe someone knows of a flock somewhere that is predominantly ash reds? I've never seen one, just an odd ash red, here and there.

In our own flocks of pigeons, ash red can take over and dominate or become the predominant color. Why it doesn't among the ferals remains a very good question other than to say that there are never too many of them in the first place. Maybe, one day it will take over as the predominant color among feral birds. Remains to be seen.

Bill


----------



## bluecheck (Aug 17, 2006)

Okay folks, here's what's going on. It's a basic in biology and it's expressed by the Hardy-Weinberg law. Alleles (alternatives such as brown, wild-type, ash-red) exist in equalibrium in the gene pool of the population. Dominant mutations DO NOT take over nor do recessive ones vanish. They reach an equilibrium and tend to stay in the same proportions. I'm not going to get into the math of it, but it's a fact. Gene frequency in a population normally changes only as a result of selection. This selection can be environmental, predatory, human, etc. If there is preferential selection of one allele or the other, then the frequency changes and you get, e.g., more reds. There is also something call drift (basically chance) that can be involved as well as something called the Founder Principle. All that means is that each new population (even of ferals) begins with a limited number of birds and that these birds don't carry all the genes in the population pool. If a particular flock happens to begin with two ash-reds, then chances are there would be more reds in that flock (unless they were actively selected against - maybe they stand out more against buildings and are taken preferentially by falcons or maybe they're selected for -- harder to see against brick, etc.)

Alleles (mutations) do not just wipe out each other. It's always selection that is the key. With N. American feral flocks it appears that wild-type pigment (blue/black) has an overall advantage for some reason or is neutral. My Feral Pigeons book was swiped one day so I can't check the reference, but I remember reading in there that there was a very, very specific distinction between wild-type (barred) birds and where and how long they nested as opposed to T-patterns and checks. Again, it's all about selection. Evolution is driven by it. It's not a random event. Those mutations that allow the organism to survive and leave more young are preferentially accumulated within the gene pool; those that don't are preferentially removed (along with the animal bearing them). Since all populations are under some sort of selection pressure, the Hardy-Weinberg equation is most often used as a baseline to calculate gene change frequencies.

For those that might wish to further explore the Hardy- Weinberg here are some places to start - http://anthro.palomar.edu/synthetic/sample.htm and http://www.biologycorner.com/bio4/notes/hardy_weinberg.php


----------



## amumtaz (Jun 13, 2007)

Mr. Mosca,

Let me start with saying how much respect I have for you and all of your research, your interaction with doc Hollander, and your contribution to pigeon genetics. I have learned a lot from your website and used some of the information on my website. 

I only have little over 2 years of experience in pigeons, I have been studying their genetics seriously for the last month or two and I have read a lot about pigeon genetics. I am still researching but obviously my experience and knowledge is nowhere near yours. 

However, I will have to disagree with you on some of the things you wrote, and I hope you won’t think that I am being ignorant with my limited knowledge or experience or think that I am challenging your authority because I want to be smart aleck. 

I have read Hardy – Weinberg’s law and it certainly makes sense. I also agree with you that evolution is about natural selection and it is not a random event. 

I just don’t understand this: If I have 10 blue bar/checker homers (5 male and 5 female) and If I introduce an ash red cock where I keep them, you have to agree that pretty soon (in a year or two) the population of ash red will be dominating the coop or at least it will increase the ash red level in that coop to as much as the blue/black color. We have to consider this example without human interaction and all random mating between these 11 birds. The question then becomes why the same thing doesn’t happen in feral flocks? Why does the theory of Hardy-Weinberg law only apply to the flock of feral pigeons but not to the coop of domestic pigeons? 

You said, “If a particular flock happens to begin with two ash-reds, then chances are there would be more reds in that flock (unless they were actively selected against - maybe they stand out more against buildings and are taken preferentially by falcons or maybe they're selected for -- harder to see against brick, etc.)”. 

But why the flocks have to start with two ash red to be dominant in feral pigeons, if it is already a dominant mutation to wild type? In addition, if the flock started with two ash red birds, wouldn't all the offspring be ash red in that flock (assuming of course that the cock bird is homozygous ash red)? What could be actively selecting against ash red in feral pigeons rather than against domestic pigeons? Studies show that hawks and falcons take as much blue bars and checkers as the ash red. Lastly, not all feral flocks live in the cities where there are lots of brick buildings that might help saving ash reds or increase their preferential rate. 

I think the answer to this question is not Hardy-Weinberg’s law because it could have been the same in domestic breeds also. I also think raptors’ preferences or bricks are not very valid explanations either. 

So, what is causing evolution to create a dominant mutation like ash red in pigeons to its wild type, but then eliminate it by natural selection?

Arif Mumtaz


----------



## bluecheck (Aug 17, 2006)

Hi Arif:

Your question is a good one and often asked. First, when you bring in the new birds, you upset the current equalibrium (you might just as well ask why when you bring in a checked bird to a flock of bar do you see checks in the flock in the next few years.) What you've done though is simply pushed the equalibrium to a new balance point. Come back in ten years and look at that same flock and you'll find that the percentages of BA and + have settled into that equalibrium (again barring any selection.) That's what's being left out of the feral equation when we talk about it - selection. ALL Ferals are under INTENSE selection pressure. The sad fact though is that there is almost no documentation of it because to most people human commensals aren't worth the time to study. Somehow, someway, ash-red seems to be under negative selection pressure in most city environments. It could be that reds don't shed their feathers as easily when a predator grabs them (I've seen that documented sometime in the past, but don't ask me where or when). 

It could be that ash-reds birds in the nest don't grow or thrive as well on the food amounts available to ferals. It could be that they have more flight damage due to fraying than do wild-type (blue/black) birds and are thus at a competitive disadvantage in flying to food sources or surviving in winter or raining conditions than are wild-type birds. I'd love to see you put together a serious study project and work on this - when I tried some thirty years ago in grad school, I was laughed out of my thesis advisor's office - it seemed that "no one gives a damn" about ferals. since at the time, i didn't have the ability to fund my own research even to the tune of about $600, I never got around to doing it. 

I will tell you this, I've kept a half-eye on feral flocks at our beach areas here in California over the years and noted that grizzle is very, very common - often ofter 60% phenotype in immediate beach area flocks, yet very uncommon as little as a mile or two inland in feral flocks I've seen.

As for your second question - there is absolutely NOTHING causing evolution to "create" ash-red. It just happened. It was almost assuredly promulgated under human control rather than under natural control. There may well ALWAYS have been and apparently is still continuing intense selction naturally against ash and only human love of it kept it going. 

_*However, I will have to disagree with you on some of the things you wrote, and I hope you won’t think that I am being ignorant with my limited knowledge or experience or think that I am challenging your authority because I want to be smart aleck. *_ There is absolutely no "challenging of authority here"; I happen to like the fact that you're willing to explore and to attempt to understand. I have zero claim to being perfect or to being right at all times. I'm simply a bit older than yuo and have looked at more things (definitely not always correctly). In fact, this particular note you wrote sounds very similar to something i wrote Hollander about 1976 or so when I was in my mid-20's  It's funny being on the other end of that now. Keep those questions and "challenges" coming. I'm a scientist, not a preacher. 
Frank


----------



## amumtaz (Jun 13, 2007)

I am neither a scientist nor a geneticist, I am just a curious, albeit serious pigeon breeder and I would like to understand as much as I can about my hobby to produce better quality offspring. I love biology and genetics and I thought about going back to school to get another degree in biology to become a geneticist, but the number of chemistry classes I would have to take scares me. I never liked chemistry for some reason, but I love experimenting, questioning, and researching. It must be some of the Greek blood in me that makes me question everything and unafraid of asking.

My plan is as follows: I will catch a couple of feral hens and mate them with my homozygous ash red Birmingham Rollers and homozygous Turkish Tumblers. I know people may be upset hearing this, but it is just an experiment, and those are the only breeds I can use at the moment. I am planning to release the babies from these pairings into the different flocks around Fort Lauderdale right after the hawk season (around April) and wait to see whether they disappear by the end of the summer or if they increase the ash red population in the flock. I also like to look at them at the end of the hawk season to see how many were taken by the hawks. Doing this for several years might give me some answers. I might be pushing the equilibrium between ash red and blue birds to a new balance, or perhaps the survival chance for ash red is very low in the wild for the reasons you have mentioned. 

If I am successful to add the ash red color into the feral flocks of Fort Lauderdale, maybe they would put my statue in the middle of the city as “the man who put color and performance into ferals of Fort Lauderdale”. The other scenario would be writing to you from the county jail for messing around with local nature….  Did you hear about the pet pythons that were released into the wild by people who could not take care of them once they become adults? Now they are fighting and trying to eat the alligators of Everglades National Park. 

In the Everglades National Park, a six-foot alligator was found protruding from the mid-section of a 13-foot Burmese python.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9600151

I am hoping my roller mixed ash reds ferals won’t roll down and kill the feral pigeons while they are calmly sitting on the roofs of the buildings!!! What about the Turkish Tumbler mixed ones? Will they clap around the city and wake people up every morning? I am only kidding of course.

What would your plan be if you had $600 back in the day?


----------



## sreeshs (Aug 16, 2009)

amumtaz said:


> I am neither a scientist nor a geneticist, I am just a curious, albeit serious pigeon breeder and I would like to understand as much as I can about my hobby to produce better quality offspring. I love biology and genetics and I thought about going back to school to get another degree in biology to become a geneticist, but the number of chemistry classes I would have to take scares me. I never liked chemistry for some reason, but I love experimenting, questioning, and researching. It must be some of the Greek blood in me that makes me question everything and unafraid of asking.
> 
> My plan is as follows: I will catch a couple of feral hens and mate them with my homozygous ash red Birmingham Rollers and homozygous Turkish Tumblers. I know people may be upset hearing this, but it is just an experiment, and those are the only breeds I can use at the moment. I am planning to release the babies from these pairings into the different flocks around Fort Lauderdale right after the hawk season (around April) and wait to see whether they disappear by the end of the summer or if they increase the ash red population in the flock. I also like to look at them at the end of the hawk season to see how many were taken by the hawks. Doing this for several years might give me some answers. I might be pushing the equilibrium between ash red and blue birds to a new balance, or perhaps the survival chance for ash red is very low in the wild for the reasons you have mentioned.
> 
> ...


Whatever you do make sure you document it and keep it available 

Otherwise some 40 - 120 years after some people will be doing research on "how some of the ferals around Fort Lauderdale are very different from the other flocks in rolling and they are predominantly ash-red; has the color ash red influenced the rolling skills"


----------



## re lee (Jan 4, 2003)

If you take a flock of ferals Introduce Ash red. First How many birds are in the flock . What is main known color in this flock. Then ash rad splits over to say blue either bar or check. you have another color split. Then those young agin pair to blue You have agin rduced the ash red as a base line color. And then Flocks also split taking on mates from different areas. Ash red in the ferals has been around for a long time. Has really never taken over. Now introduce a large Ash red flock of birds Into a know flock where Ash red Becomes the main color Then you see that leading to a more ash red base. But then gin out side this flock the color agin changes. Each time you split the color line you reduce it dominance. That I think is why Ash red does not take over the color line in feral flocks. Numbers times colors Of flocks. NO different then any other color. NOT hawks Not weaker young Just plain color split. Wild type Known to be of blue coloir NATURES color for the pigeon. Mutae from there Return to there.


----------



## indigobob (Nov 12, 2008)

The Hardy-Weingerg law cannot be applied 100% when dealing with feral populations of _Columba livia_ because the birds are not in a controlled breeding environment.
I would suggest that the reason, or one of the reasons, ash-red does not proliferate in or take-over a given population is that said population is being constantly "topped-up" with lost Racing pigeons, the majority of which will be blue bar or blue chequer.
Browsing through Racing Pigeon forums the majority of bird pictured are blue bar or blue cheq. suggesting the population of the Racing Pigeon is biased towards blue. Considering the number of racing birds lost each year, not all will succumb to predators, those that survive will assimilate with feral populations thus re-inforcing the bias towards a blue-based population.


----------



## re lee (Jan 4, 2003)

indigobob said:


> The Hardy-Weingerg law cannot be applied 100% when dealing with feral populations of _Columba livia_ because the birds are not in a controlled breeding environment.
> I would suggest that the reason, or one of the reasons, ash-red does not proliferate in or take-over a given population is that said population is being constantly "topped-up" with lost Racing pigeons, the majority of which will be blue bar or blue chequer.
> Browsing through Racing Pigeon forums the majority of bird pictured are blue bar or blue cheq. suggesting the population of the Racing Pigeon is biased towards blue. Considering the number of racing birds lost each year, not all will succumb to predators, those that survive will assimilate with feral populations thus re-inforcing the bias towards a blue-based population.


Not to that effect. Looking at the simple answer. Take 1 ash red in a loft of say 10 15 pair of blues/ bars family of birds. Offer not control over breeding. Blue stays the main color base. Now introduce the same number 10 or 15 pair of reds and 1 blue red stays on top of the color. Then in the wild Flocks grow and split as the young pair. Plus the life span say 3 years for the feral pigeon. Agin reducing numbers of ash red. about every color is found in the feral flocks somewhere.


----------



## Pawbla (Jan 6, 2009)

indigobob said:


> I would suggest that the reason, or one of the reasons, ash-red does not proliferate in or take-over a given population is that said population is being constantly "topped-up" with lost Racing pigeons, the majority of which will be blue bar or blue chequer.


That is not true, because in a place where there are little to no racing pigeons they also display the same colors.


----------



## amumtaz (Jun 13, 2007)

*Albinism*

Re Lee,

I don’t agree with you on introducing one ash red to a 10 or 15 pairs of blues and the blue staying as the main color whether it is controlled or bred randomly. You are forgetting that ash red is a dominant color to blue and brown and it will take over the flock in couple of years. Take 10 blue birds, 5 males and 5 females, their pattern (T-checker, Check, Bar, or Barless) does not matter, as pattern is inherited differently than color and pattern is not sex linked. Now, introduce a homozygous ash red cock to this flock of 10 and every baby from this mating will be ash red (all cocks are heterozygous ash red carrying blue and all hens are ash red). In second generation, the first born cock babies will produce 50% ash red and % blue cocks and hens. The hen from the second generation will produce all heterozygous ash red carrying blue, or homozygous ash red depending on who she was mated to. In time, ash red will either take over or will reach an equilibrium of 60% ash red, 40% blue birds in that flock. The above scenario assumes that hawk attacks and illness are not a factor.

I think what’s happening here is this: The ash red mutation’s survival chances are low in the wild and they would not have breed in to domestic pigeons if humans did not recognize this odd color mutation and kept inbreeding them to their flocks. We have other dominant colors and patterns like almond, and grizzle also, but we don’t see them in the wild. Sometimes we can see grizzle and pie ball markings in ferals, but I haven’t seen any, almond, lace, toy stencil, opal, indigo yellow, etc in ferals. I think humans played a big roll on inbreeding the odd birds and perfecting their color and pattern for the last 4 to 5 thousand years. I believe that mutations from blue are not meant to survive for their selection of traits. Only the strongest and the fitted would survive. This is why we have all the odd color mutations and different talents in domestic pigeons and not on Columbia Livia. 

Take albinism as an example, which is a recessive gene allele. If we keep inbreeding two albino human beings, we can now make and homozygous albino humans and we can than create an albino family. The problem is that, this would create a family of albino people with eye problems and a lot of other problems to enjoy life as non albino people. The nature would try not to allow this, unless we purposely keep inbreeding two albino people. The ash red mutation and any other odd mutations in pigeons is the same way. The only reason they exist in domestic pigeons is because humans spare them kept inbreeding them, they would not have survived otherwise. Something in the wild is preventing ash reds to take over because nature does not select them. 

The only mystery is what is the cause of this? What is preventing ash reds, almonds, or any other dominant genes to take over the feral flocks? So far we only know that mating two almond pigeons create eye problems and it is not recommended to mate almond pigeons together. Do pigeons think ash red’s survival chances are low for some reason and therefore they choose not to breed with odd mutations like ash red? Why would two albino people would start a family and have their offspring suffer the way they do? 

Please understand that I just use albinism in humans as an example and I did not mean any disrespect to people with albinism.

I think selection of traits as Darwin once described has a lot to do with odd mutations like ash reds to exist in the wild.


----------



## re lee (Jan 4, 2003)

You are not understanding. MAN makes color selection NOT the pigeon. And when colors are not balanced with control The old will maintain the base BLUE . Each time the red splits with blue it as a cock carries blue. producing Blue and red but the feral also has a shorter life span Most often. Just as the wild rabbit has a short life span. So giving 3 years for a average life span Ash red does not have the time to take over. AND other colors you presented are mostly from loft bred colors That at times end up on the wild feral area. That wash out also. Many pied birds are in the feral flocks. And many flocks have a few ash reds. Nature made the pigeon a bared blue. Flocks also split spreading through mating ect.


----------



## amumtaz (Jun 13, 2007)

re lee said:


> You are not understanding. MAN makes color selection NOT the pigeon. And when colors are not balanced with control The old will maintain the base BLUE . Each time the red splits with blue it as a cock carries blue. producing Blue and red but the feral also has a shorter life span Most often. Just as the wild rabbit has a short life span. So giving 3 years for a average life span Ash red does not have the time to take over. AND other colors you presented are mostly from loft bred colors That at times end up on the wild feral area. That wash out also. Many pied birds are in the feral flocks. And many flocks have a few ash reds. Nature made the pigeon a bared blue. Flocks also split spreading through mating ect.


I understand it perfectly! It’s me, who said man has been choosing the odd mutations and breed into his flock to make more colors. That is why we see variety of colors and patterns in domestic pigeons but not in feral pigeons. Odd mutations have not been selected by the nature to exist on their own if not spared and bred into domestic pigeons by humans. 

Each time the red splits (mated) with a blue, it will not always produce ash red cocks carrying blue. What if the ash red mated with blue is heterozygous ash red carrying blue? If you mate that cock to blue, you will get homozygous blue cocks or blue hens, or ash red cocks carrying blue and ash red hens. 

FYI. 3 years is more than enough time to take over a flock. A Pair of pigeons raises 6 to 10 rounds of babies each year averaging 12 to 20 young per year. You do the math. In addition that short span life expectancy also applies to blue birds and their young as well. 

The question still remains: “Why don’t we have dominant ash red color in the wild, if it is dominant to blue/black color?” 

Short life span of feral pigeons is not the answer as it also applies to blue birds. Here is another issue: The Checker and T-checker are also mutations from blue bar and they are dominant to bar. How come we see equilibrium of check, T-check and bar in feral pigeons, but we don’t see the same equilibrium on ash red color? 

According to you, ash red doesn’t have enough life span to take over the blue bar, but blue checks, and blue t-checks do? If nature made the pigeon a bared blue, why do we see equal number or more checks and t-checks in the wild, which are the dominant mutations from blue bar?

Why the dominant pattern is taken over or reached an equilibrium with blue bar but not the dominant ash red color?


----------



## re lee (Jan 4, 2003)

It is not according to me. Fact is its according to the base line color of the feral flock. You can dig and dig and will not change things. Or red would have taken over long a go. Checks off blue bars is the common thing. But still splits to bar and check. In the loft man helps control color. And what thought as dominate remains that way. BUT in the wild uncontroled Matings take on what they areI have seen red birds I would say all my life in feral flocks Some flocks have more some less. NOW if red could have taken over it would have been done. Why think that it should By Not knowing. Agin look at Blue as the wild color. It must remain the dominate color NOW take your ash reds Many of them to create a feral flock of reds. Then any out side color that introduces itself is the lesser And the flock remain red as dominate color for a longer time. BUT will balance out in years to blue agin. Can not rule nature by mans thoughts of what should be. AND in the wild The young raised by 1 pair Well check the numbers are much less then you think. then serviving to adulthood thats another story. And remember flocks split all the time. BUT think as you may nature still holds the truth


----------



## amumtaz (Jun 13, 2007)

re lee said:


> It is not according to me. Fact is its according to the base line color of the feral flock. You can dig and dig and will not change things. Or red would have taken over long a go. Checks off blue bars is the common thing. But still splits to bar and check. In the loft man helps control color. And what thought as dominate remains that way. BUT in the wild uncontroled Matings take on what they areI have seen red birds I would say all my life in feral flocks Some flocks have more some less. NOW if red could have taken over it would have been done. Why think that it should By Not knowing. Agin look at Blue as the wild color. It must remain the dominate color NOW take your ash reds Many of them to create a feral flock of reds. Then any out side color that introduces itself is the lesser And the flock remain red as dominate color for a longer time. BUT will balance out in years to blue agin. Can not rule nature by mans thoughts of what should be. AND in the wild The young raised by 1 pair Well check the numbers are much less then you think. then serviving to adulthood thats another story. And remember flocks split all the time. BUT think as you may nature still holds the truth


Thanks for sharing your extensive experience Re Lee. Your scientific explanations really enlightened me!


----------



## re lee (Jan 4, 2003)

amumtaz said:


> Thanks for sharing your extensive experience Re Lee. Your scientific explanations really enlightened me!


Look I was and am looking at it in the simple answer. Nature made the pigeon Blue for a reason to blend in to its enviroment. Mutations came along for a reason Perhaps as flocks became inbred Perhaps not. those first birds stood out. They were in more danger of all to be taken by prey. And those colors to was taken by man. Now agin blue is the color given by nature. Add any other colopr It splits does not remain dominate Because it lacks the nessasary numbers in the main population of the flock. So it gets bred down to a split color. Because the control is not there. You As I did visit your web page have the answer there Pigeons revert back to the wild type IF NOT BRED WITH CONTROL. NOW your web page so you are readly exploring the pigeon hobby. Thats good. And the line of birds you keep Are color bred by many of those breeder types. AS For Show bred birds Color becomes second quality allways first. Race bred birds the same As some colors in racing would never hold up to the strains of racing the birds. crossing bredd lines for new colors is a very time taking adventure. To those that have And bred back the quality it took 5 years at least. And those that look at just 1 color to breed quality is held back after time. Breeding for show one in most breeds can not keep many colors. as quality starts to go down As breeding is by its self part of the art. the bar family of color one can keep several base line color as the breeding can spread several ways in the line. Breeding for different colors demands more research To gain control of the desired color. BUT as allways quality drops at first then can be slowly rebuilt. Your web page is a good one And agin shows you are getting well into your new found hobby. I raised pigeon for near fifty years Bred for show and race. Qualty first color second Kudos for your color interest.


----------



## bluedingo (Oct 10, 2008)

This is a very interesting question, one I'd like to see more research on in the future. I'm a biologist myself, and since I've gotten into pigeon genetics this has bothered me. There is definitely some factor that is keeping blues in play, but I don't think it is as simple as the Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium. The sex-linked color trait would throw a wrench in those works. Also, and as several people pointed out earlier, the blue bar is the common type. Being recessive, the bar aspect would not fit into this Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium, rather a het check would be the common phenotype if this was the case.

I'm thinking there might be an influence of founder effects, with some environmental pressures at work as well. As I'm sure you all know, founder effects are what happens when a concentrated genetic population radiates throughout an area, and all subsequent offspring individuals carry genetics related to the "founders" of the population. Genes become fixed, and recessive, homozygous genes can be well represented by the population. Wild rock doves have been introduced in various areas all over the world, perhaps the american (and european for that matter) populations from which the wild ones originated were primarily blue. This would also facilitate the prevalence of the blue bar, as the homozygous recessive would show more often in the founder effect hypothesis.

It'd be interesting to see if wild rock doves from other parts of the world were blue in color, or maybe had other colors as dominants. Someone mentioned earlier a flock they'd been observing that had abnormal amounts of grizzle, this also sounds like a potential founder effect.

In terms of colors being evolutionarily advantageous, I've read that it really isn't the odd colored birds that stands out to hawks, it is when they are a single of that color in a large group of birds. By this reasoning a blue bird in a white flock would stand out just as much as a white bird in a blue flock. Therefore, it could be increasingly difficult to introduce new colors into an already established flock, as these individuals are more likely to be preyed upon by predators. Red birds in a blue flock would stand out much more drastically than the average blue bird. 

A phenomena as such would also be reinforced by a sexual selection advantage for choosing a mate of the same color, as it would be the advantage for the all the birds of a flock (or family) to be the same color. This would mean blue birds would be attracted to blue birds, lowering the fecundity of odd colored birds even further. 

Just some thoughts, I'd love to get your take on'em. Hope they provide some insight and please don't take it personal


----------



## Henk69 (Feb 25, 2010)

In general genetics the following could be the case.
Melanins, our birds' pigments, not only have a colortask, but also other biochemical tasks, eg in their immune system.
A red bird is compromised in these biochemical tasks (less eumelanin). No biggy, for a pigeon well taken care off in your loft, yes biggy in feral populations with parasites beyond your wildest imagination.
So an ashred is less fit than a wildtype by this theory.


----------



## cotdt (Apr 26, 2010)

I had ash reds and it survived just fine in the wild. It mated with wild pigeons but none of the eggs were fertile. Eventually after 5 years living at my home it moved in with its a new mate it found, not sure where.


----------



## Feefo (Feb 8, 2002)

> Just look around at any flock of pigeons you see around where you live. Most of the pigeons you see are either blue bar (wild type) or blue checker birds right? Some of them might have white flights, few are spread blacks and maybe one or two ash red colors. So, how do we explain that?


I used to feed a flock in the local park, at least half the pigeons were reds. They came from different parts of the city to eat, so there might have been a red flock somewhere.











A sparrowhawk eventually found us so I had to stop attracting the pigeons there, but the remains that I found were all blues. I think that the hawks will go for whatever bird stands out as being in the minority and so is easier to target in flight.


----------

