# whats the combination on getting a silver fantail



## kaipayton

ok guys im totally fascinated with silver fantail pigeons how do i get it whats the combination what two colors do i need to put together


----------



## LisaNewTumbler

Ok first things, what do you mean by silver?

Because genetically speaking it is one thing, but many people use the term to refer to other colours - generally asscociated with a particular breed.

If you can post a pic of what you are looking for it would help you get the right info straight away 

What I understand by silver is a dilute blue bird. The bird may be bar, check, barless or spread, but will be lighter than the blue bird.

What you need for this is a bird that is or carries the dilute factor and a blue bird. 

If the cock carries the dilute factor and shows it (double dose) then you will get dilutes in the first generation and all dilutes will be hens, and all hens will be dilute. 
If the cock carries one dose of dilute (and therefore doesn't show it) then all dilutes will be hens but only 50% of the hens will be dilute.

If the hen only carries the dilute (she can only carry one dose, so if she has it she will show it) then you will get cocks that carry dilute (but don't show it - one dose). None of the hens will carry dilute.

What birds do you have have available for breeding?
You can get dilutes into the gene pool from other colour bases - though if you are going for dilute blues I would avoid ash reds as it is dominant. Or even from recessive yellow.

Do you have yellows or Khaki birds? You can pair them with blue birds (with what ever pattern you want)

Warning!:
There are birds that have a smooth, grey solid colour - these are called lavendar. They are ash red spreads - NOT blue based and NOT dilute.


----------



## LisaNewTumbler

This is a silver - dilute blue check bird










These are lavendar birds










And this...I have no idea what this is genetically. Possibly qualmond???. I posted it to show you there are many other modifiers that create birds you might see as 'silver' including qualmond, and opal


----------



## Abdulbaki

Maybe you're talking about lavender? that is more likely you'll find in fantails it's a beautiful color though .. genetic people call dun bars silvers .. no expert here .. It's much easier to pick out a pair of what you precisely want and breed them as if you have a hetero bird you will not get what you exactly want


----------



## NZ Pigeon

Lisa, you say lavender has nothing to do with blue birds???

Those Lahores you have pictured are most likely - blue - spread - milky which is most often referred to as Lavender and some will say is the only genotype that should be labelled as lavender.

So yes, they are lavender birds but not ash red spread as detailed in your previous post.


----------



## LisaNewTumbler

NZ Pigeon said:


> Lisa, you say lavender has nothing to do with blue birds???
> 
> Those Lahores you have pictured are most likely - blue - spread - milky which is most often referred to as Lavender and some will say is the only genotype that should be labelled as lavender.
> 
> So yes, they are lavender birds but not ash red spread as detailed in your previous post.


????? I have never heard lavendar used to describe blue based birds.

I have only seen it in reference to ash red spreads............


----------



## LisaNewTumbler

NZ Pigeon said:


> Could be Dunn - Blue dilute spread.
> 
> Not sure if it is ash red spread. (lavendar) it could be but I am thinking its a little too even in expression. As for plum, Is that not an Indigo on blue???


This is one of your own posts from another thread.........


----------



## LisaNewTumbler

NZ Pigeon said:


> looks like one of them is extreme dilute (lemon) the other dilute. Probably ash red spread checks or maybe smoky checks, I have seen ash red opals look like them in pattern expression too.
> 
> Yellow cannot have the "pale factor" especially hens, Yellow is dilute red, Pale reds would appear darker than yellows. So an ash red thats also pale would actually appear darker than your other yellows as pale is dominant over yellow, this only applies in the cocks however due to sex linkage, a hen either is dilute or pale, she cannot be both.
> 
> Your cock is not black barred, It appears blue - bar - het spread which produces a black bird that shows the bars leaking through, Black bar is not really a name for any colour.
> 
> Basically, no matter what hen you put to the cock you will get all ash red based cocks that carry blue, All blue hens, atleast half of those young will be spread so atleast half the ash reds cocks will appear lavendar, half the hens will appear black
> . It is possible you could get 3:4 of each sex appearing spread or even all of them but that cannot be ascertained without seeing the colours of many generations.
> 
> All the cocks will carry dilute or extreme dilute depending on what hen you use.
> 
> Disclaimer: There are other possibilities ofcourse as we do not know what recessive genes could be hidden but these predictions are based on what I can see. Also, I could be wrong on the colours as I believe noone can ascertain a birds exact genotype from a pic.


Another quote, from you, from again a different thread...........again calling ash red spreads lavendar........


----------



## NZ Pigeon

I do call ash red spreads lavenders, That's not my point

You stated that lavenders have nothing to do with blues and then pictured a blue series lavender. Don't make this an argument, accept you were wrong and learn from it


----------



## NZ Pigeon

kaipayton said:


> ok guys im totally fascinated with silver fantail pigeons how do i get it whats the combination what two colors do i need to put together


If you want self silver birds similar to the lahores you want a blue spread pigeon with a double dose of milky.

you could mimic true lavender using ash red spread but that takes time and an expression as good as the lahores above is hard to achieve. Either are called lavender but geneticists refer to the former as being the more correct type.

so either ash red spread or blue milky spread is fine for achieving a "lavender" or "self silver bird"

Otherwise as Lisa said, if you want a silver as in dilute blue then you need dilute and blue


----------



## kaipayton

this is the color I'm looking to breed


----------



## NZ Pigeon

that bird appears ash red spread which is one form of "lavender"

If I was you I would try to get hold of the milky gene and cross it to a black pigeon (blue spread) take one of the black young and put it back to the milky parent. Once you lock milky in you will have a much higher success rate of plain silvers,

If you want those faint bars as this one has then use ash red spread, another form of "lavender" but Milky on blue spread will lead to more plain silver birds.

Lisa tumbler is right about everything aside from where she said lavender has nothing to do with blue, There are two genotypes which people refer to as Lavender as above.

The birds she has pictured and described as lavender are Lahores which are in nearly all cases Blue - Spread- Milky, I am not sure any geneticists would disagree with these statements, Just because Lisa has not heard of this type of lavender does not mean it does not exist, She is I believe relatively new to pigeons, don't get me wrong she has learnt a lot and is doing great but there are new things one can learn no matter how long they have been learning about pigeon genetics, I just wish people were open to learning without getting defensive and trying to quote people as contradicting themselves without reading their post properly.


----------



## NZ Pigeon

LisaNewTumbler said:


> ????? I have *never heard *lavendar used to describe blue based birds.
> 
> I have only seen it in reference to ash red spreads............


Clearly you have not heard all there is to hear in the pigeon genetic words, I am certainly not making this up, I have not heard of everything, I don't think many people have seen and or heard about all the possible genetic combinations out there but to write something off because you have not heard of it seems a little bit counter-active to me


----------



## kaipayton

So I just have to get my hands on a milky just incase I can't find one what's the combo to create one


----------



## LisaNewTumbler

NZ Pigeon said:


> I do call ash red spreads lavenders, That's not my point
> 
> You stated that lavenders have nothing to do with blues and then pictured a blue series lavender. Don't make this an argument, accept you were wrong and learn from it


OOOOOOOOOOKAAAAAAAYYYYYYYY

Geez.......if someone here is being defensive it is you. I was NOT looking for an argument, you;re the one who took it personal when all I did is question you.

Your first reply was not clear, from it I understood that you put the term lavender to blue milky and that calling ash red spreads lavendars was incorrect.

A misunderstanding, as I now understand, but no reason to get snippy.

I searched through the database for other peoples comments so that I could do research and this is the best place to do it.

Yes, I am new, BUT I am always looking to learn more and have no problem admitting I still have a lot to learn, 

Since whenever I came across the term lavendar it was always in reference to ash red spreads I looked at what other people said I then found that most of the mentions of lavendars were from you, which confused me and which is why I quoted them .........I was seeking CLARIFICATION. 

People here are so quick to get defensive, rather than just clarify the facts. People forget, cold internet messages leave a lot of stuff unsaid, so instead of putting me down and telling the person no don't listen to that one, she's obviously new, how about just SHARING INFORMATION so that we can all learn. I am ALWAYS happy to learn more about genetics

I NEVER said you were wrong, I said I had never heard it, so I looked into it.........and I still haven't found a mention of the genetics of blue based lavendar, either on PT of Mumtastic or angelfire, but there isn't much information around on milky at all.


----------



## Print Tippler

Hi Lisa. Here are some links

http://www.pigeons.biz/forums/f41/milky-and-lavender-63989.html



tmaas said:


> "Lavender" is the name given to color resulting from milky and spread on blue pigeon.
> "Powder blue" is the name given to color resulting from milky gene alone on blue.





Albannai said:


> Spread on blue will change to black and Lavender is a spread ash red. milky is called powdered. I think powder is not a gene, it is a name given to milky. Powder comes on blue and silver only.





tmaas said:


> I'll make one more attempt.
> Milky and spread are modifying genes (genotypes), lavender and powder are physical appearances (phenotypes).
> Milky gene added to normal blue gives powder blue appearance.
> Spread gene added to normal blue gives black eppearance.
> Milky and spread genes added to normal blue gives lavender appearance.
> Milky and spread genes added to ash red can also give lavender appearance.
> Spread gene alone added to ash red can also give appearance of lavender some of the time, but usually is not as uniform in color.





MaryOfExeter said:


> There are two "lavenders" in the pigeon world. There is the lavender of Lahores, which is milky black. Then there are smooth spread ash-reds which people often call "lavender" as well. "Powder" is also a term that gets thrown around a lot. Some are milky, yes, but others are not. Powder could very well be a gene, or the result of heavy selection in some breeds, such as the show racer.


http://www.pigeons.biz/forums/f41/red-lavender-black-62338.html


http://www.pigeons.biz/forums/f41/milky-factor-28440.html



bluecheck said:


> It makes no difference which parent carries milky to start with. Spread (black) plus milky = Lavender like the Lahore, a sort of solid silver color.



http://www.pigeons.biz/forums/f41/genetics-s-26952.html



bluecheck said:


> Okay folks -- you're all saying the same thing, and getting mixed up in the differences of fancier terminology and genetics terminology.
> 
> First: lavender - the word is used by many different breeds for stuff that is very different genetically. In Homers and rollers, e.g., a "lavender" is usually a Spread Ash-red bird.
> 
> In mookees, Laughers, and Lahores, a Lavender is a Spread milky (the base pigment may be blue/black, brown, or ash-red.
> 
> When most folks today want to move "lavender" to their breed, they are discussing moving Spread and homozygous milky - most want the "lavender" color of the Lahore.
> 
> Milky is the mutation that makes a "powdered" fantail. So to have "lavender" in your breed (using the Lavender term to mean that in Lahores and Mookees, e.g.) you need to have a bird that is either homozgyous or heterzygous Spread and which is also homozygous milky.
> 
> You can't "make" milky, you need to import it from another breed if you don't have it in your birds.
> 
> Frank Mosca



I could go on an on... Anyways Lisa I do not mean to be critically of your research skills but here is how I would go about searching

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=Site:pigeons.biz+lavender+milky

Hit seem more from pigeons.biz

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=Milky+lavender+pigeon


----------



## LisaNewTumbler

Print Tippler said:


> I could go on an on... Anyways Lisa I do not mean to be critically of your research skills but here is how I would go about searching


No, far from it. On the contrary, thank you for the links.


----------



## Abdulbaki

Thank you Logan for enriching this thread it could have gone another way instead I am really learning .. that's a good thing

thank you again


----------



## NZ Pigeon

Print, thanks for the links, I was leaving it to Lisa to find them for herself, She seemed more interested in proving me wrong than learning so couldn't be bothered wasting my time


----------



## NZ Pigeon

LisaNewTumbler said:


> Another quote, from you, from again a different thread...........again calling ash red spreads lavendar........


This is where I got the idea you were being smart, All the again...... again...... agains in it don't make for the nicest tone


----------



## Print Tippler

I think we all need to stop the "bridge burning" and get along. Little spats are always going on. We're *all* here to teach and learn genetics. No one is born with all pigeon genetics instilled in them. Unfortunately, we as men and women are not always perfect in our fact verifying. Which leads to wrong information spreading. I think we need to remember that. I've been wrong plenty of times in the past and have given wrong information also. I also have been hostile to people giving out wrong information too. I think we all need to learn to deal with each other in a godly manner. Remembering that we're all people. I think in the end no one wants be at in with each other. Evan, Lisa is new to pigeons, we both know that, but I think we should be happy and congratulate her for all her effort. There are plenty of people who get into pigeons and never care about genetics or who ask genetic question but are not very serious into gaining a real understanding. Lisa appears to be well on her way to have a good well rounded genetic knowledge. So I hope we can remember these things. Well here to teach and learn and help each other at. I don't think Lisa will be going anywhere nor Evan. So I hope we can move on now, remembering these things. We're all people. We all want to help we all want to learn. We all want to teach (pass along what we lean). We all make mistakes.


----------



## LisaNewTumbler

Wow you're really helpful aren't you. Deciding to stay on your high horse
whatever, think what you like.

You completely misjudged my intentions in my first reply, and then carried on talking over my head rather than addressing me and talking facts WITH me.

I specifically said 'I never heard' because i meant *I Never heard*. Not *It doesn't exist*

then you quote it back at me as though you caught me out in something, when all it does is prove I left my first query open because I REALLY HAD never heard it in that context

Did I ever say I know all? That you are inventing things and don;t know what you are talking about?
Did I ever say you were even wrong??
Did I ever insult you? 

No

I quoted things so that you could clarify and instead you brush me off and talk over my head.

So yes, THEN I had enough.

telling me to shut up and admit I am wrong before it even became a discussion, before I even had the chance to ASK you for links so that I could read up and learn more.


You took offense at an 'again'? You want to talk tone?
How about: don't create an argument, admit you were wrong

How about your first reply to me
Lisa you say lavendar has nothing to do with blue??
since I said it, obviously I believed it to be so!

All you had to do was say:
Lisa, actually lavendar can also refer to...blah, blah blah

and ta-da you have passed on knowledge to someone else! No putting down necessary


Don;t accuse me of only being interested in proving you wrong because that is utter krap.

I already told you I was seeking clarificaion because I understood you first reply to mean calling ash red spreads lavendar was wrong.

You were only interested in putting me in my place, because I DARED to not be aware of something.


----------



## Checkmate

Hey people,

Views aside here, please... I have several Indian Fantails which seems to have very similar colours as the pics on display here. Question ... is there some sort of colour chart that best describes the hues? An example, I have seen several brown birds that others call red ... for example. Is there some sort of colouring chart?

I'm currently working with my birds assessing some matchings. Also, someone told me once that to confirm a colour as 'real' within the line, there needs to be at least 3x generations; or some such a thing. What's this all about?

As you may have reasoned by now, I'm rather new with this breeding activity. I like my birds and wish to explore some ideas. Thoughts?

Cheers.
Michael.


----------



## NZ Pigeon

Print Tippler said:


> I think we all need to stop the "bridge burning" and get along. Little spats are always going on. We're *all* here to teach and learn genetics. No one is born with all pigeon genetics instilled in them. Unfortunately, we as men and women are not always perfect in our fact verifying. Which leads to wrong information spreading. I think we need to remember that. I've been wrong plenty of times in the past and have given wrong information also. I also have been hostile to people giving out wrong information too. I think we all need to learn to deal with each other in a godly manner. Remembering that we're all people. I think in the end no one wants be at in with each other. Evan, Lisa is new to pigeons, we both know that, but I think we should be happy and congratulate her for all her effort. There are plenty of people who get into pigeons and never care about genetics or who ask genetic question but are not very serious into gaining a real understanding. Lisa appears to be well on her way to have a good well rounded genetic knowledge. So I hope we can remember these things. Well here to teach and learn and help each other at. I don't think Lisa will be going anywhere nor Evan. So I hope we can move on now, remembering these things. We're all people. We all want to help we all want to learn. We all want to teach (pass along what we lean). We all make mistakes.


I agree print, you right about everything. 
I do think however rather than pulling quotes from the persons past which implies nothing but they have contradicted themselves one should ask questions if wanting clarification, I am as much to blame as Lisa here, I should have worded my posts better but her tone was IMO on the same page as mine


----------



## NZ Pigeon

LisaNewTumbler said:


> Wow you're really helpful aren't you. Deciding to stay on your high horse
> whatever, think what you like.
> 
> You completely misjudged my intentions in my first reply, and then carried on talking over my head rather than addressing me and talking facts WITH me.
> 
> I specifically said 'I never heard' because i meant *I Never heard*. Not *It doesn't exist*
> 
> then you quote it back at me as though you caught me out in something, when all it does is prove I left my first query open because I REALLY HAD never heard it in that context
> 
> Did I ever say I know all? That you are inventing things and don;t know what you are talking about?
> Did I ever say you were even wrong??
> Did I ever insult you?
> 
> No
> 
> I quoted things so that you could clarify and instead you brush me off and talk over my head.
> 
> So yes, THEN I had enough.
> 
> telling me to shut up and admit I am wrong before it even became a discussion, before I even had the chance to ASK you for links so that I could read up and learn more.
> 
> 
> You took offense at an 'again'? You want to talk tone?
> How about: don't create an argument, admit you were wrong
> 
> How about your first reply to me
> Lisa you say lavendar has nothing to do with blue??
> since I said it, obviously I believed it to be so!
> 
> All you had to do was say:
> Lisa, actually lavendar can also refer to...blah, blah blah
> 
> and ta-da you have passed on knowledge to someone else! No putting down necessary
> 
> 
> Don;t accuse me of only being interested in proving you wrong because that is utter krap.
> 
> I already told you I was seeking clarificaion because I understood you first reply to mean calling ash red spreads lavendar was wrong.
> 
> You were only interested in putting me in my place, because I DARED to not be aware of something.


If you wish to quote me, please quote my entire sentence as to not take it out of context.

I did not want to put you in your place, Just explain to the original posted that plain silver birds are better achieved using milky and spread on blue, That was infact their question.


----------



## NZ Pigeon

Where did I tell you to shut up?


----------



## LisaNewTumbler

Evan telling a person to not create an argument and admit they are wrong is frankly polite speak for saying stop talking back ergo, shut up.

I agree our tones both degraded to defensive snipes.

I will avoid quoting people in the future then, since it seems to come across at accusatory, rather than bringing facts to tha table for clarification, which was my intention.

But Evan, I ask you please also to give people's replies the benefit of the doubt until you are sure of their intentions, and stick to sharing facts, because I was not looking to prove you wrong, nor was I looking for an argument, until you told me to stop talking back, like I did not have the right to open my mouth or raise a question.

The entire point of this forum is to share experiences and knowledge and give people the opportunity to learn from people who have been in the buisness for years, from all areas of pigeon keeping.

But frankly if beginners like me become hesitant to raise a question, voice there opinion, or participate in these discussions because we're afraid we'll be mocked and put down rather than just put straight, to me it defeats the purpose of even coming here.


----------



## Print Tippler

Checkmate said:


> Hey people,
> 
> Views aside here, please... I have several Indian Fantails which seems to have very similar colours as the pics on display here. Question ... is there some sort of colour chart that best describes the hues? An example, I have seen several brown birds that others call red ... for example. Is there some sort of colouring chart?
> 
> I'm currently working with my birds assessing some matchings. Also, someone told me once that to confirm a colour as 'real' within the line, there needs to be at least 3x generations; or some such a thing. What's this all about?
> 
> As you may have reasoned by now, I'm rather new with this breeding activity. I like my birds and wish to explore some ideas. Thoughts?
> 
> Cheers.
> Michael.



Sorry theres no chat because that wouldnt work. Theres only a limited number "self" colorations, the rest would be consisting of mutliply colors and pattern. People end up creating names for common things. Theres many sub cultures of the pigeon fancy and people end up just stick with the conventions of there groups. In terms of brown and red that is just an ignorance on matters.

If you know some about the arabic language you would know they are many different "versions"/ "dialectics". Some people say from syria may not understand someone very well from Libia. They use different words to describe different things and it may take them longer to communicate what they wanted to. Long story short, there is standard arabic which is what is used in news and more offical things but the people do not use that among each other or may not really understand the "standard arabic" over the slang dialect.

So, same it is with pigeons. Standard arabic in the example below is strictly write out what know genes the bird carrys. Then you have all the different cultures like racers, rollers, show people who use different terms among each own but there may be confusion when a racer talks to a show person about a silver pigeon. People who study genetics are in there own sub culture, as they talk one to another. They often will result to what i refer to as genetic slang. An example in genetic culture they may be a pigeon where the people of culture deem it appropriate to call a bird a silver bar, some other people may refer to it as a dun bar. At the end of the day they are just names, is a rose not a rose if given another name is what it comes down to. 

So "we" use genetic culture slang here for the most part.I probably went on more that i really need to but i hope some understand this. It is slang (phenotypical) to call a pigeon Black. It in the most strict since it is a S//+ or S//S or S//? and we would list out any other gene it has that we can observe. They was to say S//? is to say the bird has has at least one gene for the spread modifier.

So, people adopt different naming conventions and there is not law stating which one you may use. Geneticist will argue theres is the most logical.

As far as birds needing to be bred the to the same color 3 times to be real or whatever is not right. Whoever told you that may have some kind of an idea of what is going on but is greatly confused. The only time when i can think of when acestory may matter is with genes which display itself completely or near completely in the heterozygous form. Which is just to say a pigeon like a black on again for example can have one gene for the Spread modifier which turns it black. Having two genes of this just may help little may not, but the bird is still black. If you want to breed only blacks then if you were to get a blacks that were not bred from black to black then your going to get non blacks out. You can still get non blacks out even if someone has been breed blacks to blacks for 10 years. so it doesn't matter really. Though someone breeding black to black is going to not breed the non blacks resulting in over time a high percentage of just blacks. But without test breed your birds out to figure out the genetics you probably wont get a line Homoygous . Which is to say only breeding pure blacks. Furtherer more, if your going breeding different colors together then it really doesnt matter. It only kinda matters if your going to breed to same color to the same color and all you want out is that color. Then again, these are just not really questions i dont think anyone asks buying birds.


----------



## Checkmate

HI Logan.

Thank you very much for your words. You have just given me a bit of solid education. Thanks.

Cheers.
Michael.


----------



## LisaNewTumbler

Checkmate said:


> Hey people,
> 
> Views aside here, please... I have several Indian Fantails which seems to have very similar colours as the pics on display here. Question ... is there some sort of colour chart that best describes the hues? An example, I have seen several brown birds that others call red ... for example. Is there some sort of colouring chart?
> 
> I'm currently working with my birds assessing some matchings. Also, someone told me once that to confirm a colour as 'real' within the line, there needs to be at least 3x generations; or some such a thing. What's this all about?
> 
> As you may have reasoned by now, I'm rather new with this breeding activity. I like my birds and wish to explore some ideas. Thoughts?
> 
> Cheers.
> Michael.


Hi Michael,

when i first got into genetics I found the genetic slang very overwhelming, but in the end I much prefer it, as has been said (and proved in this thread dare I say) people's colloquial terms tend to overlap between pigeon breeds and groups creating some confusion.

Another example I will bring up is silvers - apparently ash red bars (or someone told me ash red bar with het spread but I'm not good at distinguishing between the 2 in pics so i could never confirm if they were talking about the same thing or not) are called silvers by homer owners (or is it rollers? not sure).

But to others it refers to dilute blue birds, of any pattern.

I found that trying to look at things in terms of genetics is actually more helpful to newbies as it allows you to break down the genotype of the bird and understand it piece by piece, and how it might relate to other genotypes.

For example a dilute blue bar. 
You already have 3 levels of information:
Firstly you have the base colour - which can only be one of 3 (ash red, blue or brown)
Secondly you have the base pattern - again limited in number (t-check, check, bar, barless)
Thirdly you have any modifiers to the colour - which can be any (dilute, spread, recessive colours, white flights etc)

That way you can build up your understanding more easily (at least I found) and get less confused in the process.

Also this way one birds colour relation to another (for breeding) kind of becomes like a mathematical equation again based on level: 

Firstly - base colour - how do they compare in levels of dominance? Ash red is the most dominant, blue in the middle, brown is the least.

Secondly - pattern - how do they compare? Again dominance is as I wrote above t-check, check, bar, barless

Thirdly - what modifiers do each carry? Which are recessive which are dominant, which cover other modifiers and colours?

I find it makes it a lot easier to understand then trying to figure out what you will get crossing a silver to a lavendar when you're not sure what colours either are referring to.

The unfortunate thing is that generally, in the 'real' world phenotypes and colloquial names are used a lot more than genotypes. So in the end you really need to learn both. I have simply found that for understanding colour genotypes are more helpful.

The following link is to a genetic calculator - very fun to play around with, and a good tool if you ever get confused and what to make sure you are getting it right.

http://kippenjungle.nl/kruisingDuif...beard-;bib-;bibbeard-;,C;RP1;solid;-;pattern;


----------



## NZ Pigeon

LisaNewTumbler said:


> Evan telling a person to not create an argument and admit they are wrong is frankly polite speak for saying stop talking back ergo, shut up.
> 
> I agree our tones both degraded to defensive snipes.
> 
> I will avoid quoting people in the future then, since it seems to come across at accusatory, rather than bringing facts to tha table for clarification, which was my intention.
> 
> But Evan, I ask you please also to give people's replies the benefit of the doubt until you are sure of their intentions, and stick to sharing facts, because I was not looking to prove you wrong, nor was I looking for an argument, until you told me to stop talking back, like I did not have the right to open my mouth or raise a question.
> 
> The entire point of this forum is to share experiences and knowledge and give people the opportunity to learn from people who have been in the buisness for years, from all areas of pigeon keeping.
> 
> But frankly if beginners like me become hesitant to raise a question, voice there opinion, or participate in these discussions because we're afraid we'll be mocked and put down rather than just put straight, to me it defeats the purpose of even coming here.



My intention was not to mock or put down, It was to explain where you went wrong with your explanation to the Op'er, Yes, as said, tone got in the way or lack of tone for that matter, We can move on and get along for sure, I have taken on board what you have said to me regarding being helpful and hopefully you have taken on board why I felt you were being, in your words accusatory. You are fine to quote but explain why you are quoting them, If it is to prove someone wrong, That's fine too, I like being proven wrong.


----------



## NZ Pigeon

Lisa, racing guys call Ash red bars - silvers, We know them as Mealeys or I like simply calling them ash red, as that is their colour and then bar as that is their pattern making them ash red bars.

Checkmate, As said, The three base pigments are ash red, blue/black and brown. All other modifiers are for intellectual purposes over top or in combination with one or two of those 3 mutations, If two of these mutations are in a birds genotype (cocks only) the most dominant of the two will show with the other one being hidden, hens can only carry one of these base colour genes as they are located on the sex chromosome, In simple terms, Hens have one sex chromosome, cocks have two. So with base colour being LINKED to the sex chromosome cocks carry two chromosomes therefore two base colours and hens have one, Cocks can carry two blue/black genes, one on each chromosome and this is sometimes referred to as being pure for blue/black which is wildtype

Probably confused you here but It might help


----------



## LisaNewTumbler

NZ Pigeon said:


> My intention was not to mock or put down, It was to explain where you went wrong with your explanation to the Op'er, Yes, as said, tone got in the way or lack of tone for that matter, We can move on and get along for sure, I have taken on board what you have said to me regarding being helpful and hopefully you have taken on board why I felt you were being, in your words accusatory. You are fine to quote but explain why you are quoting them, If it is to prove someone wrong, That's fine too, I like being proven wrong.


agreed, and thank you


----------



## LisaNewTumbler

NZ Pigeon said:


> Lisa, racing guys call Ash red bars - silvers, We know them as Mealeys or I like simply calling them ash red, as that is their colour and then bar as that is their pattern making them ash red bars.


Thanks for the clarification. Do you know what they call yellow bars? Because I was under the impression mealeys referred to yellow bars, but as I said, I don;t know much about racers lingo


----------



## tmaas

Lisa, ash reds are called mealys while dilute ash reds are called creams.

It's time for Lisa and Evan to give each other a BIG hug. Yes, I know, distance is a slight issue.


----------



## tmaas

NZ Pigeon said:


> My intention was not to mock or put down, It was to explain where you went wrong with your explanation to the Op'er, Yes, as said, tone got in the way or lack of tone for that matter, We can move on and get along for sure, I have taken on board what you have said to me regarding being helpful and hopefully you have taken on board why I felt you were being, in your words accusatory. You are fine to quote but explain why you are quoting them, If it is to prove someone wrong, That's fine too, I like being proven wrong.


No, Evan, you don't "like" being proven wrong! I think it's more proper to say that people like you and I are not wrong until we're "proven" wrong. Only then do we admit it. Hope I'm wrong about you, but thats how it is for me (its been proven). Ha


----------



## tmaas

Logan, nice work! I've been away from PT too long and missed a good discussion.


----------



## LisaNewTumbler

tmaas said:


> Lisa, ash reds are called mealys while dilute ash reds are called creams.
> 
> It's time for Lisa and Evan to give each other a BIG hug. Yes, I know, distance is a slight issue.


Ah that's right, forgot about creams.
Mealy always makes me think about corn meal, maybe that;s why I keep ascociating it with yellow....


Yeah I think we're literally on opposite sides of the globe!


----------



## NZ Pigeon

LOL, Ok Tmaas, your right but when proven wrong we learn something new yeah? so that's gotta be a good thing.

I hate the word mealy, prefer ash red bar but I like trying to use genetic names where possible.

By the way Lisa, that was solid advice you gave with learning genotypes first then relating them to "lingo" used to describe phenotypes, certainly much less confusing.


----------



## NZ Pigeon

tmaas said:


> Logan, nice work! I've been away from PT too long and missed a good discussion.


Yea, Good work Logan, look at this, we moderated ourselves with I believe a good end result, And no personal attacks as such.


----------



## LisaNewTumbler

NZ Pigeon said:


> LOL, Ok Tmaas, your right but when proven wrong we learn something new yeah? so that's gotta be a good thing.
> 
> I hate the word mealy, prefer ash red bar but I like trying to use genetic names where possible.
> 
> By the way Lisa, that was solid advice you gave with learning genotypes first then relating them to "lingo" used to describe phenotypes, certainly much less confusing.


Thanks  It certainly made it easier for me! Phenotypes just drove me crazy until I got a hang of them, esp when you're too new to really be able to tell pics apart


----------



## kaipayton

Thank goodness you guys are all on one page again I thought for sure there were gonna be a world War started just from me asking one simple question although I have to say I'm beginning to understand more just from how lisa broke it down I love colors in my birds I'm always trying to get patterns and colors so I'm always curious and asking questions so thanks to tmaas, lisa and Evan you guys are really knowledgeable about these pigeons Thank you all for breaking it down for me


----------



## LisaNewTumbler

I think you'd only get a world war here when people leave a thread in a huff because then they never work through it.

As such the 'argument' was based on both of us misjudging the other and letting our tones get out of hand. Not as such on factual disagreements (though of course it all started from my incorrect notion that lavander only refered to one colour) or either on each others character - we're all here for our love of pigeons, so I think there's nothing really that we cannot work through


----------



## kaipayton

Yes I know. .we all love our pigeons I love mine so much that I would never cull I rather give them to a good home. . anyways Thanks for your input on everything


----------



## Checkmate

Hi Lisa.

Thanks for all your good words. I'm beginning to believe that I know absolutely nothing regarding breeding.

Say, as I'm being more and more convinced that colours are almost impossible to 'guarantee', what about physical features, such as, leg feathers, chest prominence, head, feather angles, etc. (remember I raise Indian Fantails). Is all this sort of a 'crap shoot'? Or, can can breed certain physical characteristics? 

Please advise.

Cheers.
Michael.


----------



## LisaNewTumbler

Checkmate said:


> Hi Lisa.
> 
> Thanks for all your good words. I'm beginning to believe that I know absolutely nothing regarding breeding.
> 
> Say, as I'm being more and more convinced that colours are almost impossible to 'guarantee', what about physical features, such as, leg feathers, chest prominence, head, feather angles, etc. (remember I raise Indian Fantails). Is all this sort of a 'crap shoot'? Or, can can breed certain physical characteristics?
> 
> Please advise.
> 
> Cheers.
> Michael.


Well, what I know about breeding and genetics is from online research not my own experiments. I have come across very little regarding passing down physical features (not that I have really looked either - one thing at a time!) so I don;t really know anything about it.

All I can say is that when I asked about good marked birds vs bad marked birds (white markings) several people said it is not such a big deal that they have bred poorly marked hens for example to excellent marked cocks and got well marked offspring. - but that is still colouring, not physical.

Instinctively I'd say breed the best with the best, but that is just a guess, I wouldn't be able to tell what you;d get breeding a bird with good muffs but bad tail to a bird with good tail but bad muffs.

But it is certainly possible, because if not we wouldn't have the varied breeds of today. 

As far as guaranteed - I think it can be close. The main problem is that its very difficult to actually know what your bird carries, I think.

I don;t think it is as hopeless to guess as you think. You need to see it in phases - colour/pattern/modifiers

The three base colours are the easiest - hens - what you see is what you have - no hidden mysteries.
Cocks - if it is brown, then it is ONLY brown.
If it is blue it may carry brown, but definitely won't carry ash red
If it is red it may carry either brown or blue.

So if you have a brown pair - then all you are going to get are browns.

If you have a blue pair then there is no chance of getting ash reds out of them.

I;d really suggest trying that link to the genetics calculator. Until I got a hang of it I'd just stay changing the settings until the pattern finally clicked in my head. For example breeding S//+ to S//S or +/- to S//S and seeing how it develops through the generations - pairing offspring to each other, pairing offspring to a parent, pairing offspring to offspring of a different pairing.

Switching modifiers between the cock and hen and seeing how it effects the results


----------



## kaipayton

One more question before this link goes what color is this saddle hen


----------



## LisaNewTumbler

mmmmm

tricky one, no idea if the colours I'm seeing are a faded red bar or just bronzing of somekind. You'll need an expert opinion 

You might want to start a new thread with it, more people will see it and possibly reply


----------



## LisaNewTumbler

gorgeous bird btw  

although it appears her muffs are getting wet somehow


----------



## kaipayton

Ok will do


----------



## kaipayton

That's how I got her the guy had then in awful conditions


----------



## tmaas

Kaipayton, your saddle hen looks like an spread ash red with an exceptional amount of brown flecking for a hen. She is probably an older hen since the amount of flecking increases with each moult and she has alot for a hen.

There is limited info. available on the inheritance of the traits that you mentioned because the breeders who learn such information by experience do not share it with others, but use it to their winning advantage in the show ring instead.


----------



## tmaas

Lisa, you mentioned in an earlier post that hens (color wise) have no hidden mysteries. You are mostly correct but keep in mind that hens can carry a different pattern gene than they express, along with rec.red and all other non sex linked recessive "modifying" traits.


----------



## LisaNewTumbler

tmaas said:


> Lisa, you mentioned in an earlier post that hens (color wise) have no hidden mysteries. You are mostly correct but keep in mind that hens can carry a different pattern gene than they express, along with rec.red and all other non sex linked recessive "modifying" traits.


sure, I was talking about the base colours, Ash red, blue and brown. Sorry if that wasn't clear


----------



## LisaNewTumbler

I've edited the previous post to specify the three base colours


----------



## kaipayton

Some on Facebook told me she look qualmond


----------



## Print Tippler

tmaas said:


> Kaipayton, your saddle hen looks like an spread ash red with an exceptional amount of brown flecking for a hen. She is probably an older hen since the amount of flecking increases with each moult and she has alot for a hen.
> 
> There is limited info. available on the inheritance of the traits that you mentioned because the breeders who learn such information by experience do not share it with others, but use it to their winning advantage in the show ring instead.


What do you mean by brown flecking? Do you mean the hen is a "freak" carrying brown gene or are you just using brown descriptively?


----------



## kaipayton

Sorry it's red not Brown my bad


----------



## tmaas

Logan, most ash red hens don't have any flecking, but their flecks are brown, rather than blue/black, if they do have flecking.

Kaipayton, your facebook assistance may be correct. I've never seen a qualmond ash red. It could also be an almond ash red, which would explain the excessive flecking on a hen.


----------



## kaipayton

That's great thanks. .. the problem is I only have a black saddle hen no cock to put her with. .in your opinion what should I do I'll take some good advice from the guys who know this stuff


----------



## tmaas

I'd search for a saddle if you want to retain the saddle marking. If you mate it to a self color (non saddle) cock you'll likely get a mix of piebald and self colors. However, if the genes responsible for the saddle markings of Indian Fans are all recessive (unlikely) then first generation offspring will all be self colored and carry the saddle genes.


----------



## tmaas

If this hen is indeed ash red almond or qualmond, all her son's will be the same color as she is (with some variations of expression) and her daughters will be other colors, (dependant upon what color her mate is), if you mate her to a blue/black or brown cock.


----------



## kaipayton

I have a blue check cock is that any good. .. other than that all I have are 2 deroy cock


----------



## tmaas

I'd try the blue check. It'll make a nice test mate to determine what color she actually is.


----------



## kaipayton

Then I'll put the blue on her tomorrow to mate up. .. Thanks again


----------



## NZ Pigeon

tmaas, I have a hen with extensive brown flecking in her tail and it has been bred into a lot of my racers, Funny thing is the cocks are what some describe as having the "super flecking gene" I am slack with taking photos but the hen is floating around on genetic sites and I think there is a thread on here too. I am sorta working on it but at the same time only keeping the birds that race well. Interesting I think that the ash red split blue cocks from this line show dark blue flecks, some with an entire tail feather being blue.


----------



## NZ Pigeon

found it

http://www.pigeons.biz/forums/f41/hen-with-flecking-het-rec-red-58931.html?highlight=flecking


----------



## Print Tippler

This thread has gotten way too confusing for me. Seems like its going in every direction.

Lisa, diluted ash red bars will be referred to as cream bars by some people. Yellow bars is IMO is pretty ignorant and doesn't follow convention. Some people just say it to come up with something. Saying yellow bars is the same as calling a blue bar a black bar. People will in the USA for the most part also call the isabella. I know it's a tippler term and believe racers. I think in general most in the USA understand isabella as the dilute ash red bar. The key part to that last sentence being in the USA as in Europe It's literally the Reverse phenotype, which is to say a yellow pigeon with white bar.

Checkmate, the key to make anything homogenous (all the same) is inbreeding. That is how traits are fixed.


----------



## LisaNewTumbler

Print Tippler said:


> This thread has gotten way too confusing for me. Seems like its going in every direction.
> 
> Lisa, diluted ash red bars will be referred to as cream bars by some people. Yellow bars is IMO is pretty ignorant and doesn't follow convention. Some people just say it to come up with something. Saying yellow bars is the same as calling a blue bar a black bar. People will in the USA for the most part also call the isabella. I know it's a tippler term and believe racers. I think in general most in the USA understand isabella as the dilute ash red bar. The key part to that last sentence being in the USA as in Europe It's literally the Reverse phenotype, which is to say a yellow pigeon with white bar.
> 
> Checkmate, the key to make anything homogenous (all the same) is inbreeding. That is how traits are fixed.



I see your point with the cream bar....but it isn't a very straight forward connection - ash red to cream.

Is there such a thing as a yellow bird with white bars?? Sounds really cool 

Isabella is the term used for horses also. I suppose that is where they got it from.


----------



## LisaNewTumbler

So what is the brown flecking in the ash red hen exactly?? Is it some kind of bronzing.

it cannot be like the blue flecking of the cocks, since hens cannot carry a second base colour....so where does it come from?


----------



## LisaNewTumbler

THAT is an awesome looking bird!

How on earth do they get it??


----------



## indigobob

LisaNewTumbler said:


> THAT is an awesome looking bird!
> 
> How on earth do they get it??


,

It is toy stencil, one of the few mutations recessive red does not mask.


----------



## LisaNewTumbler

indigobob said:


> ,
> 
> It is toy stencil, one of the few mutations recessive red does not mask.


ooooooh fun! I've got both in my loft..........but very different breeds, hmm


----------



## tmaas

Evan, your ash red hen likely possesses some unusual mutation (maybe the "super flecking gene") to cause so much flecking on a hen. Heritable mosaic genes have also been discovered recently so a super flecking gene wouldn't surprise me at all.

Logan, Isabella phenotype is the same in the US as you described, a light creamy pigment with white bars, however it can be derived from a few different genetic combinations.

Lisa, Isabella phenotype can be accomplished by combining toy stencil, spread and extreme dilute or Ts, rec. red and extreme dilute, if your up for a challenge.


----------



## indigobob

Saxon Pouters are a typical example of an "Isabelle" phenotype, this is achieved by a combination of heterozygous dominant opal, recessive red or recessive yellow and bar. Blue or ash-red can be the foundation colour, obviously, the expression will be influenced by whichever is present.

That is the easy method, although the same conclusion would be reached using toy stencil, the transfer process would be a much more protracted endeavour.

Once crossed, the recombination of the three toy stencils genes (Ts1//Ts1;Ts2//Ts2;ts3//ts3) requires a large sample of f2 young to regain a white bar phenotype, approximate ratio of 1:64. A backcross of F1 to the toy stencil parent will reduce those odds, but a lot of surplus young will still result.

Dominant opal to dominant opal will produce a percentage of non-viable young, the homozygotes generally experiencing embryonic failure.
Consequently, an Od x non-Od will produce the same percentage of Od progeny as an Od x Od, which is approximately 50%.


----------



## LisaNewTumbler

indigobob said:


> Saxon Pouters are a typical example of an "Isabelle" phenotype, this is achieved by a combination of heterozygous dominant opal, recessive red or recessive yellow and bar. Blue or ash-red can be the foundation colour, obviously, the expression will be influenced by whichever is present.
> 
> That is the easy method, although the same conclusion would be reached using toy stencil, the transfer process would be a much more protracted endeavour.
> 
> Once crossed, the recombination of the three toy stencils genes (Ts1//Ts1;Ts2//Ts2;ts3//ts3) requires a large sample of f2 young to regain a white bar phenotype, approximate ratio of 1:64. A backcross of F1 to the toy stencil parent will reduce those odds, but a lot of surplus young will still result.
> 
> Dominant opal to dominant opal will produce a percentage of non-viable young, the homozygotes generally experiencing embryonic failure.
> Consequently, an Od x non-Od will produce the same percentage of Od progeny as an Od x Od, which is approximately 50%.


ooooh wow, that's a pretty major project!
hmmm, I think I should start keeping an eye on my neighbors lol see if anyone is close to selling their house! ....I need more space. Is there ever 'enough' space to pigeon fanciers??


----------



## LisaNewTumbler

tmaas said:


> Lisa, Isabella phenotype can be accomplished by combining toy stencil, spread and extreme dilute or Ts, rec. red and extreme dilute, if your up for a challenge.


Can we just clarify things a sec, because I'm getting a little lost:

dilute ash red bar is also called in the USA cream bar/ Isabella/ yellow bar ?

Yellow bar in Europe is a rec yellow bird with a white bar like the photo?

Isabella in Europe? is an extreme dilute rec yellow with white bar? (or vairents -- spread (tmaas you mean of ash red?) / dominant opal combo)

Thanks


----------



## indigobob

LisaNewTumbler said:


> Can we just clarify things a sec, because I'm getting a little lost:
> 
> dilute ash red bar is also called in the USA cream bar/ Isabella/ yellow bar ?
> 
> Yellow bar in Europe is a rec yellow bird with a white bar like the photo?
> 
> Isabella in Europe? is an extreme dilute rec yellow with white bar? (or vairents -- spread (tmaas you mean of ash red?) / dominant opal combo)
> 
> Thanks


Unfortunately this is another example whereby breed terminology/colour descriptions cause confusion! 

Dilute ash-red bar = cream bar, used pretty much worldwide (I believe!).

The bird in the photograph is toy stencil with pied genes and recessive yellow, also referred to as "white-bar", not yellow bar.

"Isabelle" has many manifestations, and genetic combinations, for example Mookee breeders refer to milky spread brown as "Isabelle".

Historically "Isabelle" was the "yellow" with white bars as mentioned by, and depicted in illustrations of pouter breeds, in pigeon books by Tegetmieir, Fulton, etc. in the 1800's. 

Extreme dilute is not very common in Europe.


----------



## LisaNewTumbler

indigobob said:


> Unfortunately this is another example whereby breed terminology/colour descriptions cause confusion!
> 
> Dilute ash-red bar = cream bar, used pretty much worldwide (I believe!).
> 
> The bird in the photograph is toy stencil with pied genes and recessive yellow, also referred to as "white-bar", not yellow bar.
> 
> "Isabelle" has many manifestations, and genetic combinations, for example Mookee breeders refer to milky spread brown as "Isabelle".
> 
> Historically "Isabelle" was the "yellow" with white bars as mentioned by, and depicted in illustrations of pouter breeds, in pigeon books by Tegetmieir, Fulton, etc. in the 1800's.
> 
> Extreme dilute is not very common in Europe.


Thank you!


----------



## tmaas

Lisa, sorry that I confused you. The example that I gave for creating an Isabelle phenotype was only one option of many. When accomplished it would breed true, unlike most isabelle colored birds today, but would be a challenge to get to that point. Also, the Isabelle coloration would be virtually the same on all three, spread brown, spread blue and rec. red, when combined with Ts and extreme dilute. However, if extreme dilute isn't available to you then this route is not an option for you. 

"Isabelle" is very different from dilute ash red and usually is not even derived from ash reds. It also is not a simple dilute rec. red with white bars. It is, ideally, a softer buff shade in color, with white bars.


----------



## LisaNewTumbler

tmaas said:


> Lisa, sorry that I confused you. The example that I gave for creating an Isabelle phenotype was only one option of many. When accomplished it would breed true, unlike most isabelle colored birds today, but would be a challenge to get to that point. Also, the Isabelle coloration would be virtually the same on all three, spread brown, spread blue and rec. red, when combined with Ts and extreme dilute. However, if extreme dilute isn't available to you then this route is not an option for you.
> 
> "Isabelle" is very different from dilute ash red and usually is not even derived from ash reds. It also is not a simple dilute rec. red with white bars. It is, ideally, a softer buff shade in color, with white bars.


no problem just wanted to get things straight before they got any deeper 

I don;t understand though how extreme dilute on spread blue makes a buff coloured bird. I would have assumed it would make a very light silver colour


So what are lemons genetically?


----------



## tmaas

"Lemon" is extreme dilute. I should have mentioned that earlier.


----------



## LisaNewTumbler

tmaas said:


> "Lemon" is extreme dilute. I should have mentioned that earlier.


extreme dilute of anything? 

How come all the colours become cream coloured when really diluted??


----------



## tmaas

I'm not able to answer that question scientifically but can tell you that I've produced all three and the spread blue and spread brown with extreme dilute are indistinguishable from each other while the rec. red with extreme dilute is a shade brighter. All would pass for good isabelle coloration. 

It would be interesting to receive a more detailed answer to this question from a scientist.


----------



## LisaNewTumbler

tmaas said:


> I'm not able to answer that question scientifically but can tell you that I've produced all three and the spread blue and spread brown with extreme dilute are indistinguishable from each other while the rec. red with extreme dilute is a shade brighter. All would pass for good isabelle coloration.
> 
> It would be interesting to receive a more detailed answer to this question from a scientist.


how very strange! And interesting 
Would love to find out what is going on


----------



## indigobob

LisaNewTumbler said:


> how very strange! And interesting
> Would love to find out what is going on


Lisa, have a look at this link:

http://www.angelfire.com/ga/huntleyloft/lemon.html


----------

