Genetics Question

[andy Burgess]

dark cock x blue cheq hen ,off spring = dark cocks .who is the dominant parent would you say ,and why ??

[hotrod]

dark cock x blue cheq hen ,off spring = dark cocks .who is the dominant parent would you say ,and why ??

What's the cheq hen off of . A dark parent. Perhaps ?

[andy Burgess]

What's the cheq hen off of . A dark parent. Perhaps ?

from memory Stu her parents were blue cheq,s ,think her grandsire was a darker cheq ? yet not as dark as the cock she is mated too (she has 1 white feather ,hidden away under her wing) ?

[philg50]

If i remember correctly the hen would be the dominant factor as the hen passes on its traits through genes to the cocks and the cocks pass on there traits through genes to the hens .I did use to know more about this as i did a lot of reading on this but i have forgoten more than i learned ,there are some guys who are sht hot on this and they would be more help,check net for pigeon genetics.

[andy Burgess]

If i remember correctly the hen would be the dominant factor as the hen passes on its traits through genes to the cocks and the cocks pass on there traits through genes to the hens .I did use to know more about this as i did a lot of reading on this but i have forgoten more than i learned ,there are some guys who are sht hot on this and they would be more help,check net for pigeon genetics.

thanks Phil , have asked a similar question before .guess I will have to do more reading to understand it all

[Guest IB]

Three questions in there Andy, sex, colour and pattern.

 

Youngsters are cocks, and they take their sex from the hen, she is the only one of the pair that carry the gene for cock;

 

Both pigeons are black / blue colour; black is dominant to blue.

 

The cock is (dark) spread (ie. all black) the hen is (blue) chequer (ie blue/black) pattern; spread is dominant to chequer.

[andy Burgess]

Three questions in there Andy, sex, colour and pattern.

 

Youngsters are cocks, and they take their sex from the hen, she is the only one of the pair that carry the gene for cock;

 

Both pigeons are black / blue colour; black is dominant to blue.

 

The cock is (dark) spread (ie. all black) the hen is (blue) chequer (ie blue/black) pattern; spread is dominant to chequer.

ok so the dominant 1 is the hen for sex & performance ,and the cock for colouring only ? would you say that is correct ??

[Guest Owen]

andy,

you have hit the problem that all breeders of performance livestock hit. There is no way of telling which parent passes the gene for performance. The reason is that there is probably a group of genes involved and the colour of the youngsters is probably not part of the make up of the top performers. You are dealing with practical genetics and possibly theoretical genetics as well. Most pigeons are very mixed up in terms their genetic make up so there is no way they will breed true. About the only things you can rely on are the colour linked factors and the dominant colours which include eye colour.

Unfortunately we can not see anything that tells us about potential performance to help us select the birds with the best potential in terms of racing ability. Some people will swear that birds of a certain colour from a particular pair are good racers while others from the same pair are useless. This is not possible and this sort of opinion is a result of a series of coincidences. About the only practical way you can breed top racers is to breed from proven birds with a record of good performances behind them and as peter pandy said the other day cross them continually. The only concession I ever make to breeding pure is that I always pair like with like. Sprinter to sprinter, distance to distance as an example.

There will be people who will disagree with what I have said and will claim that they have birds that breed winners in spite of the fact that they have never raced a yard. This will be true but to me that is breeding blind because there is no way of measuring the capabilities of the birds so when you decide to select a non racer to breed youngsters you have no idea what will happen. You can end up with a silk purse or a sow's ear.

The problem for breeders is very boring and repetitive in that you select from the best performers, test the youngsters, select the best performers in the next generation and carry on, attempting to inch forward all the time. In my case the best indication of my progress as a breeder is that as each year goes by I usually lose less birds and the overall average performances are improving. The down side of this is the fact that as each year passes selection becomes harder.

[andy Burgess]

thanks for the reply Owen , much appreciated . yes I think your right regarding some practical & some theory in my questioning . just trying my best to understand it all ,I have a number of (un-raced by myself) stock birds .all have done well so far , yet an improvement wouldn't go amiss

[Novice]

If we are judging on the basis of only one nest then I would suggest that a completely incorrect conclusion could be drawn as you would really need to monitor the colour of the offspring over a few nests.

 

I have always been taught that the most important pigeon in any pedigree (breeding for performance) is the tail grand dam. That is the dam's mother.

[bullcock]

If we are judging on the basis of only one nest then I would suggest that a completely incorrect conclusion could be drawn as you would really need to monitor the colour of the offspring over a few nests.

 

I have always been taught that the most important pigeon in any pedigree (breeding for performance) is the tail grand dam. That is the dam's mother.

Who taught you this? and have you any theories on why?

[andy Burgess]

If we are judging on the basis of only one nest then I would suggest that a completely incorrect conclusion could be drawn as you would really need to monitor the colour of the offspring over a few nests.

 

I have always been taught that the most important pigeon in any pedigree (breeding for performance) is the tail grand dam. That is the dam's mother.

 

3 years breeding with that particular pair Novice .

cant view the Grand-Dam for detail

[Novice]

Who taught you this? and have you any theories on why?

 

Now you are going back to the time when I was a boy. We are speaking about 1970 here. I think it was in a genetics book I borrowed or in a book written by JW Langstone. The discussion was with John Mc Call from Dalry and I think was in relation to a hen I had from Bob Jamieson of Lochwhinnoch. The Jamieson left many children and grandchildren which won out of turn.

[Rooster J. Cogburn]

One theory I picked up on a while back-was that as the breeding season/number of rounds from a pair progresses,the more physically alike the offspring are to their parents.

 

Looking at any later bred birds in our loft compared to the first round, I think there is a bit of weight in it.

 

Couldn't say if it applies to racing ability, but certainly appearance.

[dal2]

andy,

you have hit the problem that all breeders of performance livestock hit. There is no way of telling which parent passes the gene for performance. The reason is that there is probably a group of genes involved and the colour of the youngsters is probably not part of the make up of the top performers. You are dealing with practical genetics and possibly theoretical genetics as well. Most pigeons are very mixed up in terms their genetic make up so there is no way they will breed true. About the only things you can rely on are the colour linked factors and the dominant colours which include eye colour.

Unfortunately we can not see anything that tells us about potential performance to help us select the birds with the best potential in terms of racing ability. Some people will swear that birds of a certain colour from a particular pair are good racers while others from the same pair are useless. This is not possible and this sort of opinion is a result of a series of coincidences. About the only practical way you can breed top racers is to breed from proven birds with a record of good performances behind them and as peter pandy said the other day cross them continually. The only concession I ever make to breeding pure is that I always pair like with like. Sprinter to sprinter, distance to distance as an example.

There will be people who will disagree with what I have said and will claim that they have birds that breed winners in spite of the fact that they have never raced a yard. This will be true but to me that is breeding blind because there is no way of measuring the capabilities of the birds so when you decide to select a non racer to breed youngsters you have no idea what will happen. You can end up with a silk purse or a sow's ear.

The problem for breeders is very boring and repetitive in that you select from the best performers, test the youngsters, select the best performers in the next generation and carry on, attempting to inch forward all the time. In my case the best indication of my progress as a breeder is that as each year goes by I usually lose less birds and the overall average performances are improving. The down side of this is the fact that as each year passes selection becomes harder.

You can get silk purses and sows lugs from proven racers.

Surely when you purchase your stock you look at their breeding and performances of closely related stock.

Sprinting to say 200miles is a much diffo game than building a distance team where patience in your stock is the most important thing as you probs wont see great things until the birds have matured.

As for colours and sex. Have found that winners come in all colours but have also found from some of mine that certsin a pair breed multiple winners which up to now have all been chequer cocks.( 6 winners from 10 in three years)

[Guest IB]

Now you are going back to the time when I was a boy. We are speaking about 1970 here. I think it was in a genetics book I borrowed or in a book written by JW Langstone. The discussion was with John Mc Call from Dalry and I think was in relation to a hen I had from Bob Jamieson of Lochwhinnoch. The Jamieson left many children and grandchildren which won out of turn.

 

I think it might have been Old Hand in 'The Strain Makers' which dates from late 1960's, although 6th Edition is dated 1995.

[Novice]

I think it might have been Old Hand in 'The Strain Makers' which dates from late 1960's, although 6th Edition is dated 1995.

 

I don't know Ian you may be correct as it was a long time ago.

[sammy]

I think it might have been Old Hand in 'The Strain Makers' which dates from late 1960's, although 6th Edition is dated 1995.

thats correct ian ,also the late sid bishop was also an advocate of the tail grand dam ,but if you study pedigrees this can be observed winning hens are hard to come by

[walterboswell59]

i read all these books years ago and most were based on theory and opinion and found every now and then something would happen to stand it all on its head and could not be explained so i agree with owen better chance of winners breeding winners breeding winners but you have to start somewhere to find these birds and you need a bit of luck thats why i run my stock cocks with 5 or 6 hens each year and when i find the hen he breeds the best offspring with i keep them togethere because you could have the best breeding cock and hen already in your loft and neaver pair them togethere with genetics some birds paired togethere just click for no reason that can be explained and the only way to find them is the basket imo

[Guest IB]

ok so the dominant 1 is the hen for sex & performance ,and the cock for colouring only ? would you say that is correct ??

 

Andy, I didn't pick up any performance data in your original question. I had not thought that colour or sex were linked with performance, all colours and sexes can score. Having said that I recall reading or hearing that colour may have some bearing in an established family. What I can remember is that a particular pair were throwing (say) blues and reds. Over time the fancier noted the reds raced well, the blues didn't but were good producers. So one was put to the race team, the other the stock loft. Another fancier was given a particular coloured youngster from the same pair and told that it would breed the goods. Instead, it was raced - and lost. When confiding this later to a friend who had been with him when the bird was purchased, his reply was 'well you were told it was for the stock loft'.

[andy Burgess]

Andy, I didn't pick up any performance data in your original question. I had not thought that colour or sex were linked with performance, all colours and sexes can score. Having said that I recall reading or hearing that colour may have some bearing in an established family. What I can remember is that a particular pair were throwing (say) blues and reds. Over time the fancier noted the reds raced well, the blues didn't but were good producers. So one was put to the race team, the other the stock loft. Another fancier was given a particular coloured youngster from the same pair and told that it would breed the goods. Instead, it was raced - and lost. When confiding this later to a friend who had been with him when the bird was purchased, his reply was 'well you were told it was for the stock loft'.

no I don't think I mentioned yet should , that's the case the "dark cocks" were carding ,the blue cheqs getting lost too .I don't want to add to the present stock , would rather reduce the numbers ,cant really wait another year to see if it works either

[Guest Owen]

Like lots of other people I used to read what the Old Hand had to say and I enjoyed his style of writing. In those days I went along with his ideas because I didn't know any different. In fact all these years later I agree that many of his ideas were very good and worked well. However there were things he said that were nonsense, amongst which were his pronouncements on the Tail Grand Dam. She is important but not more important than other individuals in the pedigree of a pigeon.

[Novice]

Can you either prove or disprove the theory?

[Guest Owen]

Novice

I don't have to prove or disprove anything and I certainly do not get involved in theories. Producing winning racing pigeons is definitely not a question of locating a good hen pigeon to use as a tail grand dam. I think that it is far more practical to use a cock line in the breeding plan rather than a hen line in any case. The Old Hand tried to convince us that it was possible to use both a cock line and a hen line switching back and forth at will. He produced a breeding plan based on a stud cock being mated first of all to unrelated hens and then to his daughters and grand daughters assuming that it was possible to reproduce a replicate of the original cock. If only it was that easy.

Another of his ideas was that the female passed her health and vigour on to her young and he used the example of race horses to demonstrate the point. In that case I believe him to be close to the truth always providing that the breeding pair are not related and bred from similar stock. i.e. sprint to sprint or distance to distance. When I was trying to find birds to start me off with a decent team of racers I was always interested in the dam of winners at sales and if I could find a hen that was the dam of several winners I was made up.

I think the Old Hand was bang on with his views on ventilation but away off on his views on feeding. His ideas on eye sign were very misleading and simply rubbish while his ideas on testing stock were spot on. He did not seem to grasp the importance of vitamin "D" and never worked out the affects on tannin on the birds or the benefits of using clay in their diets. Yet he knew how to use deep litter properly and also knew how it helped to build up the immune system of especially youngsters.

These days there is far more information available to us all and providing we do not become side tracked into opinions and so called theories and stick to known facts we can make a good job of breeding and racing our pigeons.

[Novice]

I Owen, I tend to say what I have to say as concisely as possible.

Therefore I conclude from your text that you cannot disprove the tail grand dam theory.

It that were me and I had no proof either way I would neither demean or praise the theory.

For what it's worth I had never given the theory a thought till this thread was raised but I would not have passed judgement on the theory or it's author.