The World's first ever Sabino Cremello TB colt?

[aurum]

http://www.pedigreequery.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=25011

I think he is lovely.

[JB]

Nope, he's Dominant White ;)

[Nootka]

I guess it is the first colt but Blazing Colours has 2 fillies (one max and one loud sabino)
http://www.blazingcoloursfarm.com/foals2008.html
http://www.blazingcoloursfarm.com/foals2007.html

I just found this one also and it is a colt
http://www.norsirefarms.com/admiredbyall.html
2008 Jockey Club Reg TB Cremello Sabino Colt by Zillionair out of Ebony Gold Orchid Born on June 16th, 2008 at 3:16 AM.

[JB]

The point is the colt Aurum posted isn't Sabino. He's Dominant White. His sire Sato tested DW, and there are other pattern and coloring indicators with that whole Puchilinqui family that lead to DW as well :)

[okggo]

JB - I feel like I have a lot of "duh" replies to your posts, but what is the difference between dominant white and sabino? I dont' follow color breeding and that's a new one for me...

[Nootka]

same here.. i feel "Duhish" hahahhah

[Rhyadawn]

same here.. i feel "Duhish" hahahhah

me too. Care to enlighted us?

[RiddleMeThis]

Dominant white is a white pattern like sabino.

It is thought to be embryonic lethal.

It usually creates an all white horse but does not have to.

There are 11 mutations of dominant white across several breeds. The Puchilingui line is only one of the lines found to carry dominant white in TBs.

Sato this foals grandsire is positive for Dominant White. The foals dam is marked identically to him, and so is this foal.

[Cartier]

The World's first ever Sabino Cremello TB colt?

Nope, he's Dominant White ;)

So, is this a good or a bad thing. :confused:

in any event, cute foal

[foxhavenfarm]

I want him!

[JB]

The World's first ever Sabino Cremello TB colt?



So, is this a good or a bad thing. :confused:
LOL, depends on your point of view :) It's not "bad" in terms of any health issues. It's just DW vs Sabino vs Splash vs Frame as patterns that put white on a horse :)

in any event, cute foal
:yes::yes:

[TrueColours]

I am still TRULY trying to wrap my whole head around this sabino versus DW theory as JB and RMT well know ... :lol:

RMT has posted about and commented extensively on the findings in the latest KIT study about DW horses and as mentioned, the Puchilingui line is very prominent in this study as being DW's and not sabino's

I think also what is confusing about this whole "sabino" thing is that everything and anything with even one white sock on it is being touted as "a rare and desired SABINO!!!!" as long as that sock comes to a point, by golly its sabino and worth more money than a mere mortal "plain" horse

Now - for those that know me and my breeding program, I love the "true" sabino's and try to incorporate that trait (or now - the DW trait ;) - depending on which theory you subscribe to ... ) into my babies as much as possible without losing sight of the quality issue as well but to me - calling something "sabino" with 2 white legs and white on its face isnt a "true" sabino to me. It has some "chrome" on it to make it interesting and thats about it ...

Now - IMO - the Blazing Colours fillies ARE "true" sabino's and what the colour afficionado's would acknowledge as "real" sabino's. You can see the multitude of body white on the 2008 one and the high stockings extending above the knees and hocks and the extensive white facial markings and on the 2007 one - it is ALL white, so I believe until they got the genetic tests done, they werent even 100% certain what they had which ended up being a maximally expressed sabino (or DW???) cremello filly.

So - I guess if the definition of a "sabino" is a bit of white on it, then Guaranteed Gold qualifies also as he had a sock and star on him at birth as well ... :lol:

[Cartier]

DUH!!! I never actually got that “sabino was supposed to be a good thing" i.e. that we’re suppose to want sabino. As you mention, you see the term splashed everywhere (on every horse with a bit too much white above the knee, or a spot in the tummy, etc). I thought of it more as “a thing” not necessarily “a good thing”, and for many people it is not desirable at all. I never really understood what all the fuss was about.

TO be honest, I simply can not connect to the faded look with the light colored eyes… it has no appeal (but then I am not overly fond of Fawn Dobermans, I think they look a bit like Dwight D. Eisenhower :lol: ) but some people love ‘em. :yes: What ever floats your boat. :)

Now a deep rich Palomino with a near white mane and tail (like I remember Trigger), that I can see, for parades and things (and Glitter Please looks lovely), but the rest of this dilute stuff I just don’t get, except for stallions like this guy who seems very nice. http://www.blazingcoloursfarm.com/goldentime.html.

And of course FF… love her, always have.

[BravAddict]

Nancy Castle has a little more eloquence than most of us on the subject: http://www.duncentralstation.com/PDF/KITGeneMutations-Castle.pdf

RMT has posted about and commented extensively on the findings in the latest KIT study about DW horses and as mentioned, the Puchilingui line is very prominent in this study as being DW's and not sabino's

Well, think about it this way. Didn't we lump "sabino" in with "overo" until we got a little more sophisticated on the subject? I don't think that anybody went "Oh my goodness, here we've been thinking that these extensive white markings were sabino, and they're actually dominant white!" It need not be that...um, disappointing, I guess. It's just terminology, and truly, TC, if you go on calling your babies "sabino Thoroughbreds" rather than "Possessors of the g.164309delG polymorphism on KIT", I personally promise not to wag my finger.

I will wag my finger at people who go "Oo it's LETHAL see we knew you color breeders were krazy!"
One *assumes* that this is the case, but nobody has gone around breeding mass quantities of Puchilingui's offspring to each other. And the fact that these mutations spontaneously pop up outta no where suggests that even if we select AGAINST white markings, we'll still get more dominant white mutations.

(I never shut up on this subject, so more is coming...I just wanted to get that out there.)

[Foxtrot's]

Is that colour desirable for a stud that throws a desirable colour trait - what would he throw?

Like a few spot leopard appy throws spots.

[Cartier]

(I never shut up on this subject, so more is coming...I just wanted to get that out there.)


:lol::lol::lol:

It’s good to have a passion in life, and to share it. :yes: Where we would be without our passions (Sure as hell we would not be down cleaning the barn at 7:00a.m. without a passion for this.):no:

[rcloisonne]

So - I guess if the definition of a "sabino" is a bit of white on it, then Guaranteed Gold qualifies also as he had a sock and star on him at birth as well ... :lol:
One of the things I really like about Guaranteed Gold (among many others ;)) is he doesn't have a lot of white. :lol:

I, too, am at a loss over the current fascination/appeal of bald faces, patchy body white and white over the knees and hocks. Whatever sells I suppose.

[JB]

I don't think it's a "current" fascination with color, it's one that's been there a long time, but due to there being more of them now, and the advent of bb's like this one, more people are finding out about them and are able to express their interest in them.

There have always been, and always will be, color biases. *I* don't happen to much like most chestnuts, I really don't care for the Western sorrel, but lots and lots of people just die over a pretty chestnut.

I like different - I like calico and tortoishell cats; I like pinto horses. Don't care too much for some of the appy patterns though. Love black. Don't want to own a gray but they sure are pretty when someone else cleans them up :lol:

Some people are attracted to tall dark and handsome men, others like the blond fairskinned ones. Different tastes :)

Cartier it's not necessarily that Sabino is a good thing. Dressage folks tend to not want excessive, or any, white on the legs of their horses are uneven white (which is more often than case than even) can make the movement look irregular, so not a good thing. It's just whatever you like - chrome or not, extensive or not :)

[Cartier]

Cartier it's not necessarily that Sabino is a good thing. Dressage folks tend to not want excessive, or any, white on the legs of their horses are uneven white (which is more often than case than even) can make the movement look irregular, so not a good thing. It's just whatever you like - chrome or not, extensive or not :)

I agree, it's a matter of one’s personal tastes, perspective and goals… no right or wrong, rather, what we happen to like, for whatever reason. I don’t think John Whittaker gives a flying fig if Utah is a Pinto, solid or zebra stripped. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-9ExePa8_Jc

Me personally, I like a dark bay with no markings, but a breeder would go broke trying to capture that market. :lol:

[vineyridge]

I'm not so sure about dressage people not liking flashy legs. I know they don't generally care for gray, but as far as chrome--Kennedy and Briar, anyone? Or is this a Danish thing exclusively?

As a spectator, I really like to see the long, white legs flashing about in the fancy moves. Briar is quite wonderful to watch.

[Cartier]

I'm not so sure about dressage people not liking flashy legs. I know they don't generally care for gray, but as far as chrome--Kennedy and Briar, anyone? Or is this a Danish thing exclusively?

As a spectator, I really like to see the long, white legs flashing about in the fancy moves. Briar is quite wonderful to watch.
If you look at approved WB stallions and elite WB auctions you almost never see chrome. The overwhelming preference is for black or dark bay with little or no white.

[TrueColours]

As a spectator, I really like to see the long, white legs flashing about in the fancy moves. Briar is quite wonderful to watch.


Agreed - but its a killer if you have only one tall stocking in front then everything looks disjointed and askew and not balanced and symmetrical at all ...

TO be honest, I simply can not connect to the faded look with the light colored eyes… it has no appeal

Cartier - I dont think ANY of us look at a cremello or perlino and say "oh my! I LOVE those cold ice blue eyes! You can really see into the soul of the horse by staring at those spooky eerie looking orbs!" :lol:
Its what they represent - the ability to produce those "deep rich gold palomino's with the snow white manes and tails" - thats where their value and allure lies, as long as they are correct enough and nice enough to warrant hanging on to their testicles ... ;)

and truly, TC, if you go on calling your babies "sabino Thoroughbreds" rather than "Possessors of the g.164309delG polymorphism on KIT", I personally promise not to wag my finger.


Man ... can you just imagine working that lingo into your every day descriptive terminology on your horses?! :eek:

[Cartier]

Cartier - I dont think ANY of us look at a cremello or perlino and say "oh my! I LOVE those cold ice blue eyes! You can really see into the soul of the horse by staring at those spooky eerie looking orbs!" :lol:
Its what they represent - the ability to produce those "deep rich gold palomino's with the snow white manes and tails" - thats where their value and allure lies, as long as they are correct enough and nice enough to warrant hanging on to their testicles ... ;)


I 100% connect to the fact that a rich deep colored Palomino with sparkly white chrome and white mane and tail is very appealing. I’d bet the public loves ‘em. :yes: But what about colors like perlinos and smoky beige creams or whatever? What’s up with them? Are they the end goal in terms of color, or are you simply attracted to the brighter colors that they in turn will produce?

[RiddleMeThis]

But what about colors like perlinos and smoky beige creams or whatever? What’s up with them? Are they the end goal in terms of color, or are you simply attracted to the brighter colors that they in turn will produce?
I think that depends on the person. Me personally, I LOVE smoky creams. They have that peachy tone to them, and are really gorgeous IMO. But many people DONT like that. And some would get a smoky cream just to be able to produce things like palominos, buckskins, and smoky blacks 100% of the time.

So the answer to that really depends on the person.

[Blonde Filly]

I guess it is the first colt but Blazing Colours has 2 fillies (one max and one loud sabino)
http://www.blazingcoloursfarm.com/foals2008.html
http://www.blazingcoloursfarm.com/foals2007.html

I just found this one also and it is a colt
http://www.norsirefarms.com/admiredbyall.html
2008 Jockey Club Reg TB Cremello Sabino Colt by Zillionair out of Ebony Gold Orchid Born on June 16th, 2008 at 3:16 AM.


Thank you for the mention..we also have a all white sabino cremello filly White Chardonnay aka Valentine who was all white at birth other then her medicine hat of cremello on here ears and head and is dual reg full APHA...well I should say "had"..I sold her and she left for Canada last Thursday.

White Chardonnay aka Valentine. The last one was taken on Thursday June 4th, 2009..she has a head only a mother could love!!! Darn it this will blow the theory on all my horses being so small.... :winkgrin: She is a yearling here and Fred is 6'3" tall who is holding her!!! :lol:

[JB]

I 100% connect to the fact that a rich deep colored Palomino with sparkly white chrome and white mane and tail is very appealing. I’d bet the public loves ‘em. :yes: But what about colors like perlinos and smoky beige creams or whatever? What’s up with them? Are they the end goal in terms of color, or are you simply attracted to the brighter colors that they in turn will produce?

Same with the Cremellos - some people love how they look in and of themselves (me included), and color breeders love that they 100% produce dilute offspring. RFF Starbuck is EEAACrCr (I THINK, I may be thinking of another Perlino) so you're guaranteed a buckskin out of non-dilute/non gray mares. That's very appealing to a segment of the market :) He's also a very nice stallion, IMHO.

[Mythology]

I'm weird, even for a crazy animal person! :lol: I really like the double dilute group, my Favorite is the Smokey Cream! However, I don't like any form of pinto. Sabino, tobiano, overo, Chrome, Dominant White- call it what you will, I love a solid dilute! No socks, no star. I can't explain my preferences- I doubt anyone can, but give me a well bred, well conformed, old world style Smokey black mare with no chrome and watch my heart go pitter patter *DROOL* ;)

[Cartier]

I'm weird, even for a crazy animal person! :lol: I really like the double dilute group, my Favorite is the Smokey Cream! However, I don't like any form of pinto. Sabino, tobiano, overo, Chrome, Dominant White- call it what you will, I love a solid dilute! No socks, no star. I can't explain my preferences- I doubt anyone can, but give me a well bred, well conformed, old world style Smokey black mare with no chrome and watch my heart go pitter patter *DROOL* ;)


I think you need to own a Pinto with a white butt to truly appreciate how much you hate the color. :lol:

Do you have photo of an adult Smoky Cream and an adult Smoky Black to show us what these colors look like? :)

[RiddleMeThis]

Smoky Cream
http://www.horsecolor.com/dilutions/cream/images/TeTe%20VA.JPG

http://www.sommerranch.com/assets/images/Web_Size_Xerox_liberty_1_1_09_031.jpg

(same horse in both)
http://www.thebrandfarm.ca/Pecosjuly05a.jpg
http://www.thebrandfarm.ca/The%20Key%20body.jpg

Smoky creams tend to be "peachy" rather than close to white of the cremellos.

Smoky blacks can look either really black or can look like a dark bay. These are tested and confirmed smoky blacks
http://www.sunnyksootzz.com/images/sootzz/sootzz3-4.jpg

http://colormorgans.tripod.com/triplessilversmoke3yr.jpg

http://colormorgans.tripod.com/goldgetkittyside.jpg

[Cartier]

Hmmm? I can see the appeal of the Smoky Cream, it is really very pretty, but I’m just not getting the Smoky Black? To me it looks too much like a bay.

But we all have our little quirks. For me, a pinto’s head can not look like it’s a Pinto. From the head alone, it must look like a solid colored horse... like Sandro D’s head here. And the black must be blue black, with no tinge of brown. http://logresfarm.com/Sandro%20D.htm

[BravAddict]

You know cream gets a lot of press for being on MATP. In humans, a certain polymorphism on the MATP gene is associated with oculocutaneous albinism type IV (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oculocutaneous_albinism). And so it's sometimes referred to as "the OCA4 gene." But nobody talks about the fact that there's like half a dozen OTHER polymorphisms that are related to skin and eye color in well, to speak plainly, white people.

All this talk about being creeped out by pale eyes and pale skin makes me think of how the Zulu nation would have talked about the men and women who hopped off the VOC ships. "Uhg, did you see her eyes? They look so beady and shifty without a brown iris. And that pink skin! Did you see how red they all turned? It's just unnatural." So, speaking on behalf of my fair-skinned hazel-eyed self and cremellos and champagnes everywhere, maybe it just takes some getting used to.

(No, I swear, I have a lot to say about white spotting. I'm getting there.)

[TrueColours]

I can't explain my preferences- I doubt anyone can, but give me a well bred, well conformed, old world style Smokey black mare with no chrome and watch my heart go pitter patter *DROOL*

Funny ... I love the smoky blacks but they gotta have some chrome for my liking!!! :D

Cartier - here is an adult smoky cream:

http://www.angelfire.com/on3/TrueColoursFarm/images/smokycream.jpg

You know, I am beginning to wonder if "us" colour breeder are making things so damned complicated, complex and puzzling, that 99% of the buyers have their eyes glaze over not wanting to appear stupid as they dont have a clue what the difference is supposed to be between a frame and a Dominant White and a sabino and a rabicano, nor do they truly give a rats patootie either. Either they like the youngster standing in front of them and think the markings are "neat" and eye catching and justification enough to buy it as opposed to that plainer bay youngster they also liked, but they really dont care one single bit if its a DW or a sabino.

I mean - really. Do people REALLY care about all of the components that go into making Ben and Jerry's taste better than any other ice cream out there, or do they simply buy it because they like it better than any other make of ice cream???

Hell - even MY eyes glaze over with this DW data and I'm the one that should be rabidly fascinated with all things colour related!!! :lol:

I think that truly - the only people that do care about this stuff are breeders that are breeding for specific colour patterns down the road and since most of our buyers are show riders (or should be!) I think we truly need to dummy it down and try to make this as simple as we possibly can or we are going to turn OFF more buyers than we attract

[RiddleMeThis]

I think that truly - the only people that do care about this stuff are breeders that are breeding for specific colour patterns down the road and since most of our buyers are show riders (or should be!) I think we truly need to dummy it down and try to make this as simple as we possibly can or we are going to turn OFF more buyers than we attract
Whats the difference between doing this, and doing what the JC does when registering color?

[BravAddict]

http://www.floridalupine.org/publications/PDF/trut-fox-study.pdf Lyumilda Trut's surprisingly accessible paper on Belyaev's farmed fox experiments is what turned me on to white markings, domestication, and KIT. The article is so insanely worth reading, but I will sum up the relevant bits here: starting with 130 silver foxes used in the fur trade (thus they had not undergone any selective pressure), a strain of domesticated foxes was bred with the only criteria being "tameness." Belyaev did not select for anything else. Not color, not size, not cuteness. Tameness, affability, friendliness towards humans-- such that less than 5% of each generation was used for breeding. The very first physical change to occur in the domesticated silver foxes was the appearance of piebaldism. We think of "piebald" in terms of UK-speak black-and-white pintos, but it just means regions of unpigmented skin and hair (and sometimes eyes). This depigmentation was so (relatively) common that it was given a name ("Star"); Star was more than 1500% more frequent in the farmed foxes at the time the paper was written than non-tame foxes. Here is what is said about "Star":

Even novel coat colors may be attributable to changes in the timing of embryonic development. One of the earliest novel traits we observed in our domesticated foxes was a loss of pigment in parts of the head and body. Belyaev determined that this piebald pattern is governed by a gene that he named Star. Later my colleague Lyudmila Prasolova and I discovered
that the Star gene affects the migration rate of melanoblasts, the embryonic precursors of the pigment cells (melanocytes) that give color to an animal’s fur. Melanocytes form in the embryonic fox’s neural crest and later move to various parts
of the embryo’s epidermis. Normally this migration starts around days 28 to 31 of the embryo’s development. In foxes that carry even a single copy of the Star gene, however, melanoblasts pass into the potentially depigmented areas of the epidermis two days later, on average. That delay may lead to the death of the tardy melanoblasts, thus altering the pigmentation in ways that give rise to the distinctive Star pattern.

The theory goes that the action of domesticating a species - ANY species - is selection for friendliness towards humans. Friendliness towards humans depends on the onset of the fear response - remember learning that kittens unsocialized by 7 weeks are feralforlife? - which is controlled by a complex cascade of genes. By selecting for what amounts to a delayed fear response, we select for changes in rates of embryonic development. Included are events that affect the migration of melanocytes.

Speaking of melanocytes - that is, pigment cells - I like how Thiruvenkadan, Kandasamy & Panneerselvam explain melanocyte migration in "Coat colour inheritance in horses" (Livestock Science 117 (2008) 109-129)

In order to comprehend the full complexity of genetic control of pigmentation, it is necessary to understand the
process of formation of melanocytes from the neural crest. It is an early embryonic structure, which lies along each side of the neural tube. Neural crest cells are the primary source of several vertebrate structures and help in the formation of many others. ... From the first group of neural crest cells, the embryonic melanoblasts arise. ... During embryogenesis the pigment cells (melanocytes) migrate to specific sites on either side of the body as well as the backline. There are three such sites on the head (near the eye, ear, and top of the head), and six sites along each side of the body, and several along the tail. A few pigment cells migrate to each of these sites, there they proliferate and migrate outwards, joining up to form larger patches, spreading down the legs and down the head until they meet up under the chin, and down the body until they meet up on the belly (Cattanach, 1999). ... Once the pigment cells have finished migrating they reside in the bulb of hair follicles. There they synthesize melanin pigment, which are incorporated into the growing hair.

A delay in the migration of melanoblasts (melanocyte stem cells) is what gives us white markings/sabino/DW spotting. If the melanoblasts don't make it to where they're supposed to go by a certain time, they never get there at all. As the quote above explains, the early melanoblasts migrate to near the eye, near the ear, the top of the head, six sites on the topline and some on the tail. From there they wait and multiply, then cascade down over the side. I remember being young(er) and hearing about horses looking like they'd been dipped in white paint, or had white paint poured over them. Well, my visual for melanoblast migration is that properly-colored horse is being poured on! Well then, where to the melanoblasts reach last? The ends of the limb buds (what become the feet) and the forward-facing aspect of the face. If you are familiar with cleft lip/palate in humans, you know that the bones and tissues of the face grow in towards the midline from each side. Same idea with the migration of melanoblasts.

This brings me to pointy socks.

[http://www.animalgenetics.us/Sabino1.htm] This testing facility is nice enough to give us a photograph of a tested heterozygote. I also like this [http://www.colouredthoroughbred.se/E%20Dash.html] guy for being a useful example. What do these photos tell us? That melanocytes do not migrate evenly down the leg. They travel more quickly down the back of the leg than the front-facing aspect of the leg in the hindlegs and vice-versa in the forelegs. To me, a pointy sock just indicates normal, unequal migration of melanocytes down the legs. What we are seeing with the socks is a moment of embryonic freeze-tag; time's up cells, stop where you are. Thus, any tall sock should be pointy. Can someone point me to tall socks that are lopped off at the top? I've never seen such a thing, unless you count splashed whites, but damned if I know what's going on there. So, to breeders and owners who crow over pointy socks, they should be aware that pointy is the rule, and otherwise would be the exception. Which is not to say that pointy socks aren't suggestive of white-producing power -- I think they are.

And this brings me to the genetic study of white markings.

I think we approach the genetics of white markings the wrong way (backwards), but I think that to reverse our emphasis would be very challenging, linguistically. Once upon a time, people called horses "pied" or "spotted." As these people became more wordly, and saw a larger variety of horses, they probably noticed that the ones with dark spots on a white background were easy to distinguish from the others. So they were called something else, and the rest of the horses were still called "pied." Okay. Well, eventually people noticed that some pied horses had smoothly-defined, vertically-oriented blocky patches of white that descended from the topline. These could be called "tobiano", and the rest were "overo." Of those overos, we started calling some "frame" and some "splashed." Then we got the term "sabino." And now that Sabino1 is identifiable both visually and with a DNA test, what is the rest of the "everything else" called? Our focus has been on those exceptions to the white spotting rules. But that's neither here nor there.

What else do we know about white markings?

White markings tend to be bigger on chestnuts (e/e) than non-chestnuts, and bigger on heterozygous non-chestnuts (E/e) than homozygous non-chestnuts (E/E). http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2013690

White markings are more common/bigger on the hindlegs than the forelegs. This phenomenon has a genetic component.

White markings are more common/bigger on the LEFT than the RIGHT, which is thought to be the result of very early "decisions" made in the embryo related to the primary asymmetrical part of a vertebrate: the heart. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9692229

Common white markings, even in small populations, are not caused by a single gene. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2273238

Alleles for white markings at separate loci behave cumulatively. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2732451

http://www.springerlink.com/content/647ju14005410203/fulltext.pdf
This paper summarizes much of Woolf's earlier work.

The end result, or phenotype, of white markings are affected by "randomness" or "stochastic events." Woolf 1995. In the past, I have heard people take "embryonic development" and simplify it to "in the womb", and then corrupt the meaning by suggesting that something about the NATURE of the uterus decided the white markings, which is not really what is meant. "Stochastic" means this: during embryonic development, the zygote goes from 1 cell to 100,000,000,000,000 (in humans anyways, apparently nobody has counted all the cells in a horse). There are certain times when a random "decision" is made. I say decision, but it isn't really a decision. Something happens that is just one of two or more things that COULD happen. An example is X-inactivation in female mammals (and, eek, some male mammals!). When you look at a calico or tortoiseshell cat, you each orange or black-based patch represents one OR the other X. At some point during development, each cell simply "chooses" one X to turn off. After that point, the inactivated X can never turn back on, and the cell keeps dividing. All cells descended from that cell will have the same active X as the parent cell. Stuff like that, though maybe not quite so striking. Anywho, through the course of however many gagillions of cell divisions and DNA replications, these little "random things" add up. THIS is why identical twins (including those identical twins separated in time) end up with different markings. Remember the mathematician character in Jurassic Park, and he's sitting there rolling water off the lady's hand? Well, he was pretty annoying, but his point was that the process of a drop rolling off someone's hand is made up of SO many little steps and circumstances that it is huuugely unlikely to happen the same way twice. That is what stochastic means. Even if you start with the same gene, there is no way to 100.% replicate the exact scenario a second time. So. Stochastic events and "conditions of the womb."

http://jhered.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/full/esm115v1
This one is newer, and I just about fell all over myself trying to get my hands on it. Of course, now it's available free! Here is what I learned from this paper:
* Despite the fact that the FM is subjected to studbook selections, and one of the criteria is minimal markings, white markings have exploded in size and frequency.
* These researchers also found that their data supported polygenic phenotypes (that is, a star on one horse may have a different genetic cause than a star on another horse).
* Their data also suggested a "biallelic locus", which is the same deal as dominant white and KIT. Different polymorphisms at different spots along one gene.
* Oh, surprise, their multilocus linkage disequilibrium analysis mapped the major locus to near KIT.

For your entertainment, I used the Mouse Genome Informatics database to look up all genotypes that result in a "head blaze" in mice. There are 16. For "white spotting" there are 253.

I'm tired. Make of that what you will, for now.

[RiddleMeThis]

This testing facility is nice enough to give us a photograph of a tested heterozygote.
Here are a few more heterozygous ones for you...

http://home.earthlink.net/~mikarma/images/New%20Folder/OutlawRtLook070508web.jpg

http://home.earthlink.net/~mikarma/images/New%20Folder/WFRtPose050408web.jpg

http://home.earthlink.net/~mikarma/images/New%20Folder/LilyLft070508web.jpg

http://home.earthlink.net/~mikarma/images/meme09-17-02goodweb.jpg

http://home.earthlink.net/~mikarma/images/RmFromBackSide050205web.jpg

And their sire who is homozygous
http://home.earthlink.net/~mikarma/images/cmr1.jpg

[JB]

Hmmm? I can see the appeal of the Smoky Cream, it is really very pretty, but I’m just not getting the Smoky Black? To me it looks too much like a bay.
One of the smoky black's RMT posted looks bay. The others look black. MOSTLY they look like a regular black horse. Sometimes they look bay-ish. Sometimes they look dark gray or dark mushroom-y in color. Mostly they look black though. Cream in a single form has a hard time diluting black, which is why a buckskin - black + bay + cream - still has black points. It's the double cream that really takes it down.

But we all have our little quirks. For me, a pinto’s head can not look like it’s a Pinto. From the head alone, it must look like a solid colored horse... like Sandro D’s head here. And the black must be blue black, with no tinge of brown. http://logresfarm.com/Sandro%20D.htm
Just stunning! But you're definition of "pinto" here is Tobiano. Tobi does not put white on the head. A Tobi-only horse will have a solid head. It's something else - splash or sabino usually - that puts normal white markings on the face. If there is white on the head, then technically he IS a pinto of some variation, just not pinto from a registry point of view or even most people's point of view.

Color has nothing do to with it - Sandro D there could have been bay or chestnut and he'd still have the same pinto patterns going on. Going back to the old skewbald and piebald descriptions really only covered the color, very very little to do with the actual pattern.

Funny ... I love the smoky blacks but they gotta have some chrome for my liking!!! :D
Do you love them for their color (which, as I think you know, usually is "just" black when they grow up), or for their breeding potential with the creme and no agouti? I admit I love a solid black horse, especially when they are blue-black. But I'm :eek: when they have some significant white on the legs and a pretty stripe :)

You know, I am beginning to wonder if "us" colour breeder are making things so damned complicated, complex and puzzling, that 99% of the buyers have their eyes glaze over not wanting to appear stupid as they dont have a clue what the difference is supposed to be between a frame and a Dominant White and a sabino and a rabicano, nor do they truly give a rats patootie either.
It depends on whether you're speaking from a color breeder's point of view, or the generic buyer's point of view. As a color breeder, it *cannot* get too complicated, because that's what color breeding is about - understanding what the genetic involved are. But from the pov of someone buying a pet or competition horse, sometimes it IS too much to toss DW at them instead of Sabino, and sometimes it IS too much to toss even Sabino or Splash at them instead of just stockings and a blaze.

Either they like the youngster standing in front of them and think the markings are "neat" and eye catching and justification enough to buy it as opposed to that plainer bay youngster they also liked, but they really dont care one single bit if its a DW or a sabino.
Exactly. But that is from the buyer's POV. Most of them don't care. As a color lover AND a potential buyer, for me, BOTH matter :)

I mean - really. Do people REALLY care about all of the components that go into making Ben and Jerry's taste better than any other ice cream out there, or do they simply buy it because they like it better than any other make of ice cream???
some people DO care :) *I* prefer the newer churned ice creams because they are lower fat. Sure, I could just say I like them because they are lower fat, but I also like that I know WHY they are lower fat. But, I'm an analyst by profession, and good at it because I'm an analyst by nature, so there ya go ;) A good chunk of the population doesn't have an anslytical mind, or don't care to use it, so no, they buy what they like, period.

Hell - even MY eyes glaze over with this DW data and I'm the one that should be rabidly fascinated with all things colour related!!! :lol:
I'm sure at some point your eyes glazed over at the basic color genetics too ;) But it interested you, so you learned it. As a color breeder, I hope you will keep after learning what DW is vs Sabino :)

I think that truly - the only people that do care about this stuff are breeders that are breeding for specific colour patterns down the road and since most of our buyers are show riders (or should be!) I think we truly need to dummy it down and try to make this as simple as we possibly can or we are going to turn OFF more buyers than we attract
I am not a breeder and I care a LOT. RMT is not a breeder and she cares, as well as knowing more than I do. ACC as well. Sure, you need to learn to dummy some things down for the *buyers*, but if a buyer is a color lover and potential future breeder (ie me), then it really helps if you, the "color breeder" know what you're talking about.

[PineTreeFarm]

I buy horses based on performance.

That means that if the horse can do the job I don't care what color it is or if it has spots. I do care about it's abilities.

But there is no way that I'd buy a horse entirely based on it's color. I'd be surprised if anybody that is interested in performance classes makes a decision only based on color. But stranger things have happened.

[TrueColours]

RMT is not a breeder and she cares, as well as knowing more than I do. ACC as well.

All I can say is thank God for both RMT and ACC! Not only do they know this stuff inside out but they also have no problem in explaining it time and time again if someone doesnt quite "get it" and understand how exactly it fits into the grand scheme of things ... :)

They are both my hero's ... ;) :yes: :lol:

[Penthilisea]

Wow my head just exploded! :D

[TrueColours]

Wow my head just exploded! :D


Yours and a few thousand others ... ;)

Remember the simple days when you said "this one has CHROME :yes: " and "this one doesnt have any chrome :no: " and people knew EXACTLY what you meant without getting a skull cramp trying to figure it all out?! :lol:

God I hope there isnt a test at the end of all of this or I am going to fail miserably ... :(

[Mythology]

***SNIFFFF*** AAAH, I love the smell of genetics in the morning!!! :D
Or the afternoon... or evening....

I woke up my husband last night at midnight to talk about the pros and cons of breeding to a chestnut vs. a bay vs. a Dilute to a Palomino G-line mare in 2011.
And he didn't divorce me on the spot.
I'm in LOVE :lol:

[Fancy That]

Wow - what a great thread!

It's amazing how complex color genetics can be, but I find it fun! I just feel like I'm getting a handle on DW vs SB1 now. I think DW is a confusing term when in fact many of them have 50% color. It make sense to us color genetics geeks, but certainly not to the average horseperson.

I can understand both sides. Avg horse peeps just like the horse in front of them and whether it has chrome or not, or a blaze or stockings or what not. The breeder and color genetics enthusiast MUST know more though :)

Even though I love the genetics, I still will use the term "chrome" in casual conversation.

In fact, I was just telling my sister last night that a neighbor who breeds Rocky Mountain horses has a very unusual broodmare who is a black silver dapple (called Chocolate Flaxen by the RMH folk) with "a ton of chrome"

So all his babies out of her are "chromed out" Most RMHs have little to no chrome.

Am I bad for using that term? teeheheheeee (said mare is probably splash/sabino combo IMHO)

[TrueColours]

It's amazing how complex color genetics can be, but I find it fun!

Remember way back when, when you had a "piebald" or a "Skewbald"?! :lol:

And then we got tobiano and overo to replace those terms, and then when overo's further branched into frame, splash, sabino and rabicano, THAT really befuddled a lot of people! :yes:

Then SB1 showed up on the scene ...

And now we have the new kid on the block - DW - and you wonder if this is the end or if more terms and findings are just around the corner ... :)

I do find it fascinating, but I think I need the luxury of a quiet room and no interruptions to fully digest and understand all of the nuances of these latest DW findings ... :)

***SNIFFFF*** AAAH, I love the smell of genetics in the morning!!!
Or the afternoon... or evening....


:D :D :D :D

[jilltx]

Color (Colour??) me confused, but where does maximum sabino fit into all this? Is it the same thing, only renamed DW?

I love the color genetics (or at least their phenotypical expressions!!), but it just keeps getting more and more confusing for me. Just when I think I grasp the concept overall, some "new" term or discovery comes along and blows my mind.

[RiddleMeThis]

Color (Colour??) me confused, but where does maximum sabino fit into all this? Is it the same thing, only renamed DW?

Sabino and DW are different.

DW is thought to not exist in the homozygous form. It only takes one copy to make a horse solid white, though it does not always do that.

Sabino exists in the homozygous form. According to what we know about Sabino 1 when a horse has one copy they have minimal markings, and when they have two copies they are solid white.

[JB]

Color (Colour??) me confused, but where does maximum sabino fit into all this? Is it the same thing, only renamed DW?
Nope, entirely separate ;)

The Patchen Beauty line of horses, originally thought to be max Sabinos (all white) is now known to be DW.

But the all/nearly all (95%) white TWH is a max Sabino.

So, while the phenotype might confuse you, knowing the breed is important.

Max Sabino is the homozygous expression of SB1, one of at least (presumed) 3 Sabino genes. The only one testable so far, one that does not appear to exist in the TB breed.

I love the color genetics (or at least their phenotypical expressions!!), but it just keeps getting more and more confusing for me. Just when I think I grasp the concept overall, some "new" term or discovery comes along and blows my mind.
Ain't research grand? :D

[TrueColours]

The Patchen Beauty line of horses, originally thought to be max Sabinos (all white) is now known to be DW.


okay - so that also holds true for the all white Puchilingui's and all white Airdrie Apache line as well ... correct?

[RiddleMeThis]

okay - so that also holds true for the all white Puchilingui's and all white Airdrie Apache line as well ... correct?
Puchis line is. AAs line is THOUGHT to be, but they were not used in the research.

I personally believe Airdrie Apaches line IS DW based on what I have seen from the other DW white lines.

[Kyzteke]

Sabino and DW are different.

DW is thought to not exist in the homozygous form. It only takes one copy to make a horse solid white, though it does not always do that.

Sabino exists in the homozygous form. According to what we know about Sabino 1 when a horse has one copy they have minimal markings, and when they have two copies they are solid white.

Ok -- I'm in the camp of a breeder who happens to have a color-producing stallion (cremello Akhal Teke) -- so I was forced to learn about the creme gene.

Then I found out that he also has sabino because of his markings (it's probably minimal, but there you go).

THEN I found out that a several of the Arab mares I have to breed to him are also sabino -- one has all the chrome, up past her knee/hock in two stockings, on her chin, under her jaw and two large spots on her belly (one about 2 ft. long).

So, does that mean these two horses could produce an ALL WHITE foal? And this all white would just overlay the cream influence (the palomino), like grey overlays other colors?

Before you explain, please allow me to duct tape my head back together...it's still leaking from BravAddict's post.

[RiddleMeThis]

THEN I found out that a several of the Arab mares I have to breed to him are also sabino -- one has all the chrome, up past her knee/hock in two stockings, on her chin, under her jaw and two large spots on her belly (one about 2 ft. long).

So, does that mean these two horses could produce an ALL WHITE foal? And this all white would just overlay the cream influence (the palomino), like grey overlays other colors?They COULD, but I personally don't think its very likely that they WILL.

And yes it would just "cover up" the cream.

Take this tobiano for instance.
http://www.norsk-pintos.com/Stallions/Gold%20Chain%20600pxlw.jpg

He is buckskin but the white from tobiano "covers up," so to speak, the buckskin color on parts.

That is what would happen for an all white horse.

[TrueColours]

Hey RMT - I got this email last night on the whole sabino versus DW classification. I'd love your take on it because a lot of what is being stated does make sense ... :)

Would you believe, I had temporarily, mercifully,
blocked it from my mind completely, that some scientist in a lab somewhere who obviously doesn't know diddlysquat about actual horse colors, had given that STUPID name to the additional sabino genes they isolated? Oh well.
(Honestly I can't think of anything that would have been a worse choice. Maybe albino. Maybe.)

Feel free to continue to call it sabino. We call horses by the name for their phenotype, not the name of the gene that causes it. You know, like the different alleles at the Agouti gene give us bay and brown, but we don't call them agoutis, we call them bays and browns. The alleles at the Cream gene give us all those well-known dilute colors, but we don't call them cream,
we call them palomino, buckskin, smoky black, perlino and so on and so forth. The person that isolated the frame overo gene decided to call it "LWO", but the pattern always has and always will be called Frame Overo. And so on.

Whoever discovers a gene apparently has the right to name it whatever they please, no matter how dumb or inappropriate their choice may be, but the color it causes will be called by the name it always has been called before........... :-)


I'd love to hear your opinion on these comments ... :)

[RiddleMeThis]

Hey RMT - I got this email last night on the whole sabino versus DW classification. I'd love your take on it because a lot of what is being stated does make sense ... :)



I'd love to hear your opinion on these comments ... :)

My opinion on it is that its bullshit.

It was named dominant white because it is completely different than the sabino that we have found.

It only takes ONE to get a max white horse. DOMINANT WHITE!

Sabino takes TWO to get a max white. NOT DOMINANT WHITE!

Dominant White is also thought to be embryonic lethal in its HZ state. Sabino is NOT.

It was named something different because it ACTS completely different.

Frame IS lethal white overo. And it should be called that because it creates horses that ARE LETHAL and WHITE. It is also the name of a disease rather than the pattern.

And FWIW we DO call "cream" cream. Specifially with regards to the champagne colors.

Amber Cream
Sable Cream
Classic Cream
Gold Cream


Oh and we use cream in the actual cream colors to. Smoky CREAM. and CREMEllo. And then you have the browns that will probably be called smoky brown, and Brown CREAM.


I think its bullshit personally.

ETA:Oh and we DO call dominant white there name by phenotype: WHITE.

And hell if you wanna go by phenotype alone lets just call ALL the pattern sabino.

Splash can create sabino looking markings. So lets call splash sabino too even though it acts completely different.

And hey while were at it, why don't we change Frame to Sabino as well since they both create white spots on the body.

And since its the only one left out lets rename tobiano sabino to. It creates high white leg markings and some tobianos could be mistaken for sabino by people who don't know the pattern.


These genes are all named something different because they ACT completely and totally different.

To give them the same name is bullshit.

ETAA: And just because we have always called something "X" does not mean it IS "X". Double Dilutes for a LONG time were thought to be Lethal Whites. Should we continue to call them Lethal Whites as well?

ETAAA:Maybe albino.We already technically HAVE an albinism gene. It is technically cream. (From UC Davis on Cream)
"Well, albinism can be caused by a lot of different mutations in a lot of different genes. It's not just one mutation that isn't found in horses that everybody else has. Actually, MATP (the cream gene) is an albinism gene, so in a technical sense, palominos, buckskins, cremellos, perlinos, etc. are all forms of albinism in horses. But if you mean white coats and pink eyes, the classic form of albinism, we have never seen that occur in horses. It doesn't mean it couldn't pop up one day, but so far a mutation causing that phenotype hasn't occurred."

[JB]

We call horses by the name for their phenotype, not the name of the gene that causes it.
From the e-mail that TCF received.

That says it all right there, to me. There's a BIG problem with always calling a horse the color he appears and not necessarily what his genes say. That's why a % of APHA horses are mis-registered. That's why a lot of TBs are mis-registered.

Calling a horse who is in the process of graying out a Roan is *wrong*

If someone wants to continue calling what Sato and the Puchi line are "sabino", then let them - they obviously aren't very concerned about the genetics, and no one says they have to be. Those of us who ARE concerned will strive to call them by what they genetically are, and will change that as research advances that knowledge.

[TrueColours]

I think its bullshit personally.


Hey RMT ... I was pretty certain that you were going to call a spade a spade on this one! :lol: ;) :lol:

Not disagreeing with you at all on this one. I received this email and was very interested in hearing your rebuttal on it and I certainly wasnt disappointed ... ;)

Now ... tell us all how you REALLY feel! Dont hold anything back this time ... ;)

[BravAddict]

ETAAA:We already technically HAVE an albinism gene. It is technically cream. (From UC Davis on Cream)

RMT, I am with you all the way until here. Actually, what you wrote was quite constructive to me because clearly I am not writing in a way that permits anyone to actually *read* it.

#32:

You know cream gets a lot of press for being on MATP. In humans, a certain polymorphism on the MATP gene is associated with oculocutaneous albinism type IV. And so it's sometimes referred to as "the OCA4 gene." But nobody talks about the fact that there's like half a dozen OTHER polymorphisms that are related to skin and eye color in well, to speak plainly, white people.

All this talk about being creeped out by pale eyes and pale skin makes me think of how the Zulu nation would have talked about the men and women who hopped off the VOC ships. "Uhg, did you see her eyes? They look so beady and shifty without a brown iris. And that pink skin! Did you see how red they all turned? It's just unnatural." So, speaking on behalf of my fair-skinned hazel-eyed self and cremellos and champagnes everywhere, maybe it just takes some getting used to.

Cremellos are no more albino than white people are albino. :rolleyes:

[RiddleMeThis]

Cremellos are no more albino than white people are albino. :rolleyes:
That was just what I've been told by a researcher at UC Davis when asking about albinism in horses.

[BravAddict]

THIS is what OMIM told me: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/dispomim.cgi?id=606202

MATP is only called an "albino gene" because none of the other polymorphisms are especially noteworthy.

Which researcher is it, precisely? PM would be fine. I want to run what I've said by him or her.

[JustJump]

Is it just me?

I really hate the look of pink rimmed eyes.