Chat room for non religious poultry keepers! :D

[ShrekDawg]

Don't we all?

True!!! Or we wouldn’t be on here probably LOL

 

[pipdzipdnreadytogo]

Wow, that's very interesting, did not know there were so many leg feather genes at play! I know nothing about Cruella's parentage, so it's possible. I do know about Lady Gaga (BIG parenthesis here, since I failed to mention this when going over the colour genes my serama have. After the last conversation on this, I realised I was being a total idiot. I hand picked all my serama to get the best ones conformationaly, and while at the breeder's house, I was shown their parents). Since he is a serama, and his parents don't have feathered shanks, this probably only comes from Cruella? Unless one parent carries it, and managed to pass it onto Gaga (no, I did not meet the grandparents, or at least I was not introduced to them, so I don't know if something like that could be true. And no, I'm not forgetting anything this time). Anyhow, this is all very interesting. I'm personally leaning towards some inhibitor Gene not passing through, if I understand correctly. And yes, I lost this thread for a hot minute

I've actually heard of Seramas, at least here in the U.S., occasionally producing offspring with feathered feet! But, I also know that a lot of what is sold as Seramas here have a high percentage of OEGB in them as well, accounting for much longer backs and not as petite of a size in many birds claimed to be Serama, so the ones making feathered feet also descending from some kind of mix is a distinct possibility as well.

Yes, that little one not inheriting a leg feather inhibiting gene is a likely possibility.

Fascinating. Thank you for sharing that knowledge in an easy to understand way.

That is something I really appreciate about pipd. Pipd always makes the effort to explain chicken stuff in such a way that is approachable, and understandable. So, thanks pipd!

This actually is a relief for me to see because I second guess myself a lot on whether I'm explaining something clearly or using too much jargon and not explaining enough. I genuinely want to help people learn about genetics because I love this stuff and find it super interesting, so I try to explain things as thoroughly as possible, but half the time I feel like I'm putting out this huge, overwhelming wall of text and I'm not sure if it's actually helpful or just daunting and even more confusing. I am always happy to try to explain further if anything I say is not clear, though, so feel free to ask! When I took genetics in college, I had already had a baseline fascination with the topic, but I ended up with a professor who was so awful that he almost made me give up on the subject entirely. I never want to be that kind of teacher to others, especially on a subject I have such a passion for and love to see others get interested in as well!

I do not want this to seem like I am undermining your experience pipd, because I am really not

I would never accuse you of doing so Different people view different scenarios from different perspectives, and differing experiences in life can change how those perspectives are seen and understood. That's why I put qualifying terms in my posts on such subjective topics ("I think", "personally", "in my experience", etc.), because I know that others might view the same scenario and come away with a different take on it. You posting your perspective does not invalidate mine any more so than my perspective invalidates yours, so please don't feel like you can't share!

 

[ShrekDawg]

Hey

 

[fluffycrow]

I've actually heard of Seramas, at least here in the U.S., occasionally producing offspring with feathered feet! But, I also know that a lot of what is sold as Seramas here have a high percentage of OEGB in them as well, accounting for much longer backs and not as petite of a size in many birds claimed to be Serama, so the ones making feathered feet also descending from some kind of mix is a distinct possibility as well.

Yes, that little one not inheriting a leg feather inhibiting gene is a likely possibility.





This actually is a relief for me to see because I second guess myself a lot on whether I'm explaining something clearly or using too much jargon and not explaining enough. I genuinely want to help people learn about genetics because I love this stuff and find it super interesting, so I try to explain things as thoroughly as possible, but half the time I feel like I'm putting out this huge, overwhelming wall of text and I'm not sure if it's actually helpful or just daunting and even more confusing. I am always happy to try to explain further if anything I say is not clear, though, so feel free to ask! When I took genetics in college, I had already had a baseline fascination with the topic, but I ended up with a professor who was so awful that he almost made me give up on the subject entirely. I never want to be that kind of teacher to others, especially on a subject I have such a passion for and love to see others get interested in as well!




I would never accuse you of doing so Different people view different scenarios from different perspectives, and differing experiences in life can change how those perspectives are seen and understood. That's why I put qualifying terms in my posts on such subjective topics ("I think", "personally", "in my experience", etc.), because I know that others might view the same scenario and come away with a different take on it. You posting your perspective does not invalidate mine any more so than my perspective invalidates yours, so please don't feel like you can't share!

I've heard of that before, it makes sense. Never personally seen it, but it happens for sure.Your passion for genetics shows, don't second guess yourself so much, you explain it really well! And thank you

 

[pipdzipdnreadytogo]

Happy new year, y'all!

Here's to making 2024 a great one!

 

[fluffycrow]

Happy new year!

 

[ShrekDawg]

Hiiiii

 

[ShrekDawg]

Happy new year!!!

 

[Sally PB]

Happy New Year!

Happy New Day!

 

[ShrekDawg]

I can’t believe it’s 2024 already