Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]


Welcome to Rabbit Addict.

The forums are a place to discuss all things related to rabbits and cavy. From breeding to pet, emergency to genetics questions. Our members are a mix of genetics enthusiasts, breeders, and pet owners looking to share their animals.

Hop on in and join the fun!
We don't bite. I promise.



You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as joining the discussion, customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.

If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Locked Topic
Aa genotype interactions; Sometimes genes can't hide
Topic Started: Jun 25 2015, 07:57 PM (488 Views)
HRoberts
Member Avatar
POWITH!!
[ *  *  * ]
"HRoberts what is your deal with all these endless suggestions that the colors of my rabbits being due to feed or "bad genes""

Because your rabbits look like they have a nutritional deficiency. Since you probably do not know how, and do not have access to the equipment to formulate a proper feed ration I now find their condition not surprising at all. These are not wild rabbits. They are much larger, grow much faster and are physiologically different in -many- ways. Feeding them fresh greens that you found the vitamin B content of on some blog does not constitute formulating their diet properly for growth and production. Good luck with your all natural approach to saving money on your feed bill, but from the looks of it your rabbits need a better source of fat soluble vitamins, minerals and possibly a few amino acids. If you were to bring a hair sample from them into our lab the first question we would ask is what is the source, age and quantity of fat in your feed. Thus, that was my first question.

Rule out the simplest explanations first. I know that you think your rabbits are going to show a special gene interaction which has not been documented before, but honestly it looks like all they're showing is less than ideal management.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
NeuBunny
Genetics Geek!
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
I have had MANY Aa jersey woolies and minirex in my barn (proven by throwing self kits) ... most of which DO NOT show any signs of the flanking you describe. I've had at least a few Jersey woolies that were AaEe (proven based on kits) with frosty ancestors (AAchd-ee) that also have not shown this pattern.

e.g., Cameron (shown here as a baby) had a frosty grandmother and was proven Aa based on his kits

Posted Image

The only time I have seen the shaded flanks on an agouti is when one parent is a tort and the other agouti (so AaEe + tort modifiers). I haven't bred my pearls yet, but suspect that would do the same if the pearls are properly colored and not smutty. This is not a unique observation. Every rabbit color crossing guide and genetics text (well, except for the minilops which do accept sable-chin) puts as its first rule ... "never cross agouti with any phenotypic shaded" (not genetic shaded, pearl, sable point or tort) all of which give uneven coloring (not always specifying it as flanking) in the first generation - some advise that you can expect it to take 'at least 3 generations' to fix that mistake and advocate culling all the mismarked kits if you do try it. However, those who have tracked the relationship over multiple generations (breeding the F1 kits to each other) say it breaks down over subsequent generations ... producing a mix of Aa kits with good and bad color. This observation of hundreds of kits over 3-5 generations has led most people to attribute the affect to a modifier linked to the shaded ancestry (i.e., a minor gene that shaded breeders are selecting for which minimizes smut on the torts and intensifies flank markings). I personally have not, but other breeders have confirmed that the 'uneven coloring' can be present in AA rabbits (general fault even in purebred agouti lines - with any 'a' more than 3 generations in the past including parent and siblings) ... which again points to a modifier which can become separated from 'a' during meiosis.

Likewise, breeding guides strongly caution against mixing reds and phenotypic agoutis. Red can be mixed with agouti to intensify the rufus factor of the agouti, but "Any reds produced from a Castor/red cross should probably be culled" due to poor color (especially blue undercolor and smut). EVEN when those reds are AAee they will be Ww - and no one wants W introduced back into a good show line of reds (and the only breeds that don't care about introducing w back into agoutis are those that accept the wideband version).

Your population is genetically diverse - which means you do not have a scientifically controlled study in which the only variable which is changing is AA versus Aa versus aa. With anything less than 100 kits showing no exceptions you cannot statistically separate the effect of 'a' from the effect of a linked modifier.

You do not seem to realize that you are asking everyone to revise known biochemistry (proven in the laboratory to be consistent across dozens of mammal species and consistent with observations by thousands of rabbit breeders over the last century or more) based on a handful of observations in one herd. The E locus codes for a receptor protein that is proven to be temperature sensitive. The A-locus codes for a signaling protein which is not.

That aside, any observations of consistent patterns you observe that help you to identify carriers (whether due to 'a' directly or just a gene linked to it) is useful information that can help you in making selection in your own herd.


Offline Profile Goto Top
 
wildrabbits
Hopelessly Addicted to the Fuzz
[ *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Reh I can only report what I have worked with, I can't say anything in regards to interactions of other genes I have not worked with. AaC_Ee/ee is a VERY simplistic explanation of the lighter flanking which happens to be the exact same pattern tort produces. Reh maybe you should ask yourself why a german judge would confirm light side flanking on agouti a fault and consider the easiest causes for this.

HRoberts you have problems if you truly believe synthetic nutrient sources are better for organisms than an organic one from a proven super food. Honestly I doubt you would have any idea of what half the things I grow are if I made a list for you...f.e. purslane is know for having something called "omega fatty acids"(you may want to look into what that is and what all it does because I am positive from your severely uncontrolled lab experiments that you truly have no idea what you even have) also the source of nutrients a particular produce has directly reflects what is available to it in the soil its grown from. I also severely doubt you are able to personally measure nutrient contents of any food source from your supposed "lab" which also ironically hasn't made you able to truly correlate ANYTHING for sure on your ej findings despite your hundreds of past inbred rabbits. Also Aa IS NOT A SPECIAL GENE INTERACTION THAT ONLY MY RABBITS WILL SHOW!!! THIS INTERACTION LIKE MANY OTHERS CAN EASILY BE HIDDEN BY OTHER GENES, hence part of the name of the thread "sometimes genes can hide" :doh:


Neubunny I have have only very limited experience with Aa genotypes on fancy fur type rabbits but again the fur type is a factor which obviously changes coloration and appearances by itself. If you have an interest in this try breeding a very simplified tort(nothing fancy just tort color genes) to a simplified chinchilla(nothing fancy just chinchilla color genes). Also THIS IS NOT ABOUT THE AMOUNT OF DARK SHADING OR SMUT!


So far you all act like things can only be black and white without any shades of gray in between...If even one of you actually throws a litter between very simplified genotypes as I have mentioned(no broken, no dutch, no fancy fur KEEP IT SIMPLE) more and more people will see the gene interactions for themselves. I know people have show standards and rules and things are done this way for this reason blah blah, but just HOW much truth is actually set in stone if no one tries the other things and reports their findings on it??
Edited by wildrabbits, Jun 30 2015, 06:13 PM.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
HRoberts
Member Avatar
POWITH!!
[ *  *  * ]
I think we can all see where this is going. You are clearly not interested in hearing what any of us have to say, so I think this thread is closed. Thank you though, as I learned something from reh and Neubunny.

Oh, and FYI. The lab that I work in (that has nothing to do with my rabbits) specializes in lipid metabolism. Have a great day!
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
NeuBunny
Genetics Geek!
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
How can anyone take seriously someone who will only consider their own evidence and not give any respect to hundreds of breeders and scientists who have gone before? Who doesn't even give any consideration to scientific control, or statistical power?

At (capitalized) versus at (lower case) is a difference in nationality (given this is intermediate in the gene series, it isn't standardized internationally as far as I can tell from the scientific papers - US tends to use lower case for intermediates, Europe tends to use capitals). ... and technically both are incorrect given that the t should be always be superscripted (which the text editor on this forum doesn't let us do). I use commonly use ch here ... even though I know full well the correct would be c with a superscripted ch (and others here use cch but don't give me a hard time about it), etc.

I don't need to do the experiment ... I absolutely believe that when you cross a (well-marked) tort to an agouti you will get that flanking pattern. It is your interpretation of what that MEANS in terms of the genetics that I take exception to. That experiment is insufficient to draw the conclusion that Aa is responsible (necessary and sufficient to produce the pattern) - because you aren't controlling for other genes or gene interactions that are co-varying. If your hypothesis is correct and Aa is responsible for the shading, then ALL Aa rabbits would show it. But evidence from other breeders shows that not all proven Aa rabbits show that pattern. I grabbed a photo of the Jersey because it was handy ... but I have an opal minirex in the barn that has thrown blue self kits and has no residual shading. Bred to a blue self, none of her agouti kits did either. And many other breeders have show-quality agoutis that are proven Aa. Try this one ... cross a self black to chinchilla ... the result of that cross is also Aa and does NOT usually show the flanking pattern. Aa might be a necessary piece of the pattern explanation (I honestly don't know for certain whether an AA rabbit can show the pattern, though the noting of this as a fault in the German standard which doesn't allow color mixing strongly suggests it can) but it is not sufficient on its own to explain the pattern.
Edited by NeuBunny, Jun 30 2015, 06:28 PM.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
sidd-says-gimme
Member Avatar
sidd says stay gold
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
A sincere thank you to everyone that was able to stay civil through this. I understand getting frustrated, but this is not a place for being rude to others. I'll be closing this topic because of the comments that were made toward other members that were not acceptable.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
ZetaBoards - Free Forum Hosting
Free Forums. Reliable service with over 8 years of experience.
Learn More · Sign-up Now
« Previous Topic · Genetics and Colors · Next Topic »
Locked Topic