Dean_NZ

Last season I noticed a lot of the hens laying between 1-2 pm. That was early 2010, later 2009 they seemed to lay about 10-11am I noticed. Might have something to do with the heat ranges of the day? Every hen is different but I have noticed some trends.

Im glad nubbly wrote that about greens being split YF. Its absolutely spot on about the alleles etc. If a green bird is split, it can only be split for 'blue' OR yellowface. It is is split yellowface then all the blue babies it throws can only get the yellowface from him so he will only ever through greens and yellowface blues when paired to blue hens. I've heard many times that this is not possible or blah blah, but I know the genetics work that way and im glad to have finally seen a living example of it. Might have to remember this thread as proof lol. Thanks gb and nubbly!

First and second looking very nice and buff, especially second. Thumbs up!

Fantastic thread. Faaantastic. I have been looking around various aviaries in the hope of finding how others do it, and everyone has open dishes like me for water. I think its horrible and I have been trying to think of how else to do it, be very interested to hear an update.

This is pretty much the parentage I described in my earlier post. The most logical assumption based on the chicks was that the cock was a SF spangle cobalt split cinnamon and the hen was a SF spangle dark green. The fact that she is spangle opaline doesnt really have any bearing on the chicks (except the cocks are obviously split for it) as it couldnt have affected the offspring visually unless the cock bird was also split opaline. I would say it is almost completely likely these are the sole parents (although you cant be 100% sure in colony setting).

The whole 'visual violet' thing is really a reflection of the what has historically been (and is currently) a very poor understanding of the violet gene. Even today when i have friends who are judges see some of my violet sky blues, they tell me "those are not violets, those are cobalts, if you put them in the sky class I would mark your bird as wrong class and not judge it". Needless to say I try to explain the obvious differences in the tails of the sky's verses the cobalts, the colour difference between my normal cobalts and my violet skys who the judges often mistake as cobalts (violet skys DO look like cobalts, but the depth of blue is much richer than a standard cobalt - they look like cobalts with 'great colour'). The 'visual violet' term came about because of this confusion and difficulty assessing a bird VISUALLY as to whether or not it had violet. Splat is bang on about greys, mauves and greens being very difficult to visually identify violet because of the background colour. It is a partial dominant gene so it cannot be hidden, but in certain colours you wont get 'purple' from the violet gene - you simply get what almost looks like another dark factor. So the term visual violet came to describe double factor violet sky blues and single factor violet cobalts. Why? Because most people thought they were looking at the same thing - they thought double factor violet sky's were single factor violet cobalts. Partly because there was, and sometimes still pops up a myth that 1) there is no double factor violet anything, and 2) double factor violet is lethal, so there are no double factors. What this all boils down to is a lack of knowledge and ability to identify a colour modifying gene. Most judges (or senior breeders) are too proud to admit they have trouble identifying violets and just fob you off when you try to talk about it. Think of it. Grey is a dominant gene, as is green - therefore it is super easy to breed, and is VERY common because green is dominant over blue and grey is co-dominant with green and dominant over blue (visually). So you see a LOT of greens and grey greens on the show bench, followed by a smaller percentage of blues. Wait a second? Where are all the violets? Its a dominant gene just like green and grey and yet you see maybe 1-3 visual violets even in a large show. Why? Because people shy away from breeds they cannot understand, or have difficulty identifying (like most recessive varieties, they become a 'special interest' variety, bred by only a few select breeders). I had two pet type double factor violet cobalt spangles that i was going to breed together but sold (had no spare breeding boxes for pet types). They were very purple alright - made my violet cobalts look like cobalts and my normal cobalts look like sky blues lol. I do have some pictures but the intensity of the purple never shows up on camera, be it single factor or double factor violet. In response to your question however - The violet is a colour modifying gene. It alters the structure of the feather to reflect a slightly different colour of the spectrum. DF spangle and albino does eliminate most colour types, but if you look closely at blue base DF spangles or albinos, they still have a faint blue sheen in the sunlight or good natural light. I've heard many people say such birds with violet have an almost rose or pink tinge to them, very faint but very nice. Of course any such bird with suffusion would show some violet, depending on whether it was sky or cobalt based and whether it was single or double factor violet.

Looks like it could be night fright injury? Its right on the outer part of the wing, I've seen similar injuries quite a few times in the morning after big night frights in the aviary.

I would put him to a long (tall) hen if possible. Long flight is necessary to some degree in flights with large birds as it can help with maintaining proportional feather and look.

carrot tops are fine. They love them in fact...

Its fair to say that both breeders and beginners have both been burned (breeder x breeder issues, breeder x beginner issues, beginner x beginner issues). I don't really wanna blame any one party so much as say that I guess at the end of the day im not surprised there are so few joining the ranks (staying for long anyway) and why so many who are breeding become sour and keep to themselves largely. I am beyond amazed at the politics I have seen in every aspect of this hobby - clubs, shows, auctions. At the end of the day, im responsible for moving forward in this hobby and *I* know I will be in it for a long time so Im just going to keep talking to breeders until I find one I like, with birds I like - who likes me enough to help out

Its okay lol, I miss-read things ALL the time. Or i'll look at photos too briefly before commenting on mutations and realise had I just given it a decent look I would have realised I was wrong lol.

Im not sure what you are referring to Nerwen? If you are referring to the breeding results, a single factor YF2 x a single factor YF2 will produce 25% normal white faces (no YF gene at all), 50% single factor YF2 (normal 'sea foam' green etc in sky blues for example), 25% DF YF2 with the spread of yellow reduced as you said.

The thing you mentioned about senior breeders helping the juniors is a true and sad reflection on the state of the hobby! While it obviously doesnt include ALL top breeders, a LOT only help out breeders whose birds are of a similar quality or possess a feature they like - swapping birds or buying out others while only selling their poor birds at auction or to new breeders. I have been visiting a lot of top breeders here and the answer is all the same 'cant help you out with birds'. Cant help me out when you have 300 birds? Righto... Edit: I have also been visiting the shows every week here in New Zealand - and the difference between the novice birds and the champion birds is appalling. The novice birds are all birds I would cull from my aviary and im not even showing my birds this year (sold most of them in preparation for what i was doing above - looking for a top breeder to set me up with a good 4-6 birds to start a line). It frustrates me no end that so few are willing to help out someone like me who has tried so hard to research and get good husbandry skills but now cannot find good birds.

Its normal for yellowface type two budgies. (Like yours is).

Can you confirm the dark factors of the violet? Any split or hidden mutations that you are aware of?

All look male to me.

Couldnt have said it better. All my careful thinking and explaining, only to hear its a colony setting bwahaha

If both parents are spangles there is 25% normal, 50% spangle, 25% DF spangle chances for babies. Babies: Chick 1: Cinnamon sky blue male - If it is indeed a male, then the mother must be a cinnamon spangle green split blue and the cock must be a spangle blue split cinnamon (If the cock is not split cinnamon then this chick is a female, also if the hen is not cinnamon then again this chick is female and the cock must be split cinnamon). Chick 2: Spangle (light?) green male Chick 3: Normal olive male (If it is olive then both parents can only be a spangle cobalt cock split cinnamon and a cinnamon spangle dark green hen).

Grey is a complete dominant mutation, so there is no visual differences between single and double factor - eg double and single factor greys (white base) are identical, as are single and double factor grey greens (yellow base). Therefore any grey or grey green offspring produced by two single factor grey or grey green parents have a 25% chance of being double factor which you cant be sure of until you test breed. Double factors produce only grey/greygreen chicks. The fact this pair have produced a sky blue proves neither of them is has a double dose of the grey gene. Edit: I dont think blue suffusion is any indication of anything really, irregardless of single or double factor grey being present.

If mum is split blue, she has a 50% chance of passing it on to each chick but its impossible to tell who got it without test breeding.

I wont add up all the mutations to give you all the different variation combinations and the respective chances (eg the chance of getting a yf violet opaline sky hen, or a white face opaline cobalt hen etc etc).

If you bred 2 YF2 would you get 100% normal (WF)? What about 2 goldenfaces? If you bred 2x the results are as i mentioned above (highlighted in red). Yellowface type 2 and goldenface are both incomplete dominants as they are different visually in the single and double factor form. With any incomplete dominant paired to an incomplete dominant (both single factors) you get 25% normal, 50% single factor, 25% double factor.

First of all I am not saying that Neville is wrong here. I am just pointing out a few anomilies. If a theory, in this case lets say combination pieds, is to be proven beyond a shadow of a doubt then a person must submit evidence that contains no flaws. The bird put up as a combination pied based on the pedigree supplied can be found to be flawed. The father is stated as being a Dominant Pied split for Recessive Pied but this bird may not be split for Recessive Pied. The grandfather was a Normal split for Reccessive Pied and so can pass on either a Normal or a Recessive Pied gene. So unless this bird was bred from first in order to prove its identity it cannot be said for certain the father is a Dominant Pied split Recessive. Assuming the father is a Dominant Pied split to Recessive there is still doubt as to the result. The father can pass on the Dominant Pied or Normal gene and it may also pass on the Recessive Pied gene or not. So paired to the Recessive Pied hen the possiblities are as already said by Neville. No argument there. Those birds considered to meet the visual requirements for a combination pied would then need to be test mated in such a manner as to prove their identity before they can be labelled as combination pieds. But the proof that the father is split recessive is born out by his chicks. The SF dominant pied chick and the YF cobalt chick are of course evidence that he is only a SF dominant pied. That the hen does not carry dominant pied is verified by her heritage. Therefore the other pied chicks which are clearly recessive in the least (not to say combination pied) verifies the father must be split for recessive pied. That they are combination pieds themselves is as you say only verifiable by test breeding. But what would you suggest as ideal? Pairing the combination pieds to normals to see if only normals and dominant pieds are produced? Or pairing the combination pieds to known pure recessive pieds to see if you get recessives, and combination pieds (as really only definable by their visual distinction between siblings?)

Actually the cock looks yellowface type 2 and the cinnamon grey hen looks to be yellowface type 1. If they are type 2 and type 1, you can expect 25% normal, 25% YF2, 25% YF1, 25% combination YF (it will look YF2 but when bred with a normal blue will only produce YF2's and YF1's). If they are both YF2s you will get 25% normal (white face), 50% single factor YF2, 25% double factor YF2.

Does look like a chubby boy indeed. As far as the colour goes you guys have it sussed so I wont waddle into that