alforddm":1ouingjh said:
Rumors about Ed (Extension dark) keep floating around, but I suspect modifiers to the regular steel gene Es to be capable if doing it, even with just one copy.
The researches who found the mutation for Es and ej said that they found no ED mutation. They theorized that Es and ED are the same mutation but with different modifiers. If anyone is interested I can link the paper.
How do you know those EsE ones aren't aa? I'm not trying to be argumentative, just curious.
I'm interested, please link?
The buck was bred to several self colored does before the super steel and produced large litters (9+ kits in each) of all clean agouti colored kits. Opals actually, since the does were purebred lilacs. (test bred and confirmed steel free aa)
Pancake was one of doelings from that cross.
I had been under the impression that he didn't carry self.
Had he been Aa, bred to aa he should have produced 50% self kits.
It may have been luck, or he may have been E e, and the self looking kits with the super steel doe may have been Ese.
It is VERY possible he had a recessive copy of non-extension and that none of the daughters we saved inherited it, since we only saved a couple.
Actually, IMO, that is more likely than him having Aa and fathering 18+ kits (that I know of) with self does and never producing self kits.
__________ Fri Jan 09, 2015 11:26 pm __________
My hunch on EsE kits being able to appear as self has more to do with trying to get steel colored kits out of super-steel self based silverfox than that particular breeding though.
(aa B_ C_ D_ EsEs, I'm pretty sure, bred to Aa E_ and Aa EE mostly, I've only just begun test breeding for recessive e)
I'd be lucky to get one good steel colored kit in each large litter when I should have been getting 50%.
I always, always had a disproportionate majority appearing self.
