Colour and Type

[ladysown]

I know I know.. people always say choose type over colour.

BUT is that true with washy colours? (not sure who else to describe it)

Breed Harlequin
Focus: type

stormy .. out of a big rangey doe. Died because of some ***** breaking into rabbitry and injuring her.
This kit started out the biggest, but lost ground when mom died. Has not grown out as well as hoped. BUT has a nice chocolate colour.

Kippen. Out of doe with colour that seems a mix between chocolate and lilac. This kit continues that form. BUT growing really well. Has the shorter body of her mother, with the promise of bulk from her dad.

Thinking to hold back Kippen and let Stormy go.

Just concerned about replicating the colour since her mom does that. Her mom (blossom) either throws NICE blues, or these washed chocolate/lilac kits. Problem... her blues are ALWAYS bucks.
This is Blossom

This is one of her blue bucks that I'm holding back until I get a new Harlequin senior buck.

 

[A&BRabbitry]

You've got a battle on your hands their though. Harlequins are some of the hardest rabbits to raise and consistently provide a well marked rabbit to the SOP. I know type over color but if this is the best color you are getting right now it may be time to bring in a new bloodline. If you have exceptional type I would focus on finding an ideally marked rabbit to fault breed with your beautifully typed rabbits. This should give you atleast one of two ideal rabbits to continue on with the line.

 

[ladysown]

these are not the only rabbits I have, but mom Blossom has better type. I prefer compact over rangey, though rangey gives better litters.

It's also been well-proven that markings don't breed true with harlequins.

My focus with them is to breed for better type and for cleaner markings. I don't keep showables simply because they are showable. They have to meet my other markers first.

Some of the rabbits I've produced have gotten their GC's, AND more importantly to me, have gotten comments from US based judges as having better type than many American bred rabbits.

ALL I'm concerned about with these two is type OR colour. Do I risk the continuation of poor colour or go with better colour, but risk a poorer typed rabbit? They are basically the same age, but from different lines and grow-out rates.

 

[Devon's Mom Lauren]

In any other breed, if it had those scattered white hairs or white feet, it would not be used for breeding no matter how good the type is. Those scattered whites, which is essentially what is going on there, are highly inheritable.You will never get rid of it. All breeds of rabbits have sop's for type AND colour, plus in Harlequins it also includes markings. While Harle "markings" (3-part splits etc.)don't necessarily "breed true" or exact, they must come from somewhere; and that is from "modifiers" for the markings you want in the breed. These need to built up in the line so there is a way higher chance of getting the correct markings you want. The second rabbit looks like it has incorrect chocolate colour or the undercoat is showing through somehow. They don't look that far off in type from each other from what I can see from the angle of the picture taken. Is Stormy a doe as well? It's just if she is a doe then she looks like she has a nicer head. Chunkier maybe? The pictures show slightly different angles so hard to compare.

 

[5dognightfarm]

Looking closely...is Kippen a torted Harlie?

 

[ladysown]

well, the situation was kinda resolved for me. Had someone come by today who liked the ODDNESS of Kippen and since I was really waffling on which to keep, I chose to just let her go.

What happens with the kits from Blossom is they are lilac looking are parts of their bodies, and they are chocolate looking elsewhere. They are quite "ODD", I've had another breeder comment on how they are odd too..but oh.. look at that blue, it's decent kit. It's VERY obvious if you see them in real life, much harder to get a really good picture of.

The only normal looking kits I get from her are blues. I've used her strictly as a meat doe. haven't sold kits for breeding stock with pedigrees.

Stormy is a solid chocolate all the way through. She's not particularly clean in her markings, but she's a decent chocolate colour. She's quite brindled on her back end which I dislike.

A doe I brought in had a whole whack of kits, three of which are very clean in their markings. I am hopeful that one of them is a buck, and will have decent colour.

I should have someone go stateside and see if they can find me a good chocolate magpie buck for me. A really solid lad, which a nice dark chocolate colour.. and if he carried blue all the better.

 

[Devon's Mom Lauren]

The lilac colour on the chocolate rabbits is the "undercoat" showing through.. it doesn't matter if breeding for pets I guess, but if you are going for SOP rabbits then yes it does. Anything like that should be noted even to pet buyers as they may suddenly get interested in showing.

Caitlin, that is an interesting question about being 'torted" I have seen "torted" Tris. As the non extension gene is involved along with the Japanese gene then its certainly possible the two gene mods. might "co-exist"

 

[5dognightfarm]

Caitlin, that is an interesting question about being 'torted" I have seen "torted" Tris. As the non extension gene is involved along with the Japanese gene then its certainly possible the two gene mods. might "co-exist"

It looks almost tort, doesn't it? The second one? Or am I just off a bit?

Nevermind, don't answer that. ancake:

 

[ladysown]

i have no idea what it is Cait. All I know is that it is odd and no one I know has been able to adequately describe what the colouring is.

So do I call them chocolates then???? What do I list them on the pedigree (not that I've made any for the kits showing this odd colour)? I've been tending to go with whatever colour they show the most when I list their colour on my website. Should I just list them as off-coloured chocolates?

 

[5dognightfarm]

Looking at the rabbit and trying to picture it as a solid, without the white, I think it looks like some sort of tort, but I'm not sure that's possible. I don't know genetics that well.

I'd just put chocolate. Might get some strange looks if you call them "tort magpies".

 

[Devon's Mom Lauren]

If your harlequins are all self-based (aa) then the tort part would be there as well. You need non extension "ee" plus one jap. gene to show harlequin markings.This type of gene combination would be a "torted Harlequin" Agouti based Harlequins(AA or Aa) wouldn't be tort. I believe the SOP would be for an Agouti based harlequin. The only way to tell would be to cross the harlequin with a self rabbit to see if any agouti's showed up being as agouti is dominant. If the Agouti gene is not present then the only way to get it would be to get some proven agouti parents OR Use a true (not chestnut) RED rabbit like the New Zealand Red.