I am excited to see what happens. This big red doe is 75% nz and 25% Flemish Giant, but no pedigree so I have no idea what is behind her. I tried to breed her to a REW but she chose my light gray Flemish buck, so I let her. I wonder what genetics will come out next month. Photos of the buck and doe for reference.
NZ red x Flemish Giant Light gray
- Thread starter Captaincatholic
- Start date
Help Support Rabbit Talk Forum:
red with chinchilla... probably a lot of chestnut. 
Yes, agree with @ladysown - lots of chestnuts.
Among other less-predictable colors, this pairing red x chinchilla can give you ermines (white with dark eyes) if the chin buck carries non-extension. Do you know the buck's parentage, or has he produced kits yet and do you know their colors?
This buck came without a pedigree, but the previous owner said they were all light grey but with an occasional steel. I have him bred with a light grey Flemish giant so they will have a purebred litter on Tuesday, and he has fathered some of the shared nest of two litters with a sable doe. That batch has blacks, I think chestnuts, and a few rew or himis. Not sure which are his, though.
Hopefully they will grow big fast and be tasty!red with chinchilla... probably a lot of chestnut.
So if I saved a buck to breed back to the original doe, I would be more likely to get these recessives, right?
So if I saved a buck to breed back to the original doe, I would be more likely to get these recessives, right?
What other colors would be good to throw in with this red doe to see what she is hiding? If she is 25% Flemish Giant and flemish giants do not come in red, perhaps she could be hiding some fun recessives.
So without knowing her background, from her phenotype, red, you can say her code is this: <A_B_C_D_ee> or in other words a non-extension chestnut (aka non-extension black agouti).
As you probably know, the capital letters in that code indicate dominant alleles; that means she could carry a recessive at any or all loci other than the E locus, at which she has both recessives. She could be <AA BB CC DD ee> or <AaBbCcDdee> or anything in between. That C locus tends to be the most exciting, as there are five alleles possible there, and one of them (sable, aka chinchilla light, <cchl>) is partially dominant, so it can affect other C alleles both more and less dominant than it is, as well as influencing some of the other loci.
There are five alleles at the E locus, and <e> is the most recessive of all of them, so you know she won't be carrying dominant black (which is super rare anyway), steel, normal extension or harlequin. Therefore all of her progeny will carry at least one non-extension <e>. So, if you bred one of them back to her, you could very well get more reds, and possibly torts and/or ermines.
Seeing what she produces, and what the chin buck produces, will get you a long way to figuring out what else they carry. Any kits that are a color produced completely by recessive genes (self, chocolate, blue or lilac, REW, and/or non-extension) means that you can be sure both parents carry that gene.
Flemish Giants aren't accepted for ARBA sanctioned shows in red, but that doesn't mean you won't find them especially when they're crossbred so often. In fact if she came from Flemish Giant stock and is <ee>, the Flemish in her background may have carried the <e> that makes red. Recessive genes can lurk for many generations without you knowing it.
Thanks!
In general, what color rabbit is good for test breeding woth other rabbits? Maybe I should.find a rabbit or two just for that fun job.
It depends on what color rabbit you're testing. Ideally, breeding a rabbit that's almost completely recessive itself - that would be a lilac tort <aa bb C_ dd ee> or a lilac himi <aa bb ch_ dd ee> - would tell you a lot about its mate. I say almost completely recessive because you don't want the most recessive gene at the C locus. The <cc> is REW and that essentially covers up everything else, so in effect you don't know what you're breeding to unless you have an exceptionally long and informative pedigree.
To find out what your red doe's got at the A locus, you'd use a self <aa>. That way you might find out if she carries either tan <at> or self <a> behind her <A>.
To find out if she carries chocolate <b>, breed her to a chocolate.
To find out what she carries at the C locus, breed her to a himalayan. That's the lowest in terms of recessiveness other than REW, so you could at least get a good guess at what she's got long with her full-color <C> You want to avoid both chinchilla <cchd> and sable <cchl> because they can interact with other loci in confusing ways, and REW <c> as mentioned above.
To find out if she carries dilute <d>, breed her to a dilute (blue or lilac).
You already know what she has at the E locus <ee>, and at the "broken color" En locus (enen - she's not broken).
If you want a similar work-through for your chin buck, let me know. It would be a little different because of the partial dominance chinchilla has over sable, and its interaction with self and non-extension genes, etc. But basically you want as many recessives in the test animal as possible, or a rabbit with a known genotype.
If you know the chin buck has steel in his background, you can expect to see steels appear in the red doe's litter if he's carrying it. Steel is the most dominant of the E series (other than the rare dominant black). It also does some weird things to other colors, which generally makes identifying the colors more challenging/interesting.
Also, those black kits, if they are his, might be what are called self chins (<aaB_cchd_D_E_>) or even possibly "super steels" (homozygous for the steel gene <EsEs>). The plot thickens (potentially).
Last edited:
Thank you! This is perfect. I had been thinking that maybe a bew would be the most recessive, but a lilac torte sounds fun to find anyway.It depends on what color rabbit you're testing. Ideally, breeding a rabbit that's almost completely recessive itself - that would be a lilac tort <aa bb C_ dd ee> or a lilac himi <aa bb ch_ dd ee> - would tell you a lot about its mate. I say almost completely recessive because you don't want the most recessive gene at the C locus. The <cc> is REW and that essentially covers up everything else, so in effect you don't know what you're breeding to unless you have an exceptionally long and informative pedigree.
To find out what your red doe's got at the A locus, you'd use a self <aa>. That way you might find out if she carries either tan <at> or self <a> behind her <A>.
To find out if she carries chocolate <b>, breed her to a chocolate.
To find out what she carries at the C locus, breed her to a himalayan. That's the lowest in terms of recessiveness other than REW, so you could at least get a good guess at what she's got long with her full-color <C> You want to avoid both chinchilla <cchd> and sable <cchl> because they can interact with other loci in confusing ways, and REW <c> as mentioned above.
To find out if she carries dilute <d>, breed her to a dilute (blue or lilac).
You already know what she has at the E locus <ee>, and at the "broken color" En locus (enen - she's not broken).
If you want a similar work-through for your chin buck, let me know. It would be a little different because of the partial dominance chinchilla has over sable, and its interaction with self and non-extension genes, etc. But basically you want as many recessives in the test animal as possible, or a rabbit with a known genotype.
If you know the chin buck has steel in his background, you can expect to see steels appear in the red doe's litter if he's carrying it. Steel is the most dominant of the E series (other than the rare dominant black). It also does some weird things to other colors, which generally makes identifying the colors more challenging/interesting.
Also, those black kits, if they are his, might be what are called self chins (<aaB_cchd_D_E_>) or even possibly "super steels" (homozygous for the steel gene <EsEs>). The plot thickens (potentially).
I was wondering about super steels because the black kits *may* also be from this NZ buck and a whit himi marked doe.
Attachments
Last edited:
BEW, like REW, essentially covers up the effects of all the other loci. As far as I know, the only thing BEW can't hide is REW.
With your set of rabbits, I'd prioritize finding a lilac himi over lilac tort. A tort is a full-color rabbit <C_>, so you won't necessarily be able to tell what the tort, or the red, has in the second place at the C locus.
But good luck finding either...
Thanks! I guess the bews I just found will be for the freezer, then!BEW, like REW, essentially covers up the effects of all the other loci. As far as I know, the only thing BEW can't hide is REW.
With your set of rabbits, I'd prioritize finding a lilac himi over lilac tort. A tort is a full-color rabbit <C_>, so you won't necessarily be able to tell what the tort, or the red, has in the second place at the C locus.
But good luck finding either...
So. Thst is tricky to find. I do have siamese sables, though. Would I be able to breed one of those does with some buck with a diute gene to get a lilac, or would I need to breed another generation to get two dilute genes?BEW, like REW, essentially covers up the effects of all the other loci. As far as I know, the only thing BEW can't hide is REW.
With your set of rabbits, I'd prioritize finding a lilac himi over lilac tort. A tort is a full-color rabbit <C_>, so you won't necessarily be able to tell what the tort, or the red, has in the second place at the C locus.
But good luck finding either...
Lilac rabbits are dilute chocolates <-- bb -- dd-->. Sable <aa B_ cchl_ D_ E_> is a chocolatey color but it comes from a completely different gene, and it is usually black-based. So, you won't get chocolate from your sable doe unless she just happens to carry that gene, and so does the buck. But I'd actually avoid the sables entirely for your testing purposes because that gene is partially dominant as well as interactive with other loci, so it can make color ID pretty tricky.
The nice thing about dilutes, though, is once you know what you need, you can make your own.
Lilac is a self <aa bb C_ dd E_>
Lilac tort is a non-extension self <aa bb C_ dd ee>
Lilac himalayan is a self himi <aa bb ch_ dd E_>
If you can't find a lilac, to make a lilac you can cross a chocolate with a blue (which is dilute black), colors which are a lot easier to find. If the chocolate happens to carry dilute, you'll get lilacs in the first generation. Otherwise, you'll get them in the second. Chocolate isn't recognized in NZ, or FG, so you'll have to look outside those breeds, but it sounds like you're not concerned about mixed breeds anyway. Both Satin and Rex are bred in those colors, and they are good meat breeds, so you might look for one of those. In fact, Satins come in lilac himi, so you might actually be able to find one of those.
But really, the closer to recessive you get, the faster you'll get more answers, but any cross should tell you something about the parents. Just keep good records!
Unless you want to find out what's hiding under the BEW... who knows, maybe they're lilacs (or chocolates or blues)!
It's easy to do, just breed the BEW with any rabbit other than another BEW or a REW. (Though again, the more recessives the better.)
Last edited:
Would it work to use a silver fox lilac? I can probably get those easier. I found one man 5 minutes away who raises satins according tonthe ARBA page, but he did not return my call and I do not know how old that directory is. I may need to knock on his door some day soon.Lilac rabbits are dilute chocolates <-- bb -- dd-->. Sable <aa B_ cchl_ D_ E_> is a chocolatey color but it comes from a completely different gene, and it is usually black-based. So, you won't get chocolate from your sable doe unless she just happens to carry that gene, and so does the buck. But I'd actually avoid the sables entirely for your testing purposes because that gene is partially dominant as well as interactive with other loci, so it can make color ID pretty tricky.
The nice thing about dilutes, though, is once you know what you need, you can make your own.
Lilac is a self <aa bb C_ dd E_>
Lilac tort is a non-extension self <aa bb C_ dd ee>
Lilac himalayan is a self himi <aa bb ch_ dd E_>
If you can't find a lilac, to make a lilac you can cross a chocolate with a blue (which is dilute black), colors which are a lot easier to find. If the chocolate happens to carry dilute, you'll get lilacs in the first generation. Otherwise, you'll get them in the second. Chocolate isn't recognized in NZ, or FG, so you'll have to look outside those breeds, but it sounds like you're not concerned about mixed breeds anyway. Both Satin and Rex are bred in those colors, and they are good meat breeds, so you might look for one of those. In fact, Satins come in lilac himi, so you might actually be able to find one of those.
But really, the closer to recessive you get, the faster you'll get more answers, but any cross should tell you something about the parents. Just keep good records!
Unless you want to find out what's hiding under the BEW... who knows, maybe they're lilacs (or chocolates or blues)!
It's easy to do, just breed the BEW with any rabbit other than another BEW or a REW. (Though again, the more recessives the better.)
That could work. A lilac silver fox is <aa bb_C_ dd E_ sisi> so it has the self, chocolate and dilute genes you're looking for.
You'd be adding the gene for silvering <si> into the mix, which wouldn't normally be a problem to keep straight. One copy of the silvering gene (which all a SF's bunnies would get a copy of) tends to give the kits light silvering eventually, so you can track it, unless your rabbits have what is truly just scattered white hairs without being silvers. Complicated enough yet?
But you also have steel as a factor in your herd, so that could make identification trickier, because silver is usually partially dominant, and steel is mostly dominant but interacts with other loci; both could end up looking like ticking or silvering. You also have chinchilla (light gray) in the mix, which includes one of the genes that helps produce silver-tipped steels, and those might be tough to distinguish from silvered rabbits. Silver-tipped steels have white-tipped hairs, and silvered rabbits can have both white hairs and white-tipped hairs, but it can be a fairly subtle difference. That would mostly be a problem for identification of offspring, though, since you already know your original steel buck is a steel and you know your original SF is a silver.
Thus, a lilac silver fox could tell you a lot about your red doe. But I would not breed one to your steel buck, any of his offspring, or any rabbits you suspect might carry a copy of the <Es> gene.
I'll mention too that you should avoid harlequins (including tricolors) like the plague. That can really mess up color ID down the line. Stick with <E> or <ee> especially since you have that steel <Es> in your herd.
This subject is actually near and dear to my heart because at the moment my daughter and I are trying to create Creme d'Argents (orange silvers) from Champagne d'Argents (black silvers) x Nz reds.
Last edited:
What a fantastic project! Does the NZre need to be diluted, or does the Champagne d'argent already have the dilution genes?That could work. A lilac silver fox is <aa bb_C_ dd E_ sisi> so it has the self, chocolate and dilute genes you're looking for.
You'd be adding the gene for silvering <si> into the mix, which wouldn't normally be a problem to keep straight. One copy of the silvering gene (which all a SF's bunnies would get a copy of) tends to give the kits light silvering eventually, so you can track it, unless your rabbits have what is truly just scattered white hairs without being silvers. Complicated enough yet?
But you also have steel as a factor in your herd, so that could make identification trickier, because silver is usually partially dominant, and steel is mostly dominant but interacts with other loci; both could end up looking like ticking or silvering. You also have chinchilla (light gray) in the mix, which includes one of the genes that helps produce silver-tipped steels, and those might be tough to distinguish from silvered rabbits. Silver-tipped steels have white-tipped hairs, and silvered rabbits can have both white hairs and white-tipped hairs, but it can be a fairly subtle difference. That would mostly be a problem for identification of offspring, though, since you already know your original steel buck is a steel and you know your original SF is a silver.
Thus, a lilac silver fox could tell you a lot about your red doe. But I would not breed one to your steel buck, any of his offspring, or any rabbits you suspect might carry a copy of the <Es> gene.
I'll mention too that you should avoid harlequins (including tricolors) like the plague. That can really mess up color ID down the line. Stick with <E> or <ee> especially since you have that steel <Es> in your herd.
This subject is actually near and dear to my heart because at the moment my daughter and I are trying to create Creme d'Argents (orange silvers) from Champagne d'Argents (black silvers) x Nz reds.
Well, none of them are dilute. The dilute genes reduce the amount of pigment in each hair. This oversimplifies it, but might help describe how it works... Say that a black rabbit has 100 granules of pigment inside each hair. A blue (dilute black) would only get 50 granules of pigment in each hair. Like adding food color to cups of water: adding 50 drops would look like a paler (diluted) version of a cup with 100 drops of food color.
Even though Champagnes look gray, the surface color is "diluted" not by reducing pigment, but by having jet black hairs interspersed with white hairs and/or white-tipped hairs (resulting from two <si si> genes). They don't actually have any gray hairs (or aren't supposed to anyway). A dilute Champagne would look very pale: it would have blue-gray hairs interspersed with white hairs. Similarly, Creme d'Argents have deep orange/red hairs interspersed with white hairs. And Argente Bruns have chocolate hairs interspersed with white hairs.
So, what I need to do is get the silvering (interspersed white hairs) from a black rabbit onto a red rabbit. Part of the issue is that red is an agouti and black is a self; another issue is that for deep orange/red color, two non-extension genes are needed, and possibly wideband genes as well as rufus modifiers that intensify the red, none of which exist in Champagnes. So it will take at least three generations to get what look like Creme d'Argents. Since modifiers and especially rufus factors seem to add up over generations, and slivering might also, it will probably take quite a bit longer to get good Cremes.
Here are the genes in play; the capitalized ones are dominant.
A= agouti a= self
B= black
C= full color
D= normal color d = dilute
E = normal extension e = non-extension (non-extension genes keep the black ticking from showing up on the ends of the hairs in an agouti, making a chestnut into a red)
W= not wideband w = wideband (which stretches the orange middle band of an agouti up to the tip of the hair, making an orange more red)
Si = normal color si = silvering (more or fewer scattered white hairs)
F1 cross: Red buck <AaB_C_D_ee ww SiSi> x Champagne doe <aaB_C_D_E_sisi> = chestnut kit <Aa B_C_D_Ee Ww Sisi>
This kit would look like a chestnut, possibly with just a few scattered white hairs courtesy of the single non-extension gene. There might be other colors in the litter if the parents carried hidden recessives, but the chestnuts are the ones I'll need.
F2 cross A: NZ Red <AaB_C_D_ee SiSi> x F1 chestnut kit <Aa B_C_D_Ee Sisi> will produce some or all of give the following (since the wideband gene isn't strictly necessary I'll drop it for simplicity) - their genotype and what they look like:
<AAB_C_D_Ee SiSi> (chestnut)
<AaB_C_D_Ee SiSi> (chestnut)
<aaB_C_D_Ee SiSi> (black)
<AAB_C_D_ee SiSi> (red)
<AaB_C_D_ee SiSi> (red)
<aaB_C_D_ee SiSi> (tortoise)
<AAB_C_D_Ee Sisi> (chestnut with possible few white hairs)
<AaB_C_D_Ee Sisi> (chestnut with possible few white hairs)
<aaB_C_D_Ee Sisi> (black with possible few white hairs)
<AAB_C_D_ee Sisi> (red with possible few white hairs)
<AaB_C_D_ee Sisi> (red with possible few white hairs)
<aaB_C_D_ee Sisi> (tort with possible few white hairs)
F2 cross B: Champagne <aaB_C_D_E_sisi> x F1 chestnut kit <Aa B_C_D_Ee Sisi> - their genotype and what they look like:
<AaB_C_D_EE Sisi> (chestnut)
<aaB_C_D_EE Sisi> (black)
<AaB_C_D_Ee Sisi> (chestnut with possible few white hairs)
<aaB_C_D_Ee Sisi> (black with possible few white hairs)
<AaB_C_D_EE sisi> (chestnut with silvering)
<aaB_C_D_EE sisi> (black with silvering - champagne)
<AaB_C_D_Ee sisi> (chestnut with silvering )
<aaB_C_D_Ee sisi> (black with silvering - champagne)
Now the F3 cross is the tricky part:
IF I get a red kit from F2-A (since genetics are basically statistical predictions so there's no guarantee), I can cross it back to a Champagne, and about half of the offspring should be silvered. However, I won't know which red F2-A kit is homozygous for agouti <AA>, so if I use the <Aa> one, I'll also get solid black rabbits (some with, some without silvering) in addition to red ones. But I'll probably get at least one or two silvered red rabbits. Yay!
I can also cross a silvered chestnut kit from F2-B (if I get one) with a red with few white hairs from F2-A, which would give me 50% silvered/ 50% not silvered, and 50% red and 50% chestnut. That is, if I picked the chestnut that carried the non-extension gene and not the one that is <EE>. Then it would be a toss-up as to whether any of the silvered kits were also red, but I might get one or two of those.
So as you can see, it's going to be quite a while till I see anything that looks like a Creme, and that's if the does all conceive when bred and their kits live and grow up. I don't have a ton of cage space to do this, but the consolation is that I can eat all my failures.
Last edited:
Wow! That is wonderful! I am sorry I am so ignorant as to think. creme was like a cream in being diluted. I cannot wait to see phots of your progress.Well, none of them are dilute. The dilute genes reduce the amount of pigment in each hair. This oversimplifies it, but might help describe how it works... Say that a black rabbit has 100 granules of pigment inside each hair. A blue (dilute black) would only get 50 granules of pigment in each hair. Like adding food color to cups of water: adding 50 drops would look like a paler (diluted) version of a cup with 100 drops of food color.
Even though Champagnes look gray, the surface color is "diluted" not by reducing pigment, but by having jet black hairs interspersed with white hairs and/or white-tipped hairs (resulting from two <si si> genes). They don't actually have any gray hairs (or aren't supposed to anyway). A dilute Champagne would look very pale: it would have blue-gray hairs interspersed with white hairs. Similarly, Creme d'Argents have deep orange/red hairs interspersed with white hairs. And Argente Bruns have chocolate hairs interspersed with white hairs.
So, what I need to do is get the silvering (interspersed white hairs) from a black rabbit onto a red rabbit. Part of the issue is that red is an agouti and black is a self; another issue is that for deep orange/red color, two non-extension genes are needed, and possibly wideband genes as well as rufus modifiers that intensify the red, none of which exist in Champagnes. So it will take at least three generations to get what look like Creme d'Argents. Since modifiers and especially rufus factors seem to add up over generations, and slivering might also, it will probably take quite a bit longer to get good Cremes.
Here are the genes in play; the capitalized ones are dominant.
A= agouti a= self
B= black
C= full color
D= normal color d = dilute
E = normal extension e = non-extension (non-extension genes keep the black ticking from showing up on the ends of the hairs in an agouti, making a chestnut into a red)
W= not wideband w = wideband (which stretches the orange middle band of an agouti up to the tip of the hair, making an orange more red)
Si = normal color si = silvering (more or fewer scattered white hairs)
F1 cross: Red buck <AaB_C_D_ee ww SiSi> x Champagne doe <aaB_C_D_E_sisi> = chestnut kit <Aa B_C_D_Ee Ww Sisi>
This kit would look like a chestnut, possibly with just a few scattered white hairs courtesy of the single non-extension gene. There might be other colors in the litter if the parents carried hidden recessives, but the chestnuts are the ones I'll need.
F2 cross A: NZ Red <AaB_C_D_ee SiSi> x F1 chestnut kit <Aa B_C_D_Ee Sisi> will produce some or all of give the following (since the wideband gene isn't strictly necessary I'll drop it for simplicity) - their genotype and what they look like:
<AAB_C_D_Ee SiSi> (chestnut)
<AaB_C_D_Ee SiSi> (chestnut)
<aaB_C_D_Ee SiSi> (black)
<AAB_C_D_ee SiSi> (red)
<AaB_C_D_ee SiSi> (red)
<aaB_C_D_ee SiSi> (tortoise)
<AAB_C_D_Ee Sisi> (chestnut with possible few white hairs)
<AaB_C_D_Ee Sisi> (chestnut with possible few white hairs)
<aaB_C_D_Ee Sisi> (black with possible few white hairs)
<AAB_C_D_ee Sisi> (red with possible few white hairs)
<AaB_C_D_ee Sisi> (red with possible few white hairs)
<aaB_C_D_ee Sisi> (tort with possible few white hairs)
F2 cross B: Champagne <aaB_C_D_E_sisi> x F1 chestnut kit <Aa B_C_D_Ee Sisi> - their genotype and what they look like:
<AaB_C_D_EE Sisi> (chestnut)
<aaB_C_D_EE Sisi> (black)
<AaB_C_D_Ee Sisi> (chestnut with possible few white hairs)
<aaB_C_D_Ee Sisi> (black with possible few white hairs)
<AaB_C_D_EE sisi> (chestnut with silvering)
<aaB_C_D_EE sisi> (black with silvering - champagne)
<AaB_C_D_Ee sisi> (chestnut with silvering )
<aaB_C_D_Ee sisi> (black with silvering - champagne)
Now the F3 cross is the tricky part:
IF I get a red kit from F2-A (since genetics are basically statistical predictions so there's no guarantee), I can cross it back to a Champagne, and about half of the offspring should be silvered. However, I won't know which red F2-A kit is homozygous for agouti <AA>, so if I use the <Aa> one, I'll also get solid black rabbits (some with, some without silvering) in addition to red ones. But I'll probably get at least one or two silvered red rabbits. Yay!
I can also cross a silvered chestnut kit from F2-B (if I get one) with a red with few white hairs from F2-A, which would give me 50% silvered/ 50% not silvered, and 50% red and 50% chestnut. It would be a toss-up as to whether any of the silvered kits were also red, but I might get one or two of those.
So as you can see, it's going to be quite a while till I see anything that looks like a Creme, and that's if the does all conceive when bred and their kits live and grow up. I don't have a ton of cage space to do this, but the consolation is that I can eat all my failures.
