Definitions(genetic load and others)

Posted by: Wieslaw

Definitions(genetic load and others) - 06/11/13 03:52 PM

I have been trying to find a good and simple definition of the term " genetic load". I have found several, of which the most simple said something like " the number of lethal genes carried by an average individual of the species".

The majority of other definitions were phrased in such a way, that I usually lost the meaning halfway to the end.

Examples:
1)
Genetic load is the reduction in selective value for a population compared to what the population would have if all individuals had the most favored genotype.[3] It is normally stated in terms of fitness as the reduction in the mean fitness for a population compared to the maximum fitness.


2)
Genetic load is a number between 0 and 1 and it measures the extent to which the average individual in a population is inferior to the best possible kind of individual. The genetic load equals the relative chance that an average individual will die before reproducing because of the deleterious genes that it possesses. Ignoring frequency-dependent selection, it is calculated as follows:

Suppose there are a variety of genotypes in the population, each with its characteristic fitness; one genotype has a higher fitness than the rest and we call its fitness Wopt. We can also measure the average fitness of the whole population; it is just the fitness of each genotype multiplied by its frequency: it is called mean fitness and is symbolised by v.


What is correct?
Posted by: Canuck_Bock_RAT

Re: Definitions(genetic load and others) - 06/11/13 10:18 PM

Heel low:

These three seem concise and to the point:


http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/genetic+load

Quote:
Genetic load
The extent to which a population deviates from the theoretically fittest genetic constitution.




http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetic_load

Quote:
Genetic load
In population genetics, genetic load or genetic burden is a measure of the cost of lost alleles due to selection (selectional load) or mutation (mutational load). It is a value in the range , where 0 represents no load. The concept was first formulated in 1937 by JBS Haldane, independently formulated, named and applied to humans in 1950 by H. J. Muller, and elaborated further by Haldane in 1957.




http://www.thefreedictionary.com/genetic+load

Quote:
Genetic Load
1. The relative difference between the theoretically most fit genotype within a population and the average genotype.
2. The aggregate of deleterious genes that are carried, mostly hidden, in the genome of a population and may be transmitted to descendants.


Hope one of the three works for you.

Doggone & Chicken UP,

Tara Lee Higgins
Higgins Rat Ranch Conservation Farm
Posted by: Bushman

Re: Definitions(genetic load and others) - 06/12/13 05:54 PM

What significance does the concept of genetic load hold to the average smallholder fancier, and how would he/she measure it?
Posted by: John

Re: Definitions(genetic load and others) - 06/12/13 06:52 PM

Quote:
Genetic load
In population genetics, genetic load or genetic burden is a measure of the cost of lost alleles due to selection (selectional load) or mutation (mutational load). It is a value in the range , where 0 represents no load.

So with chickens would the most pure (wildtype) Red Junglefowl be a "0"?
Posted by: Wieslaw

Re: Definitions(genetic load and others) - 06/13/13 05:51 PM

I'd like to translate the notion of genetic load into Polish. There is an old thread where Ron Okimoto(?) mentioned that genetic load for people is 5 and for chickens is 6(or 4 and 5?). This is something I understand. But now I'm a little confused by those others definitions. How could I possibly use them in a sentence and on what purpose?
Posted by: Canuck_Bock_RAT

Re: Definitions(genetic load and others) - 06/17/13 12:39 PM

Heel low:

Originally Posted By: John
Quote:
Genetic load
In population genetics, genetic load or genetic burden is a measure of the cost of lost alleles due to selection (selectional load) or mutation (mutational load). It is a value in the range , where 0 represents no load.

So with chickens would the most pure (wildtype) Red Junglefowl be a "0"?


Careful John.

If we use this definition of genetic load (The extent to which a population deviates from the theoretically fittest genetic constitution) I propose that the Red Junglefowl (Gallus gallus) is not the fittest genetic example for my particular situation! Course we need another definition, which I will provide, "What is genetic fitness?"

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/genetic+fitness

Quote:
Genetic fitness
The reproductive success of a genotype, usually measured as the number of offspring produced by an individual that survive to reproductive age relative to the average for the population.


A Red Junglefowl cannot always be zero because it would not be the best suited to my environment AND a survivor to replicate progeny (that live to replicate more of themselves) better than say my heavily mutated pseudo Red Junglefowl, the Chantecler! LMBO

I think with chickens, the "0" would be labeled on the most adapted (therefore it could also be the most "mutated" from wild type) individual with the most successful future; survival of the fittest. laugh

As Wieslaw says in his example provided, "measures the extent to which the average individual in a population is inferior to the best possible kind of individual."

The "best kind" of chicken for me is the Chantecler. I do keep ones that are not as fit, say the Booted Bantam with a single comb that may freeze and hurt, put a chicken off their game to replicate. So said, may I then use the "zero" rating for genetic load for the Chantecler and go forward from zero to a maximum of 1 to explain how UNfit the Booted Bantam is to my Chanteclers in my specific environment and my expected use for the chickens?

Course if I think about it, the Red Junglefowl could be a zero if raised in the jungle? Is this not then making your statement correct too? Nature knows best perhaps? Uh oh!

I am not positive, but I expect there are no perfect zeros for any chicken pending the circumstances of where the bird is, what purpose the bird is expected to be for, how it is raised, etc.

To each one of us, the "best possible kind of individual" is as variable as what the single word "good" means to each of us. Define a "good" bird and you'll have as many answers as there are those willing to respond.

I would expect genetic load of 0 is the best suited that survives to make more...chickeny perfection for each one of us. I would hate to tell you that your birds are nearer a one because they might not flourish in an Alberta blizzard! I think it key to know the boundaries of the "population" in question. My Province, your State; which continent North America, Europe. I guess I just simply get hung up over geography in regards to genetic fitness of a population! Even animal husbandry differences would come into play.

Who sets the criterion, who gets to say when the sample is closed within what parameters? Yes, largest number of offspring making more offspring is the deciding factor...but you can't sample the entire population ... or can you? <<wicked laughter>>

I suppose it depends on who is funding the $$research project$$...

Originally Posted By: Wieslaw
There is an old thread where Ron Okimoto(?) mentioned that genetic load for people is 5 and for chickens is 6(or 4 and 5?). This is something I understand.


I guess I don't understand. I am uncertain how Dr. Ron Okimoto is able to say 5 or 4 or 6 if what appears to be the traditional genetic load scale is measured from 0 to 1? How BAD are humans or chickens for that matter at level SIX...eep! Maybe 0 to 1 is not the correct definition for genetic load? Maybe 0 to 10 is the scale that he was using.

In that case, may I be a "negative 10" just to mess up any logical progression made here? :-p

Interesting topic.

Doggone & Chicken UP,

Tara Lee Higgins
Higgins Rat Ranch Conservation Farm
Posted by: Canuck_Bock_RAT

Re: Definitions(genetic load and others) - 06/17/13 01:32 PM

Heel low:

Originally Posted By: Wieslaw
But now I'm a little confused by those others definitions. How could I possibly use them in a sentence and on what purpose?


How about this...

Genetic load would measure the benefit of a male chicken having a Cushion comb wanting to replicate (fertilize females) in winter (therefore giving MORE opportunity to have more offspring) balanced by the negative measure of a pure Rose combed breed (lacking Pea comb) of male chicken and the number of offspring he would sire to survive to replicate offspring themselves. Since pure Rose comb has sperm that lives half the time of a non-pure or not Rose comb (Crawford & Smyth, 1964), the use of the measurement for genetic load would be able to account for the negative over pure Rose comb combined with the benefit of adding Pea comb to Rose comb to make a Cushion comb. The Cushion combed male would be "fitter" than a Single combed male with frostbite and be closer to zero than the Single combed male. Factoring in the pituitary gland requirement of over 14 hours of daylight for better fertilization by male chickens, of course. smile

A Single comb male nursing frostbite into April here, would by simple pain, not be interested in females and reproduction--he would lose his advantage over the Cushion combed male who's sperm lives half as long...put both males in a flock of females and the Cushion combed male would overcome his negatives to his good "genetic load" of having a pure Pea comb because someone bothered to select and add Rose comb to the genetic soup. He will breed and he will sire offspring while the Single combed male will be more concerned about his "head ache" than breeding females.

Is that a conversation you could have regarding "genetic load?"

"Cushion comb has less of a negative impact on genetic load than pure Rose comb by itself because the addition of Pea comb overcomes frostbite issues for reproductive interest in breeding males."

Doggone & Chicken UP,

Tara Lee Higgins
Higgins Rat Ranch Conservation Farm
Posted by: SDWGame

Re: Definitions(genetic load and others) - 06/17/13 01:54 PM

Anyone who has raised a variety of chicken breeds including game fowl knows which breed of chicken has the highest survival potential. Some of the reasons are perfectly straightforward.

1. Bred for 6,000-8,000 years in which selection is based on the most athletic, aggresive and game is very similar to natural selection and insures reproduction of the fittest.
2. Often living outdoors with little or no shelter has increased hardiness, flying ability and inate predator avoidance skills.
3. Breeding crosses of unrelated individuals is the norm to achieve the benefit of heterosis (hybrid vigor)thereby increasing the genetic diversity of the individuals.

Say it ain't so and I'll convince you by introducing my 5 lb. rooster to your 9 lb. rooster.
Posted by: Wieslaw

Re: Definitions(genetic load and others) - 06/17/13 03:36 PM

I have actually found one of the threads

http://www.the-coop.org/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=28843&Searchpage=1&Main=4086&Words=%22genetic+load%22&Search=true#Post28843

It was 2,5 for human and 6 for chickens

I will try to find the original(links do not work)
Posted by: KazJaps

Re: Definitions(genetic load and others) - 06/17/13 07:21 PM

Probably R.Okimoto was using different scale to express the same thing (eg 0.5 = 50%)?

The Coop: CREATING A DARK EGGER

R. Okimoto:
The Coop: Inbreeding thread #2
Quote:
Inbreeding is the only way to purge detrimental alleles from a population. The less inbreeding that occurs in a species the higher the genetic load. This happens because recessives can build up in a population if they are never made homozygous. If you never inbreed, detrimentals can reach a higher frequency in your population. Chickens probably have a lower genetic load than quail because they have been domesticated in small local populations for 10,000 years and detrimentals have been slowly selected against.

Humans have a pretty low genetic load. It is estimated to be less than half what it is in chickens (around 2.5 instead of 6). Modern humans seem to have had a population bottle neck around 100,000 years ago where the world population may have dropped to only around 1000 effective individuals that can account for all the humans that we see today. Humans have about 1/5 the genetic variation that you find in chimps or just about any other species. It is sort of scarry, but back 100,000 years ago humans may have been just as endangered as most of the great apes are today.



The following from D. Caveny: The Coop:Bantamising a Breed
Quote:

When DeKalb started their inbreeding of fowl in the 1940's they used 25,000 pairs of bro x sis matings. 2 years later they had 250 pairs that were only 75% inbred. This illustrates how many undesireable traits had shown themselves and been eliminated.

Any time there is inbreeding individuals become more homozygous for traits and the bad ones effect viability or fitness to a great degree. My opinion is that inbreeding is a hocus that was championed early last century in an attempt to increase differences of lines prior to crossing in an attempt to maximize heterosis when the lines were crossed. Work in the last half of the 20th century illustrated that good nickability (and viability) could be had when lines were minimally inbred.


----------------------------------

So basically 'Genetic Load' is in reference to the accumulation of deleterious genes in a population.
Posted by: KazJaps

Re: Definitions(genetic load and others) - 06/17/13 08:37 PM

The Coop: Regaining Brown Egg Colour
R. Okimoto:
Quote:
Chickens have a very high genetic load. It is around 6. Humans have a genetic load of around 2.5. Genetic load is just a rough estimate of the number of recessive lethal and detrimental genes that each animal carries on average. Some carry more and some carry less. Each bird carries a different set. Around 17 out of 20 chicken lines started by single pair matings fail to produce a male and a female by the third or fourth generation of full-sib matings and the line dies out. The lines that eventually make it aren't that healthy either and often have hatchabilities of around 30%.
Posted by: KazJaps

Re: Definitions(genetic load and others) - 06/17/13 09:07 PM

Wieslaw, here is the link to that post:

The Coop: Carefoot on Breeding Brother x Sister 20 generations

In the next post on Rokimoto's Inbreeding Depression projects, the following link (using archive.org) will bring it up (on the old board):

Old Board: Rokimoto... please tell us about the breeding projects you have...

eg..
Quote:
I have an Inbreeding depression project where we have backcrossed daughters to sires from a random bred population. We started with 10 sires, but produced enough daughters for the experimental design for only 7. All sires had hatchablities of less than 60% by the second backcross (F=0.375). Most of them less than 30% with two sires at around 11% hatchability. This isn't very good data for most of you trying to breed small populations and maintain production traits.



Quote:
Outcrosses are less likely to produce the homozygous recessive detrimentals and 1/4 of the inbred progeny of any sire would be expected to be recessive homozygotes for any detrimental allele that he carried. Any one chicken carries a lot of recessive detrimentals. Each human carries an average of 5.


So I wonder if that means that chickens carry an average of 12 recessive detrimentals?

--------------------
He also mentions an inbreeding depression project on Quails elsewhere. These were even worse than the chickens.
Posted by: KazJaps

Re: Definitions(genetic load and others) - 06/17/13 09:46 PM

R. Okimoto:

Quote:
Overdominance is when the heterozygote Aa is superior to the homozygotes aa or AA. This seems to be relatively rare.

An example of overdominance in chickens is Rosecomb, where R/r+ heterozygote males have higher fertility rates than R/R males (but no difference in females).
-----------------------
Another influence on fitness are co-dominants (not incomplete dominants in this context, not intermediate expression but expression of both alleles, ie different meaning). Eg, MHC/blood groups where there are multiple loci and many alleles. Researchers have found that specific het. combinations have greater resistance to specific pathogens (& diseases), but this specific combination may lower resistance to other pathogens (eg good Marek's resistance but low respiratory disease resistance, etc). In this example, a population has a greater chance of survival if many alleles are within the population (population resistance to multiple pathogens).
Posted by: Henk69

Re: Definitions(genetic load and others) - 06/18/13 12:52 AM

Why would a R/r+ be superior to a r+/r+? wink
I think that the heterozygote must be superior to both purebreed alternatives to be called over-dominance.

Sickle cell anemia is an example (in malarial regions).
Posted by: KazJaps

Re: Definitions(genetic load and others) - 06/18/13 06:48 AM

Operational overdominance...

Thomas W. Fox, Roy D. Crawford and J. Robert Smyth (1964).
Rose comb: an example of operational over-dominance in the domestic fowl.

Genetical Research, 5, pp 379-383. doi:10.1017/S0016672300034820.
Abstract

Quote:
The pleiotropic effect of the rose-comb gene (R) on fertility when combined with artificial selection against the single-comb type (r) results in an interesting example of operational over-dominance. An evaluation of the equilibrium frequency of the rose-comb gene based on this over-dominance concept provides a plausible explanation for the relatively high frequency of single-comb birds appearing in the Wyandotte breed of fowls.

Mentioned it too because of Canuck_Bock_RAT's example: Rosecomb (especially with P) less problems with frostbite than with r+/r+.

Similar to Sickle Cell Anemia - genetic benefits depends on environment of individual (SCA het. HgbS no benefit if not in malarial regions).
SCA genetics is also another example of co-dominance, ie hets. express both alleles (not intermediate).
-----------------------------

In the following paper they indicate that there may be some selection going on to keep heterozygosity of MHC alleles:

Cryptic preference for MHC-dissimilar females in male red junglefowl, Gallus gallus.
Mark A.F Gillingham, David S Richardson, Hanne Løvlie, Anna Moynihan, Kirsty Worley and Tom Pizzari.
Proc. R. Soc. B 22 March 2009 vol. 276 no. 1659 1083-1092
Full Paper
Quote:
An increasing number of studies test the idea that females increase offspring fitness by biasing fertilization in favour of genetically compatible partners; however, few have investigated or controlled for corresponding preferences in males. Here, we experimentally test whether male red junglefowl, Gallus gallus, prefer genetically compatible females, measured by similarity at the major histocompatibility complex (MHC), a key gene complex in vertebrate immune function. Theory predicts that because some degree of MHC heterozygosity favours viability, individuals should prefer partners that carry MHC alleles different from their own.....


They also mention the following on comb size selection ...
Quote:
Previous work has demonstrated male mating preferences in the fowl. First, male feral fowl, G. g. domesticus, are more likely to mate with a female with a larger comb (Cornwallis & Birkhead 2007), a trait phenotypically (Pizzari et al. 2003; Cornwallis & Birkhead 2007) and genetically (Wright et al. 2007) correlated with female reproductive investment.
Posted by: Wieslaw

Re: Definitions(genetic load and others) - 06/19/13 02:29 AM

Kazjaps, thanks a lot.

Quote:
First, male feral fowl, G. g. domesticus, are more likely to mate with a female with a larger comb (Cornwallis & Birkhead 2007), a trait phenotypically (Pizzari et al. 2003; Cornwallis & Birkhead 2007) and genetically (Wright et al. 2007) correlated with female reproductive investment.


I challenge this, can't confirm it at all. Au contraire. With me, whenever there are problems with a female not being mated, it is always one with a VERY big comb. The small combed ones have no problems with being omitted.

I also challenge the "recently in fashion" studies "birds of a feather flock together", where allegedly the same coloured birds as by magic keep together. I keep some pens always mixed together from the start. The only exception is that the hens e+ are popular with cocks. Have not observed them being beaten yet. There are always some other more important mechanisms not taken into consideration in all those "studies".




Posted by: Wieslaw

Re: Definitions(genetic load and others) - 07/02/13 05:57 AM

Hi guys, I need some clarification/(pinpointing?) on the use of language concerning combs.

As I understand, there is no single gene for the single comb, and it can be modified by many genes throughout the whole genom(chromosomes 1, 7 and God knows how many more).

1)the term epistatic refers to genes, but on many sites it says " comb X is epistatic to the single comb". Is this usage corect at all?

2) Can the term epistatic be applied at all to the pea comb gene(or rose)? Epistatic to exactly what ?

3) when the pea comb gene combined with rose comb gene makes something "third"((walnut), what is the term for their "relationship" to each other(ie. between the pea and the rose)

4)In one of the (very) old threads, I believe it was Henk? who wrote that D^v was supposed to overwrite? the other mutations(unless I distorted it). Comments on that ? What happens when you add D^v or D^c to the walnut (or rose or pea)?


Thanks in advance .

PS. Henk was very fast to reply, while I was changing the order of the questions

Posted by: Henk69

Re: Definitions(genetic load and others) - 07/02/13 06:40 AM

ad 1) No it is not correct, because single comb is the wildtype and thus Always the alternative to the mutation.

ad 2) This is also an "epistatic" effect, I would look for a word starting with syn~ wink

ad 3) Pure D^v/D^v causes a comb flesh reduction making all underlying combtypes hardly visible.

ad 4) See 2, but as we use it (covers/covered by), it would only be hypostatic to Breda and pure D^v
Posted by: KazJaps

Re: Definitions(genetic load and others) - 07/02/13 07:55 PM

It depends on the context, & whether talking about specific genes or phenotypes.

The problem with 1) statement is not defining 'single-comb' usage, eg whether in reference to a specific genotype or just a phenotype. As Henk mentioned, it is incorrect to use 'epistatis' in reference to the wild-type allele (same locus), eg P peacomb epistatic to p+ single-comb (this incorrect). But you could say P is epistatic to r+, which could be crudely translated as Peacomb epistatic to single-comb (r+) - there lies the problem. It's the same as saying recessive white is epistatic to black, but not defining 'black'.

From an old post...
The Coop: Which is dominant , straight comb or pea comb?
Quote:
“single comb is recessive to all other comb types except....Breda.“

Different loci, recessives, so a good example of “Epistasis”, ie where one gene interferes with the expression of another ( epistasis ).

For example, d/d,r/r,p/p,bd/bd is genetically combless, suppressing single comb. A d/d,r/r,P/P,bd/bd bird is still combless, but suppressing pea comb, & so on.... That is, the Breda combless gene (bd), when homozygous, suppresses all other comb types, regardless of d, r & p loci. Similar to recessive white gene (c/c) suppressing all colour in plumage, regardless of all colour/pattern genes present.

* In Hutt, Genetics of the Fowl:
-“Strictly speaking, pea & rose are not dominant to single comb but epistatic to it. Single comb is “Hypostatic” to these two but epistatic to the combless type of the Breda (Hutt, p88)”

-“ In Breda males, two small papillae on each side of the median line back from the upper beak indicate the duplex condition, although the birds appear practically combless (p87)”

In Crawford, p194: Dv allele is dominant to the Dc allele. The wide cavernous nostrils are expressed with homozygosity for Dv allele but not Dv/d+. Also expressed with Dv/Dc, but only in association with Dv allele.

The Breda breed has the wide-open nostril trait.

------------------------
The P gene: pea comb & breast ridge/reduced feather characteristics is a good example of “Pleiotropy” ie the effect of a single gene on more than one characteristic

* Dv comb & nostril traits also pleiotropism.
Posted by: Wieslaw

Re: Definitions(genetic load and others) - 07/10/13 02:05 AM

Is Polverara rooster's comb "pure" D^v or is something else present in there:



His nostrils look different to my rooster's nostrils


It was presented here:
http://orycteseng.blogspot.dk/2011/01/poultry-polverara-hen-ancient-glory-of.html


Posted by: Wieslaw

Re: Definitions(genetic load and others) - 07/25/13 06:28 AM

Hi guys, I need to clarify the notion of "incompletely dominant". I understand the meaning of the words, but when I read various threads, people use it in different contexts, so which one is actually correct?

As an example , in this thread

http://www.the-coop.org/forums/ubbthread...=true#Post20980

T. Adkerson used it in following fashion:

Originally Posted By: T.Adkerson
What you have is a bird that is heterozygous birchen and wild type ER/e+. Birchen is incomletely dominant to e+ so you had an e+ phenotype expression on the down and the adult plumage is expressed as birchen.


The situation implies, that the result of one and the same cross can give different results(one time birchen, another time chipmunk). It is not what other people describe as incomplete dominance. Is it used correctly here?

To add: the second description of the incompletely dominant was: two doses work stronger than one.
Posted by: Bushman

Re: Definitions(genetic load and others) - 07/25/13 08:28 AM

I think you can correctly use the term either way. I think you can also use it to describe non-allelic genes resulting in a different phenotype than was expressed in either parent, e.g., a cushion comb resulting from the combined effects of P and R. Usually RR/PP is indistinguishable from Rr/Pp and other combinations.
Posted by: Henk69

Re: Definitions(genetic load and others) - 07/25/13 08:44 AM

Only the second one is correct.
And i.m.o. birchen is dominant in chick down.
The sometimes (not) expressing of a trait is called penetrance.
Posted by: Bushman

Re: Definitions(genetic load and others) - 07/25/13 11:48 AM


So what would you call my example (two posts prior to this one)?
I consider R and P to be incompletely dominant to each other.
I consider R to be completely dominant to r (no P/p present) and I consider P to be incompletely dominant to p (no R/r present).
Posted by: Hen-Gen

Re: Definitions(genetic load and others) - 07/25/13 12:06 PM

Incomplete epistasis.
Posted by: KazJaps

Re: Definitions(genetic load and others) - 07/25/13 05:35 PM

Incomplete dominant is in reference to intermediate expression of heterozygous alleles of the same locus.

So yes, R is completely dominant to r+, P is incompletely dominant to p+, but P is not incompletely dominant to either R or r+ (nor Dv, Dc, bd, etc) as they are on a different locus.

Cushion/Walnut comb is a polygenic trait, multiple mutations involved. Any incomplete dominance of R/R P/p+ is just expression of het. P with p+, nothing to do with R locus.
Posted by: Bushman

Re: Definitions(genetic load and others) - 07/26/13 10:01 AM

Thanks! My dictionary defines epistasis as, "the dominance of one nonallelic gene over another." So, unless it is necessary to be terribly precise, in everyday conversation the use of the word dominant, or incompletely dominant to describe the relationship of R and P, does not seem entirely out of place. Do I need a new dictionary?
According to the definition, epistasis infers an unspecified degree or level of dominance.
Posted by: KazJaps

Re: Definitions(genetic load and others) - 07/27/13 03:23 AM

That definition would quickly get confusing, as there is dominant epistatic inheritance and recessive epistatic inheritance.
E & Co - dominant example,
c & E (& many others) - recessive example.

ie, dominant/recessive epistasis depends on whether the epistatic gene is dominant or recessive in inheritance. And I suppose incomplete dominant epistasis could apply also (can't think of a good example at the moment, but I suppose E could be technically incompletely dominant). R is completely dominant to r+.

But once again, the dominant/recessive/incomplete dominant, etc inheritance modes with epistasis is in reference to alleles of the same locus, not in reference to the epistatic/hypostatic relationship of genes from different loci. That is why two different defining words "epistatic" - gene masks expression of a gene on another locus, "hypostatic" - gene expression masked by a gene from another locus. Eg, you don't say c is dominant to E, or that E is recessive to c. E is hypostatic to c/c (plumage colour only, not epidermal pigment).

Definition of Epistasis:
http://ghr.nlm.nih.gov/glossary=epistasis

Quote:
  • One gene interferes with or prevents the expression of another gene located at a different locus.
    Definition from: Human Genome Project.
  • Epistasis is a circumstance where the expression of one gene is affected by the expression of one or more independently inherited genes. For example, if the expression of gene #2 depends on the expression of gene #1, but gene #1 becomes inactive, then the expression of gene #2 will not occur. In this example, gene #1 is said to be epistatic to gene #2.
    Definition from: Talking Glossary of Genetic Terms, from the National Human Genome Research Institute.


Don't know if incomplete epistasis is an accepted scientific term, but in my mind it would mean to not completely mask the gene expression of an allele from another locus. Ie, different meaning to incomplete dominant epistasis.
Posted by: Wieslaw

Re: Definitions(genetic load and others) - 09/08/13 01:00 PM

New question

I have just read the abstract provided by Kazjaps in the sticky thread( on congenital loco) and I'm not sure how to translate the "loco" part. Is it supposed to be the synonim for "crazy" as some sources suggest? The gene is responsible for the lack of control of the neck muscles at hatch. Any other words suitable to replace it without changing the meaning?
Posted by: KazJaps

Re: Definitions(genetic load and others) - 09/08/13 07:27 PM

From "Genetics of the Fowl" (Hutt, 1949, pages 232-233)

Quote:
Congenital Loco, lo
Description.
A common abnormality in chicks and one that is nearly always lethal within a week after hatching is that designated by Knowlton (1929) as congenital loco.

The Spanish word loco, meaning insane, has been used colloquially by cattlemen on the Western plains to describe the symptoms induced in cattle after they have eaten certain toxic plants of the genus Astragalus.

Its use for the complete inability to balance that characterizes these chicks is perhaps temporarily justified till further study reveals the anatomical basis for the abnormality. The affected chicks hatch normally but cannot stand more than a few seconds. The head is drawn back, and the beak points upward, usually on one side (Fig. 66). Finally the chick topples over backward and lies on its back or side till righted, when the whole performance is quickly repeated. The condition suggests some defect in the mechanism for balancing, but the anatomical basis is entirely unknown.


So that is why it was called loco.

In PB&G (p 262), they have the mutation under the heading:
Congenital Loco or Star-gazer

On page 263 they mention Ataxia in Delawares, & say that it is not clear whether the trait was the same as classical Congenital Loco. They also mention congenital loco (or star-gazer) in other species.
----------------
So, you could use "star-gazer" as a generic descriptive term (in reference to the twisting back of the head). Might need the help of a medical person to confirm whether "Ataxia" is an accurate use of this medical term for lo mutation.
Posted by: Wieslaw

Re: Definitions(genetic load and others) - 09/12/13 05:07 AM

Thanks Kazjaps. Insanity is fine, as long as it's translated correctly.
Posted by: Wieslaw

Re: Definitions(genetic load and others) - 01/18/14 04:27 PM

Is Smoky Joe gene the same as Smoky?

http://vdi.sagepub.com/content/9/4/407.full.pdf
Posted by: Wieslaw

Re: Definitions(genetic load and others) - 01/24/14 05:21 AM

Bump. Nobody interested in a new dominant white allele?
Posted by: Wieslaw

Re: Definitions(genetic load and others) - 12/11/14 05:33 PM

This one is for people who master English well. Is there an English name for the stage of feather development on the picture. If not, can you write a full sentence what the picture depicts and what would you compare the looks of the feathers to(I lack some words in my vocabulary). And when it opens, what is the name of the part that was opened. If there is both a scientific name and a colloqial name, I'd like both.
Posted by: Hen-Gen

Re: Definitions(genetic load and others) - 12/12/14 03:07 AM

I would not presume to speak on behalf of the English speaking world, Wieslaw, but in my bit of the world what is shown in your picture we would call 'pin feathers'. These then emerge to give 'quill feathers'.
But I'm sure other terms will be used elsewhere.
Posted by: Wieslaw

Re: Definitions(genetic load and others) - 12/12/14 11:37 AM

Thanks Hen-gen, it was helpful.

I just add as a curiosity, that PIN FEATHERS on one of my hens were totally BRIGHT BLUE. I wish she kept it on the QUILL feathers.
Posted by: Norwegian

Re: Definitions(genetic load and others) - 12/12/14 01:55 PM

Is the term "feather stubs" only used for the legs?
Posted by: Wieslaw

Re: Definitions(genetic load and others) - 12/12/14 02:17 PM

Originally Posted By: Norwegian
Is the term "feather stubs" only used for the legs?


As far as I know yes( but I'm not native speaker)
Posted by: Norwegian

Re: Definitions(genetic load and others) - 12/13/14 04:42 AM

Neither am I! ;-)
Posted by: Henk69

Re: Definitions(genetic load and others) - 12/13/14 04:58 AM

feather buds... wink Don't know sorry.
Posted by: Canuck_Bock_RAT

Re: Definitions(genetic load and others) - 12/13/14 11:37 AM

Heel low:

The term PIN feather is what is commonly used. I suppose the concept being that the tip of the feather (feathers are made of keratin protein), encased in a waxy casing, "pokes" (like a pin would) or fledges thru the hole for the feather (feather follicle) from where the original feather that is being replaced was originally.

I have had turkey hens moult so quickly she never had much time to break the waxy casing preening with her beak. She would ruffle what should be her feathers and make rattling noises! I called this stage, her "Porcupine" stage. Turkeys can be strange birds to begin with...ones encased in greyish pins instead of feathers are even stranger! wink

Some refer to PIN feathers as BLOOD feathers but as Wikipedia points out below...that term is only good so long as the blood is flowing WITHIN the feather as it develops.

The quote below will also answer your query about what the names of the parts are when the PIN feather opens up. I believe the specific parts are the barbs, barbules (feather webs) and central shaft or as more commonly called "quill."

Three types of feathers being vaned, down, and filoplume.

The feather shaft (rachis) becomes the quill (hollow tubular calamus) and fused to the main shaft are the barbs and branched further into barbules.


APA SOP 2010, page 19, figure 26: sections of feather are labelled as: shaft, quill, fluff or undercolor, web or surface.

No definition for "pin" or "blood" feather in ABA or APA SOPs.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pin_feather

Quote:
Pin feather
A pin feather, sometimes called a "blood feather", is a developing feather on a bird. This feather can grow as a new feather during the bird's infancy, or grow to replace one from moulting.

The pin feather looks somewhat like a feather shaft. However, unlike a fully developed feather, the pin feather has a blood supply flowing through it. As such, if the pin feather is damaged, a bird can bleed heavily.

As the pin feather grows longer, the blood supply is concentrated in only the base of the shaft, and the tip of the shaft encases the feather itself, in a waxy coating. As moulting birds preen, they remove the waxy coating, and the feather unfurls.

When the blood has receded, the term "blood feather" is no longer synonymous with "pin feather" – it can only be referred to as a pin feather.

Growth
Pin feathers begin to develop after the feather bud invaginates a cylinder of epidermal tissue around the base of the dermal papilla, forming the feather follicle. At the base of the feather follicle, epithelial cells proliferate to grow the epidermal collar or cylinder. As the epidermal cylinder extends through dermis, it differentiates into a protective peripheral sheath, longitudinal barb ridges, and growth plates. Over time these barb ridges lengthen helically, branch to create barbs and barbules, and fuse to form the rachis or central shaft. Moreover, the barb plate further differentiate into hooklets and cilia, while the marginal and axial plate die to form the intervening space within the feather structure.


Hope this helps.

Doggone & Chicken UP!

Tara Lee Higgins
Higgins Rat Ranch Conservation Farm
Posted by: coopmaster

Re: Definitions(genetic load and others) - 12/13/14 05:10 PM

Yes.
Posted by: Wieslaw

Re: Definitions(genetic load and others) - 12/14/14 03:44 AM

Thank you very much. Very detailed.
Posted by: Canuck_Bock_RAT

Re: Definitions(genetic load and others) - 12/16/14 10:45 AM

Originally Posted By: Wieslaw
Thank you very much. Very detailed.


Always an immense pleasure when the opportunity arises that we may actually assist persons of your high standing in the Fancy. grin

I'll never catch up to the help you have so generously given me and others here...but we CAN keep trying to challenge the overall tally's total on who gives more good help than the other! Heh heh heh...keep in mind I said "TRY!" crazy

Tara
Posted by: Wieslaw

Re: Definitions(genetic load and others) - 08/19/16 06:36 AM

This one is for strong theorists. I have read the newest Chinese paper on Cp gene

http://www.nature.com/articles/srep30172

I hope I will be capable of explaining what my "problem" is. According to the paper the Cp gene is actually the absence(deletion) of the ENTIRE IHH gene (Indian Hedgehog). Personally I can live with it, but I'd feel awkward while explaining to others, that the gene is actually the absence of the gene. Is there any definition of a gene, that covers such a situation?
Similar case with the Fm gene. According to what have been written, a region of a chromosome containing whole 5 genes is duplicated, and both copies of the original eumelanizing gene are expressed.
Posted by: Redcap

Re: Definitions(genetic load and others) - 08/19/16 02:16 PM

Maybe the deletion of genes could be explained by jumping genes (transposons)?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transposable_element
Posted by: KazJaps

Re: Definitions(genetic load and others) - 08/19/16 09:15 PM

A thread at BYC, posts on nomenclature & Fm:
http://www.backyardchickens.com/t/864273...0#post_13081898

Not only are there deletions, duplications etc of a gene, but also mutations in non-coding DNA regions, partial modification of multiple genes (eg K mutation) & even just deletions upstream to the structural gene, not on the gene itself (eg ASIP - agouti yellow in Jap Quails, SOX10 - Db in chickens, etc).
------------------------

STANDARDIZED NOMENCLATURE
http://www.informatics.jax.org/silver/chapters/3-4.shtml

Guidelines for Nomenclature of Genes, Genetic Markers, Alleles, and Mutations in Mouse and Rat
http://www.informatics.jax.org/mgihome/nomen/gene.shtml#trdef

Quote:

6.3 Locus
A locus is a point in the genome, identified by a marker, which can be mapped by some means. It does not necessarily correspond to a gene; it could, for example, be an anonymous non-coding DNA segment or a cytogenetic feature. A single gene may have several loci within it (each defined by different markers) and these markers may be separated in genetic or physical mapping experiments. In such cases, it is useful to define these different loci, but normally the gene name should be used to designate the gene itself, as this usually will convey the most information.


Also from the mouse genetics website:
Quote:
A single chromosome can only carry a single allele and, except in cases of duplication, deletion or trisomy, an animal carries two autosomal alleles. In particular, a transgene inserted randomly in the genome is not an allele of the endogenous locus; the condition is termed hemizygous if the transgene is present only in one of the two parental chromosome sets. By contrast, a gene modified by targeting at the endogenous locus is an allele and should be named as such.


A Complex A Complex Genomic Rearrangement Involving the Endothelin 3 Locus Causes Dermal Hyperpigmentation of the Chicken
Dorshorst et al. 2011
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3245302/
Quote:

There are several known coding elements within the first duplicated region including ATP5E (ATP synthase epsilon subunit), TUBB1 (tubulin, beta 1), SLMO2 (slowmo homolog 2) and EDN3 (endothelin 3).

NCBI Map viewer of EDN3 & the other genes within the duplicated region on Microchromosome 20:
Code:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/projects/mapview/maps.cgi?TAXID=9031&CHR=20&MAPS=genes[11229767.50%3A11232832.50]-r&QSTR=ATP5E&QUERY=uid(-2146617769)&zoom=1

*need to copy & paste above URL into browser
----------------------------
Using the above mouse genetics nomenclature rules, the old Fm nomenclature could be expressed as EDN3Fm for the Fibromelanosis mutation, and EDN3+ for the wild-type. Ie once the structural gene is identified, you combine old allele symbols with the structural gene.
Therefore, you wouldn't do EDN3FmFm for the Fibromelanosis allele, as "Fm" defines all the sequence for the Fibromelanosis mutation. You don't use the old allele nomenclature to express structural gene duplications & other modifications. Also it wouldn't be accurate to leave out other structural genes within the duplicated region.
Posted by: KazJaps

Re: Definitions(genetic load and others) - 08/19/16 09:57 PM

Originally Posted By: Wieslaw
This one is for strong theorists. I have read the newest Chinese paper on Cp gene

http://www.nature.com/articles/srep30172

I hope I will be capable of explaining what my "problem" is. According to the paper the Cp gene is actually the absence(deletion) of the ENTIRE IHH gene (Indian Hedgehog). Personally I can live with it, but I'd feel awkward while explaining to others, that the gene is actually the absence of the gene. Is there any definition of a gene, that covers such a situation?
Similar case with the Fm gene. According to what have been written, a region of a chromosome containing whole 5 genes is duplicated, and both copies of the original eumelanizing gene are expressed.


So with the above mouse genetics website definitions, the locus covers all the genomic regions modified in a mutation allele, & is not limited to a single structural gene. Nor is it limited to coding regions of a gene. But they usually name the locus allele after the structural gene that's expression is modified.

So the deletion of the genomic region in which the IHH gene is usually found, of course then knocks out expression of the IHH gene, therefore they say that Cp is a mutation of the IHH locus. Similar with Fm and EDN3 locus. The Fm allele has much more modification to this genomic region than the EDN3 structural gene itself, but it has the most effect on the expression of the EDN3 gene, therefore is named after it.
Posted by: KazJaps

Re: Definitions(genetic load and others) - 08/19/16 10:26 PM

The following NCBI map view of Cp creeper (IHH) & R rosecomb (MNR2, & CFAP65 (CCDC108)) loci:
Code:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/projects/mapview/maps.cgi?TAXID=9031&CHR=7&MAPS=genes[21637872.30%3A22000322.70]&query=CCDC108
* copy & paste above URL into browser

They also mention in that Cp paper that in humans a deletion of an amino acid in the IHH gene is causal to brachydactyly. As IHH is right next to the Rosecomb locus in chickens, I'm wondering now about the high incidence of brachydactyly I had in crosses of non-brachydactyly feather-legged single comb d'Uccles & non-brachydactyly clean-legged rosecomb Sebrights. I wish I had taken note of any correlations/linkages between rosecomb & brachydactyly, with feather-legged. Who knows, brachydactyly in chickens may be a mutation of IHH too (or a modifier/suppressor of brachydactyly expression), or in the same region (but possibly needing feather-legged genes for expression?).

In the pigeon feather-legged (ptilopody) study, their candidate genes (including a possible chicken one) were on chromosomes 13 & 15 in chickens, but Creeper & Rosecomb are on chromosome 7. But then, brachydactyly is not expressed in all chickens with feather legs (although brachydactyly rare when clean-legged).
Posted by: Wieslaw

Re: Definitions(genetic load and others) - 08/21/16 03:35 AM

Thank you guys. It was VERY helpful.




Posted by: Wieslaw

Re: Definitions(genetic load and others) - 09/05/16 08:24 AM

I'm looking for an English term for something. Not so long ago I read an article in a Danish Scientific Online Periodical about pieces of DNA floating freely in the cells.( I have forgotten the Danish term too). They were supposed to stem from deletions of genes or similar events . The context was, that they were suspected to be cancerogenic. I was trying to google intracellular and intranuclear DNA, but I did not find such a context. Does anybody know what I'm talking about?
Posted by: Redcap

Re: Definitions(genetic load and others) - 09/05/16 09:17 AM

Epigenes ?? Or Transposons??
Originally Posted By: Redcap
Maybe the deletion of genes could be explained by jumping genes (transposons)?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transposable_element
Posted by: dingsda

Re: Definitions(genetic load and others) - 09/05/16 12:55 PM

Originally Posted By: Wieslaw
I'm looking for an English term for something. Not so long ago I read an article in a Danish Scientific Online Periodical about pieces of DNA floating freely in the cells.( I have forgotten the Danish term too). They were supposed to stem from deletions of genes or similar events . The context was, that they were suspected to be cancerogenic. I was trying to google intracellular and intranuclear DNA, but I did not find such a context. Does anybody know what I'm talking about?


this wikipedia article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extrachromosomal_DNA names EE (extrachromosomal elements) and DM (double minute chromosomes) in the topic 'medicine and disease'. Maybe this is what you are looking for?
Posted by: Henk69

Re: Definitions(genetic load and others) - 09/18/16 08:55 AM

Extrachromosomal circular DNA?
Posted by: Wieslaw

Re: Definitions(genetic load and others) - 09/28/16 12:45 AM

Thank you guys. "Extrachromosomal" fits and "derived from genomic DNA" fits.
Posted by: Wieslaw

Re: Definitions(genetic load and others) - 10/18/16 09:32 AM

URGENT:
This one is mostly for native English speakers. I was entrusted with a verification of an English text written by a professional Japanese translator. In a description of a Columbian pattern and where the black is present, she uses a term "sub tail feathers". Does such a term exist at all?, I think she means tail coverts(is this the correct term?)

2)Are the terms secondaries and inner flight feathers equally correct? (she wrote sub wings)

3)The target audience of the text will be the "normal people". I need a term for e+ that will be universally "understood by everybody". Is "wild type pattern" understood by "non-geneticist"?

Please hurry


Posted by: Canuck_Bock_RAT

Re: Definitions(genetic load and others) - 10/18/16 10:07 AM

1) Co pattern in male, black diamonds would be on SADDLE of male. Female has no black on her CUSHION.

The portion where the male does not have black diamonds, is his BACK.

Columbian pattern as per SOP APA 2010, page 36...Silver Columbian is being described I believe... grin

MALE

Quote:

BACK: Silvery white.
Cape -- black and white.
Saddle -- silvery white with an elongated V-shaped black stripe increasing in width, length and density as it nears the tail coverts.

...

TAIL: Main Tail -- black.
Main and Lesser Sickles -- lustrous, greenish black.
Coverts -- lustrous. greenish black, laced with silvery white.


FEMALE

Quote:

TAIL: Main Tail -- black, except two top feathers, which are slightly laced with white.



2) APA SOP 2010 page 20...wings...



Uh, sub would be more likely to be submarine...and we all don't live in a Yellow Submarine (breaks into The Beatles rendition and clears room with screeching voice!) crazy


3) Regards to "normal persons" I would say what Sigrid says may deem workable.

GENETICS of Chicken Colours, pg 38

Quote:
e"+", Wild type 'partridge'



Dr. Carefoot, Creative Poultry Breeding, page 194

[quote]e"+" wild type plumage[\quote]


But I too would go with "wild type pattern!"

Partridge may confuse as we see that term used and there are many English speakers who have NO clue what that pattern is on a chicken thinking it is the partridge in a pear tree (little early for that, eh).

LOL Hope this helps you...in a rush to post it so other English speakers need to validate this too.

<hugs>

Tara
Posted by: Wieslaw

Re: Definitions(genetic load and others) - 10/18/16 10:32 AM

Thank you Tara, that was QUICK!!!
Do others have the same perception of "wild type pattern" as Tara?
Some European English present??
Posted by: Hen-Gen

Re: Definitions(genetic load and others) - 10/19/16 02:09 AM

Yes, I'll go along with Tara though for me a sub is a kind of sandwich from an American fast food chain!

Always avoided the word 'partridge' in relation to wild type because it is a colour of Wyandotte based on eb, Pg and s+.

To be honest I don't think that a non geneticist would understand wild type.
Posted by: John

Re: Definitions(genetic load and others) - 10/19/16 07:17 AM

Wild Type probably needs at least a little definition. There was a paper referred to in another topic here that used
Quote:
E*N, wild type;
with "N" for Normal. Maybe define wild type as the gene(s) normally or typically found in wild chickens...or whatever.
Posted by: KazJaps

Re: Definitions(genetic load and others) - 10/19/16 01:06 PM

It was a real shame that someone named eb Pg as "Partridge" Wyandottes (& Cochins, Brahmas), as the name Black-breasted Red - Partridge had already been used in UK & Europe for wild-type.

Now it has to be explained that different breeds have different names for wild type, eg Black-breasted Red (USA OEG), Black-breasted Red -Partridge (in Australian OEG, classes depending on gender, ie Black-breasted Red = males, Partridge = females), Black Red - Partridge Modern Games (again depending on gender), Partridge Dutch Bantams (Europe), Gold Partridge Dutch Bantams (UK), Brown Leghorn (UK), Light Brown Leghorn (USA), Golden Salmon Marans (USA), etc....
Posted by: Canuck_Bock_RAT

Re: Definitions(genetic load and others) - 10/21/16 07:34 AM

Cripers...don't get us going into all the "names" that mean totally the opposite, pending what country you reside in. Aggh...frustration at its finest.

I just read someone posting a Mauve Splash something or other chicken. Good gack! Mauve being, what chocolate/brown and lavender or...so glad we can list the genetic recipes to explain what we have going on and avoid all the "name calling."



On wild type since we won't likely all agree on which variety of Junglefowl (one, some, all?) originated our lovely chicken, how about...


Quote:
Wild Type - Colour pattern of the domestic chicken's wild ancestor--no mutations from wild type.


Something to say, this is our "base line" and any changes to wild type come from mutations?

Tara
Posted by: John

Re: Definitions(genetic load and others) - 10/21/16 09:15 AM

Originally Posted By: Canuck_Bock_RAT

On wild type since we won't likely all agree on which variety of Junglefowl (one, some, all?) originated our lovely chicken, how about...


Quote:
Wild Type - Colour pattern of the domestic chicken's wild ancestor--no mutations from wild type.


Something to say, this is our "base line" and any changes to wild type come from mutations?

Tara


I was temped to associate Wild Type with "color/pattern", but I didn't think that was enough. The term "Wild Type" isn't just about the e-locus and refers to all the characteristics like combs and skin color, just to name a couple.
Posted by: KazJaps

Re: Definitions(genetic load and others) - 10/21/16 03:31 PM

Quote:
On wild type since we won't likely all agree on which variety of Junglefowl (one, some, all?) originated our lovely chicken, how about...


All the old geneticists used Red Jungle fowl as the wild-type standard (& often used RJF for test breeding). Need something to compare to, to define likes & differences (yes, base line).

Note, even the yellow-skin mutation allele in domestic chickens has a different DNA sequence to Gray Jungle fowl (it's proposed ancestor). White skin W+ is the wild-type, w yellow skin is the mutation allele.
Posted by: Wieslaw

Re: Definitions(genetic load and others) - 05/10/17 04:36 AM

English help wanted: can the noun "pet" be used while talking about a plant (like: this plant is my pet)?
Posted by: CJR

Re: Definitions(genetic load and others) - 05/10/17 11:54 AM

The word: "favorite", would be a better choice. "Pet" may be used loosely, for any "favorite", even an inanimate toy, but is not a good choice.
Posted by: Wieslaw

Re: Definitions(genetic load and others) - 05/10/17 03:43 PM

Thanks CJR
Posted by: Wieslaw

Re: Definitions(genetic load and others) - 08/07/17 03:27 AM

English help wanted again. Here on the forum I have been using a phrase "this hen is built on eb"

1) Would "based on eb" be more suitable?
2) Will such a phrase be understood by people who are not "in the know"?
3)What is the correct name of a short text under a photo (explaining what the photo is showing)
4) Which form is more elegant: "Two females from Mr X's breeding" or "Two females from the breeding of Mr X"
Posted by: Hen-Gen

Re: Definitions(genetic load and others) - 08/07/17 02:51 PM

Yes, based on would be better.
The term for the explanation that accompanies a photo is the caption.
In terms of elegance, both options are grammatically correct but the first is the contemporary lingua franca whereas the second is somewhat dated and clumsy.
Posted by: Wieslaw

Re: Definitions(genetic load and others) - 08/08/17 12:42 PM

Thanks Hen-Gen.
Posted by: Wieslaw

Re: Definitions(genetic load and others) - 08/13/17 11:43 PM

Are the names of chickens breeds in English written with a capital or small letter? leghorns or Leghorns? Especially the Japanese ones. I have only found about dogs, that some breeds are written with small and if the name includes places or people names, then with a capital letter.
Thanks
Posted by: Hen-Gen

Re: Definitions(genetic load and others) - 08/14/17 04:26 AM

If its a generic term the small letter eg he owns a spaniel, she was out walking her terrier.
However if it's a specific breed then capital letters eg he has a Springer Spaniel, she was out walking her Cairn Terrier.

And so with chickens. Eg he breeds chickens, she keeps Exchequer Leghorns.

Interesting question though, if the breed name does not refer to a place or persons name then why use capitals? Convention!
Posted by: Wieslaw

Re: Definitions(genetic load and others) - 08/15/17 09:58 AM

Thanks Hen-Gen. Maybe two more for you(or others too):
1)
I'm translating descriptions of a Japanese drawing into English. They want to know the name of the part of the neck hackle which is seen when you look at the front of the bird("front hackle??")

2) I have seen different spellings on the Internet, and don't know which to chose:

toenail vs toe nail
tail-coverts vs tail coverts
primary-coverts vs primary coverts
wing-coverts vs wing coverts
wing-bow vs wing bow

Thanks




Posted by: KazJaps

Re: Definitions(genetic load and others) - 08/15/17 04:41 PM

It is strange with the naming of genes that they went with lower case as a nomenclature rule:

Quote:
The name of the genetic trait should be written with a
lower-case initial letter (e.g., dominant white, crest)


Alphabetical list of the genes of domestic fowl.
Somes RG Jr.
J Hered. 1980 May-Jun;71(3):168-74.
First page preview
Posted by: Hen-Gen

Re: Definitions(genetic load and others) - 08/16/17 01:01 AM

Originally Posted By: Wieslaw
Thanks Hen-Gen. Maybe two more for you(or others too):
1)
I'm translating descriptions of a Japanese drawing into English. They want to know the name of the part of the neck hackle which is seen when you look at the front of the bird("front hackle??")

2) I have seen different spellings on the Internet, and don't know which to chose:

toenail vs toe nail
tail-coverts vs tail coverts
primary-coverts vs primary coverts
wing-coverts vs wing coverts
wing-bow vs wing bow

Thanks






The Oxford English Dictionay recognises the word 'toenail'.
In the other cases the use of the hyphen is incorrect. The second options you give are the right way of expressing these anatomical features.
So far as I know there is no word for the front of the hackle.

Interestingly (to etymologists) the hyphen is widely over used by English speakers.
Posted by: Wieslaw

Re: Definitions(genetic load and others) - 08/17/17 03:01 PM

thanks Hen-Gen
I have found the term "front hackle" on the picture in the following link

http://www.yellowbirchhobbyfarm.com/roosters-a-complete-guide/
Posted by: Hen-Gen

Re: Definitions(genetic load and others) - 08/18/17 10:53 AM

Well that's our friends across the Atlantic!
What's that old saying, ' two nations separated by a common language ' ! laugh
Posted by: KazJaps

Re: Definitions(genetic load and others) - 08/21/17 10:40 PM

The following South African show poultry website has the chicken anatomy illustration that is in the British Poultry Standards:
http://www.poultryclubsa.co.za/anatomy-of-chickens/

11 Neck
12 Neck hackle
13 Breast

27 Primary flights
28 Wing bay
29 Wing bar
30 Wing covert
31 Shoulder
32 Wing bow
33 Saddle hackle

34 Tail covert
35 Side Hangers
36 Tail sickle
37 Main tail
38 Back

*see above link for full legend
----------------------------
Note, the British Poultry Standards differs from the American by having both "neck hackles" and "saddle hackles".
Posted by: KazJaps

Re: Definitions(genetic load and others) - 08/21/17 11:24 PM

One area that gets quite confusing is the wing feather terminology.

It seems "shoulder" and "wing bow" are often interchanged, but they are actually different areas. Might not be so noticeable in softfeather breeds, but in Modern Game males going through moults, it's easier to see 3 sections /feather type areas that combine to make the wing bow.


See that only a part of the scapulars, feathers raised up in this cockerel (which some call the shoulder), are phaeomelanin red:

-------------------
The following great photos show how the wing bow coverts & scapular (left of wing front (wing butt) & wing bow) phaeomelanin feathers join:
http://www.geauga4h.org/poultry/chicken_parts_wing.htm

Image from John Anderson, Dept. of Animal Sciences, The Ohio State University.

--------------------
From The filipino Vet:
http://www.thefilipinovet.com/useful-info.html?chart=gamefowl
Posted by: KazJaps

Re: Definitions(genetic load and others) - 08/22/17 12:08 AM

Wing diagram at Scratchcradle....
https://scratchcradle.wordpress.com/2012/04/19/chick-sexing-techniques/
Posted by: Wieslaw

Re: Definitions(genetic load and others) - 08/23/17 09:04 AM

Thanks Kazjaps. Very illustrative pictures.
Posted by: Wieslaw

Re: Definitions(genetic load and others) - 08/29/17 12:26 PM

I recall many years ago there was a discussion somewhere (here??) about the origin and meaning of the word crele.Anybody recalls? The issue is whether it has (or does not have) anything to do with creole, and if yes, then what? Or fish basket(creel)?

http://www.the-coop.org/forums/ubbthread...true#Post113671
Posted by: Redcap

Re: Definitions(genetic load and others) - 08/29/17 01:33 PM

In The Poultry Book is an explanation of these terms
https://books.google.de/books?id=3kUDAAA...%20&f=false


Posted by: Wieslaw

Re: Definitions(genetic load and others) - 09/06/17 03:26 AM

Thanks Redcap