nicksiders
GOLD MEMBER
4297 posts
Apr 07, 2010
2:59 AM
|
A crossbreed or crossbred usually refers to an animal with purebred parents of two different breeds, varieties, or populations. Crossbreeding refers to the process of breeding such an animal, often with the intention to create offspring that share the traits of both parent lineages, or producing an animal with hybrid vigor. While crossbreeding is used to maintain health and viability of animals, irresponsible crossbreeding can also produce animals of inferior quality or dilute a purebred gene pool to the point of extinction of a given breed of animal.
The term is also is used at times to refer to a domestic animal of unknown ancestry where the breed status of only one parent or grandparent is known, though the term "mixed breeding" is technically more accurate. The term outcross is used to describe a type of crossbreeding used within a purebred breed to increase the genetic diversity within the breed, particularly when there is a need to avoid inbreeding.
----------
A True Friend Is Hard To Find
------------------------------------------
Nick Siders
Last Edited by on Apr 07, 2010 3:01 AM
|
nicksiders
GOLD MEMBER
4298 posts
Apr 07, 2010
3:09 AM
|
Breeding Systems:
Cross-breeding, line-breeding, in-breeding? Which to use, that is the question. At one end of the spectrum of difficulty is cross-breeding, the easiest system, and at the other end is in-breeding, the most difficult.
Cross-breeding: the mating of birds with no relationship within the previous five generations. That is what the experts say, but we could say unrelated birds. This is the simplest system and the one used by a lot of fanciers. You avoid some of the hazards of in-breeding.
Line-breeding: somewhat the same as in-breeding but it takes longer to establish purity. For most fanciers it is less risky and less-expensive. It could involve the following matings: grandfather to granddaughter; grandmother to grandson; cousin to cousin.
In-breeding: a system used to concentrate desirable genes in a family. This system uses matings as follows: father to daughter, mother to son, brother to sister. Never start in-breeding with anything but the very best stock. Do not expect to take mediocre birds and improve their quality by using this system. In-breeding quickly shows up all the good qualities, by allowing the best association of genes, but it also shows up the faults.
If you are not good at culling don't start in-breeding because strict culling is a given in this system.
----------
A True Friend Is Hard To Find
------------------------------------------
Nick Siders
Last Edited by on Apr 07, 2010 3:10 AM
|
Scott Coe
68 posts
Apr 07, 2010
4:33 AM
|
Well said!! That is the only reason to start near the top. Thanks to all that came before me,your hard work shall make mine just a little easier. THANKS!!!
Scott Coe
Without friends its impossible.
|
birdman
811 posts
Apr 07, 2010
7:05 AM
|
Nick,
in your post #4298 you quoted the following:
"In-breeding: a system used to concentrate desirable genes in a family. This system uses matings as follows: father to daughter, mother to son, brother to sister. Never start in-breeding with anything but the very best stock. Do not expect to take mediocre birds and improve their quality by using this system. In-breeding quickly shows up all the good qualities, by allowing the best association of genes, but it also shows up the faults."
......................................................
Nick,
Can you explain why I should not expect the quality of mediocre birds to be improved upon?
Russ
|
Ballrollers
GOLD MEMBER
2388 posts
Apr 07, 2010
7:38 AM
|
Russ,
The way I look at it is that the birds can only produce in their offspring, the qualities imparted by the genes that they carry. If the bird is performing to certain characteristics of performance (depth, speed, quality, etc.) then you have at least a clue as to what genes it possesses. If the bird is not performing, it MAY have some genes for good performance characteristics, but it may also have zero. (You just have no clue.) A bird with the genetic make-up for a certain level of performance, may be able to improve on those properties itself, with proper training and conditioning (and be able to impart that capacity to do so to its offspring); but in my opinion, a pair of birds cannot impart genes for BETTER performance, because they don't have those genes to begin with. That is why the broader the gene pool, the less likely we are to get the right gene combinations for best performance. I also hear and read that one should not worry about depth because it will come. Personally, I don't believe it. Breeding out of six-foot rollers has never produced a 30-footer in my lofts. If you want to produce it in the offspring, it has to be present in the genetic make-up of the parent,; either apparent and visible in its performance, or hidden and present in its pedigree. This is an oversimplification and it is much more complex, but you get the idea.
Cliff
|
birdman
812 posts
Apr 07, 2010
8:12 AM
|
Cliff,
According to what Nick has quoted, we can't expect to improve mediocre birds by inbreeding.
If that's the case, and using the logic of your explanation that "birds cannot impart genes for BETTER performance because they don't have those genes to begin with", then how can we expect to improve our good birds by inbreeding?
Russ
PS: for the record, I'm not advocating the use of mediocre birds.
Last Edited by on Apr 07, 2010 8:14 AM
|
Ballrollers
GOLD MEMBER
2389 posts
Apr 07, 2010
11:32 AM
|
Russ,
In my opinion, through line-breeding, our hope is to bring out all the genes that are present for positive performance qualities in the original birds; and to get better combinations of genes for spin, type and character that will produce better overall performance. That's our only hope. We cannot "create" genes for performance, through inbreeding. What linebreeding REALLY hopes to impart is higher percentages of good ones, and a few more exceptional ones.
Cliff
Last Edited by on Apr 07, 2010 11:33 AM
|
Tony Chavarria
Site Publisher
3966 posts
Apr 07, 2010
12:37 PM
|
What? Guys, step back for a minute and think about what you are saying...by the reasoning I am hearing in this thread, the BR just showed up as a perfect specimen? I think not. As we all know, the breed was developed and improved upon over time up and until we arrived to the aerial standard. How many have perfect birds? To use the logic being bandied about here, unless every bird is a perfect specimen, they are by necessity all culls.
Lucy, you have some splainin' to do...
----------
FLY ON!
Tony Chavarria
Your Own Custom Telephone # Bands
The highest form of ignorance is to reject something you know nothing about.” – Dr. Wayne W. Dyer
|
nicksiders
GOLD MEMBER
4299 posts
Apr 07, 2010
12:57 PM
|
Russ, the way I look at it is that birds can only reproduce themselves. I feel that the only way a mediocre bird can elevate its off spring is to be paired with a higher value bird.
Over all evaluation of a bird may make its value to be mediocre, but it may have one trait that is outstanding that you are seeking. Another bird of the opposite sex may have another trait that you are seeking even though its over all value may be mediocre. You can breed these mediocre birds and receive a more high value bird, but at what cost? Your cull percentage would be extreme and if the off spring that comes them them make it back to the stock loft what will they reproduce? The qualities of mediocretsey or the high value qualities? I would think it would be majority mediocre and thus the mediocretsey of your loft continues.
----------
A True Friend Is Hard To Find
------------------------------------------
Nick Siders
Last Edited by on Apr 07, 2010 5:23 PM
|
birdman
813 posts
Apr 07, 2010
1:24 PM
|
Tony, you made the point I was leading up to!....lol
Nick, do you think the very first rollers were mediocre or worse, or were they perfect spinning champions?
Russ
|
Sunflower
GOLD MEMBER
646 posts
Apr 07, 2010
1:26 PM
|
Tony,
The breed was improved by breeding only the best birds with the qualities desired not every bird or even most birds. The first rollers were not perfect but some were deep, some were fast etc. By breeding those together we get what we desire and increase the percentages of good birds. The doctine of Mediocrity says that like begets like. Mediocre rollers will produce nothing but more mediocre rollers.
----------
Keep em Spinning
Joe
Last Edited by on Apr 07, 2010 1:47 PM
|
Oldfart
GOLD MEMBER
1711 posts
Apr 07, 2010
1:46 PM
|
Hey All, I‘m not as qualified as most but I paid my dime and with my two cents worth, I have change coming. I made no secret that I have been inbreeding from three birds to the closest degree. I have all but eliminated the second hen’s blood. So for all purposes I’m working with the blood lines of two birds. I have held to father-daughter, mother-son, grandfather-granddaughter and grandmother-grandson pairings. I have tried siblings with mixed results.
The one point I have not seen brought to the front of this conversation is selection. Obviously, I fall within the inbreeding/line breeding camp BUT only with extreme selection. Nick was exactly right, if you have trouble with culling then this is not your chosen path. He was also right in that starting with the very best stock you can obtain will save years of work. Inbreeding is not magic, there is no instant reward, gratification comes slowly and most will become impatient before realizing the progress they have made. I started with good stock but the birds I have now are better then my start point. This will be my forth generation and the only downside is they all look alike! They are all the same size, the same temperament, require the same feed and react as a kit to changes.
JMHO
Thom
|
birdman
814 posts
Apr 07, 2010
1:59 PM
|
Thom,
if you improved your birds by inbreeding can you tell me why someone shouldn't expect to be able to do the same with mediocre birds?
Russ
|
birdman
815 posts
Apr 07, 2010
2:05 PM
|
Joe,
Do you think that the fast rollers, the deep rollers, etc... just showed up on the roller scene or was there a beginning of the roller creation?
Russ
|
Oldfart
GOLD MEMBER
1712 posts
Apr 07, 2010
2:10 PM
|
Russ, One person's best will be another person's mediocrity. I am of the opinion that inbreeding with selection can improve any two pigeons. The better the stock the shorter the journey but ANY starting point can be improved. If that were not true we would not have any birds that spin. There are birds that roll in nature but none that spin like a Birmingham!
Again, JMHO
Thom
Last Edited by on Apr 07, 2010 2:43 PM
|
nicksiders
GOLD MEMBER
4300 posts
Apr 07, 2010
2:46 PM
|
I don't think all rollers showed up as high value rollers, but some where more high value than others. I believe the wiser breeder took the two highest value rollers and bred them and so on and so forth.
----------
A True Friend Is Hard To Find
------------------------------------------
Nick Siders
|
Tony Chavarria
Site Publisher
3967 posts
Apr 07, 2010
2:55 PM
|
Hey Joe, I have my thoughts but am trying to understand yours. Are you indicating the traits we seek in the roller, improved gradually (mutated) over time to give us what we now refer to as the aerial standard or that they have always been present in the pigeon without need for mutation? Thanks
----------
FLY ON!
Tony Chavarria
Your Own Custom Telephone # Bands
The highest form of ignorance is to reject something you know nothing about.” – Dr. Wayne W. Dyer
|
Pinwheel
195 posts
Apr 07, 2010
3:00 PM
|
Well in theory I would suppose you could improve mediocre birds, I think it would just take a longer time. Just like the really good birds, back in their lineage, I doubt all were really good. But there was a progression and selection for a bird that went a little farther each time. So I think its possible if you select right. No one knows the mechanism behind why they roll, so whos to say you cant improve mediocre birds. I am like my father, but I perform much better then he and my parents combine. Though comparing us to our birds may be apples to oranges. Yet my sister, probably a slight improvement in human performance to our parents, but not much. SO mediocore parents of mine threw a spectacular kid! lol
----------
Flying in someone else's backyard: Portable Kits
|
Tony Chavarria
Site Publisher
3968 posts
Apr 07, 2010
3:00 PM
|
Hey Joe you changed your post that I responded to!?
----------
FLY ON!
Tony Chavarria
Your Own Custom Telephone # Bands
The highest form of ignorance is to reject something you know nothing about.” – Dr. Wayne W. Dyer
|
Tony Chavarria
Site Publisher
3969 posts
Apr 07, 2010
3:11 PM
|
Joe, here is how I view it, when things are left naturally, things regress to the "mean" (so, I agree with your doctrine of mediocrity). However, it is a fact proven with livestock and poultry that with proper human intervention in parent selection, the stock can and does improve over time (could be a LONG time, but doesn't have to).
Every trait has a beginning, and not all - if any traits begin at the "breed standard" measurement.
----------
FLY ON!
Tony Chavarria
Your Own Custom Telephone # Bands
The highest form of ignorance is to reject something you know nothing about.” – Dr. Wayne W. Dyer
|
Oldfart
GOLD MEMBER
1713 posts
Apr 07, 2010
5:00 PM
|
A different place, but the same. Our youth are stagnating because parents have low expectations. Mediocrity has become the accepted norm. If in reality we can never progress beyond the capabilities of our parents, then what is the point? The same applies for our birds, if the best we can hope is just to maintain, I'm going fishing! At least I have the dream of catching a big ole bass!
The genetic pool is so diverse and the combinations so varied, of course we can win the lottery! It's not magic, it's dogma. The dreaming will pay off if given the proper amount of time. Chasing different families will not improve your stud, choosing one and sticking with it will. I can't convince anyone and I am not changing my mind, so....in the words of one I respect.
I wish you the best with them.
Thom
|
J_Star
2289 posts
Apr 08, 2010
4:44 AM
|
I am with the belief that you can breed two mediocre birds and harness some exceptional ones from them only and only if the pair are from good reputable family of BRs. Reputable families can be debated, however, any family that is bred tight and with high percentages of good offspring are the ones I am referring to. The reason is that the genetic make up is there but need to be expressed in the mediocre pairs. Once those good ones are developed then the original parents would be eliminated and the offspring put in the breeding loft.
Jay
|
Sunflower
GOLD MEMBER
647 posts
Apr 08, 2010
7:28 AM
|
Tony,
I agree that human intervention by way of parental selection can improve a breed, but you must have a bird that possesses the trait that you are attempting to replicate in the offspring. I say again breeding 2 average rollers together will not produce outstanding birds but rather more average birds. In other words "You can't make a silk purse out of a sow's ear".
I believe in-breeding or close line breeding is the only way to move a family along toward improvement. But as Nick points out, you need the tenacity to cull ruthlessly. I have been doing that with my indigo line. In the last 4 years I have raised 61 indigo factored birds. I have 6 left in the loft that spin the way I want and those are the ones that I will use to move the line forward.
----------
Keep em Spinning
Joe
Last Edited by on Apr 08, 2010 7:33 AM
|
Pinwheel
199 posts
Apr 08, 2010
7:48 AM
|
Joe, how long did you fly out all those birds before you either culled or kept. Was it the same for each.
----------
Flying in someone else's backyard: Portable Kits
|
Tony Chavarria
Site Publisher
3970 posts
Apr 08, 2010
8:37 AM
|
Joe, or anyone, what would you consider an "average" roller? To what degree is expression of a trait that makes it average or above-average?
Also, do you or does anyone know conclusively if the so-called Ro gene is influenced for better or worse by other genes? What if the influence of other genes causes the Ro gene to not express itself for the better (average roller)? What if the offending gene was minimized thus allowing the Ro gene to better express itself? What if successful strain makers recognize certain phenotype in their strain thus enabling them to better determine the potential for young birds to express desired traits and to pass them on to future offspring?
Joe, a sow's ear could never transmogrify into silk which comes from a worm. Read "Darwins Black Box". ;-)
----------
FLY ON!
Tony Chavarria
Your Own Custom Telephone # Bands
The highest form of ignorance is to reject something you know nothing about.” – Dr. Wayne W. Dyer
|
Ballrollers
GOLD MEMBER
2390 posts
Apr 08, 2010
9:28 AM
|
Tony,
To respond to your statement, "...by the reasoning I am hearing in this thread, the BR just showed up as a perfect specimen? I think not. As we all know, the breed was developed and improved upon over time up and until we arrived to the aerial standard."
I think there are a couple possible explanations. One is that gennetic modification occurs over time....mutation, crossover, etc. and most importantly...SELECTION occurs....each in itself capable of influencing (and improving) the type of performance that we value. The ones that created performance that we value are selected....the ones that we do not value get culled...so those genes are reduced in the gene pool. The other possible explanation is that there are many varieties of genes for type (physical attributes-feathering, muscle, bone structure)and mental strength or character that affect performance, both positively and negatively. There are almost endless permutations of possible combinations of these variables. Again, through selection in the many families of rollers, we keep narrowing down the gene pool for positive performance attributes. Thus the breed "improves" through time. I use quotes, because it is strictly a human-desired "improvement", and not a basic survival skill in nature.....which is usually what makes these determinations in a species.
Cliff
Last Edited by on Apr 08, 2010 9:30 AM
|
Sunflower
GOLD MEMBER
648 posts
Apr 08, 2010
9:34 AM
|
Pinwheel,
I try to fly everything out for 2 years. getting harder to do with the BOP situation. Rolldowns, non-flyers and non-kitters show during the 1st year. By the time I get to the second year I am looking for style, depth and velocity of the roll. If they don't have it after 2 years they are gone.
Tony, I place very little stock in expression per se. I really don't know if the ro gene, yes little r, is influenced by other genes. I believe that it was Quinn or Dr. Hollander that assigned the ro gene as recessive which makes sense to me. It is easy to breed away from it and wind up with tipplers. I think a good breeder who knows his family can predict the outcomes of various matings by evaluating the traits of the parents but this certainly isn't foolproof.
----------
Keep em Spinning
Joe
|
Ballrollers
GOLD MEMBER
2391 posts
Apr 08, 2010
9:41 AM
|
Tony,
As to your questions: "Also, do you or does anyone know conclusively if the so-called Ro gene is influenced for better or worse by other genes? What if the influence of other genes causes the Ro gene to not express itself for the better (average roller)? What if the offending gene was minimized thus allowing the Ro gene to better express itself? What if successful strain makers recognize certain phenotype in their strain thus enabling them to better determine the potential for young birds to express desired traits and to pass them on to future offspring?"
...they all are very appropriate in explaining the complexity of why breeding rollers with the desired performance, on a constant basis, is so difficult. We DO know that all genes, including the "Ro" gene(s) are modulated in their expression(their expression turned on and off and mildly or intensely expressed) by thousands of gene regulators and modifiers, and that it may be the inheritance of these modifiers that is more critical than the inheritance of the gene itself. A couple of years ago, I re-printed an article about this biologic phenomenon and its potential impact on our breeding.
So the situations you propose in your questions, along with many, many more, undoubtedly DO come into play.
Cliff
P.S. Tony...is the "search feature" still available on RPDC?
Last Edited by on Apr 08, 2010 9:49 AM
|
Tony Chavarria
Site Publisher
3971 posts
Apr 08, 2010
9:53 AM
|
Hey Joe, yes, little "r" as it would be recessive. In reading your post #648, I think we actually agree in our thinking. To what extent is not important?
Cliff, yes, I think you nailed it too! I think these are reasons why it is important to work with a line of birds until we understand the phenotype (I just like that word!).
----------
FLY ON!
Tony Chavarria
Your Own Custom Telephone # Bands
The highest form of ignorance is to reject something you know nothing about.” – Dr. Wayne W. Dyer
|
Tony Chavarria
Site Publisher
3972 posts
Apr 08, 2010
9:54 AM
|
Cliff, yes, third link down in link index called "Search Site". LOL
----------
FLY ON!
Tony Chavarria
Your Own Custom Telephone # Bands
The highest form of ignorance is to reject something you know nothing about.” – Dr. Wayne W. Dyer
|
wishiwon2
321 posts
Apr 08, 2010
11:35 AM
|
For what its worth, I'd like to chime in here on a couple different topic within this thread.
In response to one of the original points; inbreeding can result in improvements, but they (improvements) will come more slowly the closer the relationship and the longer the breeding practice. It is the best way to 'fix' genes within a strain, but possibly not the best way to promote improvement. The greater the genetic diversity the greater the chance of improvement (and of failure) or the greater the degree of improvement possible. As each contributor becomes more alike, there is less chance for a 'new' or 'improved' genetic combination that could result as an improvement. However once a solid foundation has been formed, inbreeding is a sucessful way to perpetuate the new found 'improved' combination. Hence why so many have stated you must start with a superior individual.
Tony, I think we should be careful to realize that not all genetic changes are the result of mutations. (post 3967) There is tremendous diversity already contained in the genetic code that can be manipulated and drawn out through selective breeding. Although I have no conclusive evidence to support my opinion, I do believe that the genetic code (ro) is modified, even controlled by multiple other genes. I believe the rolling behavior is the result of more than a single gene. In other words, I dont believe there to be a single ro gene, but perhaps a series of genes that all contribute to and control rolling behavior. If it were a single gene, it could be relatively easily isolated and an order of dominance established, just as has been done for color, eyes, etc.
Tony asked, "Joe, or anyone, what would you consider an "average" roller? To what degree is expression of a trait that makes it average or above-average?"
Without trying to assume too much, I think you are asking whether a bird could be a gentically superior roller, but due to modifying factors which could include some that are environmental vs genetic, express itself as a mediocre or average roller? and/or Could a mediocre performer still have value as breeding stock because of the modification of expression by contributing genes? My thoughts are this; It could have value, there has been much discussion in the past about using a non-performer out of good producing parents with good results. But I ask why do so, when better expressions are to be had. I believe like begets like. If the roll expression is masked by modifiers in the parent, it is reasonable to assume it would be masked similarly in the offspring. There are alot of 'what if' questions. Until there is a less expensive and simpler way to map pigeon genomes, the proof is still in the air. There are no substitutions for airtesting birds before moving to stock. Unfortunatley it doesnt offer any garuantee of success, but I think it greatly increases the odds.
----------
Jon
If it were easy, everybody would do it
|
Ballrollers
GOLD MEMBER
2392 posts
Apr 08, 2010
12:43 PM
|
Sound logic, Jon! Well-thought out, and I agree.
Cliff
Last Edited by on Apr 08, 2010 12:44 PM
|
Ballrollers
GOLD MEMBER
2393 posts
Apr 08, 2010
12:46 PM
|
Thanks, Tony, for pointing out the obvious search button. Duh! Sometimes one doesn't see the forest for the trees! LOL!
Cliff
Last Edited by on Apr 08, 2010 12:47 PM
|
pigeon pete
534 posts
Apr 08, 2010
1:39 PM
|
Genetics make my head hurt, but any family of birds can be moved one way or another by careful or not so carefull selection, so yes a mediocre pair can breed better or worse than thenselves, in fact they may have more scope for improvenemt in their young than a top class pair.
The question is, why would you want to breed rollers a bit better than mediocre this year, and then a bit more better than mediocre next year when you can start of with good birds in the first place?
|
kcfirl
636 posts
Apr 08, 2010
2:21 PM
|
Jon Farr,
excellent post that I very much agree with. If we think about the so-called "great" pigeons of the past such as Black Rain or 514, the tend to come from outcrosses and definitely not from close inbreeding.
If you want a great kit without having to breed alot of birds, do it with in linebreeding. If you want a superstar and are willing to cull the chaff, go for the outcross.
Regards,
Ken
PS. Looking forward to your visit.
|
Sunflower
GOLD MEMBER
649 posts
Apr 08, 2010
4:40 PM
|
John,
It is not cross breeding but rather an outcross within the breed. One family of rollers on another family of rollers.
----------
Keep em Spinning
Joe
|
birdman
816 posts
Apr 08, 2010
4:41 PM
|
Nick,
Is this site where you got the article you pasted here ?
http://www.racing-pigeon-fancier.com/breeding.htm
Sure looks familiar.
Last Edited by on Apr 08, 2010 4:54 PM
|
wishiwon2
322 posts
Apr 08, 2010
4:51 PM
|
Well John, not in the strict sense or definition of 'cross-breeding' which is used more to define matings between species or distinct varieties.
But I would say it could be applied here. In many cases, selection choices have resulted in wide differences in Birmingham rollers. Some are short, others are deep, some very frequent others seldom, some roll individually while others roll primarily with their kitmates, some are larger, some naturally fly higher, ... and on and on go the differences. For any individual trait there is a bell curve that describes the median or 'normal'. Those that come from the extremities for multiple traits, differ in more ways than they are similar, and therefore in my opinion, qualify as some form of a cross mating.
There is also a question of origin of what are called Birmingham rollers. Since there is no stud book to limit ancestry, they may well come from varied sources, including matings with other pigeon breeds in their origination. There are fairly well defined familial lines established, each with their own unique set of attributes. It may be more correct to call it an outcross instead of cross-breed. However, there isnt a well defined breed standard for Birminghams, but that is another debate.
----------
Jon
If it were easy, everybody would do it
|
Scott Coe
69 posts
Apr 08, 2010
4:56 PM
|
As a new comer in this I may not have the right to interject. A trait or trail is common if it's desirable breed for it. Move forward time is a luxury most of us have. The greatest did not come overnight. Chose your path and follow it. The last I will say. Sorry!!
|
nicksiders
GOLD MEMBER
4301 posts
Apr 08, 2010
5:42 PM
|
Russ, that is where I got it. Did you actually think I was smart enough to come up with that stuff myself?
----------
A True Friend Is Hard To Find
------------------------------------------
Nick Siders
|
birdman
817 posts
Apr 08, 2010
6:19 PM
|
Nick,
I knew I read it somewhere before.
I was wondering if you were writing articles for homing pigeon sites...lol
|
nicksiders
GOLD MEMBER
4302 posts
Apr 08, 2010
6:48 PM
|
Russ, I went to a state university(LOL)and played football
----------
A True Friend Is Hard To Find
------------------------------------------
Nick Siders
|
birdman
818 posts
Apr 08, 2010
9:35 PM
|
I hope they learnt you good...lol
|
fhtfire
2505 posts
Apr 09, 2010
12:01 AM
|
Tony.....I believe we beat this horse to death some years back...when I did my big long hybrid vigor post on how fanciers seem to use the term the wrong way....and we discussed what cross breeding was....LOL..its funny how things come back around...LOL
rock and ROLL
Paul
|
nicksiders
GOLD MEMBER
4304 posts
Apr 09, 2010
12:10 AM
|
I remember Paul, but I was reading a bunch of information from a bunch of sources and this caught my interest.
----------
A True Friend Is Hard To Find
------------------------------------------
Nick Siders
|
Scott
2991 posts
Apr 09, 2010
7:39 AM
|
Jon.. I disagree .. Birmingham rollers are easily identified as such regardless of country.. family or what have you..unless they are crossbred...which are also eassily identifed.
----------
Scott Campbell
" God Bless "
|
Sound Rollers
296 posts
Apr 09, 2010
9:14 AM
|
Joe, Jon
Shouldn't we use a non-word like Crosstrait, just say its a word specific to the Roller community? I think it describes what is really happening inside the breed i.e. the pairing of two different family lines.
John
|
wishiwon2
323 posts
Apr 12, 2010
12:04 AM
|
Scott, I dont think I said they were difficult to identify. There have been volumes of arguement over what defines a Birmingham, I dont know, and honestly I dont care. My posts werent to debate that, but to add my thoughts on what different breeding practices could do for a guy.
What I said and meant was that there has been, and still is, alot of variability in them since they were initially bred as Birmingham rollers. Part of that vaiability is a result of what they were made from, part of it is the selection choices breeders have made along the way, and some of it has come from matings with birds from other breeds. If a breeder wants to make improvements (or changes) in them there is already a ton of variation to select traits from to add upon.
Inbreeding is a refining process more than a building one. If you never breed outside from the original few matings, it is less likely a new genetic combination will happen. In other words, they wont change as much as if you outcrossed. Whereas if you regularly breed birds from various backgrounds, you are constantly stirring the genetic pot and will get results that range all over the place, but, some of them MAY be considerably better than the originals. Its a gamble.
I dont know how is best to call it John. I think that English based birds, Fireball, Whittinghams and Pensoms imports are all different enough from one another that it could be argued it is a crossbred mating. They could be different by 20-30 or more generations of selection choices and yet perform in a similar fashion.
----------
Jon
If it were easy, everybody would do it
|