Pintaloosa or not?

[Lisa-Ruff N Tuff Minis]

Here are a few things I know: 1.) A horse cannot be a true few spot or a true snowcap unless BOTH parents are are appaloosa or are capable of throwing those app genes into the genetic soup.

So, Lisa, your mare, if I'm reading you right, looks like a few spot, but can't be, unless she has two appy parents.

.

Thank you very much for answering I appreciate it. The dam is appy bred on the top and bottom(from the pics I have seen) and has to date had nothing but appy foals however.. the full brother (to the pintaloosa filly posted) appears from a distance to be just a pinto however when you are close up you can see some mottling and scelara he has a spot or two inside his pinto markings but if you didnt know he came from this dam you would think he was just pinto.

He doesnt have the full blanket thing going on like she does

agan thanks so much for helping out there

:

 

[Anne]

Just a thought on the 'blue eyes" being splash or overo.

Sabino as I understand it is an overo pattern.

This is Night Lady. She has one blue eye and just a few white hairs on her forehead, that make a faint star and make me "think" "sabino",

Almost ALL of her foals have shown some sabino roaning and at least one blue eye, some have two blue eyes.

There is absolutely no other white on her anywhere.

I'm pretty sure sabino can carry those blue eyes along.

Anne

 

[HGFarm]

When a foal comes out not looking like one or both parents, the DNA and genes do not just disappear and go away. They may be recessive, but are STILL THERE.

I will use a human example- and I have seen this to be true myself. If you have an Oriental parent and a Caucasian parent, and they have children, one may come out looking exactly like the Oriental, one may pick up traits from both, and one may look like the Caucasian parent. This does not mean that the Oriental looking child can deny that the other parent is Caucasian and CAN produce children with those features. Same for the one that came out with the Caucasian traits, and didnt pick up any from the other parent.

I have a Hispanic friend with two daughters. One looks more Hispanic than even the mother. The other daughter has blonde hair, green eyes and built completely different. People laugh and think they are kidding when introduced as mother and daughter. This does not mean she can deny that she carries Hispanic blood, and those traits can be passed on.

My mother did not particularly favor either parent, but looks EXACTLY like her Grandmother.

The DNA and genes are still there. Mendel's Laws of Inheritance is interesting in that it breaks down the experiments done and the results of crossing one type with another type. The first generation may appear as one thing, but depending on what that one is crossed with, F2 and F3 will have different results. It explains why colors and types CAN skip a generation or two, depending on what is crossed with what.

It explains why two blue eyed parents can have a brown eyed child. Just because the coloring is not visible, does not mean the genes have completely disappeared and you can deny they're in there. I look like my fathers side of the family completely. Does that mean I carry none of my mother's genes?

Little Wee Horse... I agree!!! And I thought I was the only one who was nuts and think that eye color, face markings and leg markings are also supported by their own gene pools. Just like people- one thing makes up eye color, another makes up hair color, or the shape of your toes or how tall you are or what pigmentation of skin you may have.

 

[Songcatcher]

When a foal comes out not looking like one or both parents, the DNA and genes do not just disappear and go away. They may be recessive, but are STILL THERE.

With all due respect, you are comparing apples and oranges (or humans and horses). I do not know enough about Appaloosa to argue one way or another and will not. However, Tobiano Pinto is a dominant gene, not a recessive gene. If the gene is present, it WILL present itself in some way. Possibly very minimally, but it will show. A Pinto MUST have at least one Pinto parent, but two Pintos do not HAVE to produce a Pinto foal (unless one of the two parents is homozygous).

 

[Little Wee Horse Farm]

Fact is, when you breed two pintos, you have a 25% chance of getting a solid! I don't know about the pinto recessive/dominant discussion, so can't comment there. (isn't THAT a relief?!)

 

[HGFarm]

Mendel's studies were done on plants. The genes and laws of inheritance works the same- we did studies in biology regarding all this. It does not change whether it is flora, fauna or anything else.

No, breeding two pintos do not necessarily show pinto characteristics in the offspring. Nor does an Appy. So why is that?

Mendel's studies will break down the CHANCES that you have showing what might be homozygous, heterozygous, etc.. and what chances you have of that particular trait not coming through at all. It is NOT based on just what the parents look like. You have to take the entire gene pool into consideration because it ALL factors in. You cant just ignore some of it and pretend it isn't there. It may be recessive, but it's still there.

 

[Little Wee Horse Farm]

I get a kick out of folks (not necessarily those here!) who ask if a pair will produce the same-looking offspring in their next foal..........if that were the case, we could duplicate the horse crosses we like over & over again for the same results.

I've seen similar looking siblings, sometimes in color, sometimes in conformation, sometimes in the head shape, sometimes, in, heck, just the ear set!! But not always the same from the same pairing. Rare is the stallion that produces a carbon copy of himself again & again.

Heck, we'd all be identical to our siblings! I look SOMEWHAT like my brothers, but the 3 of us are in no way identical or even that similiar. To begin with, mom had blue eyes, dad had brown. Both of my brothers have blue eyes. Mine are hazel!!

And I've had horses who were bred together several times make such a variety of foals. An example is Jill's (Whinney for Me) Little Wee Klassic Showgirl -- a bright leopard. Klassy's full sister is here right now -- Little Wee Skittles is BLACK!! but 5 generations of app TOP & BOTTOM. Go figure. She's just not app YET.

:

 

[crponies]

Mendel's studies will break down the CHANCES that you have showing what might be homozygous, heterozygous, etc.. and what chances you have of that particular trait not coming through at all. It is NOT based on just what the parents look like. You have to take the entire gene pool into consideration because it ALL factors in. You cant just ignore some of it and pretend it isn't there. It may be recessive, but it's still there.

Nope, sorry, but it is not necessarily still there. Let's take a look at agouti for an example. Mare is a bay who has E/e at the Eumelanin locus and A/a at the agouti locus. You could breed her to a chestnut stallion who is e/e and a/a. You could end up with a black foal who would have to be E/e and a/a in which case said foal does not have the gene (A) for bay. It is gone; it is not there even recessively (which is impossible as then the foal would be bay not black). You could also end up with a chestnut foal which would be e/e and either A/a or a/a. In this case, the E is gone entirely from this foal (and possibly the A as well). The other possibility of course would be bay (E/e, A/a) in which case all the genes are still present. This is just simple genetics like Mendel discovered. Successive generations CAN and DO LOSE genetic information.

 

[CheyAut]

Mendel's studies were done on plants. The genes and laws of inheritance works the same- we did studies in biology regarding all this. It does not change whether it is flora, fauna or anything else.

No, breeding two pintos do not necessarily show pinto characteristics in the offspring. Nor does an Appy. So why is that?

Mendel's studies will break down the CHANCES that you have showing what might be homozygous, heterozygous, etc.. and what chances you have of that particular trait not coming through at all. It is NOT based on just what the parents look like. You have to take the entire gene pool into consideration because it ALL factors in. You cant just ignore some of it and pretend it isn't there. It may be recessive, but it's still there.

Lp is what makes an appy an appy. ALL horses have SOMETHING at the Lp locus. If it's an appy, it's Lplp or LpLp. If it's not an appy, it's lplp. So yes, a horse from an appy parent will have an lp locus. So will a horse that has NOTHING to do with appy. But unless it gets the DOMINANT gene, no appy (now that I"ve typed that I realize that isn't hte BEST example, b/c appies also have pattern genes...) Ok, so think of that with Tobiano. So... if dam is homozygous RECESSIVE for tobi, and sire is heterozygous... baby can be heterozygous or can be homozygous RECESSIVE. If the former, baby is tobiano. If the latter, baby is NOT tobiano, and can never have a tobi baby on it's own. Two horses who are homozygous RECESSIVE for tobiano will NEVER produce a tobiano, regardless of what their parents were.

Jessi