Skip to main content

Due to decreasing use over the years, I have decided to disable the forum functionality of the site.

Forums will still be available to view but new posts are no longer allowed.

Splash To Splash??

Is it true that a Splash to Splash breeding results in a non-viable foal? ie will the mare go into foal at all and if she does will the resulting foal both survive and thrive.

NZ Appaloosas Thu, 04/22/2010 - 20:02

[quote="accphotography"]Well being scientifically correct and avoiding pitfalls is one thing, but there is nothing wrong with creating and backing theories. Scientific research can't be done if theories aren't put out there. I'd like to think we can be part of the research by coming up with the theories that will have a huge impact on the future.[/quote]

Yes, exactly...it's just that in this case, I'm seeing (granted a limited number, as splash is not something I want highly expressed in my horses or breed :shock: :lol: ) In the case of the horse I linked to earlier, the dam has absolutely no visible sign of splash, nor do her parents. The sire shows very minimal signs of splash. But between them, they produced a foal that's got major signs of splash. That's two minimals "outproducing" their own level of expression. I've also seen foals from that paint stallion, Shalimar's Elixer, that I linked to quite some time ago, out of splash mares with no signs of splash. And I've seen foals from him out of splash mares with the same level (or near-abouts, anyway) as both parents.

From the way I look at "incomplete dominance", I can't see how we can draw any conclusion, yet, based on levels of expression. Especially in light of the fact that it is seems hard to find horses that are "guaranteed" to be "splash only". Maybe the wild variation in levels of expression are being helped/hindered by other white patterning genes...

Blanket "this is the way it is" statements about untestable things/genes bother me, and IMO leads to people making comments like "there's no splash in drafts, and sabino causes blue eyes". And for the record, I do every thing I can to avoid blanket statements about Lp, and if I have made one, I apologise, for that was not the intent, and I didn't realise it was came across that way. I do sometimes get my own phraseology stuck in my head and wonder why what's clear to me isn't coming across clearly... :oops:

Diane

NZ Appaloosas Thu, 04/22/2010 - 20:07

[quote="admin"]When was the LP gene located? I was under the impression that they had narrowed it down but hadn't been able to pinpoint it yet? Did something new happen recently?[/quote]

Not that I've heard, we're still in a holding pattern of having found the chromosome, not the allele.

Diane

NZ Appaloosas Thu, 04/22/2010 - 20:16

[quote="rabbitsfizz"]
Once there is proof, it is easy to accept that a theory once accepted by [i]everyone[/i] was incorrect.
There is, however, no proof at the present time, of any of the PATN/LP theories.
[i]That[/i] and that alone, is what bothers me.
Why would you want anyone to say any of the above to you?
Did you, personally, discover any of this??
Anyway, I have never been one to blindly accept any theory, it is my right to question, and I shall continue to do so.
I am sorry if this annoys you, and causes you to make ridiculous, childish little digs, but that is the way it will be.[/quote]

What do you consider "proof", Rabbit? Do you not consider statistical studies regarding progeny of snowcaps/fewspots vs. leopards/spotted blankets "proof" that Lp is an incomplete dominant?

The search for knowledge on Lp started as early as 1963, as far as I know, with analysis of breeding records, etc., right up to the search on the molecular level being done by Rebecca, with Sheila doing phenoytpe and progeny/pedigree analysis.

Diane
Diane

horsegen Thu, 04/22/2010 - 20:37

The theory of Lp, that there is a single gene that "turns on" appaloosa patterns, is pretty well proven. We've mapped the gene, found the gene, and have shown that problems with expression of that gene lead to appaloosa patterning. We're just looking for the mutation now.

The PATN gene(s) theory has not been proven yet, as we have not yet seen any published data mapping or identifying any genes responsible for modifying the TRPM1 mutation. Breeding evidence suggests multiple genes that do so, but beyond that, the inheritance of the different patterns can be complex and I don't think anyone can say these theories are scientifically proven yet. But there are certainly people working on it.

RiddleMeThis Thu, 04/22/2010 - 21:06

[quote="NZ Appaloosas"]
From the way I look at "incomplete dominance", I can't see how we can draw any conclusion, yet, based on levels of expression. Especially in light of the fact that it is seems hard to find horses that are "guaranteed" to be "splash only". [/quote]
Because it's a combination of level of expression AND breeding examples. Out of all the loud very obvious splashes I have seen that have been breed to loud obvious splashes I have NEVER seen one come out NOT loud and obviously splash.

Sara Fri, 04/23/2010 - 11:12

[quote="NZ Appaloosas"]I'm seeing (granted a limited number, as splash is not something I want highly expressed in my horses or breed :shock: :lol: ) Diane[/quote]

And couldn't this be why your eye is not tuned in to the breeding patterns we are seeing? I don't care for appaloosa patterns and as such, do not pay that much attention other than what I read here and admittedly I skim those posts (the same goes for other colors I don't like, such as champagne). I have splash in my herd though, am very interested in it (as are others on this board) and we are starting to put together a pattern for this pattern, if you will. I know it's only theory at this point, but it is backed up with breeding records. I am willing to help RMT with collecting and categorizing splash families since I am quite interested in the outcome.

Danni Sat, 04/24/2010 - 17:16

I think splash in my herd is weird :roll: Most of the ponies have obvious splash when tobiano is present, but no sign of it when tobiano isn't present. And just about every single gypsy cob I've seen I would also say has splash. Some are minimal, some more maximum exression. So doesn't help me at all on any of the splash theorys here!

NZ Appaloosas Sun, 04/25/2010 - 19:44

[quote="Sara"][quote="NZ Appaloosas"]I'm seeing (granted a limited number, as splash is not something I want highly expressed in my horses or breed :shock: :lol: ) Diane[/quote]

And couldn't this be why your eye is not tuned in to the breeding patterns we are seeing? I don't care for appaloosa patterns and as such, do not pay that much attention other than what I read here and admittedly I skim those posts (the same goes for other colors I don't like, such as champagne). I have splash in my herd though, am very interested in it (as are others on this board) and we are starting to put together a pattern for this pattern, if you will. I know it's only theory at this point, but it is backed up with breeding records. I am willing to help RMT with collecting and categorizing splash families since I am quite interested in the outcome.[/quote]

It could be...I've only worked on one Paint farm, and that was mostly because it was the only horse barn that was truly close to where I lived at the time.

I just feel that splash does not have the amount of statistical data behind it (at this point) that other colour/pattern genes do, to make what comes across as a categorical "this is the way it is" statement. I think making a section for the info collected and categorised is something we should do here.

Diane

CheyAut Sun, 05/02/2010 - 10:05

[quote="NZ Appaloosas"][quote="RiddleMeThis"][quote="NZ Appaloosas"]
Explain how two h/z splashes can have that drastic a difference in expression.
[/quote]
Well it is possible that the dam carries splash and the son is truly homozygous and not heterozygous.

And ALL genes have a variable expression, even apps.[/quote]

Not likely...I've seen the mare up close and personal, and there was definitely no sock action, and I don't recall any blaze action (maybe a hint of a star), based on how her spots lined up on her.

Diane[/quote]

My leopard stallion doesn't appear to have any white markings, either, but he has a blue eye and tested negative for frame, so I know he is splash.

[img]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v295/…]
[img]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v295/…]
[img]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v295/…]
[img]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v295/…]
[img]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v295/…]

NZ Appaloosas Mon, 05/03/2010 - 20:33

Ya know...I was wondering why you had such honking huge fences...until I saw the last picture and it registered he's a mini! :rofl :rofl :rofl

But yeah, I'm finding that often, with apps at least, the only indication of splash is a blue "chip" in one eye...pretty darned minimal expression, IMO!

Diane

CheyAut Mon, 05/03/2010 - 22:32

[quote="NZ Appaloosas"]Ya know...I was wondering why you had such honking huge fences...until I saw the last picture and it registered he's a mini! :rofl :rofl :rofl
[/quote]

:rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl