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.

Appy genetics question...

Someone on another forum had twins born today. They're both appy, but they're [i]totally[/i] different. The dam doesn't appear to have LP at all and I'm not sure she even has any app blood (she's Bashkir as is the stallion). The stallion is leopard or near leopard I think. Dam (gray and I can find no evidence of LP): [ximg]http://www.curlyfarm.com/es/ebcollage.jpg[/img] Sire: [ximg]http://www.curlyfarm.com/photos/rusty_proofs/images/AAAK-11.jpg[/img] Foals: [ximg]http://sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-snc3/hs596.snc3/31393_1301743904…] [ximg]http://sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-ash1/hs536.ash1/31393_1301744064…] I have no idea what else the sire or dam have produced. I was just a bit surprised to see such extreme variance in patterns in twins (obviously not identical so that part doesn't surprise me). So does the dam carry the blanket pattern without LP or does the sire carry both or??

doublebarr Fri, 06/04/2010 - 12:06

Oh, and just as an added FYI, the dam of the twins:

This is my mare that has produced two national champions in overall points and the highest showing/scoring full-flood Bashkir Curly ever, so I'm really thrilled she's finished her career with such an exclamation point!

From the owner. It really isn't about color with ABCR Curlys. It's about the curl (hypoallergenic) and the abilities. Having spots is just a fun bonus :HB

doublebarr Fri, 06/04/2010 - 12:08

[quote="Monsterpony"]I broke the images in question for the time being until this is cleared up.[/quote]

Thank you. She can post links and there would not be ANY issue. Links would allow the owner to see where her horses are being discussed and allow her to partake in discussions about her hearts "blood, sweat and tears" investment. It is appreciated.

Third Peppermint Fri, 06/04/2010 - 12:47

[quote]What does Fair Use have to do with posted rules on THIS forum? And she has hotlinked to [b]6[/b] photos of the owners, so she would be in violation of the Fair Use also:
[/quote]

It's an educational site? I thought we were all on here to learn about equine color genetics and discuss theories.

I went back through the posts and could only find the 4 photos. One is a collage, but that only counts as one, since it is one artistic creation.

Hotlinking is more of a grey area in the law and isn't actually listed as "illegal." Annoying, yes. Flat out illegal? No. From what I understand, if ACC uploaded the images to her own server and then used them, that would be a whole different ballgame.

I'm just a little puzzled because this seems more like a personal issue with ACC.

AppyLady Fri, 06/04/2010 - 13:12

[quote="lillith"]Have I missed something?

http://www.uky.edu/Ag/Horsemap/hgpfaq4…" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[quote]Likewise, the gene for appaloosa has been found but there are at least 10 different types of white appaloosa patterns. The next frontier in color genetics is to understand what underlies these more subtle influences on color.[/quote]

Have they located LP?[/quote]
To quote horsegen (because she's the smart one!), "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."

What a shame that the original photos had to be removed.

rabbitsfizz Fri, 06/04/2010 - 13:17

Yes, well, it gives me more time to go back to breeding just for colour :rofl
(Er, that would [i]actually[/i] be pattern, but hey, who's counting!! ymwhisle )

RiddleMeThis Fri, 06/04/2010 - 14:17

Just for the record the poster double barr has something against both ACC and I that she has apparently carried over from another forum. God knows why.

doublebarr Fri, 06/04/2010 - 14:52

"Quite frankly" I posted because I found these horses that I AM involved with and have a foal out of the stallion in question AND do NOT like the way people so easily steal pictures of horses that they have NO involvement with without the simple courtesy of asking people to use those photos of THEIR horses. Particularly sad that it happens when permission is so EASILY granted if it was ONLY ASKED for between people who DO know eachother from other forums. Unfortunately, the net is rampant with people with light fingers and no manners. Had I not had an involvement with these particular horses I would not have ever known ACC was here or had reason to come here. I have known about this forum for a LONG time (through the time it was out of service because of personal health reasons of the owner to the new "owners") and had not logged on this site before because of lack of interest in becoming involved in another time filler. I don't have time to chase forum entities around the net, but when I am dealing with horses I have personal knowledge of, then I make time to see what is being said/asked/wondered about them by routinely googling their names, pictures or links to the hosting site. First hand knowledge is ALWAYS better than supposition and it would be better if owners knew when and where their horses were being posted for public comment so they could contribute towards deeper knowledge about those animals, rather than empty supposition. Which is why linking to picture hosting sites is the RULE here if you do not have permission to use the pictures or ownership of the pictures. It's not hard and it makes life much better for all involved.

doublebarr Fri, 06/04/2010 - 14:55

[quote="AppyLady"]

What a shame that the original photos had to be removed.[/quote]
I posted them a tad bit earlier and WITH permission and no hotlinking. Also, there is a direct link to the website of the owner so the dams in question can be referenced. Much better, IMO, then random pictures with no clear history for those that really want to research and trace back for color/pattern.

RiddleMeThis Fri, 06/04/2010 - 15:09

So your only reason fort posting WAS to cause problems for ACC.

These photos were posted to talk about their color but more importantly to discuss the nature of LP and PATN in general with the OP photos as examples. Having problems with people looking at photos of horses you are "connected" to discuss color in the easiest mar possible is just silly. It is just a "time filler" to have to load multiple websites just to see photos that can ber posted easily ESPECIALLY on slow connections. So I will say the same thing I always say when this comes up if you dont want your photos online dont put them there.

TheRedHayflinger Fri, 06/04/2010 - 15:14

That could have been done without hotlinking them though. Unless I find photos that are on photobucket, I always just use a link to the page or nab the link of the picture and post it...sure you might have to click on a link to view the picture, but you can tell where it came from and go to their webpage for more info. I find links to both the page and the picture quite useful myself as the page usually gives a bit of information about the horse that I can pursue further if I'm curious about something not yet discussed.

RiddleMeThis Fri, 06/04/2010 - 15:18

You can grab the link straight from thee photo acc posted that is no different than just clicking a link.

Its a hotlink with img tags. anyone who was/is remotely interested in seeing the website those photos came from could do it with ease.

TheRedHayflinger Fri, 06/04/2010 - 15:31

yes, but if you just post a link, and not directly hotlinking the picture, you aren't stealing their bandwidth are you?

RiddleMeThis Fri, 06/04/2010 - 15:48

I personally have only slight knowledge on bandwidth. that being said it would seem with what little I know that it would use the same bandwidth as actually going to the site would.

That being said I thought it would be timely to point out that the US Court of Appeals has said that inline linking (which its what was on the op) is NOT a copyright violation.

TheRedHayflinger Fri, 06/04/2010 - 15:55

not sure about hotlinking and the sort myself honestly. I do know a lot of people do find it rude and try to discourage people from doing it, and even the rules here for this forum disallow it (as do most forums I go to, not just horse ones). At any rate, we can still view the pictures.

I do know that some websites, like was mentioned earlier, have URL switching for the pictures and thus, if something were hotlinked, it would move the picture and then it would be "lost" on the post and we'd have no picture and no clue what we were discussing (especially if you are like me and go back and hunt down old posts for information)...so all the more reason to just point to a page, just in case someone has their pictures doing that.

doublebarr Fri, 06/04/2010 - 17:58

[quote="RiddleMeThis"]So your only reason fort posting WAS to cause problems for ACC. [/quote]

Sigh. Seriously? The fact that I have the stud mentioned in the op standing in my pasture, a foal out of the stud that is mine, and the dam of the foal also standing in my pasture and shared those photos with this forum on this thread when it was mentioned that the op did not know what the sires first foal looked like still continues to elude you? Seriously? I don't think I'm the one that came in with an "agenda" here, rather the one who respected the rules of this forum, unlike the OP whom I DID point out as breaking those same rules I now see she is supposed to enforce as site admin (didn't see that eariler). You would think that those running the site would be up on the rules for said site and expect themselves to follow the rules as required of everyone else. Otherwise, why have rules in the first place?

[quote="RiddleMeThis"]These photos were posted to talk about their color but more importantly to discuss the nature of LP and PATN in general with the OP photos as examples. Having problems with people looking at photos of horses you are "connected" to discuss color in the easiest mar possible is just silly. It is just a "time filler" to have to load multiple websites just to see photos that can ber posted easily ESPECIALLY on slow connections. So I will say the same thing I always say when this comes up if you dont want your photos online dont put them there.[/quote]

LOL, I have never said I have an issue with the photos being up, shoot I put them up myself including pictures of the foals from the owners website AFTER asking permission for those that were not taken by me. I do have problems with people such as yourself that seem not to care about courtesy or following the rules they agreed to follow when signing up as per your quoted post. "Reason/Excuse" it any way you want, thems the rules and you are supporting/promoting ignoring them.

One again, thank you to the admin who did correct the hotlinking in the OP of pictures she did not have permission to use. It is appreciated and I think that should suffice on this rabbit trail.

If I can answer any other questions others have about these horses, I would be happy to do so. Rusty does have one more foal to come this year, but it is out of another GRAY Curly mare. We are waiting to see curls :-)

RiddleMeThis Fri, 06/04/2010 - 18:38

[quote="doublebarr"]The fact that I have the stud mentioned in the op standing in my pasture, a foal out of the stud that is mine, and the dam of the foal also standing in my pasture and shared those photos with this forum on this thread when it was mentioned that the op did not know what the sires first foal looked like still continues to elude you?[/quote] You're the one that stated that you came on here because ACC didn't have permission to use the photos. NOT me. [quote] I don't think I'm the one that came in with an "agenda" here, rather the one who respected the rules of this forum, unlike the OP whom I DID point out as breaking those same rules I now see she is supposed to enforce as site admin (didn't see that eariler). You would think that those running the site would be up on the rules for said site and expect themselves to follow the rules as required of everyone else. Otherwise, why have rules in the first place?[/quote] The rule you choose to quote has been modified to either follow the rule, or accept the consequences of doing so on your own. If you came on here to actually participate on the forum you could have seen the addition/modification there. You didn't. You came here specifically to address some sort of problem you seem to have.

[quote]LOL, I have never said I have an issue with the photos being up[/quote] Then why bother? If all you are going to do is put the same photos up, why make a huge deal about it and start drama all over the board? If it was such an issue for it why didn't you take it up with admin rather than starting a big issue all over the thread? You didn't do any of those things and chose to make it a public/personal attack on ACC on this forum, just like you choose to do on the other forum.

accphotography Fri, 06/04/2010 - 22:56

[quote="doublebarr"](hmmmmm, may need to talk to Linds about setting up a "switcharoo" for folks like ACC that think nothing of stealing bandwidth and yanking photos without credit. Sad that a "professional photographer" doesn't think that laymen deserve the courtesy and respect her "profession" does.)
[/quote]

I'm sorry Cindy, but if you're out to insult me with little digs like this you might need to look for smaller prey. There's a reason I'm presently in New York shooting one of Thoroughbred racing's biggest days for Thoroughbred racing's best known publication and under one of racing's greatest photographers in history. Quotation marks from people with a grudge (for God only knows what reason) won't hurt my feelings. :-D

[quote="doublebarr"]Had I not had an involvement with these particular horses I would not have ever known ACC was here or had reason to come here. I have known about this forum for a LONG time (through the time it was out of service because of personal health reasons of the owner to the new "owners") and had not logged on this site before because of lack of interest in becoming involved in another time filler.[/quote]

Again, I'm sorry, but I'm not buying it. I have proof you know I've been a part of this forum for a very long time as well. Saying you didn't know I was here is an outright lie. (If I'm not mistaken, the "this has happened before" comment was [i]directly[/i] related to [i]this[/i] forum. ;-)) Besides, it's not like I hide where I post.

[quote="doublebarr"]I don't have time to chase forum entities around the net, but when I am dealing with horses I have personal knowledge of, then I make time to see what is being said/asked/wondered about them by routinely googling their names, pictures or links to the hosting site.[/quote]

"Forum entities" eh? So you count me in that group? So having come to me, visited with me, played with my horse, taken photos of me and my horse doesn't separate me from some random "forum entity"? That makes perfect sense. :-D

accphotography Sat, 06/05/2010 - 00:01

Sorry Nerd, but that was my first comment on the thread since DB joined the forum to post. I have a right to say something.

doublebarr Sat, 06/05/2010 - 08:21

[quote="accphotography"][quote="doublebarr"](hmmmmm, may need to talk to Linds about setting up a "switcharoo" for folks like ACC that think nothing of stealing bandwidth and yanking photos without credit. Sad that a "professional photographer" doesn't think that laymen deserve the courtesy and respect her "profession" does.)
[/quote]

I'm sorry Cindy, but if you're out to insult me with little digs like this you might need to look for smaller prey. There's a reason I'm presently in New York shooting one of Thoroughbred racing's biggest days for Thoroughbred racing's best known publication and under one of racing's greatest photographers in history. Quotation marks from people with a grudge (for God only knows what reason) won't hurt my feelings. :-D

[color=#4000BF]Interesting that you only choose to address the perceived "quotes issue" and not the facts of the matter. So it would seem that you have no issues with using other peoples photos without credit or courtesy of requesting permission? Yep, validates my reason for using quotes previously now. And ;-) on the self gratification in this above paragraph.[/color]

[quote="doublebarr"]Had I not had an involvement with these particular horses I would not have ever known ACC was here or had reason to come here. I have known about this forum for a LONG time (through the time it was out of service because of personal health reasons of the owner to the new "owners") and had not logged on this site before because of lack of interest in becoming involved in another time filler.[/quote]

Again, I'm sorry, but I'm not buying it. I have proof you know I've been a part of this forum for a very long time as well. Saying you didn't know I was here is an outright lie. (If I'm not mistaken, the "this has happened before" comment was [i]directly[/i] related to [i]this[/i] forum. ;-)) Besides, it's not like I hide where I post.

[color=#4000BF]Don't be sorry, I'm not. Last I heard on HGS, you couldn't get accepted here due to the original owners health problems and her not being able to keep up the site at that time, then a mention that the site was back up and running in some pony color thread there. All I know about this forum I learned from those comments you and others brought to that site. I knew it was here, but as HGS was the ONLY horse forum I was on (except for occasional visits to CPEA) and had time for I didn't bother looking. I didn't know you had a more personal involvement till I found the pictures the other day and went looking on the link, and then I didn't even notice your "title" till further into the thread. And once again you are mistaken, my comments directly relate to HGS and a couple of threads there where this SAME issue was addressed on that forum, with the same disrespect shown in this thread to layphotographers in your threads there. [/color]

[quote="doublebarr"]I don't have time to chase forum entities around the net, but when I am dealing with horses I have personal knowledge of, then I make time to see what is being said/asked/wondered about them by routinely googling their names, pictures or links to the hosting site.[/quote]

"Forum entities" eh? So you count me in that group? So having come to me, visited with me, played with my horse, taken photos of me and my horse doesn't separate me from some random "forum entity"? That makes perfect sense. :-D[/quote]

[color=#4000BF]Yep. Shortly after that I was more than happy to consider you a "forum entitie". No further personal contact desired. ;-)

And my apologies to running down the rabbit trail again but, I'm not up to "playing nice" with culpable dishonest characters today, so I won't come back to this thread till the last foal is born to post pictures of him/her. The smaller twin passed last night. Went from healthy (postpartum IgG and vet check was excellent) playing and eating great, to fever and listless in less than 2 hours last night. Vet came right out, was giving supporting IV fluids and meds but passed before the fluids could be finished. RIP Hemingway :-(
[/color]

Jenks Sat, 06/05/2010 - 08:32

I'm so sorry about the foal! That is sad.

The rules here will need to be reviewed and will be discussed in the admin forum.

Back to the topic? Acc - there was a study on identical paint twins that have extremely different paint patterns. They were never the same, as well as other breed's twins with different blazes and socks.

Third Peppermint Sat, 06/05/2010 - 09:47

What about the horse clones they've done? I know that they're not "twins" but they do have different markings. I wonder if there are any examples of horse identical twins.

Jenks Sat, 06/05/2010 - 09:53

Clones definitely do not come out with the same markings. Last year it was made known that a very popular arabian stallion was cloned and much to the owner's dismay, not only did he not look like him, but it simply wasn't him. Race horses have been cloned for awhile now - so I imagine that is more known.

If you google images "twin foals" you will see many examples of twins who do not have any identical markings. Now Acc's confusion I think is in the way appies work - so I can see the question there and I think that it's that they are fraternal and not identical. I would think that identical or cloned foals with the same appy genes would both be one pattern or the other, but just not identical spots, etc.....

Third Peppermint Sat, 06/05/2010 - 10:01

I think it's just stunning to see how different twins can look. I like the examples of human mothers giving birth to babies of different skin color. Not impossible (obviously), but unexpected for sure! http://bodyodd.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2008…" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

How much do we KNOW about Lp right now? Like, 100% for sure know?

Jenks Sat, 06/05/2010 - 10:16

I personally don't know much, but according to horsegen -who is a genetic researcher- and some of the participants of the Appy Project, it's very well understood and identified.

Jenks Sat, 06/05/2010 - 10:19

[quote="Third Peppermint"]I think it's just stunning to see how different twins can look. I like the examples of human mothers giving birth to babies of different skin color. Not impossible (obviously), but unexpected for sure! http://bodyodd.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2008…" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

How much do we KNOW about Lp right now? Like, 100% for sure know?[/quote]

But that is just the same as if they were regular brothers with years apart because they are fraternal, not identical. The thing with patterns on identical twins or clones is that it's the disbursement of the pattern that appears so random. Even clones who carry the same exact DNA do not display the same exact markings!

Third Peppermint Sat, 06/05/2010 - 10:57

Yeah, I understand the mechanism behind fraternal/identical twins and how you can have two pop out that look completely different (which is why I threw the human example in there).

I guess the point that I'm trying to make is that twins being similar/same is a stereotype or a schema that people have in their heads. When you think "twins" you generally don't pick two different things. Despite the fact that all the twins I know (fraternal) are very different looking, I still think of twinned things as two similar objects paired.

So, it's natural to see two twins that look so different and be amazed, despite the fact that it is so common. It's not in our schema of twins. And yes, if they were born a year apart no one would bat an eye. It's just cool seeing twins like that.

Anyway, I guess that's not reeeeally what this thread is about... I am curious about this Lp research that has been done because, frankly, I still don't understand Lp. Am I to understand that the stallion can have BOTH patterns? At the same time? Would that make it so each level of expression was a different gene/set of genes? Are all of the PATNs shared at one locus, or are there many? Also, is what AppyLady said about not getting certain color/pattern markings from full siblings a possibility of gene linking? /toomanyquestionssorry

accphotography Sat, 06/05/2010 - 11:31

[quote="doublebarr"]
[color=#4000BF]Yep. Shortly after that I was more than happy to consider you a "forum entitie". No further personal contact desired. ;-)
[/quote]

Yeah. Same here. I regret that I was naive enough to let you sweet talk me into letting you visit. I have no idea what your motives were but regardless, I regret it. Funny how you were on your best behavior leading up to and during the visit but as soon as you left you went back to your typical demeanor. Here I thought maybe it was just your online persona... guess not. Say all you want about me, I know who I am and what I am... I don't need validation from you.

FWIW I never had any trouble joining EC. That was RMT. Obviously you've forgotten the brown thread... or at least you say you have. :roll:

Just as you don't wish to deal with "culpable dishonest characters", same to you... nor do I. This will be my last comment on this matter with regards to you.