Facial markings on Tobianos....

It is an important lesson to learn - NEVER accept the information a registry posts as correct when it comes to colour. Some of them come close to correct, others are just plain stupid. For example, in Australia, buckskins and duns are shown in the same colour class at shows. Registering bodies are behind the curve, often through no fault of their own. I used to do a lot of work with cat registry bodies, and they are the same. It is so hard to keep up with everything new as a hobbyist, let alone then having to update websites, standards, forms etc, not to mention that many of those changes could probably only be made at certain times of the year at AGMs or special GMs.

Until we have tests for all white patterns, it is impossible to say for sure that tobiano doesn't create face white. However, currently, the evidence we are shown does point toward that being the case.

Well basically there aren't any "normal" markings. All white markings are caused by a white pattern. "Normal" white markings are basically not enough white to make the horse pinto classified. As far as we know, tobiano does not cause any facial markings, and will fight with other patterns to make the face solid colored. As far as registries go, any "normal" amount of facial white is enough to keep the horse registered as tobiano instead of tovero (I hate that word).

It is also thought that all "normal" face white is caused by a white pattern of some sort. Although, as Katie said we can't know for sure without being able to test for every pattern. We have discovered by testing, that white patterns can be very minimal for example we have horses who test positive for frame that are completely solid. There have also been many cases of horses who would "normally" be considered "solid" throwing loud white foals.

Because of the history of breeding all white patterns together in registries such as the APHA it is very common for Tobianos to carry more than one pattern. The reason we think Tobiano does not cause face white is the occurrence of many Tobianos with "normal Tobiano" body white otherwise but solid faces. You simply do not see this with other patterns. Anytime you have a well expressed splash, frame, or sabino, you have face white. We also see in breedings, were a fancy Tobiano is bred to a completely solid horse offspring will show different patterns. Well will have offspring without face white and Tobiano and offspring with face white without Tobiano.

Tobiano is the only white pattern that is thought to not cause face white.

CMhorses, we were posting at the same time :grin:

I've got 2 tobi's with no face white that should be added to the gallery too. Unfortunately I can't find any good pictures of them that show their markings all the way.

As everything about pattern is still pretty much educated (but it really is pretty well educated) guesswork, here is what has been found, and is, until proven otherwise, accepted to be factual:
Tobiano limits white forward of the shoulder and attempts to put white on all four legs.
LWO (putting aside for the moment whether it does or does not add blue eyes, and whether it does or does not add a big bald face) attempts to put white on the face and remove it from the legs.
Splash will/can add blue eyes, but does not have to (although I have a theory that it will always do so when no other pattern is present and that other patterns will inhibit the blue eyes) It also adds as much white to the face as it can but in sloppy, lopsided patterns. Same seems to be true of the legs.
Sabino is a bundle of patterns at present lumped together, it adds symmetry to the blaze, and almost always has a "drip" of white onto the bottom lip.
When you start mixing the patterns certain things clue you in as to what may be present, for instance, if you get a "tobiano" with a regular blaze, a blue eye and one solid leg you may well have Splash, Sabino and LWO in there as well.
I have not gone into roaning and lacy edgings and other tell tale signs as I was trying to keep this simple at the moment.
I have also stuck to moderate expression in all cases, let's keep minimal and maximum for another time!
Funnily enough we are having a discussion on LB at the moment about "normal" white markings and the reaction of a (very ) few members illustrates perfectly why the registries cannot do anything about regulating the descriptions of the patterns- people just will NOT buy it!
I think all registries should opt out of pattern descriptions altogether unless the pattern is backed up by DNA hence a Bay and White horse becomes just that, a Bay and White horse. If it is lab tested it is a Bay and white horse proven by DNA to be carrying Tobiano either TT or Tt, (+ Sab1 and LWO if relevant) otherwise it is just put down as it's actual, visual, colouration.
AMHA are still trying to make people register Silver Buckskins as Buckskins or "silver dapple"- although if you stand your ground and insist they will put the correct colour down which just makes it worse as far as I am concerned.
Unless a horse is lab tested, even if it looks a classic, case book Tobiano, it could actually be a Frame, with NO Tobiano at all, which means the registration document, which is a legal means of proof of ownership and pedigree, is fraudulent.
OK- who would be to blame if this were to be taken to court??
In the case of the AMHA, I hold that it would, as it has "forced" the owner to register the animal as a colour the owner knows to be false.
OK, WAY off topic, there, sorry about thta, but I feel a bit better for it.
I shall now return you to your normal, quiet, colour/pattern discussion!!

Thanks for the thoughts, I'm still not convinced tho...
rabbitsfizz, what you say makes some sense re. registration papers esp when it comes to mins, they seem to have every colour & pattern known to horse kind available lol.

What I'm wondering about mostly is that plenty of 'normally' marked horses (at least here) have tested neg to all current pattern tests (seems the vast majority like pintos or horses with plenty of BLING here lol, so go for Bling & then test hoping they've got a min whatever ;) ), so if going by the thinking from most of the above posts, that would mean (from the current understanding) that every single horse who tests neg to the current pattern tests (solid or broken coloured), HAS to be Splash or Sabino by default if they have any white markings on them period.

I'm really not sure what to make of that thought- that all markings are a pattern gene of some kind - simply as you can bred 2 marked horses together & get solid colored horses devoid of any markings at all just as easily as you can get a marked one, or visa-versa (2 totally unmarked horses & get min or loud white markings). It seems more 50/50 or plain random chance, than a coherent, predictable inherited pattern :-? .
'Normal' markings from what I've seen & experienced dont bred true or even run in patterns like 'broken coloured' genes do - nor do you seem to be able to breed neg pattern (tested neg for both Tobiano & Overo gene) horses together & consistently produce for example foals with 2 socks & a star, or 4stockings & a snip, or just leg markings without the face or just face without the legs being marked, nor non marked horses together to Always produce unmarked horses (ie when breeding the same mare & stallion together & get foal who all share similar markings to sire or dam, some may have markings, some may not, some may have loud markings, but rarely do you get 2 horses throwing the same markings over & over again)- the gene, if there is one for 'normal' markings seems to act much like birth marks do, some have them, some dont, they can look very much alike or very different, pop up unexpectedly in family's with no history of them or just as easily randomly miss many in those family's that do have them.
I've spoken to some breeders up & down the country of both paint & pinto horses since delving into the colorful world of equine patterns & it seems there are Tobianos who have indeed tested neg to any other pattern, yet have blazes, stars, snips or strips - hence my question :). Over here it's considered that face markings are just as 'normal' as a horses base colour, (kind of like a birth marks again I guess ;) ), no differently than they are on solid coloured horses (I havent seen the test results for these horses, thats just what I've been told)

I suppose until a Splash test comes out & a Sabino test that covers those horses whom test neg to the Sb1 test, there's no telling for sure.

Unless or until a gene is found, I'll probably view face markings on a Tobiano as not carrying anything else (unless someone has a more convincing view point on it from where Im standing)- only because it's not yet proven that solid coloured horses do in fact carry a gene making them have markings (or not) & until such a time, these horses have to be either considered solid coloured ‘normal’ marked horses or called Splash -(I suppose for lack of anything else that we know for SURE throws markings that hasn’t got a test), to which I can safely say the vast majority appear not to be ;) or come up with a name for it other than blazes, stars, socks & stockings etc.
I am open minded about it all, just not willing to jump overboard untill I cans see sound logic for it is all ;)

Holy cow that was a novel! But I hope that explained my confusion over the whole 'if a Tobiano has a white face marking, it must be'.... better than my 1st post did.

[quote]HAS to be Splash or Sabino by default if they have any white markings on them period.[/quote]

This is correct. We have evidence of horses that are completely solid that have tested positive for frame (LWO). There is no reason to think that solid horses can't carry other patterns as well. We know for a fact that splash is very good at "hiding". This is thought to be due to "white suppressor" genes as much as the actual absence of a pattern. These "suppressor" genes would be very common in lines that have been bred for no white. A sign of a suppressor gene, seems to be ermine spots along the coronet band which we see alot in minimal Tobianos.

[quote]Simply as you can bred 2 marked horses together & get solid colored horses devoid of any markings at all just as easily as you can get a marked one, or visa-versa (2 totally unmarked horses & get min or loud white markings). [/quote]

If both parents only carry one pattern gene you still have a 25% chance of the foal not having any pattern at all. And the current theory on splash is that it is an incomplete dominant. You breed two parents with splash white together and you get a 25% chance of the foal being homozygous for splash. Then you have to consider the action of a suppressor gene.

[quote]'Normal' markings from what I've seen & experienced dont bred true or even run in patterns like 'broken coloured' genes do.[quote]

While white patterns are inheritable we know from cloning experiments that environmental factors in the womb do affect expression. Clones with white patterns will have a different markings than the original animal although, I don't believe there has been an example of a solid donor animal having a clone with white or vice versa. There just aren't that many cloned equines.

There is an alternate theory, because I'm lazy I just copied a small section from one of the dog articles i wrote.

[quote]During fetal development cells called melanocytes migrate out from the spinal cord to other areas of the body. These melanocytes produce the pigment that “colors” the dogs coat and skin. Areas where the melanocytes do not reach during fetal development remain without pigment causing areas of white hair and pink skin. The areas most commonly white in dogs are the last areas that are reached by the melanocytes: the chest, tip of the tail, and the toes. The current theory on white pattern development is that environmental factors in the womb (and perhaps white booster or suppressor genes) can affect melanocytes migration resulting in small white spots in these areas without an actual white pattern mutation.[/quote]

It would work similarly in horses. The problem I see with this theory is breeds like the Fresian who rairly have any white at all. If white was controlled so much by environmental factors I feel that more Fresians would pop out with white around the feet as that is one of the last areas reached by the melanocytes.

Welcome to the forum by the way. It's great to have you here.

Can't white on the feet be as minimal as a white spot on the sole of the foot? I read some breed's registration descriptions and they're not supposed to have much white, if any, so it was important to check the bottoms of the feet for white. You couldn't "see" if from the side, but it was still there.

And don't forget your brain has pigment cells in it as well! You just can't "see" them. There have been a few studies that have appear to show that domestication results in white spots on the outside of the body. Since pigment cells in the brain can change things as minor as some behaviors to things as serious as seizures, it is theorized that by selecting for animals with "tame" behaviors people accidentally selected for white markings.

Basically, what I'm getting at is that I think that white markings are inherent in many domesticated animals, whether or not you can see it. That's how it pops up randomly - the combination of genes and some environment can result in two animals that have invisible white markings having a baby with noticeable white markings. In the end it wasn't really random, you just couldn't see it before. We already know that black based horses are suppressing white and there is pretty good evidence (in my opinion) that there are other genes that can suppress it.

And humans? We can have mutations in the KIT gene (dominant white?) that results in spotted people. It's heritable after it happens and can be is minimal as some white hairs on the forehead or as loud as white hands, feet, blaze, and belly spots.

Anyway, basic white markings are really complicated. You have new mutations like the dominant white genes popping up all over the place as well as horses that are so minimal that the white is invisible or overlooked. I've seen more than a couple cases of two "solid" parents having a loud splash white baby. Surprise! And like other's have said - frame can also look invisible. Sometimes people don't realize that they're horse with the socks is actually tobiano.

So yeah - super complicated/ not black and white/ too many little genes that we don't know about yet. The more we learn about equine coat color genetics (and other animals as well) the more intricate it becomes. Don't forget that some people still can't tell bay dun and buckskin apart. :)

I hope some of this was coherent.

How abouts this chap then.....
http://static.dragondriving.co.uk/image…
Obviously has Tobiano going on, something else to put the white on the face, and I would guess Splash (merely because, IME, it is often Splash that seems to "push" Tobi off the rear end like that, no idea why)
His dam is Bay, they have no idea who the sire was!

Oh, and, of course, since the only tests available are for LWO - which takes white off the legs- Sab1- which leaves all the other areas of Sabino untested, and Tobiano- which will often give just four white socks, the testing of horses with "normal" white markings is, I am afraid, totally irrelevant.
It's seems strange to me to meet someone who still believes in "normal" white markings- I guess we have just been cocooning ourselves her!

[quote=Surayya]I suppose until a Splash test comes out & a Sabino test that covers those horses whom test neg to the Sb1 test, there's no telling for sure.[/quote]

Splash has been mapped to the same gene that causes similar white patterns (white on nose, feet and tail) in several other animal species (dogs, cats, rodents, etc). They just haven't found the specific mutation.

There will likely never been an all encompassing sabino test that covers horses that are neg for Sb1. Sabino and its counterpart dominant white are really just a name given to multitudes of found and proposed mutations. Nearly 20 different DWs have been mapped so far. KIT is a gene ripe for mutation as it is poorly preserved, hence the reason so many modern DWs have appeared. Unless some lab develops a SNP test that covers every KIT mutation identified and then gets added to as more are found, you are not going to get a sabino or dw test that covers all your possibilities.

It's not just a full on gene or mutation that can have an effect on phenotype, microRNA, threshold traits, gene switches, there are all sorts of extra factors that can effect the production of proteins from a gene and fine tune their expression. There might not actually be whole genes that suppress white for example, it might be regulated by something quite minor.

[quote=Dogrose]It's not just a full on gene or mutation that can have an effect on phenotype, microRNA, threshold traits, gene switches, there are all sorts of extra factors that can effect the production of proteins from a gene and fine tune their expression. There might not actually be whole genes that suppress white for example, it might be regulated by something quite minor.[/quote]

This is why I'm not sure terming 'normal/standard' markings as having to be from already established 'patterns' is correct.

I know some horses who are solid coloured test as Frame etc, but that just suggests that Frame ONLY modifies white markings already present & cant do it's thing if 'normal' white markings are absent, which in turn suggests it doesnt actually cause White patterns to present them selves on the horse, but merely modifies the markings already present into a different pattern from the norm (thats just 1 of many theories I've bumped around anyway & well I'm far from convinced on it, it could make some sense of the solid coloured, unmarked horses who do test as having a pattern).
So for me that alone (the fact you can get solid coloured horses who test as having a pattern but dont), says White markings (normal markings NOT pattern markings) are different from the pattern genes & shouldnt just be lumped in together as being the same thing.

I may be wrong, only time will tell & if I am, thats fine as it's all in the learning :)
But until some tangible evidence comes out stating otherwise, then I will still consider 'normal' markings different from pattern markings I think.

One of the posts mentioned proof that 'normal' markings are like pinto patterns - can I please have link/s to it :)

Any chance you could post links to these theories? I would be interested to see what they base it on :smile:

I am not sure how plainer we can say it:
At present, thinking is that there are no such thing as "normal" white markings.
It is strongly believed that all white markings are attributable to Pinto.
It is a long, long time since I have met anyone who believes otherwise- and then two of you come along at once- it's like waiting for a bus!
I don't think you will find many people in the horse genetics business who believe there is a "normal" white marking gene.
Until we have tests for all forms of pinto, however it is not actually provable.
For me this is a bit like saying the "theory" of evolution is not "provable", however.
You are entitled to your opinion, without a doubt, but it is one that is, at least as far as this forum is concerned, in the minority.

She is not saying that there is "normal" white marking gene Rabbit. She's saying that "normal" white markings could be caused by something environmental or another factor and not controlled by a gene at all.

I know many people in the dog world look at "low white" markings this way. Dr. Sheila Schmutz believes this and she is one of the leaders in dog color genetics. In my opinion empirical evidence leans toward all white markings being related to a pattern. However, that is far from being proven.

Does anyone have the link to the solid warmblood parents that ended up with the load splash white foal? I was trying to find it earlier and couldn't.

This isn't the thread I was thinking of but a good example of a minimal pattern producing a not so minimal foal.

http://colorgenetics.info/equine/conten…

I'm still looking for the other thread

What I was trying to say is, in some breeds you never get more than minor white markings, these are maybe caused by sabino (for example) but extra factors that might not be a full on gene will mean they will never be anything other than minor white markings even in HZ form. Or the particular type of sabino may simply be minimal in HZ form and absent in hz.
So- there might be genes that cause minor white spotting but that doesn't mean they aren't sabino. (for e.g.)

Tt and TT would express exactly the same because of the nature of the gene, so being heterozygous/homozygous wouldn't really make much of a difference. Also tobiano prevents face white but encourages leg white. We have plenty of evidence to show that tobiano does not like face white, just like we have a lot of evidence to show that frame tries to prevent it. On that note, it could be easy for tobiano to be overpowered by the presence of 2-3 other white patterns (sabino,splash and frame) that do put white on the face, so just because the horse isn't extremely minimal with the face white, or doesn't have a badger face doesn't mean that it doesn't try to prevent it.

[quote=admin]She is not saying that there is "normal" white marking gene Rabbit. She's saying that "normal" white markings could be caused by something environmental or another factor and not controlled by a gene at all.[/quote]

Yep thats it exactly admin :)
Over here 'normal' white markings are NEVER considered as being anything other than 'random' (ie of unknown origin)- if anyone thinks otherwise, they've not said anything out loud ;)

Even the genetics lab wont go further than unless it's proven otherwise, 'normal' markings are to be considered 'normal' markings.
I'll be clear here - what if your thoughts are wrong & 'normal' white is caused by something entirely different than what you currently think it is & say for instance we find out pattern genes just cause a re-distribution of the markings already present- not white markings themselves, you'll then have groups of VERY confused & frustrated people who arent into genetics & have taken your word for it & been convinced they have Splash, Sabino, Frame or whatevers in their paddocks (& may have brought horses on this understanding to try breeding for colour/pattern) & it turns out this thinking is wrong- would it not be better to say it's possible rather than it is for certain & maybe suggest testing to confirm or rule out patterns? (sorry for that little soap box moment :oops: )

So over here at least if a Tobiano has a blaze & is neg Frame & Sab1 & the blaze is not oddly shaped or lop sided, nor are blue eye/s present, then it's considered a 'normal' Tobiano with a blaze.

We also have TT & Tt Tobiano horses over here who have 4 white stockings & a Blaze - so saying Tobiano tries to prevent white legs & blazes is incorrect - apparently some 12horses proven Tobiano look like this, but cant be registered as they lack an A4 patch of white.
I will also note that well these horses the may sound 'normally' marked their stockings in fact come 'unusually' high & the blazes tend towards rather larger than normal.
So perhaps this phenomenon is the reason over here is why we considered a Tobiano with facial & leg white as 'normal'.

I had a look at the link you posted admin -
I dont see any of the horses that post is talking about - the links are no longer working (they just go to Error or page is no longer available message page)& the only link the op posted that goes to the horse she's posting about is her stallion- I cant see a spotted/ white patch foal in her 1st link (I just looked at the smaller pics of the 4 foals there & could have missed him or maybe he sold or something & is no longer listed on the site?)

[quote=Surayya]
Over here 'normal' white markings are NEVER considered as being anything other than 'random' (ie of unknown origin)- if anyone thinks otherwise, they've not said anything out loud ;)
...
So over here at least if a Tobiano has a blaze & is neg Frame & Sab1 & the blaze is not oddly shaped or lop sided, nor are blue eye/s present, then it's considered a 'normal' Tobiano with a blaze.[/quote]

I apologise for this in advance if it seems rude. But the NZ Pinto association recognises three different pinto patterns - Tobiano, Overo and Tovero. Their credibility to be used as evidence in a discussion of the genetics that cause white patterns or white markings is just not there. As I said earlier, breed associations are so far behind the curve on current scientific information that it is ridiculous.

If "normal" white markings are not genetic then why can we even select for certain breeds to have less and certain breeds to have more?

[quote=Katie][quote=Surayya]
Over here 'normal' white markings are NEVER considered as being anything other than 'random' (ie of unknown origin)- if anyone thinks otherwise, they've not said anything out loud ;)
...
So over here at least if a Tobiano has a blaze & is neg Frame & Sab1 & the blaze is not oddly shaped or lop sided, nor are blue eye/s present, then it's considered a 'normal' Tobiano with a blaze.[/quote]

I apologise for this in advance if it seems rude. But the NZ Pinto association recognises three different pinto patterns - Tobiano, Overo and Tovero. Their credibility to be used as evidence in a discussion of the genetics that cause white patterns or white markings is just not there. As I said earlier, breed associations are so far behind the curve on current scientific information that it is ridiculous.[/quote]

I only used them as 1 of many, many, many sites (& that is not just association sites either) that state Tobianos can & do have 'normal' face markings - which is directly opposite of what is stated by many on this forum as fact. I'm asking where is the proof that white markings are in deed from the pinto pattern family is all, so far I have not seen one paper that says 'normal' white markings come directly from a pinto pattern gene - in fact we cant even conclusively say why totally solid coloured horses also are able to test positive from a pinto pattern yet let a lone out right state 'normal' white markings ARE pinto pattern.

[quote=Third Peppermint]If "normal" white markings are not genetic then why can we even select for certain breeds to have less and certain breeds to have more?[/quote]

You may want to re-read the posts I'm NOT saying 'normal' white markings can not be caused by a gene of some sort or even that it cant be caused by a pinto pattern gene- I have no proof that they are not, HOWEVER nor do I (at this point) believe that they do either due to the lack of evidence ie, not every horse with 'normal' markings tests as having one of the broken coloured patterns.

You ALWAYS get some horses born with a white marking or 2 even in horses bred to have ZERO white on them & when these breds do get a horse say with a star, if that horse is bred to another horse with say a star- they (as far as I've seen) dont produce say loud frame, splash or Sabino - yet other horses who are known to carry any of these can & do produce loud foals out of the blue on min pattern parents, so it's not the same thing in my mind- please bear in mind I've kept this way way simple for the sake of not having to right up a novel in explanation ;)

Paints I dont consider 'normal' horses, but a type of horse, as they have selectivity been bred for patterns as a 1st consideration (ie they are bred for as loud a patterns as possible over solid colours), unlike other breeds who've been bred for type over coat appearance & so are devoid of patterns.

Look what I’m saying is just because white markings can look similar to pattern markings doesn’t mean they are actually caused by the same thing nor even have behave in the same manner – to think otherwise is just guessing until it’s proven fact.

Skewbald/Piebald where correct terms for broken coloured horses until people realized you could breed similar patterns together & get similar patterned foals from them – it then became clear for Overos that 3 different patterns (so far) existed & so names have been given to these. Not one of these ‘patterns’ were named until said pattern was reliably able to be reproduced with similar appearance over generations.

I'm confused what the problem is then? We can't test for all of the white pattens and I don't think that anyone thinks that all of the markings we see now are due to sabino1, splash, dominant white, frame, or tobiano.

Sabino is generally used as a scapegoat white marking gene. Like, if a horse is tobiano and tests frame negative and has a certain combination of other markings that follows along the pattern of splash AND some that don't we'd assume that the horse is tobiano, splash, and "sabino." Sabino as in - something else/normal white markings. One horses sabino might be caused by something different than another.

It's like this. Horses were piebald/skewbald and then people refined it into tobiano and overo. Then it got refined to tobiano, frame, splash, and sabino. Then tobiano, frame, splash, sabino and dominant white. Then tobiano, frame, splash, dominant white(s), sabino1, and... other sabinos. Who knows what we'll find next? Sabino 2 through 2000? Maybe a bunch of genes that combine to look sabino-y?

We learned to identify horses through the appearance of the patterns before they could test for them and people can only identify the patterns through studying pedigrees and pictures. That's what a lot of people here have done - they've looked at hundreds upon hundreds of pictures of sires, dams, and foals and have noticed certain patterns. As time goes on we'll be able to test and refine the patterns even more.

We may have never gotten to researching the test for tobiano if people just ignored the patterns. You can't just.... come up with a test without being able to separate horses into groups. Trying to find the gene for frame may have failed if they had two groups - solid horses and horses with white somewhere.

This site has some very good examples of minimal splash whites that have produced not so minimal splash white offspring.

http://www.morgancolors.com/splashwhite…

One of the more flashy examples http://www.beachestripletranch.com/MORG… Both sire and dam have very minimal white markings and the sire has sired other foals with what are typically thought to be minimal splash markings. Splash is thought to be an incomplete dominant (by actual researchers why trying to find the mutation). So the flashy foals would be homozygous for splash.

These are good examples of why we feel minimal white markings are the result of a pattern and not just random.

OK, for years many breeds banned Pinto markings, no Pinto marked Welsh was accepted for registration, ditto Arabs, New Forest, well- any pure bred M&M pony (in spite of the fact that our own gallery here has Pinto Dartmoors as and example when, in fact Dartmoors have to be solid) had to be solid. Only "normal " white markings were accepted. (And the Welsh just waited till the foal went Grey to register it- canny Welsh)
Fast Forward to the EU regulations requiring ANY pony of purebred parents to be registered, irrespective of the colour/pattern.
We now have Pinto TBs/Arabs/Welsh/New Forest (We do not have pinto Dartmoors, however....)
This is because, with the "brakes" off, the Pinto that is "hidden" in those white markings explodes, especially when encouraged to do so, and you get a fully expressed animal.

I am sorry, but the Pinto/Broken Coloured horse and pony associations just have not got much of a clue- they really do need to abandon any attempt to classify patterns that are not backed up with a DNA report, and preferably before someone with more money than sense starts suing people for incorrectly identifying animals on their papers!

[quote=admin]This site has some very good examples of minimal splash whites that have produced not so minimal splash white offspring.

http://www.morgancolors.com/splashwhite…

One of the more flashy examples http://www.beachestripletranch.com/MORG… Both sire and dam have very minimal white markings and the sire has sired other foals with what are typically thought to be minimal splash markings. Splash is thought to be an incomplete dominant (by actual researchers why trying to find the mutation). So the flashy foals would be homozygous for splash.

These are good examples of why we feel minimal white markings are the result of a pattern and not just random.[/quote]

Ok thanks I'll have a look at them when I get back from work - I really shouldnt have checked my mail, cause I'm now running late ymwhisle & still have to pick my filly's new cover up on the way in!

I agree with both rabbit and admin. Oh, and those are great minimal splash examples. I looked at that foal's sire and he's had a few splash foals pop up. Very neat! Splash seems to lurk in a lot of mysterious places. The right combination of genes and BAM.