Is Wild Bay Recessive?

I think the Gower theory is allele AA is dominant over both At and Aa, but recessive to the wild-type allele A+. So A+ is dominant over all other alleles. I don't understand how A+ is dominant though because I thought if it was dominant we'd see a lot more wild bays. And I've never seen a wild bay. In person, that is.

From what I understand wild bay is just rare, but A+ is dominant over A and At, to answer your question.

*edit*

http://youtu.be/nX3xq6kGxfc

http://www.allbreedpedigree.com/de+el+f…

*shrug*

*edit edit*

I could see why AA would be dominant over At because of pigment restriction, but AA being dominant over A+ wouldn't make sense because A+ has stronger pigment restriction and would override A pigment restriction in any situation.

De El Fareed is out of a chestnut though, so wouldn't it possible that the dam carries A+?

I think A+ is pretty common. But it's expression varies.

[quote=rubberduckyyy]De El Fareed is out of a chestnut though, so wouldn't it possible that the dam carries A+?[/quote]
Yes.

Neither I, nor ACC, have ever found a for sure wild bay out of two for sure black based parents. Its usually a black based parent and a chestnut, or a black based parent and a gray.

The few we have been able to trace, have all appeared to come out of regular bay and browns.

IMO the dominance of agouti is most like A A+ At and then a.

Is there any analogue of a 'wild bay' agouti situation in other animals? :-?

I would think A+ would be dominant over the others given it's expression and severe restriction. A completely covers up At and I think A+ would do the same to A.

Variance of expression and A+ expression crossover with A would really muddle results.

Plus there are 'wild bay' horses under the age of 3 who didn't fill in their points yet and 'wild bay' horses that are in their winter woolies and look 100% bay in the summer.

[quote]IMO the dominance of agouti is most like A A+ At and then a.[/quote]

I've always thought that, too.

One thing that I can see as an arguement for A+ being recessive to A is that A [i]isn't[/i] a mutation, it is the wild-type of the gene. A+, At and a are all mutations of A.

[quote]One thing that I can see as an arguement for A+ being recessive to A is that A isn't a mutation, it is the wild-type of the gene. A+, At and a are all mutations of A.[/quote]

But mutations are often dominant to wild type.

I understand that. What I meant was that since it is a mutation, that doesn't necessarily mean it must be dominant.

At the moment I have all A+ horses as dominate on Capalls.com. I am trying to make it as realistic as I possibly can. So would you say that the level of dominance would then be A, A+, At, a?

I don't understand how A would be dominant over A+, could someone explain?

One analogy I could think of is wide band agouti in rabbits where the yellow in the coat is increased and the black decreased making the animal lighter. From what I can gather quickly it is inherited separately to the A series but is closely associated with it. That means an animal of any colour including self black could be HZ or hz for wide band. It has an effect on A and At phenotypes.

Sorry Monster, I didn't mean to insinuate you didn't know, I just missed what you where trying to say.

[quote]Is there any analogue of a 'wild bay' agouti situation in other animals?[/quote]

I just thought of something...The recent paper on a[sup]t[/sup] in dogs confirmed what researchers had begun to suspect that the "saddle" phenotype and the "black and tan" phenotypes are both caused by the same allele at Agouti.

Since "saddle" results in much decreased black this could be an argument against A[sup]+[/sup] being a separate allele.
That could also explain some of the ambiguity involved with wild bay.

Off to reread article!

Wow all of the saddle dogs were AtAt. But not all AtAt dogs had the saddle phenotype. Many others looked regular black and tan instead.

I'm wondering if it might be a separate modifier affecting homozygous At or just a simple color variance?

[quote]I'm wondering if it might be a separate modifier affecting homozygous At[/quote]

At the end of the paper

[quote]The difference between the traditional black-and-tan pattern and the saddle tan pattern is likely caused by a modifier gene that allows for the expansion of the phaeomelanin points. A similar phenomenon involving expansion of phaeomelanin regions in black-and-tan mice has been observed and shown to be caused by a deletion of 216 kb, spanning from intron 1 of TBX15 to 148 kb downstream of the adjacent mannose-6-phosphate receptor pseudogene (Candille et al. 2004).[/quote]

I do want to point out, that the saddle tan phenotype group was only 8 dogs and the a allele is quite rare, so it is possible that a[sup]t[/sup]a dogs can exhibit saddle tan.

[quote=Billygoatsgruff]I don't understand how A would be dominant over A+, could someone explain?[/quote]
How wouldn't it? Theres not reason to think it would have to be. Many mutations are recessive to their wild type.