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 gene discussion on an aussie forum

Dilutes January 05, 2010 February 22, 2011

Forums

There is a discussion on an aussie forum I'm on (I'm silver dilutes). It starts off about the splash gene and I'd like your opinions or views on what is correct (or what you believe to be correct). Only if you're interested ;) http://horseridersonline.net/index.php?topic=15635.0" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

accphotography Wed, 01/06/2010 - 00:36

This thread isn't nearly the nightmare of one I read on another Australian forum about a month ago. :sad Worst part about that one is the people on the other side were all mods and thus if anyone disagreed with them there were threats of banning. :evil:

lillith Wed, 01/06/2010 - 03:39

Ok i have only read the first two pages and have to post somewhere and I think I'm better off here so grandmother....eggs.... still got to say it.

LWO is the frame pattern, some express minimaly and do not look phenotypicaly frame but any genotypic frame is LWO and any LWO is frame, if two are bred together there is a 25% chance of a LW foal, very bad. If one is bred to a nonLWO then there is a chance that a highly expressed frame phenotype will result.

Most research I have seen has stated that IF a spash white horse has white extending into the inner ear then it may show deafness, nothing I have seen has argued that ALL splashes are deaf.

The generaly accepted theory here is that splash causes blue eyes whether there are two, one or a partial, LWO can also cause them but sabino does not.

Yes both sabino and splash were originaly lumped in with frame under overo - basicly meaning 'non-tobiano white pattern' it is a term we dont use much here though cos it doesn't mean much (don't let Rabbit see you use it - a particular rant point of hers I believe) Tovero is equally pointless. I try only to use overo when I mean LWO (= frame) splash is a hypothesised impartial dominant i.e. 1 splash = lower expressed pattern than 2 splash. Sabino unless refering to the testable Sb1 is a phenotype descriptor that means 'not tobiano, frame or splash'.

Ok so now I've preached it all to the choir I feel better and wont have to go and rant at people who it seems like wont listen to me.

lillith Wed, 01/06/2010 - 03:52

Read the rest now, well done acc and rmt, I generally don't have the patiance to try to pass out information where someone is soooo sure they know it all allready, just end up getting irritable which is not a good way to educate. I just had to vent the facts somewhere so the post above can be ignored by most of you guys.

accphotography Wed, 01/06/2010 - 11:49

Yeah this isn't the first time she's done that with me... she just doesn't realize it yet I don't think. She was on the other train wreck thread too. I've never understood why a person has to have a "stud" to know diddley squat. I often find breeders the LEAST knowledgeable of the bunch (as a whole, on average, no offense to the breeders here ;) ). She can get over it... I don't owe her anything.

Dilutes Wed, 01/06/2010 - 21:05

I could work out what forum you were referring to ACC without you even mentioning it :rofl

Thank you to those that joined, for your explainations, as it was educational for the other members :toast
It certainly made the thread an interesting read :lol:

NZ Appaloosas Thu, 01/07/2010 - 17:37

[quote="accphotography"]This thread isn't nearly the nightmare of one I read on another Australian forum about a month ago. :sad Worst part about that one is the people on the other side were all mods and thus if anyone disagreed with them there were threats of banning. :evil:[/quote]

I left a forum some years ago because of that...this person bred paints so apparently was THE expert. According to that person, splash did NOT cause blue eyes, sabino did, all you had to do was look at draft horses since there's no splash in those. :BH :BH :BH How can a gene that has not been located, and is not testable, be said not to be in a breed where they show low-level splash patterning?????

Diane

Heather Fri, 01/08/2010 - 11:36

[quote="accphotography"]Yeah this isn't the first time she's done that with me... she just doesn't realize it yet I don't think. She was on the other train wreck thread too. I've never understood why a person has to have a "stud" to know diddley squat. [b]I often find breeders the LEAST knowledgeable of the bunch (as a whole, on average, no offense to the breeders here ;) ). [/b]She can get over it... I don't owe her anything.[/quote]

This is a very true statement , I could tell you things that WC trainers have said that would curl your toes, they knwo their show thing and thats about it. They often have the opinion that they dont have time to be bothered with that sorta stuff, sometimes I say something , sometimes i dont and let it roll painfully off my back.

Monsterpony Fri, 01/08/2010 - 13:06

And from my experience, it is not like veterinarians are of much help in educating these breeders. Most vets that I have talked to think that the color of the horse is of no matter to them. And, yet, when I was interning with the vet down in New Zealand, I had two different big-time breeding clients basically pounce on me when they heard I could help them with their horses' colors. One came running out of the house as we were leaving waving her genetic test results so I could explain them to her and another invited me to spend a few days at her drop-dead gorgeous lodge to help with her stock (of course, that offer came right before I was leaving the country *pout*).

Jenks Fri, 01/08/2010 - 17:07

ACC and RMT: The Enforcers!

I am having some similar difficulty with chicken color genetics..... this whole phenotype thing in different countries! But, I have to say, from what I painfully skipped through, it looked like the aussie paint registry describes overo the same? She just had it twisted~

ETS:
Sorry, my DD slipped and fell on the ice

I understood it (the registry) to say that if a horse tested + for LWO that it is registered as overo. It seems like she had it turned around? I should go back and read in detail.

Jenks Fri, 01/08/2010 - 19:01

Me thinks that the Aussie Paint Assoc has some mis-information on their site.......so do most the breeds here in the US!!! It looks like a lot of people already over there had a clue too btw.

They lead this lady to believe that all LWO/OWL are frame in this sentance: "There is a test available to identify the Overo gene (OLWS)."

It doesn't mean she or the association is right, but I find this exact scenario all over. No matter the animal or the breed.

The one on Cleo? I'm tracking on. She was like the red-headed step child of the arabs. Even my arabian associates who are in the medical industry do not accept mutation as acceptable to the breed. She was fabulous while she was here.

RiddleMeThis Fri, 01/08/2010 - 19:24

From the way I am understanding it, all horses that meet the requirements for regular registry, but are not tovero or tobiano are registered Overo. They can then test the horse for OLW and Sabino1 and depending on the results THEN they can be registered as sabino, or splash.

Jenks Fri, 01/08/2010 - 19:32

[quote="RiddleMeThis"]From the way I am understanding it, all horses that meet the requirements for regular registry, but are not tovero or tobiano are registered Overo. They can then test the horse for OLW and Sabino1 and depending on the results THEN they can be registered as sabino, or splash.[/quote]

This is what the Australian Paint Registry say about registering your paint as overo:
Overo
(pronounced: oh vair" oh)
The head markings on the Overo are usually a blaze or bald face. The true Overo will usually have four dark legs and the white markings on the body or neck will appear to be framed by the contrasting coat.

As a general rule, the white markings will not cross the back between the withers and the tail. The tail will normally be one colour. The Overo paint may be either predominately dark or white. Blue eyes are more often encountered in the Overo colour pattern than the Tobiano or Sabino. The breeding of Overo to Overo may produce lethal white foals. More information on this is available from the Association.

It is possible for a horse carrying the overo gene to have next to no white anywhere on its body and be registered as 'solid'. There is a test available to identify the Overo gene (OLWS).
******************************************************************************************************

This to me means they are identifying all overos as Frame. Not to say that they can't be registered if they are not tested, but they are certainly insinuating that there is ONE OVERO GENE and it is testable as the OWLS test for frame. Key phrase is in that last sentence......

Truly different than what we think of as overo.....dark legs?????? BALD FACE???? They are sincerely mistaken..... My frame mare (OWLS +)is far from bald in the face or from having dark legs.....and far from solid-- if tacking it on to that end solid part was intentional.

RiddleMeThis Fri, 01/08/2010 - 20:43

[quote="Jenks"]This to me means they are identifying all overos as Frame.[/quote] In that portion they are, however their registration guidelines go against there own statement.
[quote]
Truly different than what we think of as overo.....dark legs?????? BALD FACE???? They are sincerely mistaken..... My frame mare (OWLS +)is far from bald in the face or from having dark legs.....and far from solid-- if tacking it on to that end solid part was intentional.[/quote]Well it is widely believed that Frame can and does cause a bald face (I personally don't think it does), and Frame BY ITSELF does not create leg white. So yes, bald face and dark legs makes A LOT of sense to go along with their "Overo" only equals Frame.

And there last sentence also makes sense. It IS possible for a horse who is OLW positive to be 100% completely solid, and thus would be registered solid.

Jenks Sat, 01/09/2010 - 08:57

[quote="RiddleMeThis"][quote="Jenks"]This to me means they are identifying all overos as Frame.[/quote] In that portion they are, however their registration guidelines go against there own statement.
[quote]
Truly different than what we think of as overo.....dark legs?????? BALD FACE???? They are sincerely mistaken..... My frame mare (OWLS +)is far from bald in the face or from having dark legs.....and far from solid-- if tacking it on to that end solid part was intentional.[/quote]Well it is widely believed that Frame can and does cause a bald face (I personally don't think it does), and Frame BY ITSELF does not create leg white. So yes, bald face and dark legs makes A LOT of sense to go along with their "Overo" only equals Frame.

And there last sentence also makes sense. It IS possible for a horse who is OLW positive to be 100% completely solid, and thus would be registered solid.[/quote]

Ya. It's no different than a lot registries in a way. No different than most confusion going on either. I remember when I thought I knew what frame was based on what the APHA said. And that was when Maigrey pointed me here - or the old site to be more precise.

rabbitsfizz Sat, 01/09/2010 - 09:56

I did register but, I am sorry, I am just too tired to go on and start another flaming row!! :booty
If you actually need me to, I shall, but you seem to be doing OK on your own........
The Oz Paint Horse people call only Frame "overo" (NOW do you see why I'd like to get this word dropped??) [i]unless[/i] it looks as if it might be and hasn't been tested, or there is an "r" in the month, or it's Tuesday, or a full moon, in which case anything at all is flaming "overo" unless it's Tobiano or Sabino, and if it doesn't test positive for Sab1, LWO, or Tobiano, it [i]must[/i]be Splash!! :hammer
Honestly, why do people not realise the importance of having an [i]International[/i] standard, and that the easiest thing to do, in the first instance, is adopt the standard of the "Mother" Society??
UGH, this is how we ended up measuring some Miniatures halfway down their backs, so they measure up to two inches smaller than they actually are!!! :sign

Dilutes Sat, 01/09/2010 - 18:26

[quote="rabbitsfizz"]
Honestly, why do people not realise the importance of having an [i]International[/i] standard, and that the easiest thing to do, in the first instance, is adopt the standard of the "Mother" Society??
UGH, this is how we ended up measuring some Miniatures halfway down their backs, so they measure up to two inches smaller than they actually are!!! :sign[/quote]

I totally agree with you on this!!! I can't help but shake my head at the 'But this is our way!' mentality of some people. With horses being imported, exported all over the world and people having access to so much information from all over the world (thanks to the internet), why not have international termonlogy when it comes to breed registeries?

Just because this is the way it is, doesn't mean it has to stay this way :BH

rabbitsfizz Sun, 01/10/2010 - 09:09

My aversion started with people saying it was a "rare" overo, to put the price up (the horse in question was Sabino / Splash!!!), and then when I came up against tovero I knew that, over here at least, I would see someone with a "rare" tovero, and yes, that is what happened!!
After that I decided the kindest thing to do would be to eradicate the term and use the correct words, this educates people as you go ;)