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.

whoopsie

vneerland April 29, 2009 February 22, 2011

Forums

I think they may be slightly confused..... :? :o http://kadlec.assa.free.fr/toomuchus.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; [i]"gruello...: chocolate with a dun gene tested EE ZZ Ccr, he will give 100% chocolate, but some cremelo with a palomino or buckskin mare."[/i]

RiddleMeThis Sat, 05/09/2009 - 11:53

[quote="rabbitsfizz"]So, hang on a minute there.....heterozygous black and red and agouti based +CrCr is now Perlino?????

Either way, this is something that has niggled at me for a while...that a CrCr horse is automatically Perlino even if it carries red???
So....really if we are to be such purists, we need terms for :
CrCr black base carrying agouti = Perlino
CrCr black base = Smoky Cream
CrCr red base = Cremello
CrCr red and black base= ????
[/quote]To me
E?aaCRCR=Smoky Cream
ee??CRCR=Cremello
E?A?CRCR=Perlino
[quote]
*[size=85]ohmygosh.....rmt....we agree!!!! :laugh1 [/size]*[/quote]
ROFL Which part do we agree on?? :lol: :lol:

rabbitsfizz Sat, 05/09/2009 - 12:40

Can't remember any more....that's the problem with getting old!!!

A CrCr horse looks the same basically whatever colours it carries, there is NO way to tell, by looking at a cream horse which dilute it is.
None.
So, basically we need a name for Red and Black based without Agouti and with CrCr.
And Red and Black based with Agouti, +CrCr.
If we are going to be totally correct, that is.

RiddleMeThis Sat, 05/09/2009 - 12:58

[quote="rabbitsfizz"]
A CrCr horse looks the same basically whatever colours it carries, there is NO way to tell, by looking at a cream horse which dilute it is.
None.[/quote] I disagree. IMO you can sometimes tell them apart fairly easily. Other times you cant, but a lot of times you can.
[quote]
So, basically we need a name for Red and Black based without Agouti and with CrCr.
And Red and Black based with Agouti, +CrCr.
If we are going to be totally correct, that is.[/quote]
Why??

We call a horse that is eeaa/eeAa/eeAA chestnut.
We call a horse that is Eeaa/EEaa black
We call a horse that is EeAa/EEAa/EeAA/EEA bay.

Why do we need different names for each subset of those when cream comes into play? Or am I misunderstanding you?

rabbitsfizz Sat, 05/09/2009 - 14:17

We don't.
Not really, but if we were approaching this from a purist POV then we [i]should[/i].
It would , I agree, be far too confusing at this point, as people have enough time identifying a Buckskin, without suggesting we go by phenotype only.

*[size=85]OMG OMG that is twice in one thread I have agreed with you.....[/size]*

Jenks Fri, 05/22/2009 - 22:37

I'm going to have to go back and re-read this thread.

If we were to heed all breed definitions? we'd be knee deep in shit. Anything not tobi would be overo, and most of our genotypes would be lost in phenotypes, etc. I think I may have to read this thread again if I truly wanted to understand.