[ryu2832]

Originally Posted by RiddleMeThis

Ok I see how that relates to how white gets put on the horse, but I dont get how that is going to influence how say "minimal pattern a" will make "pattern b" look like a max pattern A, since Pattern A isnt putting the white, pattern b is. And how can minimal pattern A effect the shape of pattern b, when in minimal form pattern A doesnt put white there?

Ok so the cells have to migrate to their final ending points. You have to remember as well that each cell carries all of the pattern genes. So as they migrate, and developmental genes are turned off/on pattern a is active as well as pattern b

So pattern A Cells go from Area A to final point D

a-->b--->c-->d
\-->b--->c-->d
\--->c-->d
\->c-->d
\-->d
\->d

Pattern B effects Cells when they migrate through area c, so the cells don't get to the final point d resulting in less pigment cells.

Now, there are physical and chemical barriers for migration that go into all of this as well, but that's the gist.

[Haas Horse Farm]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Haas Horse Farm
A wild bay will never test aa as that would make it a black horse.

Originally Posted by RiddleMeThis

Exactly. They will always test Aa or AA (as of now), so what was your point in asking about wild bays that test AA?

The fact is that a horse that is wild bay but tested AA is really A+A or A+A+... which means they will never be aa. So why did you ask about aa?? The point being that if a horse is wild bay it will not look bay. That is how you know it is wild bay. Unlike brown which is known and proven to hide under the normal bay agouti... and will only show in offspring. That is why I am asking for a picture of a wild bay that tested AA. That means that one parent has to be A+ and the other parent A. That would prove that A+ is dominant over A if it can be seen on an AA horse.

Just like I know several AA horses that are really AAt with the A being dominate over At... based on offspring.

[RiddleMeThis]

Originally Posted by Haas Horse Farm

Quote:
Originally Posted by Haas Horse Farm
The fact is that a horse that is wild bay but tested AA is really A+A or A+A+... which means they will never be aa. So why did you ask about aa??

Because it appeared that you were implying that a wild bay would not test AA.

The point being that if a horse is wild bay it will not look bay. That is how you know it is wild bay. Unlike brown which is known and proven to hide under the normal bay agouti... and will only show in offspring. That is why I am asking for a picture of a wild bay that tested AA. That means that one parent has to be A+ and the other parent A. That would prove that A+ is dominant over A if it can be seen on an AA horse.

Or it is really A+A+. Just because it tests AA does not mean its A+A. They both could have AA+.

[Haas Horse Farm]

Originally Posted by RiddleMeThis

Because it appeared that you were implying that a wild bay would not test AA. Or it is really A+A+. Just because it tests AA does not mean its A+A. They both could have AA+.

Sorry I have no idea how you got that idea. My point was that seeing a photo of wild bay that tested AA would prove what I have said that some felt was incorrect. A+ is dominant over A. What is dominant is seen. So it would have to be A+A or A+A+ because if it was AA+ then you would see the A not the A+.

This is so basic I cannot figure out why there is any question about it. It is no different than EE or Ee... you know it is definitely not ee. LOL

I suppose the difference is that I have spend many years trying to figure out brown ... which does hide behind A... so I know for a fact that A is dominant over At and will hide it but it will appear when bred to a and the At is given instead of the A.

That proves to me that the same must be true with A+. I have a friend that has several wild bays and we have spend a bit of time discussing this... To me you are trying to make something out of what humans have created but would not be had nature been left to itself... much like all the years that offspring of certain breeds were killed off at birth if they were the wrong color. Is it not possible that man has played a big part in manipulating colors by breeding them out. Is that why it seems that there are more wild bays in the Arabian breeds than others? I do not know that for a fact but just something a friend and I were pondering.

[RiddleMeThis]

Originally Posted by Haas Horse Farm

Sorry I have no idea how you got that idea. My point was that seeing a photo of wild bay that tested AA would prove what I have said that some felt was incorrect. A+ is dominant over A. What is dominant is seen. So it would have to be A+A or A+A+ because if it was AA+ then you would see the A not the A+.

AA+ to me is the same thing as A+A, just like eE is the same as Ee. It would not prove anything if it tests as AA but shows as A+. The horse could just as easily be A+A+ as AA+.

This is so basic I cannot figure out why there is any question about it. It is no different than EE or Ee... you know it is definitely not ee. LOL

Because it is proven that E is dominant over e. It is not proven that A+ is dominant over A.

I suppose the difference is that I have spend many years trying to figure out brown ... which does hide behind A... so I know for a fact that A is dominant over At and will hide it but it will appear when bred to a and the At is given instead of the A.

That proves to me that the same must be true with A+.

How? I dont get how that proves that A+ is dominant over A.

I have a friend that has several wild bays and we have spend a bit of time discussing this... To me you are trying to make something out of what humans have created but would not be had nature been left to itself... much like all the years that offspring of certain breeds were killed off at birth if they were the wrong color. Is it not possible that man has played a big part in manipulating colors by breeding them out. Is that why it seems that there are more wild bays in the Arabian breeds than others? I do not know that for a fact but just something a friend and I were pondering.

Of course there could, but even in breeds where chestnut is preferred it is still not the majority over black based horses. There are too few wild bays for me to be convinced that it is dominant to A.

[RiddleMeThis]

The only thing being AA tells you at this point is the the horse has two copies of an agouti. It could be AtAt, or AA, or AtA, or A+At, or A+A+, or AA+.

[JBandRio]

Originally Posted by RiddleMeThis

Of course there could, but even in breeds where chestnut is preferred it is still not the majority over black based horses. There are too few wild bays for me to be convinced that it is dominant to A.

This is where I am having trouble fully believing that wild bay dominates bay. We KNOW there are chestnut-based breeds - Belgian draft, Fjord as I mentioned above - so it CAN be done to breed out a dominant trait. BUT, when you look at the overall horse population, wild bay is SO much less common than regular bay that I just am having trouble swallowing that wild bay has been bred out of SO many lines across all breeds. Obviously there is no proof either way, yet.

[Haas Horse Farm]

Which is the whole reason for my statement of show me a horse tested AA or Aa that has wild bay offspring when bred to black but does not look wild bay.

[JBandRio]

This filly

(from http://www.horseville.com/php/view.php?id=126739)
by this stallion Winter Moon Phenomenon (who appears to have been bay before going gray)


I am trying to find a picture of the dam, CBMF Gift of Gold, but so far am not finding any

[JBandRio]

Oh shoot, as soon as I said that I found her - liver chestnut